The purpose of this chapter is to establish a system of applying land use regulatory controls which will best satisfy the following basic needs:

A.

To ensure procedural due process and appearance of fairness in certain land use regulatory hearings; and

B.

To provide an efficient and effective land use regulatory system which integrates the public hearing and decision-making process for certain land use matters.

(Ord. 567 § 3, 1984)

The office of Woodland municipal land use hearing examiner, hereinafter referred to as "examiner," is created. The examiner shall interpret, review, and implement land use regulations and policies as provided in this chapter or by other ordinances of the city, including but not limited to the following:

A.

Conditional uses per Chapter 17.72. Applications for conditional uses when the zoning ordinance sets forth the specific uses to be made subject to conditional use permits.

B.

Major Variances. A major variance shall be defined as a variance to a measurable zoning standard which does not fall under a category of minor variances as outlined in WMC 17.81.180.A. The examiner shall decide upon application for major variances from the terms of this title; provided that any variance granted shall be subject to such conditions as will assume that the adjustment thereby authorized shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property on behalf of which the application was filed is located; and:

1.

That such variance is necessary, because of special circumstances or conditions relating to the size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings of the subject property, to provide it with use, rights, and privileges, permitted to other properties in the vicinity and in the zone in which the subject property is located;

2.

That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated;

3.

If such permit for variance is denied, no reapplication shall be made within one year from the date of denial;

4.

An approved variance will go with or be assigned to the subject property and shall not be transferable to another property; and

5.

No use variance shall be granted except for lawfully created pre-existing uses in accordance with WMC 17.60.

Expiration of Approval—Major Variances. Approval of a major variance shall be void after three years, unless a building permit has been issued and substantial construction has taken place. The community development director, for good cause, may extend approval for no more than one year. If a variance is specifically related to an approved phasing program, the validity of the variance shall be limited only by the phasing plan. Approval expiration shall apply to all applications deemed complete on or after the effective date of the ordinance from which this section is derived.

C.

Violations. Recognizing the fact that a building may be erected in good faith with every intent to comply with the provisions of this title in respect to the location of the building upon the lots and the size and location of required yards, and that it may later be determined that such building does not comply in every detail with such requirements, although not violating the spirit or intent of this title, the examiner may issue a waiver of violation, subject to such conditions as will safeguard the public health, safety, convenience, and general welfare.

D.

All appeals regarding SEPA matters, shoreline exemptions and supplemental environmental impact statements.

E.

Issuance of replats, plat vacations, shoreline development permits, shoreline conditional use permits and shoreline variances. See also Section 19.08.030 describing decision making and appeal authority of the hearing examiner.

F.

Appeals regarding written administrative decisions concerning a land use or environmental permit application as outlined in WMC 19.08.030 or written interpretations of a provision of the Woodland Municipal Code (WMC) issued by the development review committee (DRC) or community development director.

G.

All city applications for any type of project proposal.

(Ord. 981 § 12, 2003: Ord. 939 § 22, 2000: Ord. 817 § 6 (part), 1996: Ord. 801 § 8, 1995; Ord. 720 § 1, 1991: Ord. 567 § 4, 1984)

(Ord. No. 1219, 2-6-2012; Ord. No. 1300, § 1, 10-6-2014; Ord. No. 1303, § 2, 10-6-14; Ord. No. 1378, § 82, 11-21-2016)

The examiner shall be appointed by the mayor with the consent of the city council and shall serve at the mayor's discretion. The mayor may also appoint, for terms and functions deemed appropriate, examiners pro tem to serve in the event of the examiner's absence or inability to act.

(Ord. 817 § 6 (part), 1996: Ord. 567 § 5, 1984)

Examiners shall be appointed solely with regard to their qualifications for the duties of their office and will have such training and experience as will qualify them to conduct administrative or quasi-judicial hearings on regulatory enactments and to discharge the other functions conferred upon them. Examiners shall hold no other elective or appointive office or position in city government.

(Ord. 567 § 6, 1984)

An examiner may be removed from office for cause or convenience by the affirmative vote of a majority of the city council.

(Ord. 817 § 6 (part), 1996: Ord. 567 § 7, 1984)

No person, including city officials, elective or appointive, shall attempt to influence an examiner in any matter pending before him except at a public hearing duly called for such purposes or to interfere with an examiner in the performance of his duties in any other way; provided, that this section shall not prohibit the city attorney from rendering legal services to the examiner upon request or prohibit other persons from responding in writing to requests for information from the examiner.

