Chapter 16.06
PERMIT PROCESSING
Sections:
16.06.020 Type of permit applications.
16.06.030 Types I – IV project permit applications.
16.06.050 Consistency with development regulations and SEPA.
16.06.070 Open record public hearings.
16.06.080 Appeals – Procedure.
16.06.010 Purpose.
The purpose of this chapter is to outline the permit processing application type, requirements, decision and noticing procedures for land use permit applications as outlined in this title. Procedures for legislative land use actions, or those that require actions taken by the city council, are also outlined in this chapter. (Ord. 1367-22 § 2 (Exh. A); Ord. 1328-20 § 5 (Exh. A))
16.06.020 Type of permit applications.
A. Procedures for Processing Permit Applications. For the purpose of permit processing, all land division permit applications shall be classified as one of the following: Types I, II, III, and IV. Legislative decisions are Type IV actions and are addressed in subsection (E) of this section. Exemptions from permit processing procedures are listed in subsection (F) of this section.
B. Determination of Procedure Type.
1. The director or designee shall determine the proper procedure for all project permit applications. If there is a question as to the appropriate type of procedure, the director shall resolve the question in favor of the higher procedure and type number. If a permit type is not included in subsection (C) of this section, the director shall determine the proper procedure for that permit type by reviewing the permit in light of subsection (C) of this section, and determining which procedure the permit most closely resembles.
2. Optional Consolidated Permit Processing.
a. An application that involves two or more procedures may be processed collectively under the highest numbered procedure required for any part of the application or processed individually under each of the procedures identified by code. If the application is processed under the individual procedure option, the highest numbered type procedure must be processed prior to the subsequent lower numbered procedure. If multiple applications are submitted concurrently, the city shall process them as a consolidated application unless otherwise notified by the applicant.
b. Except as otherwise exempted by Chapter 17.04 SMC, environmental (SEPA) review shall be conducted concurrently with the project review.
c. Applications processed in accordance with subsection (B)(1) of this section which have the same numbered procedure, but are assigned to different hearing bodies, shall be consolidated and heard by the highest decision maker. The city council is the highest decision maker, followed by the hearing examiner, and then the director. Joint public hearings with other agencies shall be processed according to subsection (D) of this section.
d. Project permit applications are allowed a maximum of one open record hearing and one closed record appeal hearing.
C. Permit Applications. The following tables set out the project permit decision making and appeal processes, the division of action types into permit types, the required procedure for each permit type, and the notice requirements for project permits.
|
Type I |
Type II |
Type III |
Type IV |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Boundary line adjustments |
Building permits – SEPA required |
Conditional use permits (CUP) |
Comprehensive plan amendment |
|
Minor building remodels, no permit required |
Other construction permits – SEPA required |
Variances |
Zoning code text/map amendment |
|
Building permits – no SEPA required |
Preliminary short subdivisions |
Site plan permit (commercial/ multifamily) |
Rezones |
|
Other construction permits – no SEPA required |
Minor adjustments to preliminary plats |
Shoreline CUP1 |
Development agreement |
|
Administrative interpretations |
All other land division proposals determined by the director to be most similar to Type II applications |
Reasonable use exceptions |
Pre-annexation zoning |
|
Shoreline exemptions (Chapter 17.20 SMC)1 |
Shoreline variances1 |
Annexation |
|
|
Grading permit – no SEPA required |
Preliminary subdivision applications |
|
|
|
Vegetation removal permit2 |
Grading permit3 – SEPA required |
Final subdivision plats |
|
|
Eligible facilities requests |
Binding site plans |
All other land division proposals determined by the director to be most similar to Type III applications |
|
|
All other land use proposals determined by the director to be most closely similar to Type I applications |
Site plan permit |
1. Shoreline applications and permit processes are defined in the city’s shoreline master program.
2. In addition to the procedural requirements established in this title, vegetation removal permit applications shall be governed by the performance standards in Chapter 17.16 SMC.
