This chapter provides for effective and efficient review of project and non-project applications with consistent procedures for similar types of actions and combines procedural and substantive environmental reviews with the review of project permit applications under other applicable requirements. This chapter also provides a framework within which the consistency of project permit applications with the city comprehensive plan and development regulations can be determined.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020; Ord. No. 24-002, § 10, 1-23-2024)

Four classes of review are established for the purposes of administering this title. The permits/approvals/actions included in each class, the public notice requirements, hearing body, decision maker, and appellate body are summarized in Table 14.30.050.

A.

The community development director or his/her/their designee is authorized to determine the classification of review for any permit, action, or approval not identified on the following table.

B.

The city's goal to consolidate the permit processing for projects and/or non-projects requiring two or more permits or approvals. The community development director or his/her/their designee shall determine the appropriate means of consolidating the processing of all permits, approvals, and actions and shall assign the highest-class review classification of the individual permits, being sought to the consolidated permit application (with Type 4 being the highest followed by Type 3, 2, and 1). This consolidation, sometimes referred to as a "master" application, may include integrating public hearings, establishing unified comment periods, and/or concurrent reviews. The community development director or his/her/their designee is authorized to make modifications to the procedural requirements of this Title in order to effectively consolidate project reviews.

1.

Except for the appeal of a SEPA determination of significance as provided in RCW 43.21C.075, no more than one open record public hearing and no more than one closed record appeal may occur on a single permit application or master application.

C.

When determining the timeframes referenced in this section, the following shall apply:

1.

The date that a determination or decision is made shall be day 0 and the next day shall be day 1. For instance, if a notice of decision is published on a Thursday, then the next day (Friday) shall be day 1.

2.

The number of days shall be calculated by counting every calendar day.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020; Ord. No. 24-002, § 10, 1-23-2024)

Editor's note— Ord. No. 24-002, § 10, adopted Jan. 23, 2024, amended the title of § 14/30.020 to read as herein set out. The former § 14.30.020 title pertained to project review classifications.

Prior to formal submittal of a Type 2, 3, or 4 permit applications, all applicants shall, unless waived by the city, schedule and participate in a pre-application conference with city staff and representatives of appropriate public agencies. The date, time and place of such conferences shall be at the mutual agreement of the participants. Such conferences are intended as an informal discussion and review of possible applications to assist the applicant in identifying applicable regulations, standards, application materials, and review processes that may be required. A pre-application conference does not vest a proposed project permit application.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020)

It is the intent of the city to establish policies and procedures for consultation with the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation during the review of project applications under this title. This consultation may occur during the pre-application review process or during the review of applications for Type 1, 2, 3 or 4 project permits or approvals.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020; Ord. No. 24-002, § 11, 1-23-2024)

(1) Decisions on applications for certificates of appropriateness, waivers of certificates of appropriateness, and special property tax valuations shall be made by the historic preservation commission.

(2) Decisions made by the city council to adopt or amend a shoreline master program are subject to approval by the Washington State Department of Ecology.

(3) Appeals of decisions authorized through the Growth Management Act, which may include amendments to the College Place comprehensive plan, future land use map, unified development code, and the official zoning map, may be appealed to the Washington State Growth Management Board, and in some instances, directly to Walla Walla Superior Court. Please refer to RCW 36.70A-C for more details.

(4) The required public hearing for proposed amendments to the unified development code may be heard directly by the city council. This may include but is not limited to matters pertaining to the International Codes and the administration of this title.

(5) The required public hearing shall be conducted by the city council unless delegated to the city hearing examiner or planning commission. Appeals shall be filed in accordance with the provisions of RCW 36.70C, as appropriate.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020; Ord. No. 22-024, § 1.d.(Exh. B), 12-13-2022)

Applications subject to a Type 1 review involve administrative action by the community development director or his/her/their designee without public notice or an open record public hearing. The city hearing examiner shall conduct an open record public hearing for appeals of decisions on Type 1 permits unless otherwise noted in this title.

A.

Applications for Type 1 permits shall be processed by the city in accordance with the following general procedures unless the applicant is otherwise notified in writing:

1.

Determination of completeness.

2.

Determination of consistency:

a.

Review for consistency with the College Place comprehensive plan;

b.

Review for compliance with this Code; and

c.

Site plan and design review, as appropriate.

3.

Consultation with the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, as appropriate.

4.

SEPA threshold determination, if required.

5.

Notification to the applicant of approval or denial of the application.

B.

A decision on a Type 1 application shall be effective upon issuance unless an appeal is filed in a timely manner in accordance with the provisions of this title.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020; Ord. No. 24-002, § 12, 1-23-2024)

Applications subject to a Type 2 review involve administrative action by the community development director or his/her/their designee following distribution of a public notice and the opportunity to submit written comments. The city hearing examiner shall conduct an open record public hearing for appeals of decisions on Type 2 permits unless otherwise noted in this title.

A.

Applications for Type 2 permits shall be processed by the city in accordance with the following general procedures unless the applicant is otherwise notified in writing:

1.

