A.    Purpose and Summary.

1.    The purpose of this section is to provide a process and criteria for determining whether parcels are lots of record consistent with applicable state and local law, and to include a listing of potential remedial measures available to owners of property which do not meet the criteria.

2.    In summary, parcels are lots of record if they were in compliance with applicable laws regarding zoning and platting at the time of their creation. Zoning laws pertain primarily to the minimum lot size and dimensions of the property. Platting laws pertain primarily to the review process used in the creation of the lots. Specific provisions are listed herein.

B.    Applicability.

1.    The standards of this section apply to all requests for lot determinations, or for building permit, placement permit, site plan review, short plat, subdivision, conditional use permit, rezone, or comprehensive plan change application.

2.    A legal lot determination is subject to a Type I review process as provided in Chapter 17.94.

C.    Determination Process. Lot of record status may be formally determined through the following ways:

1.    Lot Determinations as Part of a Building Permit or Other Development Request. Building or other development applications for new principal structures on parcels which are not part of a platted land division shall be reviewed by the county for compliance with the criteria standards of this section, according to the timelines and procedures of the building permit or other applicable review involved. Lot determination fees pursuant to the Adams County building and planning master fee schedule shall be assessed, unless the parcel was recognized through a previous lot determination or other review in which such recognition was made. Lot determination fees will be assessed for placement or replacement of primary structures. A separate written approval will not be issued unless requested by the applicant. Request for determinations based on the innocent purchaser or public interest exception criteria of this chapter shall require separate submittal under subsection (C)(2) of this section.

2.    Lot Determinations Requests Submitted Without Other Development Review. Requests for determinations of lot of record status not involving any other county development reviews, or any requests for innocent purchaser or mandatory public interest exceptions shall submit an application for lot determination, with fees assessed pursuant to the Adams County building and planning master fee schedule. The county will issue a letter of determination in response to all such requests.

D.    Application and Submittal Requirements.

1.    The following shall be submitted with all applications for lot determination, or applications for other development review in which a lot determination is involved. Applicants are encouraged to submit material as necessary to demonstrate compliance with this section.

a.    Prior county short plat, subdivision, lot determination or other written approvals, if any, in which the parcel was formally created or determined to be a lot of record;

b.    Sales or transfer deed history dating back to 1969;

c.    Prior segregation request, if any;

d.    Prior recorded survey, if any;

e.    At the discretion of the applicant, any other information demonstrating compliance with criteria of this section.

2.    Requests for the innocent purchaser exception shall also include a written explanation of the circumstances surrounding the purchase of the property which demonstrates compliance with innocent purchaser criteria of subsection (F)(1) of this section. Additional documentation such as earnest money agreements, written affidavits, previous tax statements or property advertisements may be included at the discretion of the applicant.

3.    Requests for the public interest exception shall also include a written explanation which demonstrates compliance with applicable public interest exception criteria of this chapter.

E.    Approval Criteria.

1.    Basic Criteria. Parcels which meet both of the following basic criteria are lots of record:

a.    Zoning. The parcel meets minimum zoning requirements, including lot area and width, in effect currently or at the time the parcel was created; and

b.    Platting.

i.    The parcel was created through a subdivision or short plat recorded with Adams County; or

ii.    The parcel is five acres or more in size and was created through any of the following:

(A)         An exempt division which occurred prior to 1969;

(B)             A tax segregation requested prior to 1969;

(C)         A survey completed as to boundaries prior to 1977;

iii.    The parcel was created through a division or segregation of four or fewer lots requested prior to September 22, 1986; or

iv.    The parcel was created through division or segregation and was in existence prior to 1977; or

v.    The parcel was created by a process listed as exempt from platting requirements by RCW 58.17.035, 58.17.040, or Section 16.04.020 or through an exemption from platting regulations provided by law at the time of creation of the parcel; or

vi.    The parcel was segregated at any time and is twenty acres or more in size.

2.    Prior Determination. Parcels which have been recognized through a previous lot determination review, or other county planning approval in which lot recognition is made, are lots of record. Such parcels shall remain lots of record until changed by action of the owner.

