Washougal City Zoning Code
CHAPTER 18
94 PROCEDURES
§ 18.94.010 Purpose.
The purpose of this chapter is to combine and consolidate the application, review and approval processes for land development in the city in a manner that is clear, concise and understandable. It is further intended to comply with state guidelines for combining and expediting development review and integrating environmental review and land use development plans. Final decision on development proposals shall be made pursuant to the time lines set forth in WMC § 18.94.130.
(Ord. 1233 § 1, 1997; Ord. 1421 § 1, 2001; Ord. 1451 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1465 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1503 § 1, 2005)
§ 18.94.020 Applicability.
(1)
The provisions of this chapter apply to any action under the following titles of the Washougal Municipal Code:
(a)
WMC Title 15, Buildings and Construction;
(b)
WMC Title 16, Environmental Regulations;
(c)
WMC Title 17, Land Divisions;
(d)
WMC Title 18, Zoning.
(2)
In addition, this chapter applies to any legislative amendment to the above listed titles.
(Ord. 1233 § 1, 1997; Ord. 1421 § 1, 2001; Ord. 1451 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1465 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1503 § 1, 2005)
§ 18.94.030 Rules of interpretation.
(1)
For the purposes of the development code, all words used in the code shall have their normal and customary meanings unless specifically defined otherwise in this code:
(a)
Words used in the present tense include the future.
(b)
The plural includes the singular and vice versa.
(c)
The words "will" and "shall" are mandatory.
(d)
The word "may" indicates that discretion is allowed.
(e)
The word "used" includes designed, intended, or arranged to be used.
(f)
The masculine gender includes the feminine and vice versa.
(g)
The word "building" includes a portion of a building or a portion of the lot on which it stands.
(h)
All day references refer to calendar days.
(2)
Distances shall be measured horizontally unless otherwise specified.
(Ord. 1233 § 1, 1997; Ord. 1421 § 1, 2001; Ord. 1451 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1465 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1503 § 1, 2005)
§ 18.94.035 Application types.
(1)
The city shall consolidate the development application and review in order to integrate the development permit and environmental review process, while avoiding duplication of the review processes.
(2)
All applications for development permits, site plan review approvals, variances and other city approvals under the development code shall be submitted on forms provided by the community development department. All applications shall be signed by the property owner, or accompanied by a letter of authorization signed by the property owner.
(3)
There are four types of land use applications. See Table 18.94-1 for classification of the land use application types. The city shall process each type of land use application as provided in this chapter. The community development director shall classify any application not included on Table 18.94-1, subject to appeal of the classification as part of an appeal of the decision on the merits of the application. Land use applications occur in the following four types:
(a)
Type I (Administrative). 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 or the public in general. Examples include boundary line adjustments, building permits and home occupations.
(b)
Type II (Administrative). 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 the general public. Examples include short plats, multifamily developments, and commercial and industrial site plans abutting residential zones.
(c)
Type III (Quasi-Judicial). 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), and planned unit developments (PUDs). A complete classification of the land use application types is found in Table 18.94-1.
(d)
Type IV (Legislative). This application has a high degree of impact on property owners within the vicinity of the site and the city as a whole. Examples include comprehensive plan changes and connected rezones, development of regulations and subarea plans, and comprehensive plan reviews. A complete classification of the application types is found in Table 18.94-1.
When a given development or action consists of applications subject to more than one type of review, all of the applications shall be processed concurrently at the highest review type applicable to the applications.
(Ord. 1233 § 1, 1997; Ord. 1421 § 1, 2001; Ord. 1451 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1465 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1503 § 1, 2005; Ord. 1613 § 1 (Exh. A), 2008; Amended during 9/08 supplement)
§ 18.94.040 Roles and responsibilities.
The regulation of land development is a cooperative activity including many different elected and appointed boards, city staff, the hearing examiner and the applicant. The specific responsibilities of these bodies are set forth below:
(1)
A developer is expected to read and understand the city development code and be prepared to fulfill the obligations placed on the developer by WMC Titles 15 through 18.
(2)
Community Development Director. The director shall review and act on the following:
(a)
Authority. The community development director is responsible for the administration of WMC Titles 15 through 18.
(b)
Administrative Interpretation. Upon request or as determined necessary, the director shall interpret the meaning or application of the provisions of said titles and issue a written administrative interpretation within 28 calendar days after the city receives a technically complete application. Requests for interpretation shall be written and shall concisely identify the issue and desired interpretation. Classification of land use actions that are not listed on Table 18.94-1 is an administrative interpretation.
(c)
Type I and Type II administrative approvals as set forth in WMC § 18.94.035(3)(a) and (b).
(3)
City Council. In addition to its legislative responsibility, the city council shall review and act on the following subjects, as set forth in WMC § 18.94.110:
(a)
Recommendations of the planning commission, pursuant to WMC § 18.94.110.
(4)
Planning Commission. The planning commission shall review and make recommendations to city council, as appropriate, on the following applications and subjects, as set forth in WMC § 18.94.100:
(a)
Amendments to the comprehensive plan;
(b)
Legislative proceedings relating to WMC Titles 15, Buildings and Construction, 16, Environmental Regulations, 17, Land Divisions, and 18, Zoning;
(c)
Other actions requested or remanded by the city council.
(5)
Hearing Examiner. The hearing examiner shall review and make final decisions, unless appealed, as appropriate, on the following applications and subjects as set forth in WMC § 18.94.105:
(a)
Variances (full variance) of more than 25 percent of any numerical standard in this title, such as building height, setback or yard restrictions;
(b)
Appeal of administrative interpretations and decisions as set forth in WMC § 18.94.035(3)(a) and (b);
(c)
Appeal of SEPA threshold determinations on any land use action associated with final decisions;
(d)
Appeal of code enforcement officer decisions;
(e)
Appeal of building official decisions;
(f)
All decisions interpreting and applying development regulations and/or having 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 (as part of Type III actions) and planned unit developments (PUDs);
(g)
Other actions requested by the city council or remanded by the superior court.