Pre-application conference, if appropriate.

2.

Determination of completeness.

3.

Notice of application.

4.

Determination of consistency:

a.

Review for consistency with the College Place comprehensive plan;

b.

Review for compliance with this Code; and

c.

Site plan and design review, as appropriate.

5.

Consultation with the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, as appropriate.

6.

SEPA threshold determination, if required.

7.

Review of public comments.

8.

Notice of decision.

B.

A decision on a Type 2 application shall be effective at the conclusion of a 15-day notice period unless an appeal is filed in a timely manner in accordance with the provisions of this title.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020; Ord. No. 24-002, § 13, 1-23-2024)

The city hearing examiner shall conduct an open record public hearing prior to making a decision on a Type 3 permit application.

A.

Applications for Type 3 permits shall be processed by the city in accordance with the following general procedures, unless the applicant is otherwise notified in writing:

1.

Pre-application conference.

2.

Determination of completeness.

3.

Notice of application.

4.

Preliminary staff determination of consistency including:

a.

Review for consistency with the College Place comprehensive plan;

b.

Review for compliance with this Code; and

c.

Site plan and design review, as appropriate.

5.

Consultation with the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, as appropriate.

6.

SEPA threshold determination.

7.

Preparation of a city staff report containing preliminary determination of consistency and recommendations, including potential mitigating measures. This report shall be available for public review ten days prior to the open record public hearing.

8.

An open record public hearing shall be conducted by the hearing examiner, in accordance with adopted administrative procedures. This may include:

a.

A presentation by city staff including submittal of staff report and application materials for record, as well as any written comments received prior to the hearing.

b.

Presentation by the applicant and the submittal of any additional information for the record.

c.

Public comments and the submittal of any additional information for the record.

d.

Questions from the hearing examiner.

e.

Rebuttal, response, or clarifying statements by city staff and applicant.

9.

Hearing examiner review of the record, preparation of findings and conclusions, and the issuance of a notice of decision in accordance with adopted administrative procedures. This shall include a decision to approve, deny, or approve subject to conditions, the application(s) based on findings that:

a.

The proposal is or is not consistent with the provisions of the College Place comprehensive plan and unified development code.

b.

The proposal is or is not in the public interest.

c.

Potential adverse environmental impacts have or have not been adequately considered.

d.

The proposal does or does not lower the level of service standards established in comprehensive plan and/or the city's concurrency standards have been met.

e.

Adequate provisions have or have not been made to protect the public health, safety and welfare. Such provisions may include, but are not limited to open space, drainage ways, streets and other public ways, transit stops, water supply, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation facilities, playgrounds, sites for schools and school grounds, and pedestrian and bicycle ways.

f.

That mitigating measures and dedications are or are not reasonably related and proportional to the impacts created by the proposal.

B.

A decision on a Type 3 application shall be effective at the conclusion of a 15-day notice period, unless an appeal is filed in a timely manner in accordance with the provisions of this title.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020)

Decisions on all Type 4 permit applications shall be made by the city council following an open record public hearing.

A.

Applications for Type 4 permits shall be processed by the city in accordance with the following procedures, unless the applicant is otherwise notified in writing:

1.

Pre-application conference.

2.

Determination of completeness.

3.

Notice of application.

4.

Preliminary staff determination of consistency including:

a.

Review for consistency with the College Place comprehensive plan;

b.

Review for compliance with this Code; and

c.

Site plan and design review.

5.

Consultation with the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, as appropriate.

6.

SEPA threshold determination.

7.

Distribution of the proposed amendments to state and local agencies, as appropriate, for review and comment.

8.

Preparation of a city staff report containing preliminary determination of consistency and recommendations, including potential mitigating measures. This report shall be forwarded to the designated hearing body and available for public review ten days prior to the open record public hearing.

9.

An open record public hearing shall be conducted by the designated hearing body, in accordance with established procedures. This may include:

a.

A presentation by city staff including submittal of staff report and application materials for record, as well as any written comments received prior to the hearing.

b.

Presentation by the applicant and the submittal of any additional information for the record.

c.

Public comments and the submittal of any additional information for the record.

d.

Questions from the planning commissioners.

e.

Rebuttal, response or clarifying statements by city staff and the applicant.

10.

A review of the complete record by the planning commission and the preparation of a recommendation to the city council, as applicable.

11.

The recommendation of the planning commission along with a complete copy of the record shall be provided to the city council for review prior to their decision, as applicable.

12.

City council review and action.

13.

Issuance of a notice of decision.

B.

A decision on a Type 4 application shall be effective upon approval unless otherwise provided, and/or unless an appeal is filed in a timely manner in accordance with the provisions of this title.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020)

A.

Applications must be submitted in the manner required by the city and all information required by the city must be provided with the application (procedural submission requirements), provided that:

1.

All applications shall be signed by the property owner or show owner consent of the application by the agent acting on the owner's behalf.

2.

Applicable fees shall be submitted at the time of application unless otherwise specified.

3.

The Applicant shall be responsible for the preparation of all application materials including all special studies and reports, this may include, but is not limited to the following, which shall be prepared by a qualified professional:

a.

