The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOW 2006-02-27 Item 4A - Ordinance - Zoning Code Amendments CO V 1 CIL AGENDA Siiwosis w M O lY P j Z Imiiais lTEM E0% G1 I Ieetin{ Date I Preba red by 1 .11arYr's 11-17(12.' I Coan revn• y ri /le 1.Q: E-i' TA 1 11/14/05 I PB 1 02/27/06 1 SL/"% 1 1 ITEM INFORMATION I CAS NUMBER. REF 05 -143 06-021 ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE. NOVEMBER 14, 2005 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Zoning Code Amendments including Administrative Appeals Process CATEGORY Discussion Motion n Resolution Ordinance n Bid Award Public Heaizng 1 1 Other Iltg Date 11/14/05 lIig Dale :lltg Date :lltg Dale 2/27/06 J(tg Dale _l ltg Date 1■• Date SPONSOR I 1 Council L1Iay'or Adm SL'cs DCD Finance n Fire Legal P&R Police I I PTV SPONSOR'S A group of four proposed amendments to the Zoning Code changing rezone procedures, SUMMARY code interpretation procedures, the design review approval standard and hearing bodies for certain adminstrative appeals. REVIEWED BY COW Mtg CA &P Cmte n F &S Cmte Transportauon Cmte Utilities Cmte ['Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planmng Comm. DAI'E. 10/11/05, 2/14/06 (CAP) 11/14/05 (COW) 1/26/06 (PC) RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADNIIN COMMITTEE Send to COW for discussion COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPENDrrURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED -0- -0- -0- Fund Source Comments MTG. DATE I RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 11/14/05 1 Send to the Planning Commission for a hearing and recommendation 2/27/06 1 1 1 MTG. DATE 1 ATTACHMENTS 2/27/06 Memorandum to CA &P Cmte. dated 2/8/06 Draft Ordinances 1 CAP Minutes 2/14/06 1 PC Minutes 1/26/06 I 11/14/05 1 Memorandum to CA&P Cmte. dated 10/06/05 Proposed Ordinance CAP Minutes 10/11/05 1 MEMORANDUM TO Mayor Mullet CommunIty Affairs and Parks Committee FROM: Steve Lancaster, DCD Director ~^-l/\.,/ RE: ZOnIng Code Amendments \ DATE: February 8, 2006 BACKGROUND Staff has grouped four proposed amendments to the Zonmg Code together for consideratIOn. The City Attorney has recommended changes m the followmg areas A. Rezone procedures; B. Code mterpretatIOn procedures and fee, C Design reVle\v approval standard; and D. City Council involvement in quasI-judicial matters. Staff presented these Issues with vanous optIOns to the Community Affairs and Parks (CAP) Committee on October 11,2005. The Committee dIscussed each item and chose to forward the first three to the PlannIng Commission for a heanng and recommendatIOn. The fourth item, Council mvolvement m quasI-judicial matters was fOr\varded to the COW for additIOnal diSCUSSIOn on November 14,2005 The COW modified several of the proposed appeal body changes and sent the revised ordmance on to the Plannmg Commission. The Planning CommISSIOn held a heanng on the four Items on January 26th. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED CHANGES Each proposed change to the code language IS shown and discussed belO\\' A. Rezones The proposed changes would replace the eXlstmg Chapter 18 84 and add additional cntena and procedural clarity for rezone applIcatIOns. "'-G Q- CODL\ \1\;D\200o.\me/JdC ~\P.DOC Page I 02/08/2006 2 03 PivI 18.84.010 Application Submittal ApphcatlOn for rezone of propeIty shall be submItted to the Department of Commul1lty Development. The apphcatlon shall be a Type 5 decIsIon processed 111 accordance wIth the provIsIons ofTMC 18 108 050. 18.84.030 Criteria Each detenmnatlOn granting a rezone shall be supported by WrItten findl11gs and conclusIOns showl11g specifically wherel11 all of the followl11g condItIons eXIst: (1) That the proposed amendment to the zOl1lng map IS consIstent WIth the goals, objectIves, and policIes of the comprehensIve plan, (2) That the proposep amendment to the ZOl1lng map is consIstent WIth the scope and purpose of thIS tItle and the description and purpose of the zone classificatIOn applIed for; (3) That there are changed condItIons Sl11ce the prevIous ZOl1lng became effectIve to walTant the proposed amendment to the zoning map; and (4) That the proposed amendment to the zonl11g map wIll be 111 the l11terest of furtherance of the publIc health, safety, comfort, convel1lence and general welfare, and will not adversely affect the sun'oundl11g neighborhood, nor be l11JUrIOUS to other propertIes m the VIcil1lty 111 whIch the subject property IS located. 18.84.050 Conditions on Rezone Approvals The CIty Council shall have the authorIty to Impose condItIOns and safeguards as It deems necessary to protect or enhance the health, safety, and welfare of the sUlToundmg area, and to ensure that the rezone fully meets the findl11gs set fOlth 111 TMC 18.84.030. 