Loading...
2024-08-28 Planning Board Packet41 OE LUMG do Agenda Edmonds Planning Board REGULAR MEETING BRACKETT ROOM 121 5TH AVE N, CITY HALL - 3RD FLOOR, EDMONDS, WA 98020 AUGUST 28, 2024, 7:00 PM REMOTE MEETING INFORMATION: Meeting Link:https://edmondswa- gov.zoom.us/s/87322872194?pwd=WFdxTWJIQmxlTG9LZkc3KOhuS014QT09 Meeting ID: 873 2287 2194 Passcode:007978 This is a Hybrid meeting: The meeting can be attended in -person or on-line. The physcial meeting location is at Edmonds City Hall 121 5th Avenue N., 3rd floor Brackett R000m Or Telephone :US: +1 253 215 8782 LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES We acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water. 1. CALL TO ORDER A. 8857 : Student Representative to Planning Board 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Previous meeting Minutes 3. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA 4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS For topics not scheduled for a public hearing. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes. 5. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Public hearing on code amendments to update land use permit processes per SB 5290 and HB 1105 (AMD2024-0002) 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 8. NEW BUSINESS 9. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT 10. PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA Edmonds Planning Board Agenda August 28, 2024 Page 1 A. Extended Agenda 11. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS 12. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS 13. ADJOURNMENT Edmonds Planning Board Agenda August 28, 2024 Page 2 Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 08/28/2024 Selection of Student Representative to the Planning Board Staff Lead: Mike Clugston Department: Planning & Development Prepared By: Michelle Martin Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Consider Isaac's application and vote on whether to have him on the Board. Narrative The Planning Board can select a student representative to join the Board as a non -voting member consistent with ECC 10.03.040. Isaac Fortin applied because of he has an interest urban planning. He's been interviewed by the Chair and Vice Chair, who now want to discuss having him serve as the student rep with the rest of the Board. His application is attached. Attachments: Isaac Fortin Application Packet Pg. 3 I 1 I 1.a Citizen Board and Commission Application (PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE) NOTE. This form Is a public record and may be subject to disclosure upon request Planning Board (Board or Commission) Name Isaac Fortin Address:18203 80th Ave W, Edmonds WA MOM Date:07/29/24 Day Phone: Evening Phone: Cell:206-790-3134 E-mail,isaacefortin@gmail.com /17 c- O Occupational status and background:I delivered the Edmonds Beacon to my neighborhood from 2016 to the closing of paper routes in 2021. 1 am a part of ASB (student govt.) at Meadowdale Hiqh School as a Class of 2025 Senator. Organizational affiliations: n/a Why are you seeking this appointment?I have a budding interest in urban planning as a potential college major and career path, and I also would like to gain an understanding of the processes and decisions behind the planning in my community. What skills and knowledge do you have to meet the selection criteria? I can quickly pick up on new skills and I am willing to assist in any way that is needed. Please list any other Board, Commission, Committee, or official positions you currently hold with the City of Edmonds:. n/a Additional comments: Please return this completed form to: Edmonds City Hall 121 5"' Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 carolyn.lafave@edmondswa.gov Phone: 425.771.0247 1 Fax: 425.771.0252 Signature Revised 4130/14 0 m a� c _ FL 0 w w a� L Q. NN� 6L _ N _ 0 Q U CL a _ 0 U_ M a� E M 0 a Packet Pg. 4 2.A Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 08/28/2024 Previous meeting Minutes Staff Lead: Mike Clugston Department: Planning & Development Prepared By: Michelle Martin Background/History The Planning Board held a Special Meeting and Regular meeting on the same day. Staff Recommendation Review and approve meeting minutes from July 24th Special and Regular Meetings. Narrative July 24th Special Meeting Minutes attached from 6 pm. July 24th Regular Meeting Minutes attached from 7 pm. Attachments: PB 07242024 Special Mtg PB 07242024 Regular Mtg Packet Pg. 5 2.A.a CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD Minutes of Special Meeting July 24, 2024 Chair Mitchell called the special hybrid meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 6:00 p.m. at Edmonds City Hall and on Zoom. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES The Land Acknowledgement was read by Board Member Li. Board Members Present Staff Present Jeremy Mitchell, Chair Judi Gladstone Lee Hankins Nick Maxwell Steven Li Board Members Absent Lauren Golembiewski (excused) Susanna Martini Susan McLaughlin, Development Services Director Navyusha Pentakota, Urban Design Planner ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA THERE WAS UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. AUDIENCE COMMENTS None UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Land Use Goals/Policies and Housing Elements Subcommittee chairs summarized the subcommittees' comments and recommendations on the draft Land Use Goals and the Housing Element. Both groups expressed a desire to restructure the existing documents; condense the number of goals; and clarify goals, policies, and actions/missions. Kirkland was mentioned as an understandable model for goals and policies for land use. A concern was raised about the focus on low income and affordable housing to the exclusion of every other type of home in Edmonds without addressing existing neighborhoods. There was a recommendation to retain material from