Environmental checklist;

b.

Critical area reports;

c.

Survey and site plan;

d.

Landscaping plans;

e.

Stormwater modeling;

f.

Fire flow calculations;

g.

Transportation studies and traffic impact analysis; and

h.

Preliminary civil plans.

B.

Upon acceptance of an application, the city will review all materials received from the applicant to determine if the application is complete and ready for processing. Within 28 days after receiving a project permit application, the city shall provide a written determination to the applicant. This written determination must state either:

1.

The city has determined the application to be complete (notice of completeness). The notice of completeness will state the date that the application is ready for processing. This notification may also include:

a.

A description of the process to review the application(s) and projected timeframes.

b.

A preliminary determination of those development regulations that will be used for project mitigation.

c.

To the extent known by the city, other agencies may also have jurisdiction over the application and/or other permits or approvals that may be required.

d.

Additional information that may be required to complete the review of the application.

e.

A preliminary determination of consistency.

2.

The city has determined the application to be incomplete because the procedural submission requirements have not been met. This determination shall outline what is necessary to make the application procedurally complete and the timeframes for submitting additional information.

a.

Upon receipt of the required additional information within the noticed timeframes, the city shall notify the applicant within 14 days if the application is complete or if additional information is required and state the timeframe for submitting the required additional information.

b.

The applicant may request a time extension to submit the requested information. The city may grant or deny the request or grant a time extension different than requested. All time extensions must be made in writing.

c.

If the applicant fails to respond or to submit the requested information in the established time frames, the city shall notify the applicant in writing that the application has lapsed and become void.

C.

A project permit application is complete for the purposes of this section when it meets the procedural submission requirements of the city. Additional information or studies may be required, or project modifications may be undertaken subsequent to the procedural review of the application by the city. The determination of completeness shall not preclude the city from requesting additional information or studies either at the time of the notice of completeness or subsequently if new information is required or substantial changes in the proposed action occur. However, if the procedural submission requirements, as outlined on the project permit application have been provided, the need for additional information or studies may not preclude a completeness determination.

D.

A project application shall be deemed procedurally complete on the 29th day after the city has received the application if the city has not provided a written determination to the applicant that the application is procedurally incomplete. This provision does not preclude the city from seeking additional information or studies as provided above.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020; Ord. No. 24-002, § 14, 1-23-2024)

Editor's note— Ord. No. 24-002, § 14, adopted Jan. 23, 2024, amended the title of § 14.30.100 to read as herein set out. The former § 14.30.100 title pertained to determination of completeness.

Within 14 days of the issuance of a determination of a completeness, the city shall issue a notice of application for all Type 2, 3, and 4 permit applications, in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 14.30.230, Public Notice Requirements.

A.

Notices of application must include:

1.

The date of application, the date of the notice of completion for the application, and the date of the notice of application;

2.

A description of the proposed project action, a list of the project permits included in the application and, if applicable, a list of any studies requested by the city;

3.

Identification of the permits not included in the application to the extent known by the city;

4.

The identification of existing environmental documents that evaluate the proposed project and the location where the application and any studies can be reviewed;

5.

A statement of the public comment period, which shall be not less than 14 nor more than 30 days following the date of notice of application, and statements of the right of any person to comment on the application, receive notice of and participate in any hearings, request a copy of the decision once made, and any appeal rights. The city may accept public comments at any time prior to the closing of the record of an open record pre-decision hearing, if any, or, if no open record pre-decision hearing is provided prior to the decision on the project permit;

6.

The date, time, place, and type of hearing, if applicable and if scheduled at the date of notice of the application;

7.

A statement of the preliminary determination, if one has been made at the time of notice, of those development regulations that will be used for project mitigation and of consistency; and

8.

Any other information determined appropriate by the city.

B.

A preliminary SEPA threshold determination or preliminary SEPA action may be included with notice of application if such preliminary actions have been made at the time the notice of application is issued. A preliminary SEPA threshold determination, or preliminary SEPA action, does not substitute, or in any way circumvent, the process for making a final SEPA threshold determination or in taking a SEPA action. Preliminary SEPA determinations are intended to encourage early public comment on project applications.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020; Ord. No. 24-002, § 15, 1-23-2024)

SEPA threshold determinations shall result in a determination of non-significance (DNS), or a determination of significance (DS), provided that the city may also issue a mitigated determination of non-significance (MDNS) based on conditions required by the city, or on changes to or clarifications of, the proposal made by the applicant.

A.

After submission of an environmental checklist and prior to a threshold determination, the city shall notify the applicant if it is considering issuing a DS. As a result, the applicant may clarify or change features of the proposal to mitigate the impacts which make the DS likely. If a proposal continues to have a probable significant adverse environmental impact, even with the mitigating measures, an environmental impact statement (EIS) shall be prepared.

B.

If a preliminary SEPA threshold determination was not made in conjunction with a notice of application, and no probable significant adverse impacts are anticipated, a determination of non-significance shall be issued, and a 15-day comment period may be required.