18.84.070 Ordinance Required Action under thIS chapter '\vhIch amends the officIal zOl1lng map shall reqUIre the adoption of an ordmance by the CIty councIl pursuant to the mUl1lcIpal code and state law. The Plannmg COl1UTIlSSlOn concurred wIth these changes B. Code Interpretations The changes would clarIfy that mterpretatlOns may be requested (for a fee) by any person and that the DIrector's decIsIon would be gIven substantIal weIght m an appeal TMC 18.96.020 Interpretations An l11terpretatlOn of thIS tItle by the DIrector or 11lS or her delegate may be requested 111 wntl11g by any person or may be mitmted by the DIrector A decIsIon by the DIrector that an Issue IS not sublect to an l11terpretatlOn request shall be final and not sublect to adml111stratIve appeal. Any request for l11terpretatlOn shall be a Type 2 DecIsIOn filed wIth the DIrector accompal1led by a fee accordmg to the most recently adopted land Use Fee Schedule. The interpretatIon of the DIrector shall be gIven substantIal \\"elghr. and the burden of estabhshl11g the contrary shall be upon the appellant. AIIl11terpretatlons of thIs tItle shall be made by the DIrector or hIs delegate. If requested, lllterprCtlltlons NG Q ,CODL\\I'\D2006 \mcndC AP DOC Page :2 02/08/2006 2 03 PM shall be reduced to wntmg and an orderly retnevable record shall be kept The Plannmg CommIssion concurred wIth these changes. C. Design Review Approval Standard ThIs would change the approval standard at TMC 18.60 030 (8) from "clear demonstration of complIance" to "preponderance of eVIdence" ThIs was an Issue wIth a recent appeal of a design revIew decIsIOn and should help create more defensIble decIsIOns The Plannll1g CommIssIOn conculTed wIth thIs change. . D. City Council Review of Quasi-Judicial Matters The City Council has recently heard several quasI-judIcIal matters and CouncIl members requested that the CIty Attorney revIew theIr ll1volvement ll1land use decisIOns Many cItIes have moved to a system where many land use decIsIOns and most land use appeals are heard by a heanng examll1er rather than the City CouncIl. They have done thIs for several reasons' 1. quasI-judIcial matters apply existll1g CIty CouncIl polIcy decIsIOns (as reflected ll1 the ComprehensIve Plan and development ordll1ances) to specIfic factual sItuatIons, 2. the legal complexIty of the issues related to land use contll1ue to ll1crease; 3. the stakes for makll1g elTors IS hIgher, wIth attorney's fees provIsIons ll1 the Land Use PetItIOn Act as well as damage claIms that can anse from makll1g decIsIons based on l1npenmssible cntena; and 4. It removes the Council from polItIcally awkward or dIfficult sItuatIOns The restnctlOns placed on CouncIl members m a quasi-judicIal settll1g cut off contact and communicatIOn with cItIzens The COW recommendatIOn was to change the following Items from CIty CouncIl to hearing examll1er revIew' Type 2 Appeal of a parkll1g standard determll1atlOn for a use not specIfied by code Appeal of a specIal penmsslOn parkll1g detennll1atlOn/modlficatlOn Type 4 Appeal of a decIsIOn about modificatIOns to certall1 parkll1g standards Appeal of a unique sIgn decIsIon Appeal of a vanance from parkmg standards greater than 10% Type 5 Shorelll1e envlromnent redeslgnatlon The COW also recommended that appeals of decIsIons about exceptIons frol11 the newly enacted smgle-family desIgn standards should be heard by the CIty COlllleIl rather than the Planl1lng CommiSSIOn "-G Q' CODE.-\ \1'\.f) ~006c\mcndC \P DOC Page 3 02/08/20062 03 PM The Plannmg CommIssIon recommended that the ul1lque sIgn and shorelme envIronment redeslgnatIon decIsIOns be retamed by the CIty CouncIl rather than moved to the heanng exammer. The CommIssIoners expressed the opmlOn that these decIsIons mvolved consIderable Judgment and should be based on a knowledge of local condItIOns and as such were most appropriately made by an elected body Followmg are the Plannmg CommIssIon recommended changes. TYPE 2 DECISIONS INITIAL APPEAL BODY TYPE OF PERMIT DECISION MAKER (open record appeal) Administrative Design Revie\y Community Board of (TMC 18.60.030) Development DIrector Arch Itectural RevIew AdmmIstratlVe Planned ResIdential Short Plat CommIttee Heanng Exammer Development (TMC 17 08.040) Bmdmg SIte Improvement Plan Short Plat CommIttee Heanng Exammer (TMC Chap 17.16) Code InterpretatIOn CommunIty Heanng Exammer (TMC 18.90.010) Development DIrector DecisIOn regardmg Sensitive Areas CommunIty Plannmg (except Reasonable Use ExceptIOn) Development DIrector CommIssIOn (TMC 18.45) ExceptIOn from Smgle-Fmmly CommunIty CIty CouncIl DesIgn Standard Development DIrector Plannmg CommIssIOn Parkmg standard for use not specIfied CommUnIty CIty CouncIl (TMC 1856 100) Development DIrector Heanng Exammer Placement of Cargo Container CommunIty Heanng Exammer (TMC 1850.060) Develpment DIrector Shorelme SubstantIal Development CommunIty State Shorelmes PermIt Development DIrector Hearmgs Board (TMC Chapter 18.44) Short Plat Short Plat CommIttee Heanng Exammer (TM C 1 7. 