F.    Exceptions.

1.    Innocent Purchaser Exception. The administrator shall determine that parcels which meet all of the following exception criteria are lots of record:

a.    The burden of proof of innocence is on the property owner. Evidence that can be used to demonstrate innocence includes, but is not limited to, aerial photography, property tax records, real estate deeds, and real property transfer disclosure statements.

b.    The applicant did not know, and could not have known by the exercise of care which a reasonable purchaser would have used in purchasing the land, that the lot, tract or parcel had been part of a larger lot, tract or parcel divided in violation of state law or Title 16, Subdivisions.

c.    To be considered an “innocent purchaser” the current owner must have purchased the property for fair market value. “Innocent purchaser” does not include acquiring property via inheritance or trusts.

d.    These provisions are not intended to exempt development from permitting requirements of state or federal agencies.

2.    Public Interest Exception, Mandatory. The administrator shall determine that parcels which meet the following criteria are lots of record:

a.    Zoning. The parcel meets minimum zoning dimensional requirements currently in effect, including lot area and width; and

b.    Platting.

i.    The administrator determines that improvements or conditions of approval which would have been imposed if the parcel had been established through platting are already present and completed; or

ii.    The property owner completes conditions of approval such as, but not limited to, road, sidewalk, and stormwater improvements which the administrator determines would otherwise be imposed if the parcel had been established through platting under current standards. Preliminary and final submittal plans and fees shall be required where applicable. Such plans may include final engineering plans and a final land division plan in lieu of a final plat.

3.    Public Interest Exception, Discretionary. The administrator may, but is not obligated to, determine that parcels meeting the following criteria are lots of record:

a.    Zoning. The parcel lacks sufficient area or dimension to meet current zoning requirements;

b.    Platting.

i.    The administrator determines that conditions of approval which would have been imposed if the parcel been established through platting under current standards are already present on the land; or

ii.    The property owner completes conditions of approval such as, but not limited to, road, sidewalk, and stormwater improvements which the administrator determines would otherwise be imposed if the parcel had been established through platting under current standards. Preliminary and final submittal plans and fees shall be required where applicable. Such plans may include final engineering plans and a final land division plan in lieu of a final plat.

c.    The administrator shall apply the following factors in making a lot of record determination under the discretionary public interest exception:

i.    The parcel size is generally consistent with surrounding lots of record;

ii.    The proposed means of sewage disposal and water supply on and to the lot, tract or parcel are adequate;

iii.    Recognition of the parcel does not adversely impact public health or safety;

iv.    Recognition of the parcel does not adversely affect or interfere with the implementation of the comprehensive plan; and

v.    The parcel purchase value and subsequent tax assessments are consistent with a buildable lot of record.

4.    Recognition of lot of record status based on the public interest exception shall be valid for five years from the date of lot determination or review in which the determination was made. If a building or other development permit is not sought within that time, the determination will expire. Applications for development or lot recognition submitted after five years shall require compliance with applicable standards at that time.

G.    De Minimis Lot Size Standard. For the purposes of reviewing the status of preexisting lots for compliance with platting and zoning standards, parcels within one percent of minimum lot size requirements shall be considered in compliance with those standards. Parcels within ten percent of lot size standards shall be similarly considered in compliance unless the administrator determines that public health or safety impacts are present.

H.    Potential Remedial Measures. Transfer or sale of properties created in violation of land division regulations is a gross misdemeanor pursuant to RCW 58.17.300. Buyers of property not in compliance with lot of record criteria, including exceptions, listed in this section may consider pursuing one or more of the following, listed in no particular order:

1.    Purchase of additional land from surrounding properties if necessary to reach compliance with zoning standards, and subsequent boundary line adjustment which does not result in any other parcels becoming inconsistent with minimum zoning standards.

2.    Private action to seek damages, including the cost of investigation and suit from the selling party if the property was transferred in violation of applicable zoning and platting regulations, as authorized by RCW 58.17.210.

3.    Private action to rescind the sale or transfer, and recover cost of investigation and suit from the selling party if the property was transferred in violation of applicable zoning and platting regulations, as authorized by RCW 58.17.210.

4.    Application for a variance if necessary to reach compliance with zoning standards. Such applications will be reviewed solely under variance criteria of Chapter 17.77, and shall not be granted on the basis of illegal lot status.