3. In addition to the procedural requirements established in this title, grading permit applications shall be governed by the performance standards established in Chapter 17.13 SMC.
|
|
Type I |
Type II |
Type III |
Type IV |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Final decision made by |
Director |
Director |
Hearing examiner/director |
City council |
|
Recommendation made by |
N/A |
N/A |
Community development director |
Planning commission |
|
Open record public hearing – Decision |
N/A |
N/A |
Hearing examiner |
City council |
|
Open record public hearing – Appeal |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
|
Closed record appeal |
Hearing examiner |
Hearing examiner |
County superior court |
No |
|
Appeal to |
Hearing examiner |
Hearing examiner |
County superior court |
County superior court |
|
Judicial appeal |
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Type I |
Type II |
Type III |
Type IV |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Preapplication conference |
Yes1 |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
|
Notice of completeness |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Notice of application |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
SEPA determination2 |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Notice of hearing |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Notice of decision |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Review period3 |
90 days |
90 days |
120 days |
No |
1. Pursuant to SMC 19.16.030, when a proposed boundary line adjustment involves only two regular rectangular parcels and the proposed boundary line adjustment is to move the common line to create two revised regular rectangular parcels, the applicant may submit the application without a preapplication conference.
2. SEPA not required for applications that are categorically exempt in accordance with Chapter 17.04 SMC.
3. One-hundred-twenty-day review does not apply to preliminary or final subdivisions. Preliminary short or long subdivisions have a 90-day review clock and final short or long subdivisions a 30-day review clock in accordance with RCW 58.17.140.
|
|
Send to Property Owners Within 300' |
Post Property |
Publish Notice |
Send to Agencies |
Send to Applicant |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Notice of completeness |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
|
Notice of application |
Yes |
Yes1 |
Yes2 |
Yes3 |
Yes |
|
SEPA determination |
No |
No4 |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Notice of open record predecision hearing, if applicable |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
|
Notice of decision5, 6 |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
|
Notice of open record appeal hearing, if applicable |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
1. Notices are posted on site for Type II – IV applications, if applicable.
2. Notices are published in the city’s paper of record for Type II – IV applications, if applicable.
3. Notices are sent to agencies for projects not categorically exempt under SEPA to directors and agencies with jurisdiction over the project permit application.
4. SEPA appeal hearing notices are posted.
5. Notices are sent to parties of record.
6. Additional (duplicate) notice may be sent electronically (email).
D. Joint Public Hearings.
1. The director may combine a public hearing on a permit application with a hearing that may be held by another local, state, regional, federal, or other agency on the proposed action if the requirements of subsection (D)(3) of this section are met.
2. The applicant may request that the public hearing on a permit application be combined with a hearing held by another government agency if the joint hearing can be held within the time periods set forth in this title.
3. A joint public hearing may be held with another local, state, regional, federal or other agency and the city, as long as:
a. The other agency is not expressly prohibited by statute from doing so;
b. Sufficient notice of the hearing is given to meet each of the agencies’ adopted notice requirements as set forth in statute, ordinance, or rule;
c. The agency has received the necessary information about the proposed project from the applicant in enough time to hold its hearing at the same time as the city’s hearing; and
d. The hearing is held within the incorporated city limits.
E. Type IV – Legislative Decisions.
1. All Type IV actions set forth in subsection (C) of this section are legislative and are not subject to the procedures in this chapter unless otherwise specified.
2. The planning board shall make a written recommendation to the city council regarding Type IV actions at the close of their final public hearing or at their next scheduled meeting. The written recommendation to the city council shall be one of the following:
a. Recommendation for additional time and/or resources on the application;
b. Recommendation of approval of the legislative action;
c. Recommendation of approval of the legislative action with modifications;
d. Recommendation of denial of the legislative action.
3. Type IV applications require a minimum of one public hearing before the city council held in accordance with established rules. The city council shall consider the recommendation of the planning commission and the public testimony in making its legislative decision.
4. Notices for public hearing shall be distributed following the threshold determination for the application and comments on the application, and shall be provided at least 20 calendar days prior to the hearing. The conduct of the hearing shall be as set forth in Chapter 16.86 SMC.