12) SIgn Area Increase CommunIty Plannmg (TMC 19.32 140) Development DIrector CommIssIon SIgn PermIt DenIal CommunIty Plannmg (TMC Chapter 19 12) Development DIrector CommIssIon SpecIal PenmsslOn Parkmg, and Commul1lty CIty CouncIl Moddlcatlons to Certam Parkmg Development DIrector Heanng Exammer Standards (TMC 1856065 & 070) SpecIal PermIssIon SIgn, except Commul1lty Planl1lng "ul1lque sIgn" (vanous sectIons of Development DIrector CommIssIon TMC TItle 19) '\G Q CODEA\I'\D<~()06 \menclC \P DOC Page -I 02/08/2006 2 03 PM TYPE 4 DECISIONS INITIAL TYPE OF PERMIT DECISION APPEAL BODY MAKER (closed record appeal) CondItIOnal Use Pennit Plannmg CIty CouncIl (TMC Chapter 18.64) CommIssIOn ModIficatIOns to Certain Parking Planning CIty CourLcil Standards (TMC Chapter 1856) CommISSIon Hearmg Exammer PublIc Hearing DesIgn RevIew (TMC Board of City CounCIl Chapter 18.60, 18 56.040 and Shorelme ArchItectural Master Program) RevIew Reasonable Use ExceptIOns under Plannmg City Council SensitIve Areas Ordmance COlTIlTIlSSIOn (TMC 18.45.180) Shorelme CondItIOnal Use Permit Planl1lng State Shorelmes (TMC 18.44 050) CommIssIOn Heanngs Board Ul1lque SIgns Plannmg CIty CouncIl (TMC 19.28010) CommIssion HCJ.ring EXJ.mrncr Vanance from Parkmg Standards Over Plannmg City CounCIl 10% (TMC 18.56.140) CommIssion Hearmg Exammer TYPE 5 DECISIONS TYPE OF PERl\lIT DECISION MAKER Planned ResIdential Development (PRD), mcludmg Major CIty CouncIl ModIficatIOns (TMC Chapter 18 46) Rezone (TMC Chapter 18.84) CIty CouncIl SensItive Area Master Plan Overlay (TMC 1845 160) City CounCIl Shorelme EnVIrOl1lnent RedesIgnatIOn CIty CouncIl HCJ.nrLg (Shorelme Master Program) EXJ.mrncr SubdIvIsIOn - Fmal Plat (TMC 17 14030) CIty CouncIl SubdIvIsIOn - PrelIminary Plat (TMC 17 14 020) City Council UnclassIfied Use (TMC Chapter 18 66) CIty CounCIl REQUESTED ACTION Forward these proposed changes to the CO\V for a publIc heanng ?\G Q" CODL-\\I'\,[) 2006.-\mendC\1' DOC Page :' 02/08/2006 2 03 Pivl CITY OF TUKWILA "V ASHINGTON ~ K fT ORDINANCE NO. 0 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, \V ASHINGTON, REPEALING TUK\VILA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 18.84 REGARDING REQUESTS FOR CHANGES IN ZONING; AND ADOPTING A NE\V TUK\VILA lVIUNICIP AL CODE CHAPTER 18.84 REGARDING REQUESTS FOR CHANGES IN ZONING; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS, the City of Tubvila desires to repeal and then adopt a new Tukwlla MumcIpal Code Chapter 18.84 (Requests for Changes m Zonmg) to establIsh new cntena for grantmg rezone applIcations, consIstent WIth state law; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLO\VS: Section 1 Repealer. Tubvila MumcIpal Code Chapter 18.84 (Requests for Changes in Zoning) is hereby repealed m its entirety. Section? New TMC 1 R R4 Adopted. A new Tubvila Municipal Code Chapter 18.84 (Requests for Changes in Zoning) is hereby adopted to read as follows: 18.84.010 Application Submittal ApplIcation for rezone of property shall be submitted to the Department of Commumty Development. The applicatIon shall be a Type decision processed in accordance with the provisions ofTMC 18.108.050. 18.84.030 Criteria Each detenninatlOn granting a rezone shall be supported by written findmgs and conclusions showmg specifically wherem all ofthe followmg condItions eXIst: (1) That the proposed amendment to the zoning map is consistent wIth the goals, objectives, and polIcies of the comprehensive plan; (2) That the proposed amendment to the zoning map IS consIstent with the scope and purpose of thIS tItle and the descnption and purpose of the zone classification applIed for; (3) That there are changed condItions smce the previous zonmg became effectIve to warrant the proposed amendment to the zonmg map; and (4) That the proposed amendment to the zomng map will be in the mterest of furtherance of the public health, safety, comfort, convemence and general welfare, and will not adversely affect the surroundmg neIghborhood, nor be mJurIous to other - 1 - Q'\CODEAMND\CA Zoning Changes\Rezone.DOC'NGi02!2\ '06 propert1es m the v1cimty m wh1ch the subject property 1S located. 18.84.050 Conditions on Rezone Approvals The CIty Councll shall have the authonty to 1mpose cond1tlOns and safeguards as it deems necessary to protect or enhance the health, safety, and welfare of the surrounding area, and to ensure that the rezone fully meets the findmgs set forth m TMC 18.84.030. 18.84.070 Ordinance Required Action under this chapter wh1ch amends the officml zonmg map shall require the adoption of an ordinance by the city council pursuant to the mumc1pal code and state law. Section 1 Severahility. Shpuld any section, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or c1rcumstance, be declared unconstitutlOnal or othenvise invalid for any reason, or should any portion of thIS Ordinance be pre-empted by state or federal law or regulation, such decision or pre-emption shall not affect the valIdIty of the remainmg portions OfthIS Ordmance or its applicatlOn to other persons or circumstances. SectIOn 4 Effective Date. This Ordmance shall be publIshed in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force five (5) days after the date of publicatIon. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AT A REGULAR MEETING THEREOF ON THE DAY OF , 2006. CITY OF TUKWILA Mayor Steven M. Mullet A TIEST/ AUTHENTICATED: Jane Cantu, City Clerk Approved as to fonn: Shelley M. Kerslake, CIty Attorney - 2 - Q-\CODEAMND\CA Zoning Changes\Rezone_DOCiNGf02i2\!06 CITY OF TUKWILA WASHINGTON DR fT ORDINANCE NO. 0 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TUK\VILA, W ASIDNGTON, AlVIENDING TlVIC 18.96.020 REGARDING ZONING INTERPRETATIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE \VHEREAS, the City has determined that there is a cost associated with a code interpretation made by the Director that should be paid by the party requesting the mterpretatIOn; and WHEREAS, the City has determined that a code interpretation made by the Director should be given deference; NOW, TIIEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUK\VILA, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 TMC 1 R 96 020, A mended. Tukwlla Municipal Code SectIOn 18.96.020 (InterpretatIOns) is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.96.020 Interpretations All intei pretatiom; of this title shall be nlade by the Direc.tOl or his delegate. If iequested, inteiPietations shall be reduced to writil1g and an ord{,rly retrievable iec.ord sllall be kept..An interpretation of thlS title hy the DIrector or hIs or her delegate may he requested In writing hy any person or may he imtlated hy the Director A decisIOn hy the Dlrector that an Issue is not snhJect to an interpretatIOn request shall he final and not sl1hject to admimstratlve appeal Any reqnest for InterpretatlOn shall he a Type 2 DeC1Slon filed wIth the Director accompal11erl hy a fee accorrllnr to the most recently adopted Land Use Fee Schedule. The 11lterpretatlOn of the Dlrector sha 11 he gIven sl1hstantla I \Vel~ht, and the hurrlen of estahlishlng the contrary shall he upon the appellant Section 2 Severahihty. Should any sectiOn, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid for any reason, or should any portIOn of this Ordmance be pre-empted by state or federal law or regulation, such decision or pre-emption shall not affect the valIdity of the remammg portions of this Ordinance or itS apphcation to other persons or Circumstances - 1 - !.).:'.CUllLi.\l,\;JlC.lZnningDwlgJ.::> DRl.ll:.ml::hm:qc.uOLQ '.(00[/,,:-' r,~O\ORO'(uJd IIk'IJ.OOCfNG/1 p 1! .ili,t&ff3fe5 SectIon 3 EffectIVe Date. ThIS Ordmance shall be publIshed m the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be m full force five (5) days after the date of publication. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AT A REGULAR MEETING THEREOF ON THE _DAY OF ,2005-5. CITY OF TUKWILA Mayor Steven M. Mullet A TIEST/ AUTHENTICATED: Jane Cantu, City Clerk Approved as to fonn: Shelley M. Kerslake, City Attorney Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the CIty Council: Date ofPublicatlOn: Effective Date: - 2- Q:.1. UDLL\[~J:LL\.ZQning.Lhaugcs OR D_,t..1l1idlllupl)11CQ TO DCA:" l?':D'.ORD.CuJd, ,[G, 1'.DOC/NG:0 " J.J16t6f63765 CITY OF TUKWILA WASHINGTON DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 0 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, "V ASHINGTON, AMENDING TUKWILA MUNICIP AL CODE SUBSECTION 18.60.030(B) RELATING Tn THE SCOPE OF AUTHORITY OF THE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW AND DCD DIRECTOR TO APPROVE, APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS, OR DENY PLANS SUBMITTED; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS, the City of Tuk\vila desires to amend Tukwila Municipal Code Subsection 18.60.030(B) to provIde that the Board of ArchItectural Review ("BAR") and the Department of Community Development Director have the authonty to approve, approve wIth conditions, or deny plans submitted based on a demonstration of complIance wIth all of the guidelines of Tukwila Municipal Code Chapter 18.60, based on the preponderance of the evidence standard; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 TMr: 1 R fiO mO(R), Amended. Tuk\vlla Municipal Code Subsection 18.60.030(B) is hereby amended to read as follows: B. Projects meeting the thresholds for admmIstrative design review will be reviewed by the DCD Director. All other projects requiring design review approval will be revIewed by the BAR. The Board and the DCD Director shall have the authority to approve, approve with condItIOns, or deny all plans submItted based on a clear demonstration of complIance wIth all of the gUIdelines of this chapter~as judged by the preponderance of eVidence standard. Section 2 Severahility. Should any section, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of thIS OrdInance, or ItS applIcation to any person or cIrcumstance, be declared unconstItutional or otherwise invalId for any reason, or should any portIOn of thIS OrdInance be pre-empted by state or federal law or regulation, such decision or pre-emptlOn shall not affect the validIty of the remaIning portIons of thIS OrdInance or its applicatlOn to other persons or CIrcumstances. Section 1 Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be publIshed In the official newspaper of the CIty, and shall take effect and be In full force five (5) days after the date ofpubhcatIon. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AT A REGULAR MEETING THEREOF ON THE DAY OF , 2006. - 1 - Q.