(Ord. 1233 § 1, 1997; Ord. 1421 § 1, 2001; Ord. 1451 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1465 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1503 § 1, 2005; Ord. 1613 § 1 (Exh. A), 2008)
§ 18.94.045 Preapplication.
A preapplication conference is an opportunity for a prospective applicant to meet with city staff to discuss the requirements for a proposed development application.
(1)
Applicability. All Type III applications shall be subject to preapplication review. Type II applications are subject to preapplication review except if excused by the director.
(2)
Upon receipt of a preapplication conference request, the community development director shall:
(a)
Schedule a date and time at which the conference will be held. The director may set a specific day of the week upon which conferences are to be held. The city will hold a preapplication conference four weeks from the date the preapplication conference submittal is made;
(b)
Forward the materials submitted to the appropriate local, state or federal agencies for review and comment;
(c)
Hold the conference. Conferences are attended by a representative from the community development and public works departments, fire, police, and other agencies or departments the director determines to be appropriate;
(d)
One week following the conference, the community development director will issue a written report summarizing the conference including any determinations made as a result of the conference.
(3)
Preapplication Conference Submittal Requirements. The following information shall be submitted:
(a)
Application form completed and signed by property owner or by applicant if accompanied with an authorization letter from the property owner, accompanied by a fee as identified in WMC § 3.90.010;
(b)
Five copies of a site plan or proposed plat, as appropriate for the proposed land use, drawn to a minimum scale of one inch equals 200 feet on a sheet no larger than 24 inches by 36 inches (one copy is acceptable of eight and one-half inches by 11 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. Include the following details:
(i)
Proposed name of the development;
(ii)
Date, north point, and scale of drawing;
(iii)
Names and addresses of the owner or owners, developer, engineer or surveyor, and land planner or landscape architect;
(iv)
The location, widths and names of all existing or platted streets or other public ways within or adjacent to the tract, railroad right-of-way or other important features, such as section lines or corners, city boundary lines and monuments;
(v)
Location and direction of all watercourses;
(vi)
Natural features, such as rock outcroppings, marshes, wooded areas and isolated preservable trees;
(vii)
Existing uses of the property, including location of all existing structures on the property, and indication if they are to remain;
(viii)
Proposed streets and their location, widths, names, approximate radii of curves, and relationship to any projected streets;
(ix)
Easements. Identify location on the site or abutting property, showing the width and purpose of all existing and proposed easements;
(x)
Lots. Approximate dimensions of all lots, minimum lot size, proposed lot and block number;
(c)
One full size copy of the assessor's quarter section map(s) with the site identified together with all other property owned by the applicant within 1,000 feet of the proposed site;
(d)
One copy of a road or vicinity map with the site identified;
(e)
One copy of the U.S. Soil Conservation Service soils survey with the site identified, or other more site-specific information;
(f)
A map showing the existing zoning of all adjacent properties. This may be written on the assessor's quarter section map;
(g)
A written narrative and attached exhibits that give a complete and accurate depiction of what the proposal involves, including any specific questions to be answered by the city. If any specific conditions or mitigation measures are proposed by the applicant, this should be included in the narrative;
(h)
A developer's packet obtained from Clark County community development will satisfy the technical land use demand to determine if the subject property contains such items as soils, geohazards, and critical lands.
(Ord. 1233 § 1, 1997; Ord. 1245 § 1, 1997; Ord. 1421 § 1, 2001; Ord. 1451 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1465 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1503 § 1, 2005; Ord. 1613 § 1 (Exh. A), 2008; Amended during 9/08 supplement)
§ 18.94.050 Content of technically complete applications.
(1)
All applications for approval under WMC Titles 15 through 18 shall include the information specified in the applicable title. The director may require such additional information as reasonably necessary to fully and properly evaluate the proposal.
(2)
The applicant shall apply for all permits identified in the preapplication conference.
(3)
A project application shall be declared complete only when it contains all of the following materials:
(a)
A fully completed and signed development application and all applicable review fees. The application shall be signed by the owner of record or be accompanied by a letter of authorization signed by the owner of record;
(b)
A fully completed and signed environmental checklist pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, if applicable;
(c)
The information specified for the desired project in the appropriate chapters of this code;
(d)
Any supplemental information or special studies identified in writing by the director in the preapplication conference report.
(Ord. 1233 § 1, 1997; Ord. 1421 § 1, 2001; Ord. 1451 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1465 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1503 § 1, 2005)
§ 18.94.055 Initial processing of applications.
The director initially shall process all Type I, II, III and IV applications as follows:
(1)
Within 28 calendar days of submittal, the director shall determine if the application is technically complete and shall send to the applicant a letter stating that the application is technically complete or identifying what additional information is required to make it technically complete.
(2)
Within 14 calendar days after the city receives additional information from the applicant in response to an initial or subsequent notice that an application is technically incomplete, the city shall mail to the applicant a written statement that the application is technically complete or identifying what additional information is required to make it technically complete. When the director finds that an application is technically complete, the director shall note the date on the application form.
(3)
Except for an application subject to Type I review, within 14 calendar days after the director finds an application is technically complete, the director shall provide notice of the application. The contents of the notice of application shall be consistent with WMC § 18.94.080.
(a)
When the application is administrative in nature (all Type II applications), notice of the application shall be provided as follows:
(i)
Post one notice of the application on the subject property for every 300 feet of frontage on a public road, or, if the property does not front on a public road, at a point abutting a public road near the subject property;
(ii)
Mail written notice of the application to solicit comments from the following affected agencies: public works, fire, Northwest Natural Gas, GTE, cable, Clark Public Utilities and other affected agencies as determined by the community development director;
(iii)
Mail written notice of the application to owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property as shown on the records of the county assessor, the applicant, the owners of the subject property and other persons and firms identified by the applicant;
(b)
When the application is legislative in nature (all Type IV), notice of the application shall be provided as follows:
(i)
Publish notice of the proposed action in the official newspaper of the city. The notice shall state the following:
(A)
What chapter is proposed to be amended;
(B)
A brief description of the proposed amendment;
(C)
The name and telephone number of the staff contact;
(D)
Where a copy of the proposed amendment may be obtained;
(E)
The deadline by which comments on the proposed change may be submitted;
(ii)
Mail a copy of the proposed legislation to any private industry directly affected by the proposed amendment, including a cover sheet identifying the comment period expiration date. Failure to mail such notice to everyone in an industry affected by the proposed change shall not be a violation of this section nor invalidate the process through completion.