F. Exemptions from Project Permit Application Processing. The following permits or approvals are excluded from the procedures set forth in this title:
1. Street vacations shall be processed in accordance with Chapter 35.79 RCW and any applicable city regulations;
2. Temporary use permits shall be processed in accordance with Chapter 15.14 RCW;
3. Street use (right-of-way) permits shall be processed in accordance with SMC 13.08.030(C) and 13.12.080(C);
4. Special event permits shall be processed in accordance with Chapter 9.14 SMC; and
5. Other permits as determined appropriate by the director. (Ord. 1367-22 § 2 (Exh. A); Ord. 1347-21 § 10; Ord. 1328-20 § 5 (Exh. A))
16.06.030 Types I – IV project permit applications.
A. Types I – III Permits. Types I – III permit applications shall be processed in accordance with the criteria and regulations set out in the appropriate title of this code and in accordance with this chapter as applicable.
1. Boundary line adjustments shall meet the criteria set out in Chapter 19.16 SMC.
2. Minor exterior remodels, no building permit required.
3. Building permits and related improvements shall be in accordance with this title as determined by the director, and with the IBC as determined by the building official.
4. Other construction permits shall be in accordance with this title as determined by the director and with the city of Sultan EDDS and other standards as approved by the public works director, notwithstanding deviations from the EDDS approved under Chapter 11.12 SMC.
5. Wireless facilities on existing structures, camouflaged, shall meet the criteria set out in Chapter 16.66 SMC.
6. Critical areas permits shall meet the criteria set out in Chapter 17.10 SMC.
7. Clearing and grading permits shall meet the criteria established in Chapters 17.13 and 17.14 SMC.
8. Shoreline exemptions shall meet the criteria set out in the city of Sultan’s shoreline master program.
B. Preapplication Meeting.
1. Applications for Types III – IV permits will not be accepted until the applicant has attended a preapplication meeting. Preapplication meetings may be required for Type IV permits at the director’s discretion. The director may waive preapplication meetings on a case-by-case basis if special circumstances, as determined by the director, exist.
2. The director shall establish procedures, reasonable schedules, and staff participation for preapplication meetings.
3. The applicant shall be responsible for all staff costs related to the preapplication meeting.
C. Project Permit Applications. This section applies to all project permit application types, except that applications for building permits shall be on forms as determined by the building official and applications for construction permits shall be on forms as determined by the public works director.
1. An application shall consist of all materials required by the application submittal checklist, the applicable development regulations and shall, at a minimum, include the following:
a. A completed project permit application form signed by the property owner(s) and/or applicant;
b. A statement that the applicant attests by written oath to the accuracy and completeness of all information submitted for an application;
c. A statement by the applicant that the property affected by the application is in the exclusive ownership of the applicant, or that the applicant has submitted the application with the written consent of all owners of the affected property and such written consent is supplied with the application;
d. A property and/or legal description of the site;
e. The application deposit, with a statement signed by the applicant accepting responsibility for all fees and charges over the deposit amount;
f. Evidence of sewer availability and payment of sewer fees, if applicable;
g. Any additional information as required by the specific submittal checklist for each specific application type;
A project permit application is complete when it meets the submittal requirements specified by the director.
2. The director shall have the authority to prepare and revise submittal requirements.
D. Submission and Acceptance of Application.
1. Where applicable, within 28 days after receiving a project permit application, the director shall provide a written determination to the applicant which states either that the application is complete, or that the application is incomplete and states the necessary items to make the application complete.
2. To the extent known by the city, other agencies with jurisdiction over the project permit application shall be identified in the city’s determination required by subsection (D)(1) of this section.
3. A project permit application is complete for purposes of this section when it meets the submittal requirements in subsection (C) of this section. A determination of completeness shall be made when the application is sufficient for continued processing even though additional information may be required or project modifications may be undertaken subsequently. The city’s determination of completeness shall not preclude the city from requesting additional information or studies either at the time of the determination or at a later time, if new information is required or where there are significant changes in the proposed action.
4. Incomplete Application Procedure.
a. If the applicant receives a determination from the city that an application is not complete, or if additional information has been required by the city, the applicant shall have 90 days to submit the requested information to the city. Within 14 days after an applicant has submitted the requested information, the city shall make the determination as described in subsection (D)(1) of this section.
b. If the applicant does not submit the requested information within the 90-day period, the application shall lapse.
c. In those situations where the application has lapsed because the applicant has failed to submit the required information within the necessary time period, the applicant may request a refund of the unexpended application fee.