the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element about single-family residential neighborhoods. Planning Board Special Meeting Minutes July 24, 2024 Pagel of 3 Packet Pg. 6 2.A.a Staff explained that there are no more single-family residential neighborhoods because of state legislation. There was a recommendation to look to see how Kirkland addressed this. It was noted that new terms would be needed to discuss this topic. Board members also noted that some items should be reconsidered which are out of the City's purview. They pointed out a need to strengthen the focus on developing around centers and hubs. Staff invited the subcommittees to present their recommendations in a joint City Council/Planning Board meeting on August 6. There was discussion about the process going forward. Land Use Goals/Policies The group debated land use goals and policies related to equity. MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER GLADSTONE, TO REQUEST THE "TOP BOX" REGARDING EQUITY BECOME THE LAND USE POLICY AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, UNDERSTANDING THEY ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE GROWTH IN HUBS AND CENTERS. Goals and policies promote equity by promoting development in underserved neighborhoods where infrastructure and public resources (for example, parks, trails, libraries, community centers, sidewalks, storm water systems, tea) are currently weaker than they are in other places. This includes not adding more infrastructure and public assets where they are already plentiful and strong. For example, not adding more public facilities and resources to Downtown or the Creative District. Equity means having Edmonds work as well for every Edmonds resident as it does for everyone else This policy includes dropping policies L U-1.1, L U-3.1, L U-3.2, L U-S 1. There was a question if the focus on equity was the best way to get the results they want. How can they invest in all the neighborhoods in a thoughtful way in order to benefit the entire city? Staff brought up the importance of Edmonds' two activity centers in the GMA framework. Policies that seem in conflict with each other were discussed. There was discussion about having a holistic approach to certain policies rather than just geographic. BOARD MEMBER GLADSTONE MADE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT THE MOTION INCLUDE REVISING THE POLICIES LISTED INSTEAD OF DROPPING THEM (EXCEPT LU- 3.1). BOARD MEMBER GLADSTONE MADE ANOTHER FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO MODIFY THE FIRST SENTENCE TO SAY, "GOALS AND POLICIES PROMOTE EQUITY BY PROMOTING INVESTING IN DEVELOPMENT IN UNDERSERVED ..." MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY (5-0) TO APPROVE THE MOTION AS AMENDED. Sexually Oriented Businesses: Planning Board Special Meeting Minutes July 24, 2024 Page 2 of 3 Packet Pg. 7 2.A.a It was recommended that this goal be removed since it is not required. MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER GLADSTONE, THAT THE GOAL FOR SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES BE REMOVED. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY (5-0). Human/Pedestrian-scaled and public -transportation -oriented structures and infrastructure: MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER GLADSTONE, THAT HUMAN/PEDESTRIAN-SCALED AND PUBLIC -TRANSPORTATION - ORIENTED STRUCTURES AND INFRASTRUCTURE BE A GOAL FOR ALL OF EDMONDS. HUMAN SCALED STRUCTURES AND INFRASTRUCTURE INCLUDE WALKABILITY, HUMAN SCALED BUILDING HEIGHTS, GROUND -FLOOR PEDESTRIAN ENGAGEMENT, MIXED USE AND LIVE/WORK HOUSING CHOICES, AND MINIMIZING TRAFFIC, NOISE, WATER POLLUTION, AIR POLLUTION, AND NIGHTTIME LIGHT POLLUTION. Director McLaughlin explained that live/work can be problematic in areas where they want to promote ground level commercial or retail. It may not be appropriate in the core of downtown. Board members felt that all the centers and hubs should have the same standard as what is in downtown. THE MOTION WAS TABLED DUE TO LACK OF TIME. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS None PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS None ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:03 p.m. Planning Board Special Meeting Minutes July 24, 2024 Page 3 of 3 Packet Pg. 8 2.A.b CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD Minutes of Hybrid Meeting July 24, 2024 Chair Mitchell called the hybrid meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. at Edmonds City Hall and on Zoom. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES The Land Acknowledgement was read by Board Member Gladstone. Board Members Present Staff Present Jeremy Mitchell, Chair Judi Gladstone Lee Hankins Nick Maxwell Steven Li Board Members Absent Lauren Golembiewski (excused) Susanna Martini (excused) Susan McLaughlin, Development Services Director Navyusha Pentakota, Urban Design Planner Tristan Sewell, Planner Leif Bjorback, Building Official READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER GLADSTONE, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JUNE 26, 2024 AS PRESENTED. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER HANKINS, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER LI, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF DULY 10, 2024 AS PRESENTED. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Board Member Gladstone noted that the minutes from February 28, 2024 should indicate she was absent from the meeting because she had recused herself due the topic being discussed. MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER GLADSTONE, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 28, 2024 SPECIAL MEETING AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED 4-0. • AYES: MITCHELL, GLADSTONE, MAXWELL, HANKINS • NOES: NONE Planning Board Meeting Minutes July 24, 2024 Pagel of 5 Packet Pg. 9 2.A.b • ABSTAIN: LI ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA Chair Mitchell recommended continuing the discussion subcommittee recommendations related to Land Use Goals/Policies and the Housing Element to Unfinished Business. THERE WAS UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. AUDIENCE COMMENTS None ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS None as PUBLIC HEARINGS E y 3 None c as L NEW BUSINESS a A. AMD2023-0002 Code Amendment for Legislative Conformance with SB5290 — "Concerning consolidating local permit review processes." A board member asked if there is anything in the code amendment that is not specifically driven by the RCW Staff will follow up. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Green Building Incentives Pilot Code Amendments Planner Tristan Sewell and Building Official Leif Bjorback made the presentation regarding the Green Building Incentives Pilot Code Amendments. They gave a recap of the process to date and introduced topics for discussion: enforcement case studies; proposed enforcement measures; bond examples; and CW and CG zones. Proposed enforcement measures would be a proof of certification required prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy; otherwise, two 2-year performance bonds required. Failure to certify within two years would require surrendering the bonds as penalty. Examples of how this would work with various projects were reviewed. Questions were asked about who is responsible for the costs, how long the ROI takes to pay back, and if the incentives are enough. There was a recommendation that the Certificate of Occupancy be denied (or removed if already provided) in situations where there was a land use variance accompanied by failure to achieve certification. There was concern about the occupants being penalized for a developer's inadequacy. It was noted that the policy for sidewalks is the same. Staff mentioned there is an option to do a Conditional Certificate of Occupancy. There are also significant dollar amounts on the line for developers' land use Planning Board Meeting Minutes July 24, 2024 Page 2 of 5 Packet Pg. 10 2.A.b incompliance. Fees collected would go to supporting other green building programs for the city. Staff added that the percentage of people that do not make the goal in two years is very low. The group debated the adequacy of the incentives and penalties. Staff also reviewed potential incentives in Waterfront (CW) and General (CG) Commercial zones. MOTION MADE BY BOARD MEMBER GLADSTONE, SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER HANKINS, TO RECOMMEND THAT THIS MOVE FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL. CHAIR MITCHELL MOVED, BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL SECONDED, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO ADD A LIEN ON THE PROPERTY IN ADDITION TO A PERFORMANCE BOND FOR MULTIFAMILY. There was some discussion about the appropriateness of a lien. Concerns were raised about the impact of the N penalties on different parties. There was a suggestion to stick to height and expedited review and not offer setbacks as an incentive. In the v, event that a builder doesn't meet their certification requirements, height and expedited review seem to be less of an imposition on neighbors. It was noted that even if a builder doesn't meet its certification, because of the E checkpoints it is still going to be mostly green built; therefore, the risk isn't that concerning. Staff concurred. 3 0 MOTION TO AMEND FAILED (exact count inaudible). L a MOTION TO AMEND MADE BY BOARD MEMBER MAXWELL TO REMOVE ALL SETBACKS a' AS AN INCENTIVE. THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. L THE MAIN MOTION WAS APPROVED 4-1. • YAYS: MITCHELL, GLADSTONE, LI, HANKINS • NAY: MAXWELL It was decided that staff would draft a summary memo based on the discussion. B. Subcommittee Work on Land Use Goals/Policies and Housing Element Housing Element Subcommittee: There was some debate about whether H-9.1 and 9.3 were just implementing the law or going beyond what is required. Staff explained the intent was to remove barriers too middle housing. There was some concern by Planning Board members that these might be going too far too soon and a recommendation to change the verbiage to "consider" or "explore". Staff generally reviewed middle housing regulations and what middle housing is for the benefit of new members. The subcommittee recommended deleting several goals because of redundancy. There was a recommendation to separate out policies that apply citywide versus those that are geographic -specific. They referred to policy H- 2.3 and recommended that higher density zoning be allowed around all transit locations, not just centers and hubs. Policy H-1.6 says to provide opportunities to support co -housing needs clarification. Director McLaughlin concurred and explained how this has been modified. Planning Board Meeting Minutes July 24, 2024 Page 3 of 5 Packet Pg. 11 2.A.b The subcommittee supported removing Goal 3 but keeping/modifying the policies beneath it and moving them elsewhere. Regarding policy H-3.1, the group felt that preserving historic buildings is the not the same as preserving modest/older housing stock. Staff brought up a concern that this could be used against any growth or development opportunity to say that any older housing stock would be validated for preservation. There was discussion about if there even is naturally occurring affordable housing in Edmonds to preserve, if it is possible to encourage homeowners to preserve and rehabilitate older housing stock rather than flipping property for maximum returns, and methods of supporting preservation of older housing stocks. There was agreement that the policy should not dictate the methods but be broad enough to allow for solutions. Staff expressed concern about having policies that are too vague. The group generally questioned if preservation is the best policy. Staff