(c)
When the application is quasi-judicial in nature (all Type III applications), notice of application shall be provided as identified at WMC § 18.94.080, Notice provisions.
(4)
Except for a determination of significance, the city shall not issue a SEPA threshold determination until expiration of the comment period on the notice of application. The threshold determination shall be published in the official newspaper of the city.
(Ord. 1451 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1465 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1503 § 1, 2005; Ord. 1613 § 1 (Exh. A), 2008)
§ 18.94.060 Subsequent application processing.
(1)
Type I Applications. Except in the case of a building permit application, and unless accompanied with a SEPA checklist review, the director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a Type I application within 28 calendar days after the date the application was accepted as technically complete; provided, that an applicant may agree in writing to extend the time in which the director shall issue a decision. Time spent by the applicant to revise plans or provide additional studies or materials requested by the city shall not be included in the 28-day period. The planning official may consider new evidence the applicant introduces with or after such a written request for extension. The planning official's decision shall address all of the relevant approval criteria applicable to the development application pursuant to WMC § 18.94.090 and § 18.94.130. The decision of the director may be appealed pursuant to WMC § 18.94.140(1).
(2)
Type II Applications. The final decision on a Type II application shall be made and mailed pursuant to WMC § 18.94.090 not more than 120 calendar days (90 days for short subdivisions) after the date a technically complete determination is made that contains the decision to approve, approve with conditions or deny the application. This period shall not include:
• Time spent by the applicant to revise plans or provide additional studies or materials requested by the city. |
• Substantial project revisions made or requested by an applicant, in which case the time lines set forth will be calculated from the time that the city determines the revised application to be complete. |
• Projects involving the siting of an essential public facility. |
• Time spent preparing an environmental impact statement. |
• All time required to obtain a variance. |
• Time between submittal and resolution of an appeal, including remands and determination of significance. |
• Time required to process a request for reconsideration. |
• Any extension of time mutually agreed upon by the applicant and the city in writing. |
(a)
The decision of the director may be appealed within 14 calendar days after it is issued pursuant to WMC § 18.94.140(1), including an appeal of a SEPA determination.
(b)
The city shall not issue a SEPA threshold determination until expiration of the comment period on the notice of application.
(3)
Type III Applications.
(a)
Within 14 calendar days after receipt of a technically complete application, the director shall schedule the proposal for public hearing before the hearing examiner. The final decision on a Type III application shall be made and mailed not more than 120 calendar days after the date a technically complete determination is made. This period shall not include:
• Time spent by the applicant to revise plans or provide additional studies or materials requested by the city. |
• Substantial project revisions made or requested by an applicant, in which case the time lines set forth will be calculated from the time that the city determines the revised application to be complete. |
• Projects involving the siting of an essential public facility. |
• Time spent preparing an environmental impact statement. |
• All time required to obtain a variance. |
• Time between submittal and resolution of an appeal, including remands and determination of significance. |
• Time required to process a request for reconsideration. |
• Any extension of time mutually agreed upon by the applicant and the city in writing. |
(b)
The director shall give notice of the initial hearing before the examiner as provided in WMC § 18.94.080(2). Where the application is an appeal of a Type I or II decision, the director also shall mail written notice of the initial hearing before the examiner to the parties of record below.
(c)
At least seven calendar days prior to the public hearing, the director shall issue and mail to the applicant a staff report. Copies of the staff report and recommendation shall be available at City Hall at no charge to the public upon request. The staff report shall:
(i)
Identify the relevant standards and criteria;
(ii)
Provide proposed findings and conclusions about whether the application complies with those standards and criteria based on substantial evidence in the record;
(iii)
Recommend a proposed decision, and, if appropriate, proposed conditions of approval warranted to ensure the impacts of the proposal will be mitigated and the application does or will comply with applicable standards and criteria; and
(iv)
Contain the final SEPA determination.
(v)
In the case of a final order by the examiner, the director also shall summarize how the order can be appealed to superior court consistent with WMC § 18.94.140(2).
(d)
The city shall not issue a SEPA threshold determination until expiration of the comment period on the notice of application.
(4)
Type IV Applications.
(a)
Not sooner than the deadline specified in the notice of application required in WMC § 18.94.055, the director shall schedule a work session with the planning commission to consider the contents of the draft proposal and amendments to the draft.
(b)
The director shall hold a work session with the city council on the proposed amendment as revised following the planning commission work session.
(c)
When the amendment is ready for a public hearing after the city council work session, the director shall schedule the proposal for public hearing before the planning commission.
(d)
The director shall give notice of the initial hearing before the planning commission as provided in WMC § 18.94.080(2). In addition, the director shall mail notice to any person or firm who commented on the proposed amendment.
(e)
At least seven calendar days prior to the public hearing, the director shall issue and mail to the applicant a staff report. Copies of the staff report and recommendation shall be available at City Hall at no charge to the public upon request. The staff report shall:
(i)
Identify the relevant standards and criteria;
(ii)
Provide proposed findings and conclusions about whether the proposed amendment complies with those standards and criteria;
(iii)
Recommend a proposed decision and, if appropriate, any recommended changes to the draft amendment; and
(iv)
Contain the final SEPA determination.
(f)
Within 14 calendar days after the director receives a recommendation from the planning commission, the director shall schedule the matter for public hearing before city council.
(g)
The director shall give notice of the initial hearing before the city council as provided in WMC § 18.94.080(2). In addition, the director shall mail notice to any person or firm who commented orally or in writing in the public hearing(s) before the planning commission.