5. The applicant shall designate a single person or entity to receive all notices required by this chapter and to receive all billing statements.
E. Notice of Application. A notice of application shall be issued in accordance with the provisions of Table 16.06-C and shall include the information set out in SMC 16.06.040, Public notice.
F. Referral and Review of Project Permit Applications.
1. The director shall route project permit applications to all affected city departments for review and comment. Timing of such routing shall be determined in consultation with the director. Project permit applications shall be reviewed in accordance with applicable city policies and regulations. The director shall set out time periods for review by affected departments and distribute information.
2. The director shall route project permit applications to consultants as the director determines necessary. All costs of consultant review shall be billed to the project applicant.
G. Time Limits/Review Clock. Following are the time limits that are set out for project review:
1. The city shall issue a notice of final decision on a project permit application for a preliminary long or short plat within 90 days after the applicant is notified that the application is complete.
2. The city shall issue a notice of final decision on a project permit application for a final plat within 30 days after the applicant is notified that the application is complete.
3. The city shall issue a notice of final decision on all other project permit applications within 120 days after the applicant is notified that the application is complete or within 14 days of approval.
4. The city shall exclude the following periods from the time limits of subsections (G)(1) through (3) of this section:
a. Any period during which the applicant has been requested by the city to correct plans, perform required studies, or provide additional information. The period shall be calculated from the date the city notifies the applicant by mail, at a meeting, or by email that additional information is required until a date no more than 14 days after the applicant has submitted the requested information. The city shall determine if the information submitted is sufficient. If the information is not sufficient, this process will begin again;
b. Any period of time in excess of that allowed by the city for applicant review of city comments and documents;
c. Any period during which an environmental impact statement (EIS) is being prepared following a determination of significance;
d. Any period for administrative appeals of project permits, if applicable;
e. Any period where the city and applicant agree in writing to a waiver of the clock, if applicable.
H. Notice of Decision.
1. The city shall provide a notice of decision that also includes a statement of any SEPA threshold determination made and the procedures for administrative appeal. The notice shall be provided to the applicant and any person who, prior to the rendering of the decision, requested notice of decision or submitted substantive comments on the application. The staff report can be the notice of decision.
2. The city shall make every effort to process applications in a timely manner. When time limitations are not met, the city shall provide a written explanation to the applicant. The explanation shall state the reasons why the decision has not been issued and the estimated date of the decision. Alternatively, an applicant and the city can mutually agree to extend the time period for a decision.
I. Substantial Revisions or Modifications to Proposal.
1. A revision or modification to the contents of an application before or after issuance of the permit, either voluntarily or to conform with applicable standards and requirements, shall be deemed a new application for the purpose of vesting when the revision or modification would result in a significant increase in a project’s impacts as determined by the director. In reaching a decision on whether a revision is significant, the director’s consideration shall include but not be limited to the magnitude of the revision and the effect on the environment, the environmental sensitivity of the site, any changes in location of significant elements of the project and their relationships to public facilities, the impact of the revision on the review clock, and impacts to surrounding lands and land uses.
2. Written notice of such determination of substantial revision or modification shall be provided to the applicant and to all parties of record.
3. Any revision or modification deemed by the director to be substantial shall conform to the time periods set forth in subsection (G) of this section. The review cycle for the revised project application shall begin with the date the revised project application is determined to be complete. The revised project application shall be subject to all laws, regulations, and standards in effect on the date of receipt of a complete, revised project application. (Ord. 1367-22 § 2 (Exh. A); Ord. 1328-20 § 5 (Exh. A))
16.06.040 Public notice.
A. Publication and Certification of Notice.
1. The director shall publish notices for which publication is required in the city’s official newspaper.
2. Publication is deemed complete on the date of publication. Proof of publication provided by the newspaper shall be presumptive evidence of the date of publication.
3. The director shall post, or cause to be posted, notices in the manner required by this code. Proof of posting in the following form executed by director or director’s representative shall be presumptive evidence of the date of posting:
CERTIFICATE
I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the state of Washington that the content of the attached form of notice was posted in the following described manner on the following stated date(s): ________.