will continue to work on this verbiage with the intent of avoiding the loss of existing affordable housing. There was discussion about the environmental component of this as well. The group doesn't support the in -lieu fee for affordable housing (H-7.2) unless there is a policy for how the funds get used. H-2 and 3 are big topics that need more discussion. Staff explained these are state mandates. Director McLaughlin will confirm if Edmonds aligns with that mandate or exceeds it. There was a comment in v, support of having group homes in single-family homes with supportive services in residential areas. Goal H-5 needs language that avoids actions that result in displacement. Goal 6 should refer to working toward £ eliminating racial inequity rather than minimalizing it. H-9.5 has a lot inherent in the policy. These should be 0 "considered" rather than assume that it will all be done. c as L There was discussion about how to proceed with a recommendation for Council. It was noted that these are a subcommittee recommendations and have not been fully vetted by the whole group. The study session on August 6 with the Council will be an opportunity for more discussion. L PLANNING BOARD EXTENDED AGENDA August 6 — Special joint meeting with Council. Staff reviewed the workflow timeline for the Draft EIS. The Draft EIS will be published on August 22 followed by a 30-day public comment period and subsequent revision by staff. The Planning Board will be discussing and making a recommendation on the final EIS and the Comprehensive Plan in October 23. There will likely be another special meeting on September 11 or 25 related to transportation. Board Member Gladstone will not be attending the September 25 meeting. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Board Member Hankins reported on his meeting as liaison with the Economic Development Commission where they discussed how to close the current Edmonds budget gap. He will continue to attend and provide updates. Board Member Maxwell reminded the group about email protocol. Board Members Li and Gladstone expressed appreciation for the discussion. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS Planning Board Meeting Minutes July 24, 2024 Page 4 of 5 Packet Pg. 12 2.A.b Chair Mitchell thanked everyone for the subcommittee work. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:07 p.m. as a� _ 4) 4) E y 3 O d L a a� w L NN� LIB N O N Iq N I - CD m a c m E U a Planning Board Meeting Minutes July 24, 2024 Page 5 of 5 Packet Pg. 13 6.A Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 08/28/2024 Public hearing on code amendments to update land use permit processes per SB 5290 and HB 1105 (AM D2024-0002) Staff Lead: Amber Brokenshire Department: Planning & Development Prepared By: Amber Brokenshire Background/History During the 2023 legislative session, the Washington State Legislature passed, and the Governor signed Senate Bill 5290, updating portions of the Local Project Review Act, Chapter 36.70B RCW. The intent of the updates was to consolidate, streamline, and improve project review and permitting, with an emphasis on housing development, and to reduce the amount of time it takes for projects complying with local development regulations to receive approval. To accomplish this goal, SB 5290 contained thirteen separate sections including a variety of mandatory and voluntary measures for local government agencies to consider when implementing permit streamlining. The legislation is included as Attachment 1. House Bill 1105, also passed during the legislative session, requires public agencies to provide notice for public comment that includes the last date and time by which such public comments must be submitted. The legislation is included as Attachment 4. While these code changes are solely procedural as required by RCW 36.70B, review and recommendation by the Planning Board is required consistent with ECDC 20.80 (Text and Map Changes). Because these updates are solely procedural, they are exempt from requiring a SEPA threshold determination consistent with WAC 197-11-800(19). Staff Recommendation After a brief staff presentation, the Planning Board should open the public hearing to take public testimony on the draft redline/strike-out code in Attachment 4. If the Board is satisfied with the draft language and has no additional comments, staff asks that the Board forward the draft code in Attachment 4 to City Council. A decision memo is not needed since the code changes are procedural rather and policy -related. Narrative Key Components of Senate Bill 5290 The SB 5290 updates contain a new series of requirements for local governments. Key components of the legislation are included below, and a comprehensive summary including the effective date of each Packet Pg. 14 6.A change has been outlined by a fact sheet developed by the Washington State Department of Commerce and included in Attachment 2. Proiect Permits - The legislation defines project permits as, any land use or environmental permit or license required from a local government for a project action, including but not limited to subdivisions, binding site plans, planned unit developments, conditional uses, shoreline substantial development permits, site plan review, permits or approvals by critical areas ordinances, site -specific rezones which do not require a comprehensive plan amendment, but excluding the adoption or amendment of a comprehensive plan, subarea plan, or development regulations except as otherwise specifically included in RCW 36.70B. Permit Timelines - The legislation established new permit review time periods for project permits. The updated timelines were established in three separate tiers, based on public involvement, and may be modified by local ordinance. The new default time periods are: 65 days for permits that do not require public notice 100 days for permits that require public notice, but not a public