C.

If a pre-decision open record public hearing is required, the SEPA threshold determination must be issued at least 15 days before the hearing.

D.

If the city makes a SEPA determination of significance concurrently with the notice of application, the notice of application shall be combined with the determination of significance and scoping notice.

E.

Whenever the city makes a threshold determination, it shall seek to include the public notice for the SEPA action with the notice of application or notice of decision for any associated land use application(s) or permits, provided that:

1.

If no public notice is required for the permit or approval, the city shall give notice of the DNS or DS by publishing a notice in the city's newspaper of record;

2.

Whenever the city issues a DS, all public notices shall state the scoping procedure for the required EIS; and

3.

Whenever the city issues a draft EIS (DEIS), or supplemental EIS (SEIS), notice of the availability of those documents shall be given by at least two of the following methods:

a.

Indicating the availability of the DEIS or SEIS in any public notice required for an associated land use application or permit;

b.

Posting the property, for site-specific proposals;

c.

Posting on the city's website;

d.

Publishing notice in the city's newspaper of record; and/or

e.

Notifying the news media.

F.

Mitigation measures incorporated in the MDNS shall be deemed conditions of approval of the permit decision and may be enforced in the same manner as any term or condition of the permit or enforced in any manner specifically prescribed by the city.

G.

Nothing in this section shall limit the authority of the city in its review or mitigation of a project to adopt or otherwise rely on environmental analyses and requirements under other laws, as provided by Chapter 43.21C RCW, the State Environmental Policy Act.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020)

As part of all project and application reviews, the city shall determine if a proposed project or development activity is consistent with the provisions of the College Place Unified Development Code, or in the absence of applicable development regulations, the vision, values, goals, and policies, of the College Place comprehensive plan.

A.

The determination of consistency shall include a review to verify that the proposed action will not cause levels of service to fall below the level of service standards established in the College Place comprehensive plan.

1.

This shall include locally adopted regulations, procedures and methods for determining concurrency in accordance with the provisions of WAC 365-196-840.

2.

In the case of transportation, proposed developments that would cause the level of service on a locally owned transportation facility to decline below the adopted standards shall not be approved unless improvements or strategies to accommodate the impacts of development are made concurrent with the development.

a.

These strategies may include increased public transportation service, ride sharing programs, demand management, pro-rated financial contributions toward future improvements, and other transportation systems management strategies.

b.

"Concurrent with development" means that improvements or strategies are in place at the time of development, or that a financial commitment is in place to complete the improvements or strategies within six years.

B.

The city may require that any outstanding code enforcement actions be addressed, or unpaid fees, fines, or taxes paid before a final determination of consistency is made.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020; Ord. No. 24-002, § 16, 1-23-2024)

The purpose of a site plan review is to is to determine whether new development activities will or will not have an adverse effect on the public health, safety and welfare of residents of College Place, and that new development activities are compatible with existing patterns of development and the provisions of the College Place comprehensive plan.

A.

A site plan review is required for all proposed development activities in the multi-family residential (MFR), general commercial (GC), light industrial (LI), and the downtown mixed-use zone (DMU), as well as for manufactured home and mobile home parks, unless waived in writing by the city.

1.

Development activities subject to a site plan review shall be determined by the city and may include new construction, modifications to existing uses or structures that increase the size of the building or the intensity of the use, and/or changes of use.

2.

The site plan review shall include the whole site including subsequent phases of development without regard to existing or proposed lot lines as well as nearby infrastructure.

3.

A site plan review permit is separate from and does not replace other required permits such as a conditional use permit or a shoreline substantial development permit. A site plan review may be combined and reviewed concurrently with other permits/approvals/actions, as determined by the city.

B.

A site plan review application, prepared by a qualified professional, shall be submitted in a format prescribed by the city, and should include, but is not limited to, the following:

1.

An accurate scaled drawing(s) depicting:

a.

The location and dimension of the lot(s).

b.

Existing topography and natural features.

c.

The nature, location, dimensions of critical areas, shorelines, and their associated buffers, if any, on or adjacent to the site.

d.

The footprint of existing and proposed structures, proposed building heights, proposed building setbacks, and the proposed uses.

e.

The location of existing and proposed utilities including but not limited to water, hydrants, irrigation, sanitary sewer, electrical, light poles, and cable.

f.

Existing and proposed easements.

g.

The location of existing and proposed roads, driveways, parking facilities, loading areas, curbs, sidewalks, pedestrian facilities, bike lanes and facilities, and signage.

h.

Existing and proposed walls, fences, and landscaping.

i.

Existing and proposed open space, parks, plazas, public spaces, and public art.

j.

Proposed grading and drainage facilities in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 13.86, Stormwater Management and the City of College Place Engineering Design Standards.

k.

Other items as may be required by the city in writing.

2.

Technical reports prepared by a qualified professional. This may include, but is not limited to:

a.

Critical area reports;

b.

Landscaping plans;

c.

Geo-technical reports;

d.

Preliminary stormwater report;

e.

Traffic impact analysis; and

f.