\CODEAMND'.CA Zoning ChangesiBAR _Standard _ Ord.DOCNGf02f21 !06 RAfT AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING TMC 18.104.010 TO REMOVE THE CITY COUNCIL FROM CERTAIN QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES; REPEALING ORDINANCE NOS. 1768 92 (PART), 1796 93 (PART), 1841 92, 1857 9~, 2005 920, 2066 92, 2097 922, AND 2098 94; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council desires to remove itself from certain quasi-judicial processes; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. TMC 18.104.010, Amended. Tukwila Municipal Code Section 18.104.010, Classification of Project Permit Applications, is hereby amended, to read as follows: 18.104.010 Classification of Project Permit Applications A. Project permit decisions are classified into five types, based on the degree of discretion associated with each decision, as set forth in this section. Procedures for the five different types are distinguished according to who makes the decision, whether public notice is required, whether a public meeting and/ or a public hearing is required before a decision is made, and whether administrative appeals are provided. B. Type 1 decisions are made by City administrators who have technical expertise as designated by ordinance. Type 1 decisions may be appealed to the Hearing Examiner who will hold a closed record appeal hearing based on the information presented to the City administrator who made the decision. Public notice is not required for Type 1 decisions or for the appeals of those decisions. Q.\ CODEAMND\ CA Zoning Changes\ Quasi-Judicial Ord.doc SK-PB:ksn 2/21/2006 Page 1 of 1 TYPE 1 DECISIONS TYPE OF PERMIT Any land use permit or approval issued by the City, unless specifically categorized as a Type 2, 3, 4, or 5 decision b this Cha ter Boundary Line Adjustment, including Lot Consolidation Develo ment Permit Minor modification to BAR approved design TMC 18.60.030 Minor Modification to PRD TMC 18.46.130) Sign Permit, except for those sign permits specifically requiring approval of the Planning CommIssion or denials of sign permits which are a ealable Tree PermIt (TMC 18.54) DECISION MAKER As speCIfied by ordinance Community Develo ment Director Buildin Official Commumty Develo ment Director Community Develo ment Director Community Development Director Community Develo ment Director C. Type 2 decisIons are decisions which are initially made by the Director or, in certain cases, other City administrators or committees, but which are subject to an open record appeal to the Hearing Examiner, Planning Commission, City Councilor, in the case of shoreline permits, an appeal to the State Shorelines Hearings Board pursuant to RCW 90.58. Q.\ CODEAMND\ CA Zoning Changes\ Quasi-Judicial Ord.doc SK-PB.ksn 2/21/2006 Page 2 of 2 TYPE 2 DECISIONS INITIAL APPEAL BODY TYPE OF PERMIT DECISION MAKER (open record appeal) AdministratIve Design Review Community Board of (TMC 18.60.030) Development DIrector Archi tectural Review Administrative Planned Short Plat Committee Hearing Residential Development Examiner (TMC 17.08.040) Binding Site Improvement Plan Short Plat Committee Hearing (TMC Chap.17.16) Examiner Code Interpretation Community Hearing (TMC 18.90.010) Development Director Examiner Decision regarding Sensitive Areas Community Planning (except Reasonable Use Exception) Development Director Commission (TMC 18.45) Exception from Single-Family Community City Council Design Standard Development Director Parking standard for use not Community Hearing specified (TMC 18.56.100) Development Director Examiner Placement of Cargo Container Community Hearing (TMC 18.50.060) Develpment Director Examiner Shoreline Substantial Community State Shorelines Development Permit Development Director Hearings Board (TMC Chapter 18.44) Short Plat Short Plat CommIttee Hearing (TMC 17.12) Examiner Sign Area Increase Community Planning (TMC 19.32.140) Development Director Commission Sign Permit Denial Community Planning (TMC Chapter 19.12) Development DIrector Commission Special Permission Parking, and Community Hearing Modifications to Certain Parking Development Director Examiner Standards (TMC 18.56.065 & .070) Special Permission Sign, except Community Planning "unique sign" (various sections of Development Director Commission TMC Title 19) D. Type 3 decisions are quasi-judiCIal decisIOns made by the Heanng Examiner following an open record hearing. Type 3 decisions may be appealed only to Superior Q'\ CODEA!\.IND\ CA Zoning Changes\ Quasi-Judicial Ord,doc SK-PB:ksn 2/21/2006 Page 3 of 3 Court, except for shoreline variances that may be appealed to the State Shorelines Hearings Board pursuant to RCW 90.58. TYPE 3 DECISIONS TYPE OF PERMIT DECISION MAKER Resolve uncertain zone district boundary Hearing Examiner Variance (zoning, shoreline, sidewalk, Hearing Examiner land alteration, sign) E. Type 4 decisions are qu~si-judicial decisions made by the Board of Architectural Review or the Planning Commission, following an open record hearing. Type 4 decisions may be appealed to the Hearing Examiner or the City Council, based on the record established by the Board of Architectural Review or Planning Commission, except Shoreline Conditional Use Permits, which are appealable to the State Shorelines Hearings Board pursuant to RCW 90.58. TYPE 4 DECISIONS INITIAL TYPE OF PERMIT DECISION APPEAL BODY MAKER (closed record appeal) Conditional Use Permit Planning City Council (TMC Chapter 18.64) CommissIOn Modifications to Certain Parking Planning Hearing Examiner Standards (TMC Chapter 18.56) CommIssion Public Hearing Design Review (TMC Board of CIty Council Chapter 18.60, 18.56.040 and Shoreline Architectural Master Program) Review Reasonable Use Exceptions under Planning City Council SensitIve Areas Ordinance Commission (TMC 18.45.180) Shoreline Conditional Use Permit Planning State Shorelmes (TMC 18.44.050) Commission Hearings Board Unique Signs Planning CIty Council (TMC 19.28.010) Commission Variance from Parking Standards Planning Hearing Examiner Over 10% (TMC 18.56.140) CommissIOn F. Type 5 decisions are quasi-judIcial decisions made by the Hearing Examiner or City CouncIl following an open record hearing Type 5 decisIOns may be appealed only to Superior Court. Q.