5.    Application for zoning changes under Chapter 17.80 if an alternative designation can bring the parcel into lot of record status. Such zone change requests shall be reviewed solely according to their compliance with respective criteria of Chapter 17.80 and shall not be granted on the basis of illegal lot status. (Ord. O-02-25 § 1 (Exh. A))

A.    Purpose. Upon review of the administrator, uses designated as permitted subject to review and approval (R/A) may be allowed in the various districts; provided, that the administrator is of the opinion that such uses would be compatible with neighboring land uses.

B.    Review Procedures. Uses subject to review and approval (R/A) shall be reviewed through a Type II process per Chapter 17.94; provided, that the administrator, at their discretion, may refer any proposal to the hearing examiner for review and approval or denial. Any uses approved under the provisions of this chapter by either the administrator or the hearing examiner in a public hearing, shall be compatible with adopted county land use policies and goals.

C.    Approval Criteria—General. Except for the uses listed in subsection D of this section, in approving a use, the administrator shall first make a finding that all of the following conditions exist:

1.    The site of the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use;

2.    All setbacks, spaces, walls and fences, parking, loading, landscaping, and other features required by this title are provided;

3.    The proposed use is compatible with neighborhood land use;

4.    The site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the quantity and kind of traffic generated by the proposed use;

5.    The proposed use will have no substantial adverse effect on abutting property or the permitted use thereof; and

6.    In the case of residential uses, the housing density of the development is consistent with the existing zoning densities, or the general plan, and that all other aspects of the development are consistent with the public health, safety, and general welfare for the development and for adjacent properties.

D.    Approval Criteria—Special Uses. When the following uses are allowed subject to review and approval (R/A) the administrator shall review them subject to the applicable standards and criteria in Chapter 17.69, Specific Uses and Standards, including but not limited to:

1.    Accessory dwelling units (Section 17.69.020);

2.    Bed and breakfast establishments (Section 17.69.070);

3.    Home businesses—Major (Section 17.69.200);

4.    Kennels (Section 17.69.170);

5.    Manufactured home parks (Section 17.69.210);

6.    Wireless communications facilities (Chapter 17.74). (Ord. O-02-25 § 1 (Exh. A))

A.    Purpose. The purpose of this section is to provide a review process for uses with unusual characteristics, or uses that are located in areas with special characteristics. Such uses can be approved with appropriate conditions of approval to ensure that the uses are properly located and restricted in size and/or intensity to comply with the objectives of this section.

B.    Reviewing Official Authority. The reviewing official shall have the authority to approve, approve with conditions, deny, or revoke conditional use permits subject to the Type III process pursuant to Chapter 17.94. In granting a conditional use permit, certain safeguards may be required, and certain conditions may be established to accomplish the following objectives:

1.    To protect the health, safety, convenience, and general welfare of the public;

2.    To ensure that the purposes of the zoning code shall be maintained with respect to the particular conditional use on the particular requested site;

3.    To consider the location, use, building, traffic characteristics, and environmental impact(s) of the proposed use; and

4.    To consider existing and potential uses within the general area in which the requested conditional use is proposed.

C.    Preapplication Submittal Requirements for a Conditional Use Permit.

1.    A preapplication meeting is required for all conditional use permit applications subject to the requirements in Chapter 17.94.

2.    An applicant for a preapplication meeting of a conditional use permit shall comply with the submittal requirements in Chapter 17.94.

D.    Concurrent Application. Conditional use applications may be submitted concurrently with the associated site plan review application, where applicable.

E.    Application Submittal Requirements for a Conditional Use Permit. An application for a review of a Type III conditional use permit shall comply with the submittal requirements in Chapter 17.94, in addition to a written response to the following review criteria:

1.    The proposal is compatible with other uses in the surrounding area or is no more incompatible than any other outright permitted uses in the applicable zoning district;

2.    The proposal will not materially endanger the health, safety, and welfare of the surrounding community to an extent greater than that associated with any other permitted uses in the applicable zoning district;

3.    The proposal would not cause the pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the use to conflict with existing and anticipated traffic in the neighborhood to an extent greater than that associated with any other permitted uses in the applicable zoning district;

4.    The proposal will be supported by adequate service facilities and would not adversely affect public services to the surrounding area; and

5.    The proposal would not hinder or discourage the development of permitted uses on neighboring properties in the applicable zoning district as a result of the location, size or height of the buildings, structures, walls, or required fences or screening vegetation to a greater extent than other permitted uses in the applicable zoning district.