Parking studies.

3.

Any additional information deemed necessary by the city.

C.

The city may approve a proposed site plan in whole or in part, with or without conditions, based on a finding that:

1.

The project is consistent with the College Place comprehensive plan and meets the requirements and intent of this Code, including the type of land use and the intensity/density of the proposed development.

2.

The physical location, size, and placement of the development on the site and the location of the proposed uses within the project avoid or minimize impacts to any critical resource or flood plain area to the greatest extent possible or are compatible with the character and intended development pattern of the surrounding properties.

3.

The project makes adequate provisions for water supply, storm drainage, sanitary sewage disposal, emergency services, and environmental protection to ensure that the proposed project would not be detrimental to public health, welfare, and safety.

4.

Public access and circulation including non-motorized access and emergency vehicle access, as appropriate, are adequate to and on the site.

5.

Adequate setbacks and buffering have been provided. Any reduction to setbacks or buffer widths is the minimum necessary to allow for reasonable economic use of the lot and does not adversely impact the functional value of the critical resource area or adjoining land uses.

6.

The physical location, size, and placement of proposed structures on the site and the location of proposed uses within the project are compatible with and relate harmoniously to the surrounding area.

7.

The project adequately mitigates impacts identified through the SEPA review process, if required.

8.

The project would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, or general welfare.

D.

Approval of a site plan shall be valid for five years after the effective date and shall lapse at that time unless a building permit or other associated permits, as determined by the city, has been issued. The city may extend the Site Plan approval if it finds that the facts on which the site plan review is approved have not changed substantially.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020; Ord. No. 24-002, § 17, 1-23-2024)

A.

For project permit applications submitted after January 1, 2025, the time periods for the city to issue a final decision for each type of complete project permit application or project type subject to this chapter should not exceed the following time periods:

1.

For project permits subject to a Type 1 review a final decision must be issued within 65 days of the determination of completeness.

2.

For project permits subject to a Type 2 review a final decision must be issued within 100 days of the determination of completeness.

3.

For project permits subject to a Type 3 review a final decision must be issued within 170 days of the determination of completeness.

B.

The following time periods shall not be counted when determining the number of days required to make a final decision:

1.

Any period between the day the city notified the applicant, in writing, that additional information is required to process the application and the day when responsive information must be submitted or resubmitted by the applicant.

2.

Any period after an applicant informs the city, in writing, that they would like to temporarily suspend review of the project permit application until the time that the applicant notifies the city, in writing, that they would like to resume the review of the application. The city may set, by written policy, conditions for the temporary suspension of a permit application.

3.

Any period after an administrative appeal is filed until the administrative appeal is resolved and any additional time period provided by the administrative appeal has expired.

C.

The time periods for the city to process a project permit shall start over if an applicant proposes a change in use that adds or removes commercial or residential elements from the original application that would make the application fail to meet the determination of procedural completeness for the new use, as required by the city.

D.

If, at any time, an applicant informs the city in writing, that the applicant would like to temporarily suspend the review of the project for more than 60 days, or if an applicant is not responsive for more than 60 consecutive days after the city has notified the applicant, in writing, that additional information is required to further process the application, an additional 30 days may be added to the time periods for the city to issue a final decision for each type of project permit that is subject to this chapter.

1.

Any written notice from the city to the applicant that additional information is required to further process the application must include a notice that non-responsiveness for 60 consecutive days may result in 30 days being added to the time for review.

2.

For the purposes of this subsection, "non-responsiveness" means that an applicant is not making demonstrable progress on providing additional requested information to the city, or that there is no ongoing communication from the applicant to the city on the applicant's ability or willingness to provide the additional information.

E.

The city may approve, approve subject to conditions, or deny an application based on the information included in the record.

1.

In approving an application, the city may impose such conditions and safeguards as may be required to comply with the provisions of this title and to protect the health, safety, and welfare. These conditions and safeguards may include, but are not limited to, the following:

a.

Measures identified during the environmental review process;

b.

Measures necessary to comply with the provisions of the College Place comprehensive plan;

c.

Measures necessary to comply with provisions of this Code; and/or

d.

Measures necessary to ensure compatibility of the proposed development activity with neighboring land uses, and consistency with the intent and character of the zoning district. This may include, but is not limited to:

(1)

Increasing the required lot size, setback or yard dimensions;

(2)

Limiting the height of buildings or structures;

(3)

Controlling the number and location of vehicular access points;

(4)

Requiring the dedication of additional rights-of-way for future public street improvements identified in an adopted transportation plan;

(5)

Requiring the designation of public use and utility easements and the recording of same;

(6)

Increasing or decreasing the number of required off-street parking and/or loading spaces as well as designating the location, screening, drainage, surfacing or other improvement of a parking area;

(7)

Frontage improvements or infrastructure improvements;

(8)

Limiting the number, size, height, shape, location and lighting of signs;

(9)

Requiring view-obscuring fencing, landscaping or other facilities to protect adjacent or nearby properties;

(10)

Requiring site reclamation upon discontinuance of use and/or expiration or revocation of the project permit;

(11)

Limiting hours and size of operation; and

(12)

Controlling the siting of the use and/or structures on the property.