(h)
Review of Type IV applications also is subject to WMC § 18.94.115.
(Ord. 1233 § 1, 1997; Ord. 1421 § 1, 2001; Ord. 1451 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1465 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1503 § 1, 2005)
§ 18.94.080 Notice provisions.
(1)
Notice of Application for Type II, Type III and Type IV Applications. Within 14 calendar days following issuance of a technically complete letter under WMC § 18.94.060, the city shall issue a notice of application and solicit comments from affected agencies and the public.
(a)
The notice shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
(i)
The name of the applicant;
(ii)
Technically complete date of application;
(iii)
The location of the project (including address and legal description);
(iv)
A brief project description;
(v)
The requested approvals, actions and/or required studies;
(vi)
The deadline for submitting comments. The comment period shall be 15 calendar days following the date of notice;
(vii)
Identification of existing environmental documents to be relied upon, if any;
(viii)
A city staff contact and phone number;
(ix)
The applicant's contact name and telephone number.
(b)
The notice of application for Type II applications shall be posted on the subject property in two or more locations, mailed to all property owners as shown on the records of the county assessor of properties within 500 feet of the boundary of the site, and to the applicant, property owner and engineer/consultant, and be published once in the official newspaper of the city. The posting, publication and mailing of such notice shall occur on the same date.
(c)
The notice of application for Type III and IV applications shall be mailed to all property owners as shown on the records of the county assessor of properties within 500 feet of the boundary of the site, and to the applicant, property owner and engineer/consultant, and be published once in the official newspaper of the city. The posting, publication and mailing of such notice shall occur on the same date.
(d)
A notice of application is not required for the following actions, when they are categorically exempt from SEPA or environmental review has been completed:
(i)
Application for building permits;
(ii)
Application for lot line adjustments;
(iii)
Application for Type I administrative approvals.
(2)
Notice of Public Hearing. Notice for hearings for all Type III and Type IV land use actions and all appeals shall be given as follows:
(a)
Publication at least 10 calendar days before the date of an initial public meeting, hearing, or pending action in the official newspaper of the city; and
(b)
At least 10 calendar days before the date of an initial public meeting, hearing or pending action, mailing of written notice to all property owners as shown on the records of the county assessor within 500 feet, not including street rights-of-way, of the boundaries of the property which is the subject of the meeting or pending action, and to the applicant, property owner and engineer/consultant;
(c)
Posting at least 10 calendar days before the initial meeting, hearing, or pending action, three or more notices, as determined necessary by the director, on the subject property, one in the library and one notice in City Hall;
(d)
Content of Notice. The public notice shall include a general description of the proposed project, action to be taken, a nonlegal description of the property or a vicinity map or sketch, the time, date and place of the public hearing and the place where further information may be obtained;
(e)
Continuations. If, for any reason, a meeting or hearing on a pending action is not completed on the date set in the public notice, the meeting or hearing may be continued to a date, time and place certain and no further notice under this section is required. If a meeting or hearing is not continued to a date, time and place certain, the director shall provide notice of the continued meeting or hearing as though it was the initial evidentiary hearing.
(3)
Notice of Decision. A notice of decision shall be sent to the parties of record for any application subject to the notice provisions of subsection (1) of this section. The notice of decision shall be the appealable document in all land use actions. Notice shall be made as follows:
(a)
Type II Actions. The director shall notify parties of record of an administrative decision by sending a copy of the staff report and determination for the proposal. The staff report shall indicate that the decision will become final unless an aggrieved party files an appeal pursuant to WMC § 18.94.140.
(b)
Type III and Type IV Actions. A written notice for all final decisions shall be sent to the applicant and all parties of record. The final decision on all Type III actions subject to review by the examiner is the signed written order of the examiner. The final decision on all Type IV actions shall consist of the resolution, ordinance or a copy of the approved minutes from the city council. However, the date of the final decision for purposes of appeal shall be the date the city mails notice of the decision.
(4)
In addition to the posting and publication requirements of subsection (2) of this section, notice of appeal hearings shall be as follows:
(a)
For administrative approvals, notice shall be mailed to parties of record;
(b)
For planning commission recommendations, mailing to parties of record from the commission hearing.
(5)
The director may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the following without notice, except to the applicant:
(a)
Lot line adjustments;
(b)
Extension of time for approval;
(c)
Minor amendments or modifications to approved developments or permits. Minor amendments are those which may affect the precise dimensions or location of buildings, accessory structures and driveways, but do not:
(i)
Affect overall project character,
(ii)
Increase the number of lots, dwelling units, or density, or
(iii)
Decrease the quality or amount of open space;
(d)
Director's decisions under this section may be appealed by the applicant pursuant to WMC § 18.94.140.
(6)
Within 14 days of a Type II, Type III, or Type IV application being deemed technically complete, the applicant shall post one four-foot by four-foot sign per road frontage. The sign shall be attached to the ground with a minimum of two four-inch by four-inch posts or better. The development sign shall remain posted and in reasonable condition until a final decision of the city is issued, and then shall be removed by the applicant within 14 days of the notice of decision by the city. The sign shall be clearly visible from adjoining rights-of-way and generally include the following:
(a)
Description of proposal;
(b)
Types of permit applications on file and being considered by the city of Washougal;
(c)
Site plan;
(d)
Name and phone number of applicant, and city of Washougal contact for additional information;
(e)
If a Type III or Type IV application, then a statement that a public hearing is required and scheduled. Adequate space shall be provided for the date and location of the hearing to be added upon scheduling by the city.
(Ord. 1233 § 1, 1997; Ord. 1421 § 1, 2001; Ord. 1451 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1465 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1503 § 1, 2005; Ord. 1740 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013; Ord. 1886 § 1 (Exh. A), 2019)
§ 18.94.090 Development review.
(1)
Environmental Review.
(a)
Developments and planned actions subject to the provisions of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) shall be reviewed in accordance with the policies and procedures contained in Chapter 16.36 WMC and this chapter.