hearing 170 days for permits that require public notice and a public hearing The time periods include the number of calendar days it takes a local government to reach a final decision and excludes the application completeness check process and time periods when the local government is waiting on an applicant response. As outlined in RCW 36.70B.080, these new permit timelines will take effect on January 1, 2025, unless a local government agency elects to modify the review timelines based on special circumstances. Permit Fee Refunds - As a potential consequence the legislation includes a measure that, in some circumstances, may require jurisdictions to refund a portion of the permit fees when the timelines are not met. The portion of the refund may range from 10-20% based on criteria established in RCW 36.70B.080. Streamlining Measures - As an incentive the legislation provides an option for jurisdictions to adopt a minimum of three out of ten streamlining measures as listed in RCW 36.70B.160 to avoid refunding permit fees. Jurisdictions that implement three streamlining measures will need to meet adopted permit timelines fifty percent of the time by the next comprehensive plan update after January 1, 2026, or be required to adopt additional streamlining measures. Performance Reports - RCW 36.70B.080 also establishes a new set of criteria for annual performance reports and requires certain jurisdictions, including Edmonds, to publish the reports online and provide copies to the Department of Commerce. Procedural Changes - The legislation also included several procedural updates including but not limited to changes in definitions, requirements for determination of permit application completeness, excluding site plan review for most interior alterations, clarifying permit application submittal requirements, and minor amendments to citations. Key Components of House Bill 1105 HB1105 requires public agencies to provide notice for public comment that includes the last date and time by which such public comments must be submitted. The Washington House Bill text is Attachment 3. Attachments: 1. Senate Bill 5290 Session Law 2. Local Project Review Act Commerce Fact Sheet 3. House Bill 1105 Session Law Packet Pg. 15 6.A 4 DRAFT Redline strikethrough SB 5290 & HB 1105 Code Amendment v.2 Packet Pg. 16 6.A.a CERTIFICATION OF ENROLLMENT SECOND SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL 5290 Chapter 338, Laws of 2023 68th Legislature 2023 Regular Session PROJECT PERMITS —LOCAL PROJECT REVIEW —VARIOUS PROVISIONS EFFECTIVE DATE: July 23, 2023—Except for section 7, which takes effect January 1, 2025. Passed by the Senate April IV, 2023 Yeas 47 Nays 0 DENNY HECK President of the Senate Passed by the House April 10, 2023 Yeas 98 Nays 0 LAURIE JINKINS Speaker of the House of Representatives Approved May 8, 2023 1:17 PM JAY INSLEE Governor of the State of Washington CERTIFICATE I, Sarah Bannister, Secretary of the Senate of the State of Washington, do hereby certify that the attached is SECOND SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL 5290 as passed by the Senate and the House of Representatives on the dates hereon set forth. SARAH BANNISTER Secretary FILED May 10, 2023 Secretary of State State of Washington Packet Pg. 17 6.A.a 1 2 3 4 5 SECOND SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL 5290 AS AMENDED BY THE HOUSE Passed Legislature - 2023 Regular Session State of Washington 68th Legislature 2023 Regular Session By Senate Ways & Means (originally sponsored by Senators Mullet, Kuderer, Fortunato, Liias, Nobles, Saldana, and C. Wilson; by request of Office of the Governor) READ FIRST TIME 02/24/23. AN ACT Relating to consolidating local permit review processes; amending RCW 36.70B.140, 36.70B.020, 36.70B.070, 36.70B.080, and 36.70B.160; reenacting and amending RCW 36.70B.110; adding new sections to chapter 36.70B RCW; creating new sections; and providing an effective date. 6 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON: 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Sec. 1. RCW 36.70B.140 and 1995 c 347 s 418 are each amended to read as follows: a (1) A local government by ordinance or resolution may exclude the 3 following project permits from the provisions of RCW 36.70B.060 through 36.70B.090 and 36.70B.110 through 36.70B.130: Landmark 0 N designations, street vacations, or other approvals relating to the in use of public areas or facilities, or other project permits, whether 0 N LO administrative or quasi-judicial, that the local government by = m ordinance or resolution has determined present special circumstances that warrant a review process or time periods for approval which are N different from that provided in RCW 36.70B.060 through 36.70B.090 and r 36.70B.110 through 36.70B.130. (2) A local government by ordinance or resolution also may exclude the following project permits from the provisions of RCW a 36.70B.060 and 36.70B.110 through 36.70B.130: Lot line or boundary P. 1 2 S S packet Pg. 18 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 6.A.a adjustments and building and other construction permits, or similar administrative approvals, categorically exempt from environmental m review under chapter 43.21C RCW, or for which environmental review = has been completed in connection with other project permits. M A local government must exclude project permits for interior 0 N LO alterations from site plan review, provided that the interior y alterations do not result in the following: a sleeping quarters or bedrooms; �+ _Additional d N Nonconformity with federal emergency management agency m substantial improvement thresholds; or a (c) Increase the total square footage or valuation of the L1 E structure thereby requiring upgraded fire access or fire suppression a systems. () Nothing in this section exempts interior alterations from c M otherwise applicable building, plumbing, mechanical, or electrical