Battle Ground City Zoning Code

Type I (Administrative Quasi-Judicial). This application involves no or very little discretionary decision making in application of the applicable development ordinances, and has little to no significant impact to abutting property owners and/or the public in general. Examples include boundary line adjustments, building permits and home occupations.

Type II (Administrative Quasi-Judicial). This application type requires a higher degree of discretionary decision making in interpreting and applying the applicable development regulations, and has a greater degree of impact on abutting property owners and/or the general public. Examples include short plats, multifamily developments and commercial site plans abutting residential zones.

Type III (Hearing Quasi-Judicial and Legislative). This application type requires a high degree of discretionary decision making in interpreting and applying development regulations, and/or has a high degree of impact on property owners within the vicinity of the site and the public in general. Examples include subdivisions, conditional use permits (CUPs), code interpretations, rezones and planned unit developments (PUDs), or amendments to the comprehensive plan or plan map.

Administrative Interpretation. Upon request or as determined necessary, the planning director shall interpret the meaning or application of the provisions of such title as well as development agreements executed under RCW 36.70B.170 and issue a written administrative interpretation within thirty days. Requests for interpretation shall be written and shall concisely identify the issue and desired interpretation. In issuing administrative interpretations, the planning director is authorized to accept deviations from design, dimensional, and aesthetic and buffering standards in the development code; provided, that any approved deviation results in a proposal that, in the judgment of the planning director, provides equivalent or superior design and/or protection to adjoining properties and is consistent with any development agreement related to the subject property.

Deviations. In reviewing and approving project permit applications, the planning director may approve administrative deviations from the standards in the BGMC; provided, that (a) any deviation is consistent with any development agreement related to the subject property; and (b) in the judgment of the planning director, any approved deviation would result in a project that is equivalent or superior to what would be required under the standards set forth in this chapter.

Recommendations of the planning commission;

Any legislative action;

Decisions. The city council shall make its decision by motion, resolution or ordinance as appropriate.

All Type III land use actions that are site-specific in nature, and Type I and II appeals.

Hearing and reporting on any proposals to change the comprehensive plan map land use and/or implementing zoning designation of specific parcels of land, including such annual reviews which are applied for and are not of general applicability.

A preapplication conference is required for all Type II and III applications, unless waived by the planning director. Generally, the planning director may waive the preapplication conference only if he/she determines that the proposal is relatively simple (e.g., has few, if any, development-related issues), or it involves subsequent phases of an approved development where requirements are known, or an application is substantially similar to a prior proposal affecting substantially the same property, as determined by the planning director.

To request a waiver of a preapplication conference, the applicant shall submit:

Completed and signed preapplication conference request form provided by the planning director accompanied by fees as identified in BGMC fee schedule.

Copies of a site plan or proposed plat, as appropriate for the proposed land use, drawn to a minimum scale of one inch equals twenty feet on a sheet no larger than twenty-four by thirty-six inches (one copy is acceptable if eleven by seventeen inches, if to scale). The development plan shall include sufficient information so city departments can make an adequate determination as to the potential impact of the proposal and respond accordingly.

Provide a written narrative and attach exhibits that give a complete and accurate depiction of what the proposal involves, including any specific questions to be answered by the city. If the applicant proposes any specific conditions or mitigation measures, this should be included in the narrative.

Within seven days schedule a date and time at which the conference will be held. The planning director may set a specific day of the week upon which conferences are to be held. Conferences shall be held at least two but no more than four weeks from the date the preapplication conference submittal is made.

Forward the materials submitted to the appropriate local agencies for review and comment.

Hold the conference. Conferences are held with the applicant and are attended by a representative from the planning, public works and fire departments, as applicable and appropriate.

The planning director shall provide to the applicant, other attending parties, and those who request a copy of the preapplication summary report in writing at the preapplication conference, unless otherwise arranged with the applicant.

Request for Second Conference. An applicant may submit a written request for a second preapplication conference within one calendar year after an initial preapplication conference. There is no additional fee for a second conference if the proposed development is substantially similar to the one reviewed in the first preapplication conference or if it reflects changes based on information received at the first preapplication conference.

Expiration. The preapplication comments from the city shall expire one year from the date the preapplication conference is held. Once the preapplication comments have expired the applicant must file a new request for a preapplication conference or receive approval of a preapplication waiver request in order to submit a development application.