(b)
SEPA review shall be conducted concurrently with substantive development review and, where possible, integrated into the project review. Previously completed programmatic environmental reviews (i.e., comprehensive plan EIS, subarea plans, etc.) should be relied upon whenever possible. The following are exempt from concurrent SEPA review:
(i)
Projects categorically exempt from SEPA;
(ii)
Components of previously completed planned actions, to the extent permitted by law and consistent with the EIS for the planned action.
(2)
Substantive Development Review. Any application made pursuant to this chapter shall be evaluated against the applicable criteria from the applicable title (WMC Title 15, 16, 17, or 18) and relevant provisions of the comprehensive plan and other adopted plans.
(Ord. 1233 § 1, 1997; Ord. 1421 § 1, 2001; Ord. 1451 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1465 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1503 § 1, 2005)
§ 18.94.100 Planning commission review.
(1)
Staff Report. The director shall prepare a staff report on the proposed action pursuant to WMC § 18.94.090(2). The staff report shall include findings, conclusions and proposed recommendations.
(2)
Hearing. The planning commission shall conduct a public hearing on proposals for the purpose of taking testimony, hearing evidence, considering the facts germane to the proposal, and evaluating the proposal for consistency with the city's development code, adopted plans and regulations. Notice of the planning commission hearing shall be in accordance with WMC § 18.94.080(2), and conduct of the hearing shall be in accordance with WMC § 18.94.120(1).
(3)
Recommendation. Upon a recommendation approving, conditionally approving or denying a proposal, the planning commission shall pass a motion by majority vote of those in attendance and participating adopting findings of fact, conclusions and recommendations to be forwarded to city council for consideration consistent with WMC § 18.94.060(4)(f).
(Ord. 1233 § 1, 1997; Ord. 1421 § 1, 2001; Ord. 1451 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1465 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1503 § 1, 2005)
§ 18.94.105 Hearing examiner review and decision.
(1)
Hearing. The hearing examiner shall conduct a public hearing on development proposals for the purpose of taking testimony, hearing evidence, considering the facts germane to the proposal, and evaluating the proposal for consistency with the city's development code, adopted plans and regulations. Notice of the hearing examiner hearing shall be in accordance with WMC § 18.94.080(2). The hearing examiner shall conduct a public hearing in accordance with WMC § 18.94.120(1).
(2)
Required Findings. The hearing examiner shall not approve a proposed development unless it first makes the following findings and conclusions:
(a)
The development is consistent with the comprehensive and other adopted plans and meets the applicable provisions of WMC Titles 15, 16, 17 and 18.
(3)
Decision. The hearing examiner's decision to approve as recommended, approve with additional conditions, modify, with or without the applicant's concurrence; provided, that the modifications do not enlarge the area or scope of the project; increase the density or proposed building size; significantly increase adverse environmental impacts as determined by the responsible official, deny (reapplication or resubmittal is permitted), deny with prejudice (reapplication or resubmittal is not allowed for one year), and shall be based upon findings of fact and shall be final, unless appealed to the Clark County superior court within 21 days from the date the final decision is issued per RCW 36.70C.040(3).
(Ord. 1233 § 1, 1997; Ord. 1421 § 1, 2001; Ord. 1451 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1465 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1503 § 1, 2005)
§ 18.94.110 City council actions.
(1)
Actions. Upon receiving a recommendation from the planning commission or notice of any other matter requiring the council's attention, the council shall perform the following actions as appropriate:
(a)
Deliberate and make a decision on a planning commission recommendation, based upon the closed record established at the public hearing;
(b)
At the council's discretion, it may hear oral argument based on the evidence in the record and make a decision on the following matters:
(i)
Recommendations of planning commission;
(ii)
Other matters not prohibited by law;
(c)
Council, at its discretion, may accept new evidence only for the following reasons:
(i)
The evidence relates to standing, notice, ex parte contact, bias or other alleged procedural irregularity or violation of the appearance of fairness doctrine or whether the record before council is complete.
(2)
Decisions. The city council shall make its decision by motion, resolution, or ordinance as appropriate.
(a)
A council decision on a planning commission recommendation or following a public hearing shall include one of the following actions:
(i)
Approve as recommended;
(ii)
Approve with additional conditions;
(iii)
Modify, with or without the applicant's concurrence; provided, that the modifications do not:
(A)
Enlarge the area or scope of the project;
(B)
Increase the density or proposed building size;
(C)
Significantly increase adverse environmental impacts as determined by the responsible official;
(iv)
Deny (reapplication or resubmittal is permitted);
(v)
Deny with prejudice (reapplication or resubmittal is not allowed for one year);
(vi)
Remand for further proceedings and/or evidentiary hearing in accordance with WMC § 18.94.100.
(Ord. 1233 § 1, 1997; Ord. 1421 § 1, 2001; Ord. 1451 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1465 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1503 § 1, 2005)
§ 18.94.115 Legislative actions.
The provisions of this section shall apply to all legislative amendments to WMC Titles 15, Buildings and Construction; 16, Environmental Regulations; 17, Land Divisions; and 18, Zoning; or the comprehensive plan policies or text.
(1)
Legislative changes shall be considered through a Type IV process, with the exception of those provisions set forth in subsections (2) and (3) of this section.
(2)
Supplemental Procedures.
(a)
Upon completion of a draft of any legislative amendment to any chapter subject to this section, the director shall:
(i)
Solicit comments from affected agencies, private industries and the general public. This shall be accomplished by:
(A)
Sending copies of the proposed amendment to any private industry directly affected by the proposed amendment, including a cover sheet identifying the comment period expiration date. Failure to send to all industries affected by the proposed change shall not be a violation of this section, nor invalidate any process to its completion;
(B)
Publishing notice of the proposed amendment, consistent with subsection (3) of this section;
(ii)
Upon expiration of the initial comment period, the director shall hold a work session with the planning commission to discuss the contents of the proposed amendments. Comments that result from the work session may be incorporated into the draft amendment;
(iii)
Hold a work session with city council on the proposed amendment as revised by the planning commission;
(iv)
Complete the hearings process consistent with a Type IV land use action.