\ CODEAi\IND\ CA Zoning Changes\ Quasi-Judicial Ord.doc SK-PB:ksn 2/21/2006 Pa ae 4 of 4 b TYPE 5 DECISIONS TYPE OF PERMIT Planned Residential Development (PRD), including Ma'or Modifications (TMC Cha ter 18.46) Rezone (TMC Cha ter 18.84) Sensitive Area Master Plan Overla (TMC 18.45.160) Shoreline Environment Redesignation (Shoreline Master Pro am) Subdivision - Final Plat (TMC 17.14.030) Subdivision - Prelimin Plat (TMC 17.14.020) Unclassified Use TMC Cha ter 18.66) DECISION MAKER Ci ty CouncIl Cit CouncIl Cit Council City Council Council Council CounCIl Section 2. Repealer. Ordinance Nos. 1768 92 (part), 1796 93 (part), 1841 92, 1857 97, 2005920,2066 92,2097922, and 209894 are hereby repealed. Section 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force five days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2006. A TIEST / AUTHENTICATED: Steven M. Mullet, lvlayor Jane E. Cantu, CMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Filed wIth the City Clerk: Passed by the CIty Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordmance Number: Office of the CIty Attorney Q"\ CODEA,\IND\ CA Zoning Changes\ Quasi.Judicial Ord.doc SK-PB.ksn 2/21/2006 Page 5 of 5 rfllmmR~ L0 LfQ L~ If U Community Affairs and Parks Committee February 14, 2006 Present: Joan Hernandez, Chair; Joe Duffie, Pamela Linder. Peter Beckwith, Bruce Fletcher, Nora Gierloff, Steve Lancaster Planning Commission members Bill Arthur and Allan Ekberg 1. Fitness Center Equipment Bid. The Agenda was amended to add this item at Bruce Fletcher's request. Mr. Fletcher distributed a memorandum recommending a bid award for the purchase of fitness center equipment for the Tukwi1a Community Center In the amount of $48,098.94. He expld,ined this expenditure is included in the 2006 budget, which funds are being combined with replacement funds for 2005. This has allowed for all equipment to be replaced at one time to obtain a better price and to minimize disruption to the fitness center operations. The Committee agreed to forward this item to the next regular City Council meeting under New Business, and recommended approval. 2. Parks and Recreation Update. Bruce Fletcher provided an overview of upcoming events and activities, including the Wildlife Habitat Fair (May 13), Fanners Market (opening day May 17), and the return of Music in the Park at Bicentennial Park (dates to be detennined). He reported that the Wednesday evening musical perfonnances held last year in Cascade View Park will be combined with the Fanner's Market this year. Mr. Fletcher reported that the scope ofthe Macadam Winter Garden Project has been revised in hopes of obtaining a bid within the project budget, and further noted that staff is discussing with Sound Transit the possible use of the Macadam 'Wetlands for wetland mitigation in connection with the Link light rail project. If agreement on Sound Transit improvements to the wetlands can be reached, it may provide an opportunity to implement the original Winter Garden plans within the existing budget. Council member Linder suggested that the Department of Agriculture be contacted regarding the possibility of financial participation in the project, to partially compensate for the loss of vegetation related to Citrus Longhomed Beetle eradication efforts. Mr. Fletcher will follow-up. Mr. Fletcher reported on the recent trespass committed by Sound Transit's contractor at the Beaver Hill construction staging area. Staff is working with Sound Transit, in consultation with other interested parties, to ensure appropriate mitigation and to prevent any future occurrences. He reported in the upcoming "Golf Made Easy" marketing campaign at Foster Golf Course, the recent Senior's Infonnation Fair, and the upcoming Cascade View Summer Playground program. Information only. No action required. * Proposed Zoning Code Amendments. Nora Gierloff reviewed four proposed zoning code amendments recommended by the City Attorney and described the review process to date. The CAP previously reviewed the amendments in October 2005, and one amendment (City Council involvement in quasi-judicial matters) was referred to and C. \DOCUME-l \jane\LOCALS-l \ Temp\tvHl'rUTE-l.DOC Page 1 I DRAFT reviewed by the Committee ofthe Whole in November. The Planning Commission held a publIc hearing on January 26,2006 and adopted a recommendatIOn to approve the proposal with two modifications: that Unique Sign Permit appeals and decisions on Shoreline Environment Redesignations be decided by the CIty Council. The Committee concurred with the recommendations of the Planning Commission and referred the matter to CO\V for approval. The Committee requested that a copy of the Planning Commission minutes for this item be included in the COW agenda packet. 