The application is technically complete; or

That the application is not technically complete and what is necessary to make the application complete.

The planning director may upon written request waive application requirements that are clearly not necessary to show an application complies with relevant criteria and standards and may modify application requirements based on the nature of the proposed application, development, site or other factors. Request for waivers shall be reviewed before applications are submitted for counter-complete review, or discussed at the preapplication conference, and confirmed in the preapplication conference summary.

The decision about the technically complete status of an application, including any required engineering, traffic or other studies, shall be based on the criteria for completeness and methodology set forth in the BGMC or in implementing measures adopted in a timely manner by the planning director and shall not be based on difference of opinion as to quality or accuracy.

An application's technically complete and vesting status may be revoked if the planning director determines that the applicant intentionally submitted false information.

Upon submittal of requested information, the city shall, within seven days, issue a letter of completeness or identify what additional information is required.

If the city is unable to make a technically complete determination within the time frames provided for this section, the director shall provide notice to the applicant in writing as to when the determination will be made, which shall be no more than twenty-eight days following submittal of initial application or fourteen days following resubmittal.

If the applicant does not submit the missing items within six months, the application will be considered withdrawn. The applicant may request an extension if there have not been any substantial changes in the laws governing the development of the site and has actively pursued the development review in good faith.

If a Type I application, issue a notice of decision within twenty-eight calendar days pursuant to BGMC § 17.200.060(E).

If a Type II application, issue a notice of application within fourteen calendar days pursuant to BGMC § 17.200.065(E).

If a Type III application, issue a notice of application/hearing within fourteen days pursuant to BGMC § 17.200.070(E).

Application Forms. Type I applications shall be made on forms provided by the planning director.

Submittal Information. Type I applications shall:

A statement of the applicable criteria and standards pursuant to the BGMC and other applicable law;

A statement of the facts demonstrating how the application does or does not comply with applicable approval criteria;

The reasons for conclusions to approve, approve with conditions or deny the application;

The decision to approve or deny the application and, if approved, conditions of approval necessary to ensure the proposed development will comply with applicable law; and

The date the final decision is signed.

Application Forms. Type II applications shall be made on forms provided by the planning director.

Submittal Information. Type II applications shall:

The case file number(s), the date of application, the technically complete date of application and the date of the notice of application;

The location of the project;

A description of the proposed project action;

The proposed SEPA threshold determination, if the optional SEPA process is used; whether the application is categorically exempt from SEPA or other matters covered by SEPA;

The identification of any existing environmental documents that may be used to evaluate the proposed project;

A statement of fourteen-day public comment period, a statement that the public has the right to comment on the application, receive notice of the decision, request a copy of the decision once made, and a notice of any appeal rights;

The name of the applicant's contact name, address and telephone number, if any;

City staff contact name, address and telephone number;

A map showing the subject property in relation to other properties or a reduced copy of the site plan;

An indication that after the comment period closes, the planning director shall issue a Type II notice of decision;

Any additional information determined appropriate by the planning director.

The applicant and all owners of the site which is the subject of the application;

All owners of record of property as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll, located within five hundred feet of the site;

Any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental agreement entered into with the city which includes provision for such notice or which is otherwise entitled to such notice;

Any person who requested, in writing, to receive a copy of the notice of application.

Time spent by the applicant to revise plans or provide additional studies or materials requested by the city.

Time spent preparing an environmental impact statement.

Time between submittal and resolution of an appeal.

An extension of time mutually agreed upon by the applicant and the city in writing.

The nature of the application in sufficient detail to apprise persons entitled to notice of the applicant's proposal and the decision;

The address or other geographic description of the subject property;

The date the planning director's decision shall become final, unless appealed;

A statement that all persons entitled to notice or who have standing under BGMC § 17.200.140 may appeal the decision;

A statement briefly explaining how an appeal can be filed, the deadline for filing such an appeal, and where further information can be obtained concerning the appeal;

A statement of the applicable criteria and standards pursuant to the BGMC and other applicable law;

The decision to approve or deny the application and, if approved, conditions of approval necessary to ensure the proposed development will comply with applicable law.