(3)
Supplemental Notice Provisions. The following notice provisions shall be implemented in conjunction with any proposed legislative amendment:
(a)
Initial Notice. Upon completion of a draft amendment, the director shall publish notice of the proposed change in the official newspaper of the city. The notice shall state the following:
(i)
What chapter is proposed to be amended;
(ii)
A brief description of the proposed amendment;
(iii)
The name and telephone number of the staff contact;
(iv)
Where a copy of the proposed amendment may be obtained;
(v)
The deadline by which comments on the proposed change may be submitted.
(b)
Hearing Notice. Once the initial comment period has expired, the director shall schedule the matter for public hearing. The notice for public hearing shall be consistent with the notice provisions for a Type IV application, except as follows:
(i)
Notice shall be sent to parties of record who responded to the initial publication or request for comments.
(Ord. 1233 § 1, 1997; Ord. 1421 § 1, 2001; Ord. 1451 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1465 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1503 § 1, 2005)
§ 18.94.120 Procedures for public proceedings.
(1)
Hearings. Public hearings shall be conducted in accordance with the hearing body's rules of procedure and shall serve to create or supplement an evidentiary record upon which the body will base its decision. The chair or hearing examiner shall open the public hearing and, in general, observe the following sequence of events:
(a)
Applicant presentation, including submittal of any materials. Members of the hearing body or hearing examiner may ask questions of the applicant;
(b)
Staff presentation, including submittal of any administrative reports. Members of the hearing body or hearing examiner may ask questions of the staff;
(c)
Testimony or comments by the public germane to the matter. Questions directed to the staff or the applicant shall be posed by the chair or hearing examiner at its discretion;
(d)
Rebuttal, response or clarifying statements by the staff and the applicant or the applicant's representative;
(e)
The evidentiary portion of the public hearing shall be closed and the hearing body or hearing examiner shall deliberate on the matter before it.
(2)
Procedures for Closed Record Appeals. Closed record appeals shall be conducted in accordance with the hearing body's rules of procedure and shall serve to provide argument and guidance for the body's decision. Closed record appeals shall be conducted generally as provided for public hearings. Except as provided in subsection (4) of this section, no new evidence or testimony shall be given or received. The parties to the appeal may submit timely written statements or arguments addressing the evidence already in the record. In the case of a closed record appeal to council, such written comments shall be received by the director at least five calendar days prior to the hearing.
(3)
Reconsideration. A party to a public hearing or closed record appeal may seek reconsideration of a final decision only by filing a written request for reconsideration with the director within five calendar days after the direct mail notice of the final decision. The request shall comply with WMC § 18.94.140(4). The council, hearing body or hearing examiner shall consider the request at its next regularly scheduled meeting, without public comment or argument by the party filing the request. If the request is denied, the previous action shall become final. If the request is granted, the council, hearing body or hearing examiner may immediately revise and reissue its decision or may call for argument in accordance with the procedures for closed record appeals. Reconsideration should be granted only when an obvious legal error has occurred or a material factual issue has been overlooked that would change the previous decision. The request for reconsideration stops the appeal clock from running, and the appeal clock restarts only when a decision on the reconsideration request is made.
(4)
Remand. In the event the city council determines that the public hearing record is insufficient or otherwise flawed, the council may remand the matter back to the initiating hearing body to correct the deficiencies. The council shall specify the items or issues to be considered and the time frame for completing the additional work. The council may hold a public hearing on a closed record appeal only for the limited purposes identified in RCW 34.05.562(1).
(Ord. 1233 § 1, 1997; Ord. 1451 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1465 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1503 § 1, 2005)
§ 18.94.130 Final decision – Effective date.
The final decision of the council, hearing body or hearing examiner shall be effective on the date stated in the decision, motion, resolution or ordinance; provided, that the date from which appeal periods shall be calculated shall be the date a notice of decision is issued pursuant to WMC § 18.94.080(3).
(Ord. 1233 § 1, 1997; Ord. 1421 § 1, 2001; Ord. 1451 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1465 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1503 § 1, 2005)
§ 18.94.135 Post-decision review.
(1)
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 director may approve some de minimis changes without a post-decision review using the final plat/final site plan review process.
(2)
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 post-decision review application requesting a minor change to aspects of the development proposal or conditions of approval. The post-decision review application may be filed at any time during the period of validity of the preliminary decision; provided:
(a)
A post-decision review application shall not be accepted for a land division after a final plat has been recorded.
(b)
A post-decision review application for a site plan review shall not be accepted for a development after issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
(c)
A post-decision review application for phased site plan review projects shall not be accepted for a phase after issuance of an occupancy permit for that phase.
(d)
Post-decision review shall not substantially change the nature of development approved under a given decision.
(e)
An application that is denied is not eligible for post-decision review.
(3)
Modification of a development other than by a timely appeal or post-decision 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 director may determine that proposed changes exceed the scope of the post-decision review process and that a new development application is warranted. Such determination may be appealed to a hearing examiner in accordance with WMC § 18.94.140.
(4)
Vesting. Vesting for a proposed development is based on the original development application; 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 post-decision review application is filed.
(5)
Classification. The director 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 WMC § 18.94.140.
(a)
An application for post-decision review of a Type I decision shall be subject to a Type I review process.
(b)
An application for post-decision review of a Type II decision shall be subject to a Type I review process, if the director finds that the requested change in the decision:
(i)
Is consistent with the applicable law or variations permitted by law, including a permit to which the development is subject;
(ii)
Involves changes to the interior of the development that will not result in impacts, to include visual impacts, beyond the perimeter of the development site;
(iii)
Does not result in additional lots;
(iv)
Does not change the location of access ways to frontage roads where off-site traffic would be affected;
(v)
Does not locate parking closer to land zoned or used for residential purposes unless more than 100 feet remain separating the parking area and the residential properties;
(vi)
Does not increase the height or gross floor area of a structure by more than 10 percent;
(vii)
Does not require the approval of a road modification that has off-site impacts;
(viii)
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;
(ix)
Proposes to phase a project that was not phased in the original review, or proposes changes to a phasing plan; and
(x)
Does not require further SEPA review.