2.

The city may deny an application based on finding that the proposed action:

a.

Would endanger the public health, safety, and welfare;

b.

Would have a probable, significant, adverse impact on the environment that cannot be reasonably mitigated;

c.

Is not consistent with the goals and policies of the College Place comprehensive plan;

d.

Does not comply with the provisions of this Code; or

e.

Information required by the city in order to complete the processing was not provided in accordance with the provisions of this title.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020; Ord. No. 24-002, § 18, 1-23-2024)

Editor's note— Ord. No. 24-002, § 18, adopted Jan. 23, 2024, amended the title of § 14.30.150 to read as herein set out. The former § 14.30.150 title pertained to permit processing.

Certain uses may only be permitted in a zoning district through the issuance of a conditional use permit.

A.

The approval of a conditional use permit shall be based on a finding by the city that:

1.

The use will not endanger the public health, safety, or welfare;

2.

The location and character of the use if developed according to the plan as submitted and approved or conditionally approved will be compatible and in harmony with the area in which it is to be located;

3.

The proposed use is in general conformity with the city's comprehensive plan; and

4.

The use meets all required conditions and specifications set forth in the zone where it is proposed to be located, unless a variance has been granted by the city.

B.

The city shall have the authority to require and approve specific plans and to increase the requirements set forth in this title. Any reduction in the requirements of this title shall only be granted through the approval of a variance.

C.

If the potential adverse impacts of a proposed development activity cannot be adequately mitigated through conditions of approval, the city may deny the application for a conditional use permit.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020)

Temporary uses may be permitted for a specific period of time in a zoning district through the issuance of a special use permit.

A.

Applicability. The uses or activities that may be permitted through a special use permit are identified in the Table of Permitted Uses (CPMC 14.30.050), provided that:

1.

The city may approve additional uses based on a finding that they are compatible with neighboring uses.

2.

Uses that are specifically prohibited in a zoning district may not be permitted through the issuance of a special use permit in that district.

B.

Approval Criteria. The city may approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for a special use permit subject to compliance with the following criteria:

1.

The applicant owns the property to be used or has provided proof of the property owner's permission to use his/her/their property.

2.

The proposed site is adequate to accommodate the use while providing for appropriate protection of the public health, safety, and welfare as determined by the city, which may include, but is not limited to, appropriate traffic control measures, emergency service access, potable water supply and sanitation facilities, stormwater control, sewage, solid waste services, and environmental protection.

3.

The proposed site is adequate to accommodate the special use and appropriate measures to mitigate impact on neighboring properties and uses are taken or exist on the property to be used.

4.

The proposed site has adequate parking or public transportation available for the use.

5.

The proposed site and use comply with all other city requirements imposed in the interest of public safety and welfare.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020; Ord. No. 24-002, § 19, 1-23-2024)

This section shall govern the issuance of variances to reduce or modify certain provisions of this title.

A.

A variance may be granted to the density, dimension, height, setback and development standards, provided that all other provisions of this title can be met. A variance of a numerical standard, such as a setback or density, shall not exceed 20 percent. For example, a ten-foot setback could be reduced up to two feet.

B.

Under no circumstances shall the city grant a variance to allow a use not permissible under the terms of this title in the zoning district involved, or any use expressly or by implication prohibited in the zoning district by the terms of this title.

C.

Variances shall be processed in conjunction with associated permits/approvals/actions. For example, a variance request submitted with a short plat application, will be processed in accordance with the Type 2 review procedures, a variance request submitted with a subdivision application will be processed in accordance with the Type 3 procedures.

D.

Variances may be approved by the city based on a finding that such variance will not be contrary to the public interest and the comprehensive plan or where literal enforcement of the provisions of this title would result in undue hardship. A variance shall not be granted unless the city further finds that the applicant has demonstrated all of the following:

1.

That special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, do exist; and

2.

That because of such special circumstances, strict application of this title would deprive the subject property of rights and privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity under identical zoning district classification; and

3.

That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zoning district classification in which the property is situated; and

4.

That the special circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant; and

5.

That the granting of a variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this title, the specific zoning district, and the city comprehensive plan.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020; Ord. No. 24-002, § 20, 1-23-2024)

A notice of decision shall be issued for all Type 2, 3 and 4 permit applications. A notice of decision may not be issued until the expiration of the comment period on the notice of application.

A.

Notices of decision shall include:

1.

A description of the decision or actions taken;

2.

Any mitigation or conditions of approval required under applicable development regulations or under SEPA;

3.

If a SEPA threshold determination has not been issued previously, the notice of decision shall state this determination;

4.

A description of applicable appeal procedures; and

5.

Notification that affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020)

A.

Standing to initiate an appeal of Type 1, 2, 3 and 4 reviews is limited to the applicant, project sponsor, or owner of the property in which the project permit is proposed, parties of record, affected agencies or tribes, or any person aggrieved by the final decision and who will suffer direct and substantial impacts from approval or denial of the project. A person is aggrieved or adversely affected within the meaning of this section, only when all of the following conditions are present:

1.

