Chapter 14.10
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sections:
14.10.040 Administration and interpretation.
14.10.050 Foundation of project review.
14.10.060 Determination of consistency.
14.10.070 SEPA and project permit review to be combined and integrated.
14.10.080 Relation of development regulations and mitigations of project impacts under SEPA.
14.10.085 Relation of development regulations and comprehensive plan.
14.10.090 Conflict or inconsistency with other provisions of municipal code.
14.10.010 Purpose and intent.
A. It is the purpose of this title to provide for combining the environmental review process, both procedural and substantive, with review of project permit applications; to provide for no more than one open record hearing and one closed record appeal in review of project permit applications; and to provide for establishment of a development review process which complies with the applicable requirements for local permit processing contained in the Regulatory Reform Act of 1995, Chapter 36.70B RCW.
B. This title is intended to establish procedures for the efficient and uniform processing of project permit applications under existing codes, ordinances, regulations and policies. It is not intended to create any new or additional substantive requirements, except as specifically provided herein. (Ord. 768 § 2, 1996).
14.10.020 Scope.
A. The provisions of this title shall apply to all project permit applications filed on or after the effective date hereof under the substantive provisions of other titles of this code, except as specifically provided by subsections (B), (C) and (D) of this section.
B. Landmark designations, street vacations and any permits relating to the use of public areas or facilities shall be exempt from the provisions of this title, except the requirements of SMC 14.10.070, integration of SEPA and project permit review, and SMC 14.40.020, limitation of hearings and appeals.
C. Applications for approval of mixed use final plans present special circumstances that warrant a different review process as provided in Chapter 17.30 SMC, and shall be exempt from the requirements of this title, except the requirements of SMC 14.10.070, integration of SEPA and project permit review, and SMC 14.40.020, limitation of hearings and appeals.
D. Lot line or boundary adjustments, building permits, sign permits not requiring design review, or other similar administrative permits, which are either categorically exempt from environmental review under Chapter 43.21C RCW or for which environmental review has been completed in connection with other project permits, shall be exempt from the requirements of SMC 14.30.060, notice of application, SMC 14.30.130, optional consolidated permit processing, and SMC 14.30.110, relating to giving notice of the decision to the public and other agencies. (Ord. 768 § 2, 1996).
14.10.030 Definitions.
Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, the definitions in this section apply throughout this title.
A. “Closed record appeal” means an administrative appeal on the record, with no or limited new evidence or information allowed to be submitted and only oral argument allowed, to either the hearing examiner or the city council, following an open record hearing on a project permit application.
B. “Comprehensive plan” means the Snoqualmie Vicinity Comprehensive Plan, as the same now exists or may hereafter be amended, including any other plans incorporated therein by reference or by operation of law.
C. “Director” means the director of community development.
D. “Open record appeal hearing” means a hearing conducted by the city council to receive testimony and the submission of exhibits and information for the purpose of reviewing a decision of city staff for which no open record hearing is required before the planning commission or hearing examiner.
E. “Predecision open record hearing” means a hearing conducted by the hearing examiner or the planning commission to create the city’s record through testimony on oath or affirmation and submission of evidence and information, other than those proceedings falling within the definition of “public meeting” in subsection (G) of this section. If an open record hearing is held prior to the city’s decision on a project permit application, it shall be known as a “predecision open record hearing.” If an open record hearing is held after the city’s decision on a project permit application, it shall be known as an “open record appeal hearing.”
F. “Project permit application” means any land use or environmental permit, license or approval required from the city for a project action, including but not limited to building permits, subdivisions, binding site improvement plans, planned unit developments, conditional uses, shoreline substantial development permits, flood improvement permits, design review, sensitive areas review, drainage review and site specific rezones authorized by the comprehensive plan, but excluding adoption or amendment of the comprehensive plan, subarea plans, annexation implementation plans.
G. “Public meeting” means an informal meeting, workshop or other public gathering to obtain comments from the public or other agencies on a proposed project permit prior to the city’s decision. Public meetings may include but are not limited to design review and scoping meeting on a draft environmental impact statement. (Ord. 768 § 2, 1996).
14.10.040 Administration and interpretation.
A. The provisions of this title shall be administered by the director.
B. Any person may request an interpretation of the meaning or application of a development regulation, and the director, with the advice of the city attorney as deemed appropriate, shall issue a written administrative interpretation within 30 days. Such request for a code interpretation shall be as concise as possible, and refer to the specific language in the code for which an interpretation is sought.
C. The director shall maintain a file of all such interpretations, which shall be available to the public for inspection and copying, and which may be relied upon until specifically superseded by a subsequent interpretation, or overruled by a decision on appeal to city council.
D. Any such interpretation may be appealed to the city council, which shall hear and determine the matter as expeditiously as possible. Such appeal shall be allowed as an interlocutory appeal not subject to the limitation on hearings and appeals applicable to project permit applications.
E. The director shall prepare a user assistance guide, which shall be available for distribution to the public at the offices of the community development director, containing a concise summary of this title, identifying the category of project permits under other titles of this code, and presenting in summary or tabular form the requirements and procedures applicable to such project permit applications or categories of project permit applications. (Ord. 768 § 2, 1996).