______________________
(Date and Place of Signing)
______________________
(Signature)
B. Notice of Application – Contents.
1. Where formal notice of application is required for individual notice to applicants, agencies, surrounding property owners, or other persons, said notice shall include the following:
a. The identity of the applicant;
b. The date of the notice of application;
c. Notice that the city uses the optional threshold determination process authorized by WAC 197-11-355;
d. Notice that the application comment period for nonexempt proposals may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal;
e. Notice that the proposal may include mitigation measures under applicable codes and the project review process may incorporate or require mitigation measures regardless of whether an environmental impact statement is prepared;
f. Notice that a copy of the subsequent threshold determination on the proposal may be obtained upon request;
g. A statement identifying the public comment period, the right to comment on the application, receive notice of and participate in hearings, request a copy of decision on the proposal once made and any appeal rights;
h. To the extent applicable, the date, time, place and type of hearing upon the application if such hearing has been scheduled at the time the notice of application/proposal is given; and
i. Other information that the director determines to be appropriate.
C. Notice of Application – Distribution. Notice shall be distributed in the following manner, as appropriate to the level of review applicable to the project:
1. Applicant Notice. The director shall deliver or mail notice of application to the applicant or the person or entity designated by the applicant to receive notice. The notice of application may be provided to the applicant or applicant’s designee contemporaneously with the determination of completeness.
2. Agency Notice. The director shall mail notice of applications that are not categorically exempt under SEPA to directors and agencies with jurisdiction over the project permit application.
3. Combined Notice. Notice of application may be combined with notice of hearing if the hearing date has been set at the time notice of application is given. Each combined notice shall contain the notice of application information required herein and the notice of hearing information required by Chapter 2.26 SMC.
4. The director will document the date and manner by which any notice is given.
5. The director may remove, or cause to be removed, posted notice upon expiration of the comment period.
6. Publication costs and costs incurred to post and remove notice at the proposal site shall be borne by the applicant in addition to other costs and fees which apply, as provided by the then-current city of Sultan annual fee schedule.
D. Notice of Application – Type I Applications Categorically Exempt from SEPA Review.
1. The director shall deliver or mail notice of interpretation requests and applications for Type I proposals that are categorically exempt under SEPA to parties that have filed a special notification request in accordance with SMC 16.06.050.
2. Such notice shall explain that there is no comment period and that the proposal is categorically exempt under SEPA.
E. Notice of Application – Type II Applications and Type I Applications Nonexempt from SEPA Review.
1. The director shall deliver or mail notice for application of Type II proposals and Type I applications that are not categorically exempt under SEPA to parties that have filed a special notification request in accordance with SMC 16.06.050.
2. The director shall additionally post notice on the city internet website containing the following information:
a. The identity of the applicant;
b. The date of the application and the date of the determination of completeness;
c. A brief description of the proposed action;
d. If a preliminary determination has been made, a statement that the proposal is subject to threshold determination requirements and the preliminary threshold determination that it expects to issue;
e. A statement identifying the public comment period and where comments may be made and a statement that the application comment period may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal;
f. A statement explaining how interested parties may request special notice.
F. Notice of Application – Level III and Level IV Applications.
1. The director shall deliver or mail notice for application/proposal of Level III and Level IV applications to:
a. The record owner(s) of property within 300 feet of the proposal site measured from each property line of the proposal site, as shown by the records of the Snohomish County assessor’s office.
b. Parties that have filed a special notification request in accordance with SMC 16.06.050.
2. The director shall post, or cause to be posted, conspicuous notice at the proposal site and post notice on the city internet website which states:
a. The identity of the applicant;
b. The date of the application and the date of the determination of completeness;
c. A brief description of the proposed action;
d. If a preliminary determination has been made, a statement that the proposal is subject to threshold determination requirements and the preliminary threshold determination that it expects to issue;
e. A statement identifying the public comment period and where comments may be made and a statement that the application comment period may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal;
f. A statement explaining how interested parties may request special notice.
G. Notice of Application – Level III and Level IV Public Hearings.
1. Notice shall be published in the city’s official newspaper as provided in subsection (A) of this section.
2. The director shall deliver or mail notice for application/proposal of Level III and Level IV applications to:
a. Parties that have filed a special notification request in accordance with SMC 16.06.050.
b. The record owner(s) of property which is within 300 feet of the exterior boundaries of the subject parcel.