The land use decision has prejudiced or is likely to prejudice that person;

2.

That person's asserted interests are among those that the local jurisdiction was required to consider when it made the land use decision;

3.

A judgment in favor of that person would substantially eliminate or redress the prejudice to that person caused or likely to be caused by the land use decision; and

4.

The petitioner has exhausted his/her/their administrative remedies to the extent required by law.

B.

All appeals of interpretations or actions regarding Type 1 and 2 reviews shall be filed in a format prescribed by the city along with the required fee, within 14 days of the date of the interpretation or action. If the deadline to file an appeal falls on a weekend or on a city holiday, the deadline shall become the next business day. The city shall mail written notice to all parties of record to apprise them of all open and closed record public appeal hearings and shall place a public notice in the city's newspaper of record at least 14 days before the open record appeal hearing.

1.

The notice of appeal shall specify the claimed error(s) and issue(s) which the appellate body is asked to consider and shall specifically state all grounds for such appeal. Issues or grounds of appeal which are not so identified need not be considered by the appellate body;

2.

The appellants and any respondents to the notice of appeal shall have the opportunity to present oral and written arguments during open record appeal hearings. For all closed record appeals, the record shall be limited to information presented during the preceding open record hearing. Oral argument shall be confined to the established record and to any alleged errors in the decision;

3.

Following an appeal hearing, the appellate body may affirm, reverse or modify the decision of record and shall adopt its own written findings and conclusions in support of its decision; and

4.

The city may require an applicant and/or the appellant to reimburse the city for the cost of preparing materials to be used during open record public hearings or closed record appeals, including but not limited to the cost of copying, taping, and/or transcribing a certified record of the proceedings;

5.

Appeals of SEPA threshold determinations or SEPA actions shall be combined with any appeals of associated applications or permits. If the final decision incorporates the SEPA threshold determination subject to a 14-day comment period, a joint 23-calendar-day appeal period shall be provided on both the project decision and the SEPA threshold determination.

C.

All Type 3 and Type 4 land use decisions and the decisions of the hearing examiner on appeals of Type 1 and 2 permits may be appealed by a party with standing to file a land use petition in Washington State Superior Court, unless otherwise specified, in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 36.70C RCW. Such petition must be filed within 21 days of issuance of the decision. This process shall be the exclusive means of judicial review except for local land use decisions reviewable by a quasi-judicial body created by state law, such as the shorelines hearings board.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020; Ord. No. 21-017, § 1.d.(Exh. B), 11-23-2021; Ord. No. 24-002, § 21, 1-23-2024)

The purpose of this section is to establish the process for amending project specific permits/approvals/actions, as well as the city's comprehensive plan and the unified development code and related maps.

A.

Project Specific Permits/Approvals/Actions—Minor Amendments.

1.

Proposed amendments to project specific permits and approvals may be determined by the city to be minor amendments, and subject to the provisions of this section, provided that the proposed amendments do not:

a.

Alter the overall character of the project;

b.

Increase the number of lots, dwelling units, or density;

c.

Decrease the quality or amount of open space;

d.

Significantly increase the demand for public utilities or services;

e.

Trigger the need for a new or supplemental environmental review; or

f.

Introduce a new use that is prohibited in the zone or that may only be permitted through a conditional use permit.

2.

Minor amendments shall be processed in accordance with the provisions of this Section 14.30.060 and may be approved, modified with conditions of approval by the city, or denied, provided that:

a.

A proposed change to a condition of approval does not modify the intent of the original condition;

b.

The perimeter boundaries of the original site shall not be extended by more than five percent of the original lot area;

c.

The proposal does not add more than ten percent gross square footage of structures on the site;

d.

Proposed changes to yard and height requirements are limited to ten percent of the required dimension.

e.

Proposed changes to yard and height requirements are limited to ten percent of the required dimension.

3.

Any additions or expansions approved through minor amendments that would cumulatively exceed the requirements of this section shall be reviewed as a major amendment.

B.

Project Specific Permits/Approvals/Actions—Major Amendments.

1.

Proposed amendments to project specific permits/approvals/actions that do not meet the criteria for a minor amendment, as determined by the city, shall be considered a major amendment and subject to the provisions of this section.

2.

Major amendments shall be subject to processing in the same manner as the original permit or approval, as determined by the city.

C.

Amendments to the College Place Comprehensive Plan. Proposed amendments to the comprehensive plan including, but not limited to the goals and policies, level of service standards, and the future land use map shall be processed as a Type 4 review, in accordance with the provisions of Section 14.30.090, provided that:

1.

Applications from the public shall only be accepted for review in accordance with the provisions of the public participation plan adopted by the city to guide the annual review of comprehensive plan amendments.

2.

Proposed amendments may be proposed by the city at any time.

3.

Amendments shall be considered by the city council no more frequently than once a year, except when the proposed amendment:

a.

Is for the initial adoption of a sub-area plan;

b.