F.    Action by the Reviewing Official.

1.    The reviewing official may impose, in addition to regulations and standards expressly specified in this title, other conditions found necessary to protect the interests of the surrounding properties or neighborhood, or the county as a whole. These conditions may include but are not limited to requirements:

a.    Increasing the required lot size or setback dimensions;

b.    Increasing street widths;

c.    Controlling the location and number of vehicular access points to the property;

d.    Increasing the number of off-street parking or loading spaces required;

e.    Limiting the number of signs;

f.    Limiting the lot coverage or height of buildings because of obstructions to view and reduction of light and air to adjacent property;

g.    Limiting building area and intensity of the use;

h.    Limiting or prohibiting openings in sides of buildings or structures or requiring screening and landscaping where necessary to reduce noise and glare and maintain the property in a character in keeping with the surrounding area;

i.    Establishing hours of operation;

j.    Establishing maintenance standards; and

k.    Establishing standards under which any future enlargement or alteration of the use shall be reviewed by the county and new conditions imposed.

2.    Findings. The reviewing official must find that the establishment, maintenance or operation of the use applied for will not be significantly detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to the property and improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the county.

3.    Expiration.

a.    The reviewing official shall include an expiration date as a condition in their approval. The expiration date shall be set based on what is reasonable and appropriate for the specific project.

b.    The expiration date shall generally be two years after the issuance of the approval for the applicant to commence said use or receive a building permit for said use. In the event that no specific time limit to begin the conditional use is identified in the conditional approval, then the conditional use permit shall remain valid for a period of two years from the date that the permit was issued.

c.    The review authority may include a provision for a one-time administrative extension of one year of the conditional use permit if the applicant can demonstrate extraordinary circumstances or conditions not known or foreseeable at the time the original application for a conditional use permit was granted. The administrative extension of a conditional use permit is a Type I project process in Chapter 17.85.

d.    If the conditional use permit expires pursuant to the conditions of the hearing examiner and this section, the administrator shall issue a written notice of expiration.

4.    Discontinuance of Use—Expiration.

a.    The reviewing official shall include an expiration upon a discontinuance of the use for a set period of time as a condition in their approval. The discontinuance of use expiration shall be set based on what is reasonable and appropriate for the specific project.

b.    The discontinuance of use expiration shall generally be after the use has discontinued for thirty-six consecutive months. In the event that no specific time is identified in the conditional approval, then the conditional use permit shall expire if the use is ceased for thirty-six consecutive months.

c.    A one-time administrative extension of the conditional use permit may be granted if the applicant can demonstrate extraordinary circumstances. The administrative extension of a conditional use permit is a Type I decision per Chapter 17.94.

d.    If the conditional use permit expires pursuant to the conditions of the hearing examiner and this section, the administrator shall issue a written notice of expiration.

5.    Additional Reviews.

a.    All projects are subject to additional reviews, unless exempted by the reviewing official. The reviewing official shall include under what frequency and by who shall conduct the additional reviews as a condition in their approval. A requirement for additional reviews shall be set based on what is reasonable and appropriate for the specific project. In the event that no specific time is identified in the conditional approval, the default frequency for additional reviews shall be every five years and shall be conducted administratively.

b.    Additional reviews may be conducted by the administrator, the hearing examiner, the planning commission, or the board of county commissioners.

c.    Additional reviews may be limited to a one-time review after a set time period, or required periodically.

d.    The additional review shall serve as guarantees and evidence that conditions are being or will be complied with.

e.    If the approved conditional use on the subject property is determined to be in violation of conditions of approval, the administrator shall take appropriate action.

G.    Revocation. The reviewing official may revoke any conditional use permit for noncompliance with conditions set forth in the granting of said permit through a Type III process. The revocation shall not be the exclusive remedy, and it shall be unlawful and punishable under Title 1 for any person to violate any condition imposed by a conditional use permit.

H.    Expansions.

1.    Subject to subsection (F)(1)(k) of this section, a conditional use may be expanded or modified as follows:

a.    An existing permitted conditional use may be expanded or modified by site plan approval pursuant to Section 17.85.040 if the expansion or modification complies with other applicable regulations and is not expressly prohibited by the approved conditional use permit for the site.

b.    A lawful but nonconforming conditional use that was commenced prior to a conditional use permit being required may be expanded or modified by site plan approval if the expansion or modification:

i.    Complies with other applicable regulations;

ii.    Does not add a new conditional use other than that already existing on the site; and

iii.    Qualifies as a Type I site plan review pursuant to Section 17.85.040.

c.    A lawful but nonconforming conditional use that was commenced prior to a conditional use permit being required must first obtain a conditional use permit and the necessary site plan review approval subject to the standards in subsection (H)(2) of this section and Section 17.85.040 if the expansion or modification qualifies as a Type II site plan review pursuant to Section 17.85.040 or includes a new conditional use not already existing on the site.