3. The director shall post, or cause to be posted, conspicuous notice at the proposal site and post notice on the city internet website which states:
a. The identity of the applicant;
b. The date of the application and the date of the determination of completeness;
c. A brief description of the proposed action;
d. If a preliminary determination has been made, a statement that the proposal is subject to threshold determination requirements and the preliminary threshold determination that it expects to issue;
e. A statement identifying the public comment period and where comments may be made and a statement that the application comment period may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal;
f. A statement explaining how interested parties may request special notice.
H. Comment Period.
1. There is no public comment period on Level I proposals that are categorically exempt under SEPA.
2. There shall be a 14-day public comment period on Level II proposals and Level I proposals that are not categorically exempt under SEPA.
3. There shall be a 14-day public comment period on all Level III and IV proposals even if they are categorically exempt under SEPA.
4. The length of the comment period shall be identified in the notice of application.
5. The applicant is deemed to be a participant in the comment period and may submit comments during the comment period in addition to those submitted by agencies and the public.
6. Comments must be submitted in writing to the director prior to expiration of the comment period.
7. The city may assume that parties which do not respond with written comments within the time period for commenting have no information relating to the proposal or its potential impact(s).
I. Integration of Notice Procedures with Environmental Review Procedures.
1. If the city has made a determination of significance under Chapter 43.21C RCW concurrently with the notice of application, the notice of application shall be combined with the determination of significance and scoping notice. Nothing in this chapter prevents a determination of significance and scoping notice from being issued prior to the notice of application.
2. Except for a determination of significance, the city may not issue its threshold determination, or issue a decision or a recommendation on a project permit, until the expiration of the public comment period on the notice of application.
J. Request for Special Notice.
1. “Special notice” means that the city will provide the information required by subsection (E), (F), or (G) of this section, whichever is appropriate to the specified application process, to a person not specified by the applicable code provisions to receive such notice. “Special notice” does not mean that the person may request or expect to receive information beyond that normally called for by the notice provisions applicable to the application.
2. A person may request to be provided notice of a particular application process filed under the provisions of this title by one of the following methods:
a. Filing a no-cost form provided by the city for the purpose of requesting a special notice.
b. Providing by letter or email a request for special notice which clearly states:
i. The requester’s name and contact information;
ii. The specific application of interest in the request.
3. The city shall have five days to respond to a request for special notice. If the hearing or other event that is the subject of the special notice request has already taken place, there shall be no effect or recourse available to the requester based on lack of notice.
K. Notice of Decision. Notice of decisions made pursuant to this title shall be provided according to the following provisions:
1. Notice of decision on an application under this title shall be provided to the following:
a. A letter delivered, or sent by first-class mail or by email sent to:
i. The applicant, or the person or entity designated by the applicant to receive notice;
ii. The appellant, if any;
iii. Parties that have filed a special notification request in accordance with SMC 16.06.050 prior to rendering of the decision;
iv. Identifiable parties who have provided addresses and have submitted substantive written comments on the proposal prior to rendering of the decision.
b. For Level II applications and Level I applications nonexempt from SEPA review, notice shall be as provided in subsection (A)(1) of this section and shall also include:
i. Posting on the city’s website;
ii. Individual notice to the record owner(s) of property which is adjacent to the proposal site, as shown by the records of the Snohomish County assessor’s office.
c. For Level III and Level IV applications, notice shall be as provided in subsection (A)(1) of this section and shall also include:
i. Posting on the city’s internet website;
ii. The record owner(s) of property within 300 feet of the proposal site measured from each property line of the proposal site, as shown by the records of the Snohomish County assessor’s office.
d. A notice of decision shall include the following:
i. The name and a brief description of the project;
ii. The identity of the applicant;
iii. Date of the decision;
iv. Brief description of the decision and any conditions;
v. The appeal rights that apply to the decision and the final date to file an appeal. (Ord. 1367-22 § 2 (Exh. A); Ord. 1328-20 § 5 (Exh. A))
16.06.050 Consistency with development regulations and SEPA.
A. Consistency with Other Regulations and Plans.
1. When the city receives a project permit application, consistency between the proposed project and the applicable regulations in this title and the policies set out in the Sultan comprehensive plan shall be determined through staff review of the project and the issuance of a permit or the preparation of a staff report to the decision maker.