The applicant, all owners of the site which is the subject of the application and parties of record;

Any person who requested, in writing, to receive a copy of the final decision of the planning director.

Application Forms. Type III applications shall be made on forms provided by the planning director.

Submittal Information. Type III applications shall:

The case file number(s), the date of application, the date a technically complete application was filed, the technically complete date of application and the date of the notice of application;

The location of the project;

A description of the proposed project action;

The proposed SEPA threshold determination, if the optional SEPA process is used; whether the application is categorically exempt from SEPA or other matters covered by SEPA;

The identification of any existing environmental documents that may be used to evaluate the proposed project;

A statement of fourteen-day public comment period, a statement that the public has the right to comment on the application, receive notice of the decision, request a copy of the decision once made, and a notice of any appeal rights;

The name of the applicant's contact name, address and telephone number, if any;

City staff contact name, address and telephone number;

A map showing the subject property in relation to other properties or a reduced copy of the site plan;

An indication that after the comment period closes, the planning director shall issue a Type III notice of decision;

Any additional information determined appropriate by the planning director;

The date, time, place, and type of hearing, if established at the time of the notice of application. If the hearing date has not been established at the time of issuance of the notice of application, the notice of hearing procedures of BGMC § 17.200.120 shall apply;

A statement that a consolidated staff report and SEPA review will be available for review at no cost at least seven calendar days before the public hearing and the deadline for submitting written comments.

The applicant and all owners of the site which is the subject of the application;

All owners of record of property as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll, located within five hundred feet of the site;

Any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental agreement entered into with the city which includes provision for such notice or which is otherwise entitled to such notice;

Any person who requested, in writing, to receive a copy of the notice of application.

Time spent by the applicant to revise plans or provide additional studies or materials requested by the city.

Time spent preparing an environmental impact statement.

Time between submittal and resolution of an appeal.

An extension of time mutually agreed upon by the applicant and the city in writing.

The nature of the application in sufficient detail to apprise persons entitled to notice of the applicant's proposal and the decision;

The address or other geographic description of the subject property;

The date the planning director's decision shall become final, unless appealed;

A statement that all persons entitled to notice or who have standing under BGMC § 17.200.140 may appeal the decision;

A statement briefly explaining how an appeal can be filed, the deadline for filing such an appeal, and where further information can be obtained concerning the appeal;

A statement of the applicable criteria and standards pursuant to the BGMC and other applicable law;

A statement of the facts demonstrating how the application does or does not comply with applicable approval criteria;

The decision to approve or deny the application and, if approved, conditions of approval necessary to ensure the proposed development will comply with applicable law.

The applicant, all owners of the site which is the subject of the application and parties of record;

Any person who requested, in writing, to receive a copy of the final decision of the planning director.

Upon completion of a draft of any legislative amendment to any chapter subject to this section, the planning director shall:

Initial Notice. Upon completion of a draft amendment, the planning director shall publish notice of the proposed change in the newspaper of general circulation. The notice shall state the following:

Hearing Notice. Once the initial comment period has expired, the planning director shall schedule the matter for public hearing. The notice for public hearing shall be consistent with the notice provisions for a Type III application, except as follows: Notice shall be sent to parties of record who responded to the initial publication or request for comments.

Except for final and recorded plats, post-decision procedures may modify an approved development without necessarily subjecting the change to the same procedure as the original application. Such changes may be warranted by ambiguities or conflicts in a decision, by new information or laws, as a result of unforeseen physical site conditions that warrant modifications to the project, or as a desire to change aspects of a project.

The applicant or subsequent designee may apply for a post-decision review at any time prior to the recording of a plat. The post-decision review, which may be of any Type I, II or III decision, must be made describing the nature of the proposed change to the decision and the basis for that change, including the applicable facts and law, together with the fee prescribed for that application, as provided in the Battle Ground fee table.

An application for post-decision review is not subject to preapplication review, unless it is determined by the planning director that a Type III review is warranted. Post-decision review applications shall contain the submittal requirements as outlined in this chapter.

As part of a determination of completeness of an application for post-decision review of a Type I, II or III decision, the planning director shall classify the application as a Type I, II or III procedure and advise the applicant in writing of that classification. In addition, all parties of record from the original decision shall also be notified of the decision in writing. The classifications in this chapter are recommended, but the classification of each post-decision review shall be based on the circumstances of that decision and the guidelines in subsection C of this section. The decision classifying the application shall be subject to appeal as part of the decision on the merits of the post-decision review.