2.    An expansion involving the absorption of an abutting parcel(s) of land not considered in the original conditional use permit review shall be subject to a Type II application if the proposed use was never proposed or discussed in the original application.

3.    An expansion involving the absorption of an abutting parcel(s) of land that was considered in the original conditional use permit review shall be a Type II application if the proposed use was approved or if the expansion involves an existing approved use in a prior conditional use permit review. (Ord. O-02-25 § 1 (Exh. A))

A.    Purpose. The purpose of site plan review is to establish a permit process to review the conceptual plan for the development of property for residential (other than single detached), recreational/cultural, general services, business services, retail, manufacturing, and regional land uses where a division of property is not proposed under this title. Site plan review precedes approval of a building permit or other construction permits, in order to ascertain that the general layout of the development will conform to the requirements of this title, including but not limited to dimensional standards, streets and sidewalks, parking, landscaping and protection of critical areas.

B.    Applicability.

1.    Site plan review is required for new development and modifications to existing development, unless expressly exempted by this chapter.

2.    A site plan is considered major and subject to a Type II review process as provided in Chapter 17.94 if the proposal meets one or more of the following:

a.    New uses in all industrial, commercial, and airport zones;

b.    Change of use from residential to commercial or industrial use;

c.    New construction of four thousand or more square feet, excluding single-family dwellings;

d.    Expansions involving the addition of four thousand square feet or more to an existing building or structure, except:

i.    Where the size of the addition is equal to fifteen percent or less of the building’s or structure’s existing gross floor area; and

ii.    Expansions to single-family dwellings;

e.    Any multifamily building that will create five or more new dwelling units, regardless of size;

f.    A modification to existing permitted development or a permitted modification to an existing nonconforming use, as allowed under Chapter 17.64, if it will cause any of the following:

i.    An increase in density or lot coverage by more than ten percent for residential development if the change is made along the development site perimeter; or twenty percent or more for the development;

ii.    A change in the type of dwelling units proposed in a residential development (e.g., a change from detached to attached structures or a change from single-family to multifamily) if the change is made along the development site perimeter;

iii.    An increase of more than ten percent in required on-site parking or an increase of more than forty on-site parking spaces, unless the required parking spaces exist on site and meet the design standards for parking and landscaping;

iv.    An increase in the height of an existing structure(s) by more than fifty percent if the structure is located within twenty feet of the property lines;

v.    A change in the location of accessways to frontage roads where off-site traffic would be affected;

vi.    A change in the location of parking where the parking is closer to land zoned or used for residential or mixed residential/other purposes;

vii.    A change in location or increase in size of a stormwater facility if the change is made along the development site perimeter;

viii.     An increase in vehicular traffic generated to and from the site of more than twenty average daily trips, based on the latest edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual or substantial evidence by a professional engineer licensed in the state of Washington with expertise in traffic engineering;

ix.    An increase in floor area of a structure used for nonresidential purposes by more than ten percent and at least five thousand square feet;

x.    A SEPA determination is required by Chapter 18.04;

xi.    A reduction in the area used for recreational facilities, screening, buffering, landscaping and/or open space by more than ten percent, provided the minimum standards and conditions of approval under the original decision are met; or

xii.    A modification, other than one listed in this section, if subject to Type II review based on the permit revision procedures in Section 17.85.050 or based on other sections of this title;

g.    Aboveground storage tanks over two thousand gallons and underground tanks larger than ten thousand gallons in size, except: on agricultural and industrial lands, aboveground and underground storage tanks larger than sixty thousand gallons.