4. Proposed Appeal Fees. Nora Gierloff and Peter Beckwith presented the staff proposal. The Committee asked; that a comparison of appeal fees from neighboring cities and information on the cost of conducting appeal hearings be provided to the COW. Committee Chair Hernandez asked about the possibility of a waiver of appeal fees for senior citizens. Staff responded that, unlike utility payments, staff is unaware of specific statutory authority to provide such a waiver. The potential of providing a refund of code enforcement appeal fees for a prevailing party was discussed. Forward to CO\V with recommendation for approval, including a fee refund to prevailing parties for code enforcement appeals. 5. Proposed Land Use Fee Update. Nora Gierloffpresented the staff recommendations on updating land use permit fees, explaining that the fees were last reviewed in 2002. For the most part the proposed fee increases are pegged to changes to the overall city budget over that period. The resulting fees would be at or near the average for neighboring cities. In addition to this general increase to cover inflation, Ms Gierloff noted several specific proposed changes to more accurately reflect costs and to take into account changing circumstances, such as repeal of the Staged ComplIance Sign Amortization Program and anticipated public notification capabilities of our Geographic Information System. Council member Linder requested that where new or significantly increase fees are proposed, information on the cost of processing these pennits be provided. Ms. Linder also spoke in support of the proposal to modify permit fees annually, to avoid large increases in the future. Forward to CO\V with recommendation to approve. 6. Fourth Quarter 2005 Reports. At the Committee's request, Steve Lancaster provided updates on Department of Community Development 4th Quarter Significant Issues. Bruce Fletcher highlighted issues from the Parks and Recreation department. Information only. No action required. Minutes by S. Lancaster Committee Chair approval. C.\DOCUME-l \jane\LOCALS-l \Temp\vlINUTE-l.DOC Page 2 I -. ~.~ DRAFT PLANNING COlVIMISSION PUBLIC HEARING lVIINUTES JANUARY 26, 2006 The Public Hearing was called to order by Chair Bratcher at 7:00 PM Present: ChaIr Margaret Bratcher, VIce Chair Allan Ekberg, CommlsslOners, George Malma, BIll Arthur, Henry Marvm, and Lynn Peterson. Absent: Vem Meryhew Representmg CIty Staff- Nora GIerloff, Brandon Miles, MOIra Bradshaw, and Wynetta BIvens COMlVllSSIONER MALINA MADE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE PUBLIC HEARING MIl\'1JTES FROM DECEMBER 8, 2005 WITH ONE CORRECTION. COMMISSIONER ARTHUR SECONDED THE MOTION; THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Chair Bratcher swore m those wishmg to gIve pubhc testImony. PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING LOCATION: L96-0061 Paul \Vozniak Major modIficatIOn to an approved wIreless communicatIOn facilIty In 1997, the Department approved a condItional use penmt for GTE Wireless at the location. Due to the merge of AT&T Wireless with Cingular, Cingular must modify their eXIsting sItes to be able to accommodate both AT&T and Cingular customers. The applIcant is proposmg three addItIonal antennas to the existmg pole on the site. The height of the pole wIll not change. New ground eqUIpment wIll also be rnstalled for the facilIty. 16500 Southcenter Parkway CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: REQUEST: Commissioner Arthur gave a declaratIOn. His daughter IS employed by Cmgular and he asked If anyone objected to hIm hearing the case. The applIcant had no obJectIOns. Brandon Miles gave the presentatIOn for staff. ThIS case was ongmally submItted m 1996 and it was approved for GTE Wireless to have SIX antennas on the sIte. Due to a merger, Cmgular "Wireless currently has control of the SIX antennas. Staff made the decIsIOn to work under the old applIcatIOn. Staff recommends approval of the CondItional Use Penmt as presented wIth no condItIOns Mr. Miles answered several questions for the CommIssIOners and deferred other questIOns to the applIcant. Bob Dyer, for the ApplIcant, answered questIOns. REBUTTAL: None Planning Commission Minutes January 26,2005 Page 2 of 4 There were no further comments The PublIc Heanng was closed. The Plannmg CommiSSIOn Deliberated. CONII\USSIO~'ER ARTHUR MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF'S FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS, FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERlvIIT ON CASE NUMBER L96-0061. COMI\nSSIO~TER MALINA SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL VOTED IN FAVOR. CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: REQUEST' LOCATION: L05-075 Clearwire Clearwrre has submItted for a Conditional Use Perrmt applicatlOn to mstall two mIcrowave antennas on an existmg building at 3311 S. 120th Street. The purpose of the antennas is to provIde wireless mtemet servIce. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-800 thIS project IS exempt from SEPA revIew. 3311 S. 120th Street Commissioner Arthur gave a declaration. His daughter IS employed by Cmgular and he asked If anyone objected to h1l11 hearing the case. The applIcant had no obJectlOns. Brandon Miles gave the presentatIOn for staff. The applicant meets all reqUIrements. Staff recommended that the Plannmg CommIssIOn approve the applIcant's request as presented with no conditIOns Commissioner Arthur requested computer-generated images for clanficatIOn. Norris Bacho, for the ApplIcant, thanked Mr. Miles for gettmg theIr applIcatIOn processed very qUIckly Mr. Bacho confinned that the ClearwIre signals would not interfere wIth publIc safety signals Mr. Bacho will provide Brandon wIth photo Images so that they may be distributed to the Planning CommIssioners. Mr. Bacho answered several questlOns for the CommIssIOn. REBUTTAL: None There were no further comments. The PublIc Heanng was closed. The Plannmg CommissIOn Deliberated. COMMISSIONER EKBERG MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF'S FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOlVIMENDATIONS, FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERlV1IT ON CASE NUMBER L05-075. COIVIlVIISSIONER MARVIN SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL VOTED IN FAVOR. CASE NUMBER: APPLICAt'-JT REQUEST. L05-061 CIty ofTukWlla Amendments to the Zonmg Code affectmg rezone procedures, code mterpretatIOns, the DesIgn RevIew approval standard and heanng Planning Commission MlI1utes January 26, 2005 Page 3 of 4 LOCATION. bodIes for quasI-judIcIal appeals. CIty wIde Nora Gierloff gave the presentatiOn for staff. An overView was provided on each proposed zomng change and discussiOn transpIred followmg the overView. Staff IS requestmg that a pubhc heanng IS held on the proposed changes and that the Planmng CommIssiOn makes a recommendation to the City Council. A. Draft Ordinance Changing Rezone Procedures No pubhc comments The PublIc Hearing was closed. The Planmng CommIssIOn Deliberated. COMl\tllSSIONER EKBERG MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF'S FINDlL~GS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS, FOR CASE NUMBER LOS-061, DRAFT ORDINANCE CHA1~GING REZONE PROCEDURES. COMlVIISSIOl\TER MARVIN SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL VOTED IN FAVOR. B. Draft Ordinance Changing Code Interpretation Procedures No publIc comments. The PublIc Heanng was closed. The Planmng COmmISSIOn Deliberated. COMMISSIONER EKBERG MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF'S FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS, FOR CASE NUMBER LOS-061, DRAFT ORDINANCE CHANGING CODE INTERPRETATION PROCEDURES. COlVIlVIISSIOl".'ER MALINA SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL VOTED IN FAVOR. C. Draft Ordinance Changing Design Review Approval Standard No pubhc comments. The PublIc Heanng was closed. The Plannmg COmmISSIOn Deliberated. COMMISSIONER EKBERG MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF'S FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMEl'Il)A TIONS, FOR CASE NUMBER LOS-061, DRAFT ORDlL~A1~CE CHA1~GING DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL STAl"IDARD. COlVllvIISSIONER PETERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL VOTED IN FAVOR. D. Draft Ordinance Changing City Council Review of Land Use Permits Planning Commission Minutes January 26, 2005 Page4of4 Dave Fenton testified that It'S a mIstake for, "somethmg as Important as thIS, have the decIsIon laid wIth the heanng exammer, not the CIty CouncIl" REBUTTAL: None There were no further comments. The PublIc Heanng was closed. The Plannmg CommIssion Deliberated. Commissioner Arthur went on record saying, "I do represent a property owner that is considering annexation who would be affected by this." No one objected to Mr. Arthur hearing the case. COMMISSIOl\TER EKBERG MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF'S FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMlYlENDATIONS WITH TWO EXCEPTIONS: 1) REVERT BACK TO CITY COUNCIL, TYPE 4 APPEAL OF A Ul\TJQUE SIGN DECISIONS; 2) REVERT BACK TO CITY COUNCIL, TYPE 5 SHORELINE ENVIRONlYIENT REDESIGNATION DECISIONS. FOR CASE NUMBER L05-061, DRAFT ORDINANCE CHAt"lGING CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF LAND USE PERi"llTS. COMlYllSSIONER lYV\RVIN SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL VOTED IN FAVOR. ELECTION OF 2006 OFFICIERS Commissioner Arthur nommated COmll11SSlOner Ekberg for Chair, CommIssIoner Malma seconded. All voted m favor. Commissioner Arthur nommated COmll11SSlOner Malma for Vice-ChaIr, CommIssIOner Marvm seconded. All voted m favor Commissioner Arthur also thanked Chair Bratcher for servmg as chaIr m 2005 At 8 30 a break was requested. Reconvened at 8 40 Director's Report . MOIra Bradshaw gave an update on the Westfield Southcenter ExpansIOn. She provIded an overvIew on numerous sIte plans dIsplayed and dIscussed tlmeframe for completIOn of the proJect. . The Plannmg CommIssIOn revIewed By-Laws and requested some reVISIOns, revIsed By-Laws wIll be submItted for approval . Meetmg adjourned at 9 10 PM Submitted by: 'vVynetta Bivens