Post-decision review cannot substantially change the nature of development proposed pursuant to a given decision. As part of a determination of completeness of an application for post-decision review of a Type I, II, or III decision, the planning director may issue a decision that the proposed change in a decision should not be subject to post-decision review; it should be subject to a new application on the merits of the request. That decision may be appealed to the hearings examiner pursuant to this chapter.

An application for post-decision review does not extend the deadline for filing an appeal of the decision being reviewed and does not stay appeal proceedings.

Post-decision review can only be conducted in regard to a decision that approves or conditionally approves an application. An application that is denied is not eligible for post-decision review.

Recorded subdivision and short plats.

An application for post-decision review is subject to a Type I review when:

An application for post-decision review is subject to a Type II review when it:

An application for post-decision review is subject to a Type III review before the hearing examiner when:

Proposed land use actions shall be reviewed as indicated in this chapter. All listed actions reviewed by the hearing examiner, planning commission, and city council shall be conducted at a public hearing according to the applicable procedures in the BGMC, and decisions that shall be issued based on compliance with applicable standards, pursuant to this title.

The planning director shall have the authority to assign the review body in cases in which this chapter and the BGMC do not clearly identify the appropriate review body. The act of assigning the review body shall be a Type I decision.

Notice of Hearing. Notice of a Type I or II appeal hearing shall be given by the planning director in the following manner (notice of hearing for a Type III application is governed by BGMC § 17.200.070(E)):

Content of Notice. Notice of a Type I or II appeal hearing shall contain the following information:

Staff Report Issuance. At least seven calendar days before the date of the hearing for a Type III application or Type I or II appeal hearing, the planning director shall issue a written staff report and recommendation regarding the application(s), shall make available to the public a copy of the staff report for review, and shall mail a copy of the staff report and recommendation without charge to the applicant and applicant's representative. If the planning director does not issue the staff report at least seven days before the date of the hearing, the applicant or appellant shall be entitled to ask for a continuance without penalty.

Conduct of the Hearing. At the commencement of the hearing, a statement shall be made to those in attendance that:

Additional Evidence. Prior to the conclusion of the initial evidentiary hearing, any participant may request an opportunity to present additional relevant evidence or testimony regarding the application so long as the evidence and testimony is within the scope of the hearing. The hearing examiner may grant such a request by continuing the public hearing pursuant to subsection (B)(5)(a) of this section or by leaving the record open for additional evidence or testimony pursuant to subsection (B)(5)(b) of this section.

Content and Custody of the Record.

Impartiality. Parties to a Type III application or Type I or II appeal hearing are entitled to an impartial review authority as free from potential conflicts of interest and prehearing ex parte contacts as reasonably possible. It is recognized, however, that the public has a countervailing right of free access to public officials. Therefore:

Ex Parte Communications.

Presenting and Receiving Evidence.

The Decision Process.

Distribution of Final Decision. A final decision on a Type III application or Type I or II appeal decision shall be mailed to the following:

Final Decision and Effective Date. A hearing examiner decision is final for purposes of appeal when the final decision is mailed. Such decision becomes effective on the day after the appeal period expires, unless an appeal is filed, in which case the procedures of BGMC § 17.200.140 shall apply.

An appeal hearing before the hearing examiner shall be conducted according to the procedures set forth in BGMC § 17.200.120.

An appeal hearing heard before an otherwise specified body shall be conducted pursuant to the hearing rules as specified by said review body and any applicable provisions of the BGMC, RCW, Washington State Court Rules, or other applicable requirements.

Notice of the appeal decision shall be mailed to all parties listed under BGMC § 17.200.120.