3.    A site plan is considered minor and is subject to a Type I review process as provided in Chapter 17.94 if:

a.    It is not subject to Type II review under Chapter 17.94;

b.    It is not exempt under subsection (B)(4) of this section; or

c.    It is listed below:

i.    Walk-up or drive-through vendors such as espresso and coffee carts, flower stands and food carts that do not exceed three hundred square feet; provided, that such uses are accessory to existing legally permitted nonresidential development on the same site;

ii.    Neighborhood parks;

iii.    Aboveground tanks over one hundred twenty-five gallons up to and including two thousand gallons. CARA provisions in Chapter 18.06 may also apply;

iv.    Any new construction of less than four thousand square feet for which a building permit is required, excluding single-family dwellings;

v.    Any multifamily building that will create four or less new dwelling units, regardless of size;

vi.    Reconfiguration of a parking area, means of ingress or egress or site circulation, regardless of whether a building permit is required, unless the small size of the proposed use or other factor(s) justify a waiver in the sole discretion of the administrator.

4.    The following land uses and development are exempt from site plan review, provided applicable standards of this title are met:

a.    A single-family detached dwelling and modifications to it;

b.    A duplex or triplex and modifications to it on a lot created and approved for such use;

c.    Development exempt from review under the adopted building code;

d.    Modifications to the interior of existing structures that do not change the use or the amount of a use;

e.    Changes in use that do not require an increased number of parking spaces over those required for the existing use, based on Section 17.76.090. The proposed change in use must be a permitted use in the zoning district and may not violate the existing site plan approval. The existence of on-site parking greater than the minimum number of spaces required for a new use exempts a development from site plan review; provided, all parking spaces meet the design standards for parking and landscaping. Additional transportation impact fees (TIC fees) may apply;

f.    Land divisions;

g.    School modulars or portables, provided:

i.    The total gross floor area of the modulars does not exceed thirty percent of the gross floor area of the existing school building, not including existing modulars; and

ii.    The project is either exempt from SEPA, or the applicant takes on lead agency status for SEPA; and

h.    Other development the administrator finds should be exempt, because it does not result in an increase in land use activity or intensity or in an adverse impact perceptible to a person of average sensibilities from off site, and because the county can ensure that the development complies with applicable standards without site plan review.

C.    Binding Site Plans.

1.    The purpose of binding site plan approval is to provide an alternative to the standard subdivision process for specific types of development. The binding site plan shall only be applied for the purpose of dividing land for:

a.    Sale or lease of commercially or industrially zoned property as provided in RCW 58.17.040(4);

b.    Lease as provided in RCW 58.17.040(5) when no residential structure other than manufactured homes or travel trailers are permitted to be placed upon the land; provided, that the land use is in accordance with the requirements of this title; and

2.    In addition to the requirements of a standard site plan, a binding site plan shall contain:

a.    Inscriptions or attachments setting forth such appropriate limitations and conditions for the use of the land; and

b.    Provisions making any development conform to the site plan.

3.    In addition to the requirements of a standard final site plan, a final binding site plan application shall contain:

a.    Survey prepared by a licensed land surveyor in the state of Washington showing the project boundary with mathematical closures and any land division lines created through the binding site plan process; and

b.    Parcel area of lots expressed in square footage and/or acreage for developments in the rural area.

D.    Approval Process.

1.    A site plan subject to a Type I review is not subject to preapplication meeting unless requested by the applicant.

2.    A site plan subject to a Type II review is subject to preapplication meeting pursuant to Chapter 17.94, unless waived.

3.    An application for a preapplication meeting of a site plan shall comply with the submittal requirements in Chapter 17.94 regarding preapplication meeting.

4.    An application for a review of a site plan shall comply with the submittal requirements in Chapter 17.94.

E.    Approval Criteria.

1.    If the administrator finds that a site plan application does or can comply with the applicable approval and development standards, the administrator shall approve the site plan, or approve the site plan subject to conditions of approval that ensure the proposed development will comply with the applicable standards.

2.    If the administrator finds that a site plan application does not comply with one or more of the applicable approval or development standards, and that such compliance cannot be achieved by imposing a condition or conditions of approval, the administrator shall deny the site plan application.

3.    If a site plan is subject to a standard(s) over which the administrator does not have sole jurisdiction, then the administrator shall not make a final decision regarding the site plan until the related decision(s) regarding the applicable standard(s) has been received.