(c)
An application for post-decision review of a Type II decision shall be subject to a Type II review process if it does not qualify for Type I review under subsection (5)(b) of this section.
(d)
An application for post-decision review of a Type III decision shall be subject to a Type II review process if the director finds that the requested change in the decision:
(i)
Does not increase the potential adverse impact of the development authorized by the decision or SEPA determination;
(ii)
Does not result in additional lots;
(iii)
Does not require the approval of a road modification that has off-site impacts;
(iv)
Does not reduce any transportation safety or transportation concurrency related obligations of the applicant;
(v)
Does not result in a change in the routing of off-site traffic;
(vi)
Does not delete dedications for public utilities/facilities on the site;
(vii)
Does not reduce proposed setbacks by more than 10 percent;
(viii)
Does not increase the height of a structure by more than 10 percent;
(ix)
Does not increase the gross floor area of a structure more than 10 percent;
(x)
Does not eliminate or change fences from sight obscuring to nonobscuring; and
(xi)
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.
(e)
An application for post-decision review of a Type III decision shall be subject to a Type III review process if it does not qualify for a Type II process under subsection (5)(d) of this section.
(f)
When a post-decision 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.
(6)
Submittal Requirements. Application for post-decision review shall include the following:
(a)
A narrative describing the nature of the proposed change to the development and the basis for that change, including the applicable facts and law;
(b)
A copy of the approved development plan;
(c)
A copy of the original development review decision and any approved modifications;
(d)
A copy of the proposed development plan;
(e)
Application fee;
(f)
Reduced copies 11 inches by 17 inches in size shall be included for any application materials larger than 11 inches by 17 inches in size; and
(g)
Any other relevant information the applicant thinks may be helpful.
(Ord. 1740 § 1 (Exh. A), 2013)
§ 18.94.140 Appeals.
(1)
Appeal of Administrative Interpretations and Approvals. Administrative interpretations and administrative approvals under WMC Titles 15, Buildings and Construction; 16, Environmental Regulations; 17, Land Divisions; and 18, Zoning; may be appealed by applicants or parties of record, or any person aggrieved by the interpretation or approval, to the hearing examiner, unless otherwise noticed in this chapter, within 14 calendar days after issuance of the notice of the decision or after other notice that the decision has been made and is appealable. New evidence can be introduced and new issues can be raised before the hearing examiner in an appeal of a Type I or II decision, and the examiner shall make an independent decision based on all of the evidence in the whole record.
(2)
Appeal of a Hearing Examiner Decision.
(a)
A decision of the examiner shall be final and conclusive unless a land use petition is timely filed (within 21 days of the notice of decision) in superior court pursuant to RCW 36.70C.040(3); provided, that no person having actual prior notice of the proceedings of the examiner shall have standing to challenge the examiner's action unless such person is a party of record at the examiner's hearing.
(b)
Notice of the appeal and any other pleadings required to be filed with the court shall be served on the city clerk, director, and city attorney within the applicable time period.
(c)
The cost of transcribing and preparing all records ordered certified by the court or desired by the appellant for such appeal shall be borne by the appellant. The appellant shall post with the city clerk, prior to the preparation of any records, an advance fee deposit in the amount specified by the city clerk. Any overage will be promptly returned to the appellant.
(3)
Appeal of a City Council Decision.
(a)
The decision of the city council shall be final unless appealed by applicants or parties of record, or any person aggrieved by the decision, and for which all other appeals specifically authorized have been timely exhausted, and such appeal shall be made to Clark County superior court within 21 calendar days of the date of issuance of the notice of decision, unless another time period is established by state law or local ordinance.
(b)
Notice of the appeal and any other pleadings required to be filed with the court shall be served on the city clerk, director, and city attorney within the applicable time period.
(c)
The cost of transcribing and preparing all records ordered certified by the court or desired by the appellant for such appeal shall be borne by the appellant. The appellant shall post with the city clerk prior to the preparation of any records an advance fee deposit in the amount specified by the city clerk. Any overage will be promptly returned to the appellant.
(4)
Content of Appeal to Hearing Examiner. The appeal shall contain a concise statement identifying:
(a)
The decision being appealed;
(b)
The name and address of the appellant and the appellant's interest(s) in the matter;
(c)
The specific reasons why the appellant believes the decision to be in error as a matter of fact or law, and the evidence relied on to prove the error. The appellant shall bear the burden of proving the decision was wrong.
If the petitioner wants to introduce new evidence in support of the appeal, the written appeal also must explain why such evidence should be considered, based on the criteria identified in WMC § 18.94.060(3);
(d)
The desired outcome or changes to the decision;
(e)
The appeals fee.
(5)
Appeal Process to Hearing Examiner. Appeals shall be processed as a Type III action; provided, that notice of the appeal hearing shall be sent to only parties of record of the original proceeding.
(Ord. 1233 § 1, 1997; Ord. 1421 § 1, 2001; Ord. 1451 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1465 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1503 § 1, 2005)
§ 18.94.150 Plat alterations.
(1)
Minor Modifications. Minor amendments or modifications to approved development, final plats, or permits are those which may affect the precise dimensions or location of buildings, accessory structures and driveways, but do not affect overall project character; increase the number of lots, dwelling units or density; decrease the quality or amount of open space; change any points of ingress or egress; conflict with any conditions of development agreement or hearing examiner approval; or vary from specified dimensional standards of this title. Minor amendments are Type I decisions and may be approved by the community development director in conjunction with the fire chief and city engineer, as needed.
(2)
Major Amendments. A major amendment is any change in a plan or subdivision other than those identified at subsection (1) of this section as minor adjustments. An example of a major amendment is a request to amend a condition of approval. Major amendments must be reviewed and approved by the hearing examiner. The decision of the hearing examiner shall be considered as an amendment to the subdivision or project and fees charged accordingly for this review.
