Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2006-02-27 Item 4B - Ordinance - Appeal Fees w ►LAy�� COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS o j" q Luttn /s ITEM No. 19414 's 1 _lleetrng, Date Prepared 1 llayor:I tram Connor renera u1. I 02/27/06 I SL k /jJ r//11, (t GPI ITEM INFORMATION ! CAS NUMBER. 06-022 I ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 2/27/06 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Appeal Fee Ordinance CATEGORY D1SC11SS10f1 Motion Resolution Ordinance Bl'Award Public Hearing Other AN Date 2/27/06 .11tg Date AN Date AN Date 2/27/06 Mfg Dertc 111g Date Jltg Date SPONSOR Council Mayor Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal n P &R Police PTV SPONSOR'S Currently the City pays for all administrative costs associated with appeals. The proposed SUA IARY ordinance would allow the City to charge fees for appeals of business license denials, code enforcement appeals and certain land use decisions. REVIEWED BY COW Mtg CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: 2/14/06 RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN Approve the ordinance COMMr1 'BE Approve the ordinance as amended COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED -0- 0 -0- Fund Source. Comments The proposed fees would offset a portion of the City's costs to conduct appeal hearings MTG. DATE 1 RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 2/27/06 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 2/27/06 Staff Memo dated 2/21/06 Proposed Ordinance 2/14/06 CAP Minutes CITY OF TUK\VILA lVIElVIORANDUlVI TO: Mayor Mullet CommIttee ofthe Whole v/ Steve Lancaster, DCD DIrector & February 21,2006 FROM. DATE' RE: Appeal Fees Issue Whether the City should adopt fee provIsions for appeals of bus mess lIcense demals, code enforcement appeals and certam land use decIsions. Background Tukwila MumcIpal Code provIdes that a party may appeal an admmIstratIve decIsion to either the heanng examiner or the CIty. Currently the City pays for all admmIstratIve costs assocIated wIth the appeal including staff tIme, exammer fees and, when applIcable, the City's legal representatIOn. The law allows citIes to derray administratIve costs by nnposmg appeal fees. These changes \vere revIewed by the Commumty AffaIrs and Parks CommIttee on February 14, 2006. The CommIttee asked for addItIOnal informatIOn about other citIes' appeal fees and proposed that for successful code enforcement appeals only the fee would be refunded to the appellant. Discussion Attached please find a proposed ordmance, whIch mcludes fee provIsIOns for appeals of bus mess license denials, code enforcement actions and land use decIsions The busmess lIcense appeal fee IS $250. ThIS amount represents a portIOn of the CIty'S admmIstratlve costs, as estImated by the City Clerk. The code enforcement appeal fee IS $100 m the LDR zone and $200 m all other zones. The reason for the dIfference In amounts is that generally more admInIstratIve costs are Involved m non-resIdential code enforcement actIOns The land use appeal fees are specIfied m the Department of Community Development's Land Use Fee Schedule Appeal fees charged by other south county jUrISdIctIons Q: CODEA\I~DC.-\ Zoning Changes'Appeal tces to CO\V.doc"G:O~ ~ I :06 Appeal Type Burien Kent Federal Renton SeaTac Average Way Appeal of Administrative Decision $100 $200 $148 50 $75 $100 $12470 Code Enforcement/Building Code Appeal $100 $10000 SEPA Appeals $200 $104 $75 $100 $11975 Short Plat Appeal $200 $200 00 Appeal Hearing Cancellation Fee $10 $1000 Recommendation Adoption of the ordmance. -2- Q' CODE. \\ I~D C"\ Zoning Chal1ges'_-\PFa' tees to CO\\'.doc''.G 02,21 06 CITY OF TUKWILA \V ASHINGTON . ~ ~ fY ORDINANCE NO. 0 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TUK"VILA, "V ASHINGTON, AMENDING TUK"VILA MUNICIP AL CODE SECTIONS 5.04.112, 8.45.090, 18.90.010, 18.116.010, AND 21.04.280 REGARDING APPEAL FEES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS, the City has detel111ined that there IS an admmIstratIve cost assocIated with appeals; and WHEREAS, the City has detel111med that the appealmg party should pay this cost; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLO\VS: SectIOn 1 Amended TMC ') 04 112 Adopted. Amended Tukwila Municipal Code Section 5.04.112 (Appeal of Notice of Denial, SuspensIOn or Revocation) IS hereby adopted to read as follows: Appeals from a Notice of Demal, Suspension or RevocatIOn under thIS chapter shall be conducted in the same manner as appeals from a "NotIce and Order" under TuhvIla Municipal Code Chapter 8.45. Tn addItIOn, the appeal shall he filed wIth the Clerks office alone wIth an appeal fee of$2')0 dollars Section 2 A mended TMC R 4') 090( A) Adopted. Amended TukwIla MumcIpal Code SectIOn 8.45.090(A) (Appeal to Heanng Exammer) IS hereby adopted to read as follows A. The person incurring the penalty described m a Notice of ViolatIOn Issued by the Code Enforcement Officer pursuant to TMC 8.45.050C may obtam an appeal of the Notice by requesting such appeal wIthin ten calendar days after receiving or otherwise bemg served with the NotIce pursuant to TMC 8.45.050. When the last day of the perIod so computed is a Saturday, Sunday