4.    A change of use on a lawfully developed site with nonconforming landscaping and screening shall be brought into compliance with standards in Section 17.76.140, subject to the following:

a.    An alternate landscaping or screening plan may be approved if:

i.    Compliance with requirements in Section 17.76.140 is not reasonably possible due to location of existing structures, topography, life safety concerns, etc.; or

ii.    Requirements for on-site parking, including access drive aisles, will not meet standards;

iii.    The required landscaping improvements exceed ten percent of the value of construction costs of all building and site improvements, except landscaping, for the change in use; however, the minimum requirements under subsection (E)(4)(b) of this section shall be met.

b.    At a minimum, outdoor storage areas shall be screened from adjoining properties or public rights-of-way by a six-foot fence or wall.

5.    Decision Criteria. A written record of decision shall be prepared in each case. The record may be in the form of a staff report or other written document and shall indicate whether the application is approved, approved with conditions or denied. The administrator’s decision shall include any reasonable conditions to ensure consistency with the county’s development regulations based upon, but not limited to, the following:

a.    Conformance of the proposed site development plan with any conditions on a portion of the site, and with any applicable codes and ordinances of the state of Washington and the county;

b.    A finding that the site plan makes appropriate provisions for, but not limited to, the public health, safety, and general welfare related to dedication of rights-of-way or recreation space, and tracts, easements, or limitations which may be proposed or required for utilities, access, drainage controls, sanitation and water supply;

c.    A finding that the site plan complies with all applicable provisions of this title, and all other applicable adopted administrative rules and regulations.

F.    Final Site Plan/Final Construction Plan Review.

1.    Submittal Requirements. All of the materials listed below must be submitted for a complete application, unless otherwise authorized by the administrator:

a.    Completed application form;

b.    Application fee pursuant to the building and planning master fee schedule;

c.    Construction Plans. Where improvements are required, plans for such improvements shall be submitted to the county engineer who shall review them for conformance with conditions of preliminary site plan approval and other adopted county standards as of the date of preliminary site plan approval. Approval shall be given by the signature of the county engineer on the construction plans. Improvements shall be designed by or under the direct supervision of a licensed engineer where required by statute (Chapters 18.08, 18.43, and 18.96 RCW). The licensed engineer shall certify same by seal and signature. All construction plans shall comply with the provisions of the Adams County Code.

Unless waived by the county engineer, the construction plan set shall include the following elements:

i.    Final grading plan;

ii.    Final transportation plan;

iii.    Final signing and striping plan;

iv.    Final stormwater plan;

v.    Proposed erosion control plan;

vi.    Final landscaping plan;

vii.    Final wetland and/or habitat mitigation plan, if applicable;

viii.                    Final water and wastewater disposal plan; and

ix.    Additional information as required by the administrator consistent with the conditions of the preliminary approval or as otherwise required by the code;

d.    Conditions, covenants and restrictions, notes, and/or binding agreements as required by this code, SEPA, conditions of preliminary plat approval or other law, including but not limited to the following:

i.    Private road maintenance agreement, if applicable,

ii.    Stormwater covenant, if applicable,

iii.    Wetland and/or habitat covenant(s), if applicable,

iv.    Recorded conservation covenant, if applicable, and

v.    Latecomer’s agreement, if applicable;

e.    Verification of installation of required landscape;

f.    Copy of recorded public and private off-site easements and right-of-way dedications for required improvements;

g.    Final archaeology comments, if applicable;

h.    Receipt showing payment of any fees;

i.    Other supporting documents required pursuant to the preliminary site plan decision.

2.    Copies. All plans and materials shall be submitted in the format and number established by the administrator.

3.    Construction Plan and Final Site Plan Review Procedure.

a.    Final site plan/final construction plan applications are subject to a Type I review pursuant to Chapter 17.94.

b.    The administrator shall approve final site plan/final construction plans and forward the final site plans to the appropriate department for issuance of a building permit if the approval criteria below are met:

i.    The construction plans, if required, and final site plan are in proper form as established by the submittal requirements;

ii.    The construction plans, if required, meet the technical performance requirements of the county. Improvements were designed by or under the direct supervision of a licensed engineer where required by statute (Chapters 18.08, 18.43, and 18.96 RCW) and the licensed engineer has certified same by seal and signature;

iii.    The construction plans, if required, and final site plan are in conformance with the conditions of the preliminary site plan approval; and

iv.    The construction plans, if required, and final site plan are in compliance with the requirements of this chapter and all applicable adopted statutes and local ordinances.

c.    The construction plan approval shall be given by the signature of the county engineer on the improvement plans. (Ord. O-02-25 § 1 (Exh. A))

A.    Purpose. The purpose of this section is to allow minor changes to preliminarily approved development applications in a timely and cost effective manner. Such changes may be warranted by ambiguities or conflicts in a decision and by new or more detailed information, permits, or laws. It allows for public notice and input relative to the degree and scope of the proposed changes. The administrator may approve some de minimis changes without a permit revision review using the final plat/final site plan review process.