(3)
Any request to modify a condition of permit approval shall be processed in the same manner, and shall be subject to the same standards, as was the original application, provided the standards and criteria used to approve the decision are consistent with the current code. The decision maker shall limit its review of the approval criteria to those issues or aspects of the application that are proposed to be changed from what was originally approved. If the standards and criteria used to approve the original decision have been amended and are inconsistent with current code, a new application is required, rather than a plat alteration.
(4)
Unauthorized Changes. Unauthorized changes from the approved development approval shall be subject to a stop work order and are subject to code enforcement action as described at Chapter 18.96 WMC.
(Ord. 1496 § 1, 2004; Ord. 1503 § 1, 2005; Ord. 1613 § 1 (Exh. A), 2008)
§ 18.94.160 Development agreements.
(1)
Authorized. The city council may enter into a development agreement with a person having ownership or control of real property within its jurisdiction. Development agreements are intended to vest zoning criteria for a particular parcel in exchange for some benefit to the city including an agreement to annex. The city may enter into a development agreement for real property outside its boundaries as part of a proposed annexation or a service agreement. A development agreement must set forth the development standards and other provisions that shall apply to and govern and vest the development, use, and mitigation of the development of the real property for the duration specified in the agreement. A development agreement shall be consistent with applicable development regulations adopted by the city.
(2)
Effect. Unless amended or terminated, a development agreement is enforceable during its term by any party to the agreement. A development agreement and the development standards in the agreement govern during the term of the agreement, or for all or that part of the build-out period specified in the agreement, and may not be subject to an amendment to a zoning ordinance or development standard or regulation or a new zoning ordinance or development standard or regulations adopted after the effective date of the agreement. Any permit or approval issued by the county or city after the execution of the development agreement must be consistent with the development agreement.
(3)
Recording Parties and Successors Bound. A development agreement shall be recorded with the real property records of Clark County. During the term of the development agreement, the agreement is binding on the parties and their successors, including the city if the city assumes jurisdiction through incorporation or annexation of the area covering the property covered by the development agreement.
(4)
Public Hearing. Notwithstanding other procedural requirements of this title, the city shall only approve a development agreement by ordinance or resolution after a public hearing by the city council or the hearing examiner, as directed by city council. The city shall publish notice of the public hearing in the local paper, a minimum 10 days prior to the initial public hearing, the time, date and location of the hearing, and a general description of the location and proposal.
(5)
If the development agreement relates to a project permit application, the provisions of Chapter 36.70C RCW shall apply to the appeal of the decision on the development agreement.
Table 18.94-1 Land Use Application Types and Approval Authority | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Application | Type | Approval Authority | Appeal to Hearing Examiner (HE) or Superior Court (SC5) | |||||
I | II | III | IV | Director or Staff | Hearing Examiner (HE) | City Council (CC) | ||
Administrative Variance | X | X | HE/SC | |||||
Administrative Interpretation | X | X | HE/SC | |||||
Boundary Line Adjustment | X | X | HE/SC | |||||
Binding Site Plan Review | X | X | HE/SC | |||||
Building Permit | X | X | HE/SC | |||||
Code Interpretation | X4 | X1 | HE/SC | |||||
Conditional Use Permit | X | X1 | X3 | SC | ||||
Critical Areas Permit | X | X | HE/SC | |||||
Full Variance | X | X1 | X3 | SC | ||||
Home Occupation | X | X | HE/SC | |||||
Legal Lot Determination | X | X | HE/SC | |||||
Plan and Zoning Code Text Amendment | X | X1 | X2 | SC5 | ||||
Planned Unit Development | X | X1 | X3 | SC | ||||
Plat Alteration | ||||||||
Minor | X | X | HE/SC | |||||
Major | X | X1 | X | SC | ||||
Post-Decision Review | ||||||||
Type I | X | X | HE/SC | |||||
Type II | X | X | HE/SC | |||||
Type III | X | X1 | X | SC | ||||
Preapplication Conference | X | X | HE | |||||
Rezone/Plan Amendment | X | X1 | X2 | SC5 | ||||
Road Modification | X | X | HE/SC | |||||
Shoreline Permit | ||||||||
Nonsignificant | X | X | HE/SC5 | |||||
Significant | X | X1 | X | Department of Ecology5 | ||||
Short Plat | X | X | HE/SC | |||||
Sign Site Plan Review | X | X | HE/SC | |||||
Site Plan Review (Type II) | X | X | HE/SC | |||||
Site Plan Review (Type I) | X | X | HE/SC | |||||
Subdivision | X | X1 | X3 | SC | ||||
Temporary Use | X | X | HE/SC | |||||
Wetland Permit | X | X | HE/SC | |||||
1 Department reviews and recommends to hearing body |
2 Planning commission recommends to council for final determination |
3 Hearing examiner makes final decision |
4 The director makes initial interpretations when making Type I and II decisions; the examiner does so when making Type III decisions |
5 Based on the facts of the case, an appeal may be made to an administrative hearings body prior to superior court |
(Ord. 1465 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1496 § 1, 2004; Ord. 1503 § 1, 2005; Ord. 1613 § 1 (Exh. A), 2008; Ord. 1929 § 1 (Exh. A § 8), 2020)
§ 18.94.170 Completion of public improvements.
If public improvements are not fully complete and accepted by the city, an acceptable security guaranteeing the construction of such improvements shall be submitted in a form acceptable to the community development director and in an amount and with sureties commensurate with improvements to be completed plus an additional 25 percent for administrative costs, securing to the city the construction and installation of the required improvements within a time fixed by the community development director which shall include a reasonable amount of time to complete said improvements but shall not exceed 18 months or as extended by the community development director. Such guarantee shall be in the form of an escrow account, letter of credit or other form acceptable to the community development director that provides the city with the necessary funds to complete the improvements should they not be constructed within the required timeframe.
(Ord. 1613 § 1 (Exh. A), 2008)