Adopts or amends a shoreline master program; or

c.

Amends the capital facilities element concurrent with the adoption of the city's budget.

D.

Amendments to the Unified Development Code and/or Official Zoning Map. Applications to amend Title 14 of this Code, also known as the unified development code and/or a general, non-site specific amendment to the official zoning map, also known as a general rezone, may be submitted at any time, in a format prescribed by the city. These applications shall be processed as a Type 4 review, in accordance with the provisions of Section 14.30.090, provided that:

1.

Site specific rezone applications that require an amendment to the comprehensive plan or future land use map, shall be processed in conjunction with those amendments, and shall be subject to the annual limitations for processing proposed amendments to the comprehensive plan.

2.

Amendments to the unified development code may be held by the city for processing in conjunction with the annual review of comprehensive plan amendments.

3.

The diagrams and illustrations contained in the unified development code are provided as a resource to the reader and may be changed by city staff without formally amending the code.

E.

Upon review of the application materials, the city staff report, environmental documents, written comments from the public as well as from local, state, and federal agencies, and testimony presented at the required public hearing, the planning commission shall make a recommendation to the city council to approve, approve subject to conditions, or deny the application. The recommendation of the planning commission shall be based on the official record of their proceedings and deliberations and shall include written findings addressing the following:

1.

The need for the proposed rezone;

2.

Whether the proposed rezone is in the public interest;

3.

Consistency with the College Place comprehensive plan and related documents;

4.

Consistency with the College Place future land use map;

5.

Compliance with the provisions of the College Place unified development code; and

6.

Compliance with the provisions of the Laws of Washington State including, but not limited to, the Washington State Growth Management Act and the Washington State Environmental Policy Act.

7.

The city council shall make a decision to approve, approve subject to conditions, or deny the application(s) based on a review of the record provided by the planning commission, provided that the city council may also remand proposed amendments to the planning commission for further research, review, and deliberations.

F.

Nothing in this chapter shall preclude the city council from adopting moratoria or interim zoning controls in accordance with the provisions of RCW 36.70A. 390 or as subsequently amended.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020; Ord. No. 24-002, § 22, 1-23-2024)

A.

Any development activity authorized through a permit or approval issued in accordance with the provisions of this title shall be completed within two years from the date of approval, unless otherwise specified by the city.

1.

Failure to meet the time limit set shall void the permit or approval.

2.

The city, at its sole discretion, may authorize a time extension upon request, provided such extension request is filed in writing prior to the required completion date. Such extension request shall detail unique and special circumstances that prohibited the completion of the use authorized.

B.

If the city finds the conditions and safeguards made part of the terms under which the project permit was granted have not be complied with or are not being maintained, the city shall prescribe a reasonable time for correction, and if corrections are not made within the time limit, the permit may be suspended or revoked.

C.

The city may revoke a project permit issued pursuant to this title, based on a finding that:

1.

The application included any false information material to the project permit approval, or the permit was obtained by fraud;

2.

The conditions and safeguards required in the permit have not been complied with or are not now being maintained;

3.

The use for which a conditional use permit was granted has at any time ceased for one-year or more; or

4.

The required fees were not paid, or documents were not recorded, in a timely manner.

D.

The suspension or revocation of a permit may be appealed to the city hearing examiner in order to show cause why such permit approval should not be suspended or revoked.

E.

An application for a permit previously revoked under this section cannot be submitted until all remedial actions required of the applicant/project sponsor/property owner have been completed and all fines, penalties, and fees paid.

F.

Violation of such conditions and safeguards, when made part of the terms under which the project permit is granted, shall be considered a violation of this title and may result in suspension or revocation of the permit and/or enforcement actions in accordance with the provisions of this Code.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020)

A.

These public notice requirements shall apply to the following unless otherwise specified:

1.

Notices of application;

2.

Public hearing notices;

3.

SEPA threshold determinations;

4.

Notices of decisions; and

5.

Notices of appeals.

B.

At least 15 days prior to the date of any open record public hearing and/or the begin date of any public comment periods the city shall:

1.

Publish the notice in the general newspaper of record.

2.

Post the notice on the city website and at City Hall.

3.

Place a sign that displays the public notice on each street frontage in accordance [with] city specifications and installation requirements. and

4.

Mail or email the public notice to the:

a.

Applicant;

b.

Owners of all parcels within 300 feet of the boundaries of the parcel in question and any adjacent parcels under the ownership or control of the project sponsor;

c.

Agencies with jurisdiction;

d.

Parties who have provided oral or written testimony on the permit and requested to be on the mailing list;

e.

Parties who have submitted written requests to receive notice; and

f.

Parties of record.

C.

All SEPA threshold determinations shall be distributed to:

1.

The Washington State Department of Ecology SEPA Register at separegister@ecy.wa.gov;

2.

Agencies and jurisdictions on the city's SEPA mailing list; and

3.

All parties listed in Section 14.30.230 B.4. above.

(Ord. No. 20-021, § 2(Exh. A), 11-24-2020; Ord. No. 24-002, § 23, 1-23-2024)