The case number as designated by the city on the Type I, Type II, or code compliance decision issued pursuant to Chapter 20.100 BGMC that is being appealed;

The name and signature of each appellant and their authorized representative, if any. If multiple parties file a single appeal, the application shall designate one party as the contact representative for all contact with the community development director. All contact with the community development director regarding the appeal, including notice, shall be with the designated contact representative;

A statement establishing the basis for standing each appellant has to file the appeal pursuant to the requirements of subsection C of this section;

The specific component or section of the decision or determination being appealed and the specific reasons why each is in error as a matter of fact or law;

If the appeal is pertaining to a Type I or Type II decision, a statement demonstrating that the specific issues raised on appeal were raised during the period in which the record was open; and

Payment in full of the appeal fee as per Battle Ground fee schedule. The fee shall be refunded if the appellant requests a withdrawal of the appeal in writing at least fourteen calendar days before the scheduled appeal hearing date.

Type I Decision. Only the applicant and property owner have standing to appeal a Type I decision, unless otherwise specified in this title.

Type II Decision. The following parties have standing to appeal a Type II decision:

Code Compliance Decision Issued Pursuant to Chapter 20.100 BGMC. The following parties have standing to appeal a code compliance decision issued pursuant to Chapter 20.100 BGMC:

All written petitions for appeal submitted to the community development director which are in full compliance with subsections B and C of this section shall be scheduled for a public appeal hearing before the hearing examiner. A final decision shall be rendered by the hearing examiner within ninety calendar days of the filing date of the written petition for appeal. Extensions of the scheduled public appeal hearing and thereby a corresponding extension of the deadline for the final decision are permitted upon mutual agreement of the appellant(s) and the community development director. If a final decision is not reached within the time frame as provided herein, the community development director shall so notify the appellant and shall provide a reason for the delay and an estimated date of final decision issuance. If the community development director provides such notification, there shall be no penalty or prejudice to the appellant or the city in the event of a delay of the issuance of the final decision.

Notice of the public appeal hearing before the hearing examiner shall be mailed to all parties listed in BGMC § 17.200.120.

Any party to the appeal that participated in the public appeal hearing, including any appellant or the city, may file a written request for reconsideration of the final decision with the hearing examiner within ten business days of the date of the hearing examiner's final decision. The request shall explicitly set forth the alleged errors of procedure, law, or fact. The request shall additionally be provided to all other parties that participated in the public appeal hearing within the same time period. Any nonmoving party shall have the right to file a written response within ten business days of receipt of the written request for reconsideration. The hearing examiner shall act within ten business days after the deadline for the filing of a response by the nonmoving party has expired by denying the request, issuing a revised decision, or by setting a new public appeal hearing on the issues raised in the written request for reconsideration. The decision on the request for reconsideration and/or issuing a revised decision shall be mailed to all parties of record.

Hearing examiner final decisions may be subsequently appealed to superior court within twenty-one calendar days after the date of decision, subject to compliance with appeal eligibility and notice provisions as specified by Chapter 36.70C RCW, if applicable.

Appeal decisions by the hearing examiner on shoreline substantial development permits, shoreline variance permits, and shoreline conditional use permits may be subsequently appealed to the State Shorelines Hearings Board pursuant to applicable law.

Water or sewer facilities improved or constructed must be within the city's urban growth boundary or approved water service boundary to be eligible and must be consistent with all comprehensive plans and development regulations of the city.

The contract will provide for the pro rata reimbursement to the owner or the owner's assigns.

The contract will be in effect for twenty years from the date of its filing for recording by the city or the current timeline allowed under Chapter 35.91 RCW.

The reimbursement must be received by the city within the period of time that the contract is effective.

The contract will set forth the reimbursement obligation as calculated by the city for each affected parcel for a portion of the costs of the water or sewer facilities improved or constructed in accordance with the contract. The amount of the total reimbursement obligation under the contract is limited to the dollar amount verified and approved as costs related to the water or sewer facility.

The reimbursements will be paid from latecomer fees received by the city from property owners who subsequently connect to or use the water or sewer facilities, but who did not contribute to the original cost of the facilities. All latecomer fees received by the city within the effective period of the contract shall be paid out by the city under the terms of its contract within sixty days after receipt thereof.

The contract will include a provision requiring that every two years from the date the contract is executed a property owner entitled to reimbursement under this section provide the city with information regarding the current contact name, address, and telephone number of the person, company, or partnership that originally entered into the contract. If the property owner fails to comply with the notification requirements of this subsection within sixty days of the specified time, then the city may collect any reimbursement funds owed to the property owner under the contract. The funds collected under this subsection must be deposited in the capital fund of the city.