or federal or CIty hohday, the perIod shall run until 4 30PM on the next busmess day. The request shall be in vvritmg and Include the appl1cahle appeal fee, and upon receipt of the appeal request, the Code Enforcement Office shall schedule an appeal hearmg before the Heanng Exammer. The appeal fee for a NotIce of VIOlatIOn In an LDR zone shall he $100 and In all other zones shall he S?OO The Clppeal fee sheil I he relmhursed If the appel1cmt suhstantn:Jlly prenlls 111 the appeal actIOn Notice of the hearIng shall be sent to the appellant and/or the person(s) named on the Notice of ViolatIOn under the procedures described m TMC 8 45 050D or as may be otherwise - 1 - Q'\CODEAMND:CA Zoning Changcs,Ordinance re appeal tees,DOCNG 0221"06 requested by the appealmg party. SectlOn'1 Amended TMC 1 R 90 010 Ac1opted. Amended TukwIla MUl1lCIpal Code SectIOn 18.90.010 (Appeals fi-om the DecIsion or InterpretatIOns ofthe DIrector) IS hereby adopted to read as follows. Any person aggrieved by any mterpretatIOn of thIS title by the DIrector may appeal the Director's interpretation to the Hearmg Exammer. Any such appeal shall be a Type 2 decIsion and shall be processed pursuant to TMC 18 108.020. At the tllne the 8ppe81ls filed, the 8ppeahn2: party sh811 p8Y::ln ::Ippe81 fee pmsl18nt to the fee schedule Section 4 Amended TMC 1 R 11601 O(A) Adopted. Amended Tukwila MUl1lCIpal Code Section 18.116.01 o (A) (Time for FilIng Appeal) IS hereby adopted to read as follows: A. Except for shorelme penmts whIch are appealable to the state Shorelmes Heanngs Board, all notIce of appeal of Type 2 land use declSlons and Type 4 decIsions made by the Board of ArchItectural RevIew or Planl1lng CommIssIOn shall be filed wIthm 14 calendar days from the date of issuance of the NotIce of DeclSlon ::Ilone wIth ::In appe81 fee pmsl18nt to the fee schedule; provIded that the appeal penod shall be extended for an additIOnal seven calendar days Ifthe project involves anyone or more of the followmg situatIOns: 1. There is another agency wIth jurisdictIOn as defined m WAC 197-11-714(3). 2. The project mvolves the demolItion of any structure or facilIty that IS not categorIcally exempt under WAC 197-11-800(2)(f) or 197-11-880. 3. The project involves a cleanng or gradmg permIt not categoncally exempt under WAC 197-11 - 800 through 197-11-880. 4. A MItigated Determmation ofNonsIgl1lficance was Issued for the project pursuant to WAC 197- 11-350. 5. A Declaration of SIgmficance for the project has been wIthdrawn pursuant to WAC 197-11-360(4) and replaced by a Declaration ofNonsigl1lficance. SectIon') Amended TMC 21 042RO(A) Adopted. Amended TukwIla MUl1lCIpal Code Section 21.04.280(A) (Appeals) IS hereby adopted to read as follows' A. In the event that the Department issues a MItigated DetermmatlOn of Non- SIgmficance (MDNS), any party of record may file an appeal challengmg eIther the condItIOns whIch were Imposed or the fmlure of the Department to Impose addItIOnal condItIons. At the tIme the ::Ippeal IS filed. the ::Ippe8lmg pmiy sh::ll1 P8Y ::In appeal fee pmsu::Int to the fee schedule No other admmIstratIve SEP A appeal shall be allowed. Section 6 Sever8hlhty. Should any sectIOn, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of thIS Ordinance, or ItS applIcation to any person or CIrcumstance, be declared unconstItutIOnal or otherwise mvalid 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 Ordmance or ItS applIcatIOn to other persons or CIrcumstances - 2- Q-,CODEAMND'.CA Zoning Changes'.ordinance re appeal fccs_DOUNG02 21 '06 SectIOn 7 EffectIve Date. This Ordmance shall be pubhshed m the officIal newspaper of the CIty, and shall take effect and be m full force five (5) days after the date ofpubhcatlOn. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AT A REGULAR MEETING THEREOF ON THE DAY OF , 2006. CITY OF TUKWILA Mayor Steven M. Mullet A TTESTI AUTHENTICATED: Jane Cantu, City Clerk Approved as to form: Shelley M. Kerslake, CIty Attorney Filed with the CIty Clerk: Passed by the CIty Council: Date of PublicatIOn: EffectIve Date: "I - .) - Q''.CODEAivIND'.CA Zoning Changes\Ordinance re appeal fees.DOCiNGi02 '21 :06 Community Affairs and Parks February 14, 2006 Page 2 _- ". reviewed by the Committee of the 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 COW for approval. The Committee requested that a copy of the Planning Commission minutes for this item be included in the COW agenda packyt. * 4~ Proposed Appeal Fees. Nor~ 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 disyussed. Forward to COW with recommendation for approval, including a fee refund to prevailing parties for code enforcement appeals. (. ' 5. Proposed Land Use Fee Update. Nora Gierloffpr~sented 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 ofthe 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 permits be provided. Ms. Linder also spoke in support of the proposal to modify permit fees annually, to avoid large increases in the future. Fonvard to COW 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 creation department. Information only. No action required. Minutes by S. Lancaster 1 )...,/ S'f-\"'- 6 Committee Chair approval. C:\DOCillvIE-l \jane\LOCALS-l \Temp'u'vIINUTE-l.DOC Paae 2 I '='