(Ord. 567 § 8, 1984)

No examiner shall conduct or participate in any hearing, decision or recommendation in which the examiner has a direct or indirect substantial financial or familial interest; or concerning which the examiner has had substantial prehearing contacts with proponents or opponents.

(Ord. 567 § 9, 1984)

The examiner shall have the power to prescribe rules for the scheduling and conduct of hearings and other procedural matters related to the duties of his office. Such rules may provide for cross-examination of witnesses.

(Ord. 567 § 10, 1984)

A.

The examiner shall receive and examine all available information, conduct public hearings and prepare a record thereof and enter decisions as provided in Sections 17.81.020 and 19.08.030.

B.

The decision of the hearing examiner shall be final unless such decision is appealed as set forth in WMC 19.08.030.

(Ord. 817 § 6 (part), 1996: Ord. 567 § 11, 1984; Ord. No. 1494, § 3, 1-3-2022)

A.

In addition to the powers described in Sections 17.81.020 and 19.08.030, the hearing examiner is hereby authorized to hear, by way of appeal or upon review of a project permit application, all assertions of project-specific taking of property for public use without just compensation and/or the denial of substantive due process of law, and all challenges to imposition of conditions on a project of a similar nature, whether based on constitutional, statutory or common law. Failure to raise a specific challenge to such condition or exaction shall constitute a waiver of such issue and a failure to exhaust an administrative remedy.

B.

In deciding and resolving any such issue, the examiner may consider all law applicable to the city. Should the examiner determine that, but for a taking without just compensation or a violation of substantive due process of law, imposition of any such condition would be required by standard, regulation, or ordinance the examiner shall so state in the decision and so report to the city council. In lieu of failing to impose such condition, the examiner shall first provide the city with due opportunity to provide just compensation. The examiner shall specify a time period in which the council shall elect to or not to provide just compensation. Upon notice of the election of the city council not to provide such compensation, the examiner is authorized to and shall, within fourteen days, issue a decision modifying to whatever degree necessary such condition to eliminate the taking or violation of substantive due process.

(Ord. 817 § 6 (part), 1996)

Applications for permits or approvals within the jurisdiction of the hearing examiner shall be presented to the city clerk-treasurer. The clerk-treasurer shall accept such applications only if applicable filing requirements are met. The clerk-treasurer shall be responsible for assigning a date for and assuring due notice of public hearing for each application, which date and notice shall be in accordance with the statute or ordinance governing the application.

(Ord. 567 § 12, 1984)

The staff planner shall coordinate and assemble the reviews of city departments and governmental agencies having an interest on the subject application and shall prepare a report summarizing the factors involved and the staff planner's findings and recommendations. Such report shall be sent to the applicant and the examiner by letter seven calendar days prior to the hearing, or by personal delivery five calendar days prior to the hearing. At the same time the report shall also be made available for inspection by the public and copies thereof shall be provided to interested persons upon payment of reproduction costs.

(Ord. 620 § 2, 1986: Ord. 567 § 13, 1984)

A.

Prior to rendering a decision on any application, the examiner shall hold an open record hearing thereon. Notice of the time and place of the hearing shall be published in the city's official newspaper at least ten days prior to the date of the hearing.

B.

Once legal notice has been given, no matter shall be postponed over the objection of any interested party, except for good cause shown. Continuances may be granted at the discretion of the examiner; provided, the interested parties in attendance shall be given an opportunity to testify prior to the continuance. The applicant shall pay an amount equal to one-half the original application fee for any hearing postponed or continued by request of the applicants after legal notice has been given; provided, that this requirement shall not apply where the request is based upon new information presented at the hearing.

(Ord. 817 § 6 (part), 1996: Ord. 567 § 14, 1984)

A petitioner's failure to state specific grounds of the appeal and relief sought may result in dismissal of such appeal. The city staff or any party may request dismissal of an appeal at any time with notice to all parties. Upon finding that the appeal fails to state cause to reverse or modify the decision or that the examiner lacks jurisdiction to grant relief, the examiner may dismiss such appeal without hearing. The examiner shall state in writing whether such dismissal is with or without prejudice.