r, codes. R a ()_For purposes of this section, "interior alterations" include r construction activities that do not modify the existing site layout w c a) or its current use and involve no exterior work adding to the E building footprint. d NEW SECTION. Sec. 2. A new section is added to chapter 36.70B RCW to read as follows: (1) Subject to the availability of funds appropriated for this specific purpose, the department of commerce must establish a consolidated permit review grant program. The department may award grants to any local government that provides, by ordinance, resolution, or other action, a commitment to the following building permit review consolidation requirements: (a) Issuing final decisions on residential permit applications within 45 business days or 90 calendar days. (i) To achieve permit review within the stated time periods, a local government must provide consolidated review for building permit applications. This may include an initial technical peer review of the application for conformity with the requirements of RCW 36.70B.070 by all departments, divisions, and sections of the local government with jurisdiction over the project. (ii) A local government may contract with a third -party business to conduct the consolidated permit review or as additional inspection p. 2 2 S S packet Pg. 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 6.A.a staff. Any funds expended for such a contract may be eligible for reimbursement under this act. m (iii) Local governments are authorized to use grant funds to = contract outside assistance to audit their development regulations to M identify and correct barriers to housing development. 0 N (b) Establishing an application fee structure that would allow LO y the jurisdiction to continue providing consolidated permit review a within 45 business days or 90 calendar days. (i) A local government may consult with local building N m associations to develop a reasonable fee system. a (ii) A local government must determine, no later than July 1, E 2024, the specific fee structure needed to provide permit review a within the time periods specified in this subsection (1)(b). (2) A jurisdiction that is awarded a grant under this section = M must provide a quarterly report to the department of commerce. The 4, report must include the average and maximum time for permit review R a during the jurisdiction's participation in the grant program. r (3) If a jurisdiction is unable to successfully meet the terms w c as and conditions of the grant, the jurisdiction must enter a 90-day E probationary period. If the jurisdiction is not able to meet the a=i E requirements of this section by the end of the probationary period, R the jurisdiction is no longer eligible to receive grants under this a� o section. (4) For the purposes of this section, "residential permit" means a permit issued by a city or county that satisfies the conditions of RCW 19.27.015(5) and is within the scope of the international residential code, as adopted in accordance with chapter 19.27 RCW. NEW SECTION. Sec. 3. A new section is added to chapter 36.70B RCW to read as follows: (1) Subject to the availability of funds appropriated for this specific purpose, the department of commerce must establish a grant program for local governments to update their permit review process from paper filing systems to software systems capable of processing digital permit applications, virtual inspections, electronic review, and with capacity for video storage. (2) The department of commerce may only provide a grant under this section to a city if the city allows for the development of at least two units per lot on all lots zoned predominantly for residential use within its jurisdiction. p. 3 2 S S packet Pg. 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 6.A.a NEW SECTION. Sec. 4. A new section is added to chapter 36.70B RCW to read as follows: m (1) Subject to the availability of amounts appropriated for this = specific purpose, the department of commerce must convene a digital M permitting process work group to examine potential license and 0 N permitting software for local governments to encourage streamlined LO y and efficient permit review. a (2) The department of commerce, in consultation with the association of Washington cities and Washington state association of N m counties, shall appoint members to the work group representing groups a including but not limited to: E (a) Cities and counties; aD a (b) Building industries; and (c) Building officials. _ M (3) The department of commerce must convene the first meeting of 4, the work group by August 1, 2023. The department must submit a final R a report to the governor and the appropriate committees of the o r legislature by August 1, 2024. The final report must: w c a) (a) Evaluate the existing need for digital permitting systems, E including impacts on existing digital permitting systems that are 4)i E already in place; R (b) Review barriers preventing local jurisdictions from accessing a) 0 or adopting digital permitting systems; c (c) Evaluate the benefits and costs associated with a statewide = permitting software system; and L t (d) Provide budgetary, administrative policy, and legislative recommendations to increase the adoption of or establish a statewide a system of digital permit review. 3 Sec. 5. RCW 36.70B.020 and 1995 c 347 s 402 are each amended to read as follows: Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, the definitions in this section apply throughout this chapter. (1) "Closed record appeal" means an administrative appeal on the record to a local government body or officer, including the legislative body, following an open record hearing on a project permit application when the appeal is on the record with no or limited new evidence or information allowed to be submitted and only appeal argument allowed. (2) "Local government" means a county, city, or town. 2 S S packet Pg. 