2. During project permit application review, the city shall determine whether the items listed in this section are defined in the development regulations applicable to the proposed project and if the proposed project meets the development regulations. In the absence of applicable development regulations, the city shall determine whether the items listed in this section are defined in the city’s adopted comprehensive plan and if the proposed project meets the comprehensive plan policies. This determination of consistency shall include, but is not limited to, the following:
a. The type of land use permitted at the site, including uses that may be allowed under certain circumstances, if the criteria for their approval have been satisfied;
b. The level of development, such as units per acre, floor area ratio, lot coverage, etc.;
c. Availability and adequacy of infrastructure and public facilities identified in the comprehensive plan, if the plan or development regulations provide for funding of these facilities as required by Chapter 36.70A RCW; and
d. Character of the development, such as development standards.
3. The project permit application shall be reviewed for consistency with all criteria set out in this title for the project permit application type(s).
B. Initial SEPA Analysis. The city shall review the project permit application under the requirements of SEPA, Chapter 43.21C RCW; the SEPA rules, Chapter 197-11 WAC; and the city’s SEPA regulations, Chapter 17.04 SMC. (Ord. 1367-22 § 2 (Exh. A); Ord. 1328-20 § 5 (Exh. A))
16.06.060 Appeals.
A. Appeal of Decisions. Project permit applications shall be appealable as provided in Table 16.06-B.
B. Consolidated Appeals.
1. All appeals of project permit application decisions, other than an appeal of determination of significance (DS), shall be considered together in a consolidated appeal.
2. Appeals of environmental determinations under SEPA shall proceed as an appeal of the underlying permit in the process set out in this chapter.
C. SEPA Appeals.
1. SEPA appeals associated with a Type I or II project permit application can be on procedural or substantive grounds and are administered as follows:
a. SEPA appeals shall be heard by the hearing examiner in consolidation with any appeal of the underlying project permit application.
b. Appeals shall only be of the determination of nonsignificance or mitigated determination of nonsignificance, or final determination if issued.
c. Appeal of a SEPA determination shall be made by filing an appeal form containing all of the information listed in subsection (D) of this section and other information as determined to be necessary by the director and paying the applicable fee set out by resolution.
d. Appeals shall be filed within 21 days of the issuance of a determination of nonsignificance where public comment is required.
e. Appeals shall be filed within 14 days after the issuance of a determination of significance with no comment period.
f. Appeals shall be filed within 14 days after a determination of nonsignificance is issued if such determination is issued at the same time a decision on a project permit is filed.
g. Appeals shall be consistent with the provisions of Chapter 43.21C RCW and WAC 197-11-680.
2. SEPA appeals associated with Type III, IV, or V permits shall be to Snohomish County superior court within the provisions of this chapter, or to the Shorelines Hearings Board or the Growth Management Hearings Board consistent with state law.
D. Appeal Procedures. Appeals of the decision shall be governed by the following:
1. Standing. Only parties of record have standing to appeal the decision maker’s decision.
2. Time to File. An appeal of the decision maker’s decision must be filed within 14 days after service or publication of the notice of decision or as stated in subsection (C) of this section. The appeal must be submitted before the end of business day on the last business day of the appeal period.
3. Computation of Time. For the purposes of computing the time for filing an appeal, the day the decision maker’s decision is rendered shall not be included. The last day of the appeal period shall be included unless it is a Saturday, Sunday, or a day designated by RCW 1.16.050 or by the city’s ordinances as a legal holiday, then that day also is excluded and the filing must be completed by 4:30 p.m. on the next business day.
4. Content of Appeal. Appeals shall be in writing, be accompanied by the appeal fee, and contain the following information:
a. Appellant’s name, address and phone number; appellant’s statement describing his or her standing to appeal;
b. Identification of the application which is the subject of the appeal;
c. Appellant’s statement of grounds for appeal and the facts upon which the appeal is based;
d. The relief sought;
e. A statement that the appellant has read the appeal and believes the contents to be true, signed by the appellant.