(Ord. 817 § 6 (part), 1996)

A.

Within ten working days of the conclusion of a hearing, unless a longer period is agreed to in writing by the applicant, the examiner shall render a written decision which shall include at least the following:

1.

Findings based upon the records and conclusions therefrom which support the decision. Such findings and conclusions shall also set forth the manner by which the decision would carry out and conform to the city's comprehensive plan, other official policies and objectives, and land use regulatory enactments;

2.

A decision on the application which may be to grant, deny or grant with such conditions, limitations, modifications and restrictions as the examiner finds necessary to make the application compatible with its environment, the comprehensive plan, other official policies and objectives, and land use regulatory enactments;

3.

A statement as to appeal rights of any party (quasi-judicial or judicial) including the jurisdictional time limits for such appeal. See Sections 17.81.150, 17.81.160 and 17.81.180.

B.

Except where the parties have agreed to extend time periods, the time period for consideration and decision on appeals shall not exceed:

1.

Ninety days for open record hearings; and

2.

Sixty days for a closed record appeal.

(Ord. 817 § 6 (part), 1996: Ord. 567 § 15, 1984)

Not later than five working days following the rendering of a written decision, copies thereof shall be personally delivered or mailed to the applicant, community development director, public works director, and to other parties of record in the case. "Parties of record" shall include all persons who specifically request notice of decision by signing a register provided for such purpose at the public hearing.

(Ord. 817 § 6 (part), 1996: Ord. 567 § 16, 1984)

(Ord. No. 1378, § 83, 11-21-2016)

A.

In cases where the examiner's jurisdictional authority is to render a decision, the decision of the examiner shall be final and conclusive unless appealed by a party of record. Final decisions may be appealed only if, within twenty-one calendar days after written notice of the decision is sent, a written appeal is filed in the superior court with jurisdiction, either Clark County or Cowlitz County, pursuant to Chapter 36.70C RCW or applicable state law.

B.

The timely filing of an appeal shall stay the effective date of the examiner's decision until such time as the appeal is adjudicated by superior court or is withdrawn.

(Ord. 817 § 6 (part), 1996; Ord. No. 1494, § 4, 1-3-2022)

Editor's note— Ord. No. 1494, § 5, adopted Jan. 3, 2022, repealed § 17.81.160, which pertained to city council consideration/procedural rules and derived from Ord. 817 § 6 (part), adopted 1996.

Final decisions, (after exhausting administrative remedies) may be appealed by a party of record with standing to file a land use petition in the Cowlitz County superior court. Such petition must be filed within twenty-one days of issuance of the decision as provided in RCW Chapter 36.70C.

(Ord. 817 § 6 (part), 1996)

A.

The following variances shall be deemed minor in nature and may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the development review committee (DRC) without a public hearing based on the approval criteria outlined in WMC 17.81.180.B and in accordance with the notice requirements outlined in WMC 17.81.200:

1.

A reduction in lot area, setbacks, lot dimensions; and, an increase in lot coverage and building height, all by not more than thirty percent of that required by the applicable standard of the zoning district in which the proposal is located;

2.

Any reduction in a side or rear yard setback below the minimum setback required by the applicable standard in the light industrial (I-1) or heavy industrial (I-2) zoning district; or

3.

The modification of pre-existing nonconforming structures housing permitted uses, to the extent that the modification will not cause a greater infringement than exists of any standard of the zoning district in which the proposal is located.

4.

The enlargement, addition, or modification to any non-conforming single-family residence built prior to 1968.

B.

Approval Criteria for Minor Variances.

1.

No variance shall be approved by the DRC which will allow an increase in the number of dwelling units on a parcel greater than that permitted by the applicable zoning district, or which will permit the reduction in area of any lot created after the adoption of the ordinance codified in this chapter;

2.

All major variance criteria outlined in WMC 17.81.020.B shall be met, except where a variance is proposed to side or rear setback standards applicable to the light industrial (I-1) or heavy industrial (I-2) zoning districts. In these cases, the DRC shall consider criteria 2—5 outlined in WMC 17.81.020.B. The DRC shall also consider whether or not the requested minor variance is necessary due to the unique physical characteristics of the existing site configuration, building, and/or use and consistent with the intent of applicable standard to which the minor variance is sought.

C.