14.10.050 Foundation of project review.
A. Fundamental land use planning choices made in the comprehensive plan and development regulations shall serve as the foundation for project review. Project review shall not be used for comprehensive planning purposes. Proposed projects shall be reviewed for consistency, conformity and compliance with applicable development regulations, or in the absence of applicable development regulations the comprehensive plan, and for project specific environmental impacts and mitigations.
B. During project review, the city shall not re-examine alternatives to or hear appeals from fundamental land use planning choices made in the comprehensive plan or adopted development regulations, except for issues of comprehensive plan or code interpretation. If during project review deficiencies are identified in the comprehensive plan or in development regulations, project review shall continue, and identified deficiencies shall be docketed for consideration on at least an annual basis, consistent with the provisions of RCW 36.70A.130.
C. The city may determine that the requirements of environmental review and mitigation in development regulations or other applicable laws provide adequate mitigation for some or all of a proposed project’s specifically identified probable adverse impacts.
D. Nothing in this title shall be construed to limit the city’s authority to approve, condition or deny a project as provided in the city’s development regulations or under policies identified in Chapter 19.04 SMC, SEPA Procedures and Polices, as the possible basis for substantive authority under RCW 43.21C.060, the State Environmental Policy Act. Project review shall be used to identify specific project design, and conditions relating to the character of development, such as details of site plans, curb cuts, drainage facilities, transportation demand management, payment of impact fees, when authorized by law, and other measures to mitigate a proposal’s probable adverse environmental impacts, if applicable. (Ord. 768 § 2, 1996).
14.10.060 Determination of consistency.
A. In reviewing and acting upon any project permit application, the reviewer and the designated decision maker shall determine whether the following items are defined in development regulations applicable to the proposed project or, in the absence of development regulations, in the comprehensive plan:
1. The type of land use permitted at the site, including uses which may be allowed under certain circumstances, including planned unit developments and conditional uses, if criteria for their approval are satisfied;
2. The density of residential development;
3. The conditions and limitations under which commercial, industrial, utility and open space development may be permitted; and
4. The availability and adequacy of public facilities identified in the comprehensive plan, if the plan or development regulations provide for funding of such facilities.
B. If the items set forth in subsection (A) are defined in development regulations applicable to the proposed project, or in the absence of development regulations, in the comprehensive plan, then such definitions shall be determinative, and the project permit application shall thereafter be reviewed and decided based upon its consistency therewith.
C. In review of and action upon any project permit application, the designated reviewer and decision maker shall determine the proposed project’s consistency with development regulations, and in the absence of development regulations, the comprehensive plan, by consideration of the matters set forth in subsection (A) of this section, together with the character of the development, such as development standards.
D. Nothing in this section shall preclude the city from requesting more specific information or posing related questions with respect to any of the subjects addressed by items addressed by this section. (Ord. 768 § 2, 1996).
14.10.070 SEPA and project permit review to be combined and integrated.
A. Environmental review pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 43.21C RCW and city SEPA Procedures and Policies, Chapter 19.04 SMC, shall be combined and integrated with the processing of project permit applications in all cases in which the project permit application is not categorically exempt from SEPA or for which environmental review has not already been accomplished.
B. Environmental impacts of a proposed project shall be analyzed in one project review process, which shall include land use, environmental, public and governmental review, as established in this title. If applicable development regulations require studies which adequately analyze a proposed project’s specific probable adverse environmental impacts, additional studies shall not be required under SEPA.
C. Project level environmental review shall be used to review and document consistency with the comprehensive plan and development regulations; to provide prompt and coordinated review by government agencies and the public on compliance with applicable environmental laws and plans, including mitigation for specific project impacts that have not been considered and addressed at the plan or development regulation level; and to ensure accountability by the city to applicants and the public for requiring and implementing mitigation measures. (Ord. 768 § 2, 1996).
14.10.080 Relation of development regulations and mitigations of project impacts under SEPA.
A development regulation or requirement of the comprehensive plan shall be considered to adequately address an impact if the city, through planning, review and adoption of the comprehensive plan and development regulations under the Growth Management Act, has identified the specific adverse environmental impacts and either the impacts have been avoided or otherwise mitigated, or the development regulations or comprehensive plan have designated certain levels of impacts as acceptable. (Ord. 768 § 2, 1996).
14.10.085 Relation of development regulations and comprehensive plan.
In applying the provisions of this title, development regulations adopted subsequent to the adoption of the comprehensive plan to fulfill the requirements of the Growth Management Act shall be presumed to be consistent with and to implement the comprehensive plan, and shall control for purposes of this chapter. Development regulations adopted prior to the adoption of the comprehensive plan not intended to fulfill the requirements of the Growth Management Act shall not be afforded such a presumption, and in the event such a regulation is found to be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan, the provisions of the comprehensive plan shall control for purposes of this title. (Ord. 768 § 2, 1996).
14.10.090 Conflict or inconsistency with other provisions of municipal code.
In the event any other provision of this code shall conflict or are inconsistent with any of the provisions of this title, the provisions of this title shall prevail, notwithstanding such conflict or inconsistency; provided, the remainder of such other provision shall be given full force and effect as to those parts thereof which are not in conflict or inconsistent with the provisions of this title. (Ord. 768 § 2, 1996).