5. Effect. The timely filing of an appeal shall stay the effective date of the decision maker’s decision until such time as the appeal is adjudicated or withdrawn.
E. Judicial Appeals. The city’s final decision on an application may be appealed by a party of record with standing to file a land use petition in Snohomish County court. Such petition must be filed within 21 days of issuance of the decision, as provided in Chapter 36.70C RCW. (Ord. 1367-22 § 2 (Exh. A); Ord. 1328-20 § 5 (Exh. A))
16.06.070 Open record public hearings.
A. General. Public hearings on all Types III and IV project permit applications, as defined in SMC 16.06.020(D), shall be conducted in accordance with this chapter.
B. Responsibility of Director. The director shall:
1. Schedule an application for public review and/or public hearing;
2. Give notice as required by SMC 16.06.040;
3. Prepare a staff report on the application, providing all pertinent information, including recommendations on project permits in the consolidated permit process that do not require an open record public hearing. The report shall state any mitigation required or proposed under the development regulations or the city’s authority under SEPA. The staff report may constitute the permit and the notice of decision.
C. Conflict of Interest, Ethics, Open Public Meetings, Appearance of Fairness. The hearing body shall be subject to the code of ethics (RCW 35A.42.020), prohibitions on conflict of interest (RCW 35A.42.020 and Chapter 42.23 RCW), Open Public Meetings Act (Chapter 42.30 RCW), and appearance of fairness (Chapter 42.36 RCW) as the same now exist or may hereafter be amended. (Ord. 1367-22 § 2 (Exh. A); Ord. 1328-20 § 5 (Exh. A))
16.06.080 Appeals – Procedure.
A. The appeal hearing shall be based on the record and no new evidence may be presented except as provided herein.
1. For director interpretations and Level I decisions and SEPA determinations for which there was no comment period, the record for appellate review may be supplemented by evidence of material facts that were not made part of the original record.
2. For Level II decisions and SEPA determinations for which there was a comment period, the record may be supplemented by additional evidence only if the additional evidence relates to:
a. Grounds for disqualification of the approving authority that made the decision, when such grounds were unknown by the petitioner at the time the record was created;
b. Matters that were improperly excluded from the record after being offered by a party to the approving authority; or
c. Matters that were outside the jurisdiction of the approving authority that made the decision.
3. If the appellate body allows the record to be supplemented, it shall require the parties to disclose before the appeal hearing the specific evidence they intend to offer. If any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any party, requests records under Chapter 42.56 RCW relating to the matters at issue, a copy of the request and response thereto shall simultaneously be given to all other parties and the appellate body.
4. The appellate body may require or permit corrections of ministerial errors or inadvertent omissions from the record of the approving authority.
B. The scope of an appeal shall be limited to issues timely raised by the appellant before the approving authority. An appellant shall be deemed to have waived any objection that was not raised at a time and in a manner to allow the approving authority to make correction prior to issuance of the decision which is the subject of the appeal.
C. The appellate body shall review the record and may grant relief only if the appellant has carried the burden of establishing that one of the standards set forth in subsections (C)(1) through (6) of this section applies:
1. The approving authority engaged in unlawful procedure or failed to follow prescribed process, unless the error was harmless;
2. The decision of the approving authority is an erroneous interpretation of the law, after allowing for such deference as is due the construction of a law by the approving authority with expertise;
3. The decision of the approving authority is not supported by substantial evidence when viewed in light of the whole record before the appellate body;
4. The decision of the approving authority is a clearly erroneous application of the law to the facts;
5. The decision of the approving authority is outside the authority or jurisdiction of the body or officer making the decision;
6. The decision of the approving authority violates the constitutional rights of the party seeking relief.
D. The appellant, respondent and city staff shall be permitted to address the appellate body and present argument upon the appeal. Such argument may not be used to introduce new evidence into the record except as provided in subsection (A) of this section.
E. Copies of the administrative appeal decision shall be sent to the appellant and to other parties of record as soon as practicable following the hearing at which the appeal is considered and, if applicable, within the time required by state law. (Ord. 1367-22 § 2 (Exh. A))