B.    Applicability. An applicant who has obtained preliminary approval of a development application, including land division, site plan review, conditional use permit, or planned unit development, may file a permit revision review application requesting a minor change to aspects of the development proposal or conditions of approval. The permit revision review application may be filed at any time during the period of validity of the preliminary decision; provided:

1.    A permit revision review application shall not be accepted for a land division after a final plat has been recorded.

2.    A permit revision review application for a site plan review shall not be accepted for a development after issuance of a certificate of occupancy.

a.    For phased site plan review projects, no application for a permit revision shall be accepted for a phase after issuance of an occupancy permit for that phase.

3.    Permit revisions shall not substantially change the nature of development approved under a given decision.

4.    An application that is denied is not eligible for permit revision review.

C.    Modification of a development other than by a timely appeal or permit revision review shall be through review of a new application; provided, a new application cannot be filed within one calendar year after the date of a decision denying a substantially similar application, unless such earlier decision provides otherwise. The administrator may determine that proposed changes exceed the scope of the permit revision review process and that a new development application is warranted. Such determination may be appealed to a hearing examiner in accordance with Chapter 17.94.

D.    Vesting. Vesting for a proposed development is based on the original development application, in accordance with Chapter 17.94; provided, that any changes that increase impacts beyond the original development application will be subject to the applicable ordinances in effect on the day that a fully complete permit revision review application is filed.

E.    Classification. The administrator shall classify the application as subject to a Type I, Type II, or Type III process. This classification decision may be appealed to the hearing examiner in accordance with Chapter 17.94.

1.    An application for permit revision review of a Type I decision shall be subject to a Type I review process.

2.    An application for permit revision review of a Type II or a Type III decision shall be subject to a Type I review process, if the administrator finds that the requested change in the decision:

a.    Will not result in an increase in land use activity or intensity; and

b.    Will not result in an adverse impact; and

c.    Does not involve an issue of broad public interest.

3.    An application for permit revision review of a Type II decision not subject to public hearing shall be subject to a Type II review process if it does not qualify for Type I review under subsection (E)(2) of this section.

4.    An application for permit revision review of a Type III decision shall be subject to a Type II review process if the reviewing official finds that the requested change in the decision:

a.    Does not increase the potential adverse impact of the development authorized by the decision or SEPA determination;

b.    Adds up to two lots for a subdivision;

c.    Requires a Type I or Type II variance;

d.    Is consistent with county, state and federal laws and regulations, but may involve changes that neighboring property owners should be aware of;

e.    Does not involve an issue of broad public interest, based on the record of the decision. An issue of public interest is one about which testimony was submitted to the record either at the public hearing or in writing.

5.    An application for permit revision review of a Type III decision shall be subject to a Type III review process if it:

a.    Proposes reductions in effectiveness of exterior landscaping;

b.    Proposes to reduce dedications for public facilities;

c.    Results in a change of routing traffic or requires a road modification that has off-site impacts;

d.    Reduces transportation safety;

e.    Exceeds the limits of subsection (E)(4)(b) of this section;

f.    Involves an issue of broad public interest based on the record of the decision. An issue of public interest is one about which testimony was submitted to the record either at the public hearing or in writing;

g.    Increases the potential adverse impact of the development authorized by the decision or SEPA determination.

6.    When a permit revision review application requests a change involving a condition of approval that was imposed in the original decision to address a specific potential impact of the proposed development, that condition of approval can be changed only using the same type process as the original decision.

F.    Submittal Requirements. Application for permit revision review shall include the following:

1.    A narrative describing the nature of the proposed change to the development and the basis for that change, including the applicable facts and law;

2.    A copy of the approved development plan;

3.    A copy of the original development review decision and any approved modifications;

4.    A copy of the proposed development plan;

5.    Application fee;

6.    Any other relevant information the applicant thinks may be helpful. (Ord. O-02-25 § 1 (Exh. A))