The following modifications to approved conditional uses or administrative conditional uses shall be deemed minor in nature and may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the DRC without a public hearing based on the approval criteria outlined in WMC 17.81.180.D and in accordance with the notice requirements outlined in WMC 17.81.200:

1.

Construction of accessory buildings which will not alter or affect the permitted conditional use of the property.

D.

Approval criteria for minor modifications to approved conditional uses or administrative conditional uses:

1.

No minor modifications to an approved conditional use or administrative conditional use shall be approved by the DRC which will allow an increase in the number of dwelling units on a parcel greater than that permitted by the applicable zoning district, or which will permit the reduction in area of any lot created after the adoption of the ordinance codified in this chapter; and

2.

Granting of the proposed minor modification to the approved conditional use or administrative conditional uses is consistent with the applicable zoning district requirements, and will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated.

E.

The DRC may solicit advice from the planning commission as part of a public meeting and/or qualified professionals without a public meeting, to help determine whether the proposed minor variance or minor modification to the approved conditional use or administrative conditional use meets the approval criteria.

F.

The DRC shall develop a written decision including the DRC's response to each applicable approval criteria concerning minor variances outlined in WMC 17.81.180.B or concerning minor modifications to approved conditional uses or administrative conditional uses outlined in WMC 17.81.180.D.

G.

The DRC's decisions concerning minor variances or minor modifications to approved conditional uses or administrative conditional uses can be appealed to the planning commission within ten days from the date the DRC's written decision is issued. The planning commission shall review such appeals at an open record public hearing in accordance with the notice requirements outlined in WMC 19.06.070 and 19.06.080 and render decisions based on the applicable review criteria outlined in WMC 17.81.180.B or WMC 17.81.180.D, the intents of applicable standards, and applicable provisions in the Woodland Comprehensive Plan.

(Ord. 600 § 2, 1985)

(Ord. No. 1219, 2-6-2012; Ord. No. 1369, § 1, 8-1-2016)

A.

Valid Applicant. The proper owner or the owner's authorized agent, or a non-owner resident may file an application for a minor variance or minor modification to an approved conditional use or administrative conditional use. Where the applicant is a non-owner resident, the owner or owner's agent shall co-sign the application.

B.

An application for a minor variance or minor modification to an approved conditional use or administrative conditional use shall be accompanied by the following:

1.

A site plan of the property involved that is to scale showing all property lines, existing and proposed structures and off-street parking;

2.

In the case of a variance from the height limitations, front and side or longitudinal cross-sections of the proposed structure(s) showing grade and building elevations;

3.

A filing fee as determined by the city council;

4.

The applicant's response to each applicable approval criteria outlined in WMC 17.81.180.B or WMC 17.81.180.D; and

5.

Other information as determined by the DRC that is necessary to demonstrate the proposed minor variance or minor modification to the approved conditional use or administrative conditional use permit meets the approval criteria and other applicable standards in the Woodland Municipal Code and policies and goals in the comprehensive plan.

(Ord. 600 § 3, 1985)

(Ord. No. 1219, 2-6-2012)

Upon receipt of a valid application, the city clerk-treasurer or designee shall notify in writing the applicant, the owner of record of the subject property, the planning commission, and the owners of record of all properties located within three hundred feet that the requested minor variance or minor modification to an approved conditional use or administrative conditional use is being reviewed and approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the DRC based on the applicable approval criteria. The city shall mail such notices at least fourteen days prior to the date the DRC makes the final decision on the proposal. Such notices shall provide a fourteen-day public comment period. Not later than five days following the rendering of the DRC's written decision, copies thereof shall be mailed to the applicant, the owner of record of the subject property, and those who have submitted to the city a non-anonymous written comment during the fourteen- day comment period.

(Ord. 600 § 4, 1985)

(Ord. No. 1219, 2-6-2012)

Approval of a minor variance shall be void after three years, unless a building permit has been issued and substantial construction has taken place. The community development director, for good cause, may extend approval for no more than one year. If a variance is specifically related to an approved phasing program, the validity of the variance shall be limited only by the phasing plan. Approval expiration shall apply to all applications deemed complete on or after the effective date of the ordinance from which this section is derived.

(Ord. No. 1300, § 2, 10-6-2014; Ord. No. 1378, § 84, 11-21-2016)