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 6.A.a (3) "Open record hearing" means a hearing, conducted by a single hearing body or officer authorized by the local government to conduct a such hearings, that creates the local government's record through 3 s testimony and submission of evidence and information, under 'C c procedures prescribed by the local government by ordinance or C u resolution. An open record hearing may be held prior to a local a Co government's decision on a project permit to be known as an "open s record predecision hearing." An open record hearing may be held on an a appeal, to be known as an "open record appeal hearing," if no open c record predecision hearing has been held on the project permit. i s (4) "Project permit" or "project permit application" means any s land use or environmental permit or license required from a local i government for a project action, including but not limited to 0 ((biildingserRiit)) subdivisions, binding site plans, planned unit = c developments, conditional uses, shoreline substantial development e permits, site plan review, permits or approvals required by critical area ordinances, site -specific rezones (( plan)) which do not require a s c comprehensive plan amendment, but excluding the adoption or amendment E s of a comprehensive plan, subarea plan, or development regulations except as otherwise specifically included in this subsection. c (5) "Public meeting" means an informal meeting, hearing, C workshop, or other public gathering of people to obtain comments from i the public or other agencies on a proposed project permit prior to = 'i the local government's decision. A public meeting may include, but is i not limited to, a design review or architectural control board s meeting, a special review district or community council meeting, or a si scoping meeting on a draft environmental impact statement. A public F meeting does not include an open record hearing. The proceedings at a s public meeting may be recorded and a report or recommendation may be included in the local government's project permit application file. Co Sec. 6. RCW 36.70B.070 and 1995 c 347 s 408 are each amended to read as follows: (1) (a) Within ( (tweet e-~,�) ) 28 days after receiving a project permit application, a local government planning pursuant to RCW 36.70A.040 shall ((Ffta4 er)) provide H )) a written determination to the applicant((, statin ))_ (bb)_The written determination must state either: ((+a+)) S2 That the application is complete; or p. 5 2 S S packet Pg. 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 6.A.a ((+]E)-})) ii That the application is incomplete and that the rocedural submission reauirements of the local government have not m been met. The determination shall outline what is necessary to make = the application procedurally complete. M (c) The number of days shall be calculated by counting every 0 N LO calendar day. y To the extent known by the local government, the local a government shall identify other agencies of local, state, or federal governments that may have jurisdiction over some aspect of the N m application. a (2) A project permit application is complete for purposes of this LI E section when it meets the procedural submission requirements of the a local government ((anelis suffie-lent feL= eentin pr-eeessing even deli t i-e l i €e r� lei _ na n metre M m~��r' laseel en � ) ) as outlined on the e-afire �t-�}�r; - � _ _ - - =1== - - - - =1 a) w project permit application. Additional information or studies may be R a required or project modifications may be undertaken subsequent to the o r procedural review of the application by the local Government. The w determination of completeness shall not preclude the local government c as E from requesting additional information or studies either at the time a=i E of the notice of completeness or subsequently if new information is R required or substantial changes in the proposed action occur. a� 0 However, if the procedural submission requirements, as outlined on c the project permit application have been provided, the need for = additional information or studies may not preclude a completeness L determination. (3) The determination of completeness may include or be combined a with the following ((as—eptienal infei=fftatien)): (a) A preliminary determination of those development regulations 0 that will be used for project mitigation; N (b) A preliminary determination of consistency, as provided under i) RCW 36.70B.040; ( (ems) ) 0 rn N (c) Other information the local government chooses to include; or m The notice of application pursuant to the requirements in RCW 36.70B.110. a Cn (4)(a) An application shall be deemed procedurally complete on r the 29th day after receiving a project permit application under this section if the local government does not provide a written determination to the applicant that the application is procedurally a incomplete as provided in subsection (1)(b) ii of this section. When p. 6 2 S S packet Pg. 23 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 6.A.a the local government does not provide a written determination, thev may still seek additional information or studies as provided for in m subsection (2) of this section. _ (b) Within ((peen)) 14 days after an applicant has submitted M 0 to a local government additional information identified by the local N LO government as being necessary for a complete application, the local y government shall notify the applicant whether the application is a complete or what additional information is necessary. N (c) The notice of application shall be provided within 14 days m after the determination of completeness pursuant to RCW 36.70B.110. Sec. 7. RCW 36.70B.080 and 2004 c 191 s 2 are each amended to i read as follows: o (1)(a) Development regulations adopted pursuant to RCW 36.70A.040 = must establish and implement time periods for local government e actions for each type of project permit application and provide timely and predictable procedures to determine whether a completed project permit application meets the requirements of those c development regulations. The time periods for local government E s actions for each type of complete project permit application or project type should not exceed (( leeal: geverrnffi .-nt ffiakes written finEilnejs that a ;rp eeifieel affteunt of a-elelitienal tiffie is neeeleel te pr-eeess speeifie eeffiplete 19Lejeet laeLcffiiti epplieatiens ea r-etypes)) those specified in this section. s 'i (b) For project permits submitted after January 1, 2025, i the development regulations must, for each type of permit s application, specify the contents of a completed project permit c application necessary for the complete compliance with the time F periods and procedures. c ((+2+)) (c) A jurisdiction may exclude certain permit types and I timelines for processing project permit applications as provided for u c in RCW 36.70B.140. °c U The time periods for local government action to issue a final - a decision for each type of complete project permit application or project type subject to this chapter should not exceed the following u time periods unless modified by the local government pursuant to this t section or RCW 36.70B.140: E For project permits which do not require public notice under RCW 36.70B.110, a local government must issue a final decision within 65 days of the determination of completeness under RCW 36.70B.070; p. 7 2 S S packet Pg. 24 6.A.a I ii For project permits which require public notice under RCW 2 3 4 5 7 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 36.70B.110, a local government must issue a final decision within 100 days of the determination of completeness under RCW 36.70B.070; and iii For project permits which require public notice under RCW 36.70B.110 and a public hearing, a local government must issue a final decision within 170 days of the determination of completeness under RCW 36.70B.070_ 1Z A jurisdiction may modify the provisions in (d) of this subsection to add permit types not identified, change the permit names or types in each category, address how consolidated review time Periods may be different than permits submitted individually, and provide for how projects of a certain size or type may be differentiated, including by differentiating between residential and nonresidential permits. Unless otherwise provided for the consolidated review of more than one permit, the time period for a final decision shall be the longest of the permit time periods identified in (d) of this subsection or as amended by a local overnment. If a local government does not adopt an ordinance or resolution modifying the provisions in (d) of this subsection, the time periods in (d)—of this subsection apply. (g) The number of days an application is in review with the countv or citv shall be calculated from the day completeness is determined under RCW 36.70B.070 to the date a final decision is issued on the project permit application. The number of days shall be calculated by counting every calendar day and excludina the followina time periods: Any period between the day that the county or city has notified the applicant, in writing, that additional information is required to further process the application and the day when responsive information is resubmitted by the applicant; ii Any period after an applicant informs the local government, in writing, that they would like to temporarily suspend review of the project permit application until the time that the applicant notifies the local government, in writing, that they would like to resume the application. A local government may set conditions for the temporary suspension of a permit application; and iii Any period after an administrative appeal is filed until the administrative appeal is resolved and any additional time period Provided by the administrative appeal has expired. p. 8 2 S S packet Pg. 25 6.A.a I (h) The time periods for a local government to process a permit 2 3 4 5 7 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 shall start over if an applicant proposes a change in use that adds m or removes commercial or residential elements from the original = M application that would make the application fail to meet the r_ 0 determination of procedural completeness for the new use, as required N LO by the local government under RCW 36.70B.070. m If, at any time, an applicant informs the local government, in writing, that the applicant would like to temporarily suspend the review of the project for more than 60 days, or if an applicant is not responsive for more than 60 consecutive days after the county or city has notified the applicant, in writing, that additional information is required to further process the application, an additional 30 days may be added to the time periods for local government action to issue a final decision for each type of project permit that is subject to this chapter. Any written notice from the local government to the applicant that additional information is required to further process the application must include a notice that nonresponsiveness for 60 consecutive days may result in 30 days being added to the time for review. For the purposes of this subsection, "nonresponsiveness" means that an applicant is not making demonstrable progress on providing additional requested information to the local government, or that there is no ongoing communication from the applicant to the local government on the applicant's ability or willingness to provide the additional information. Annual amendments to the comprehensive plan are not subject to the requirements of this section. A county's or city's adoption of a resolution or ordinance to implement this subsection shall not be subject to appeal under chapter 36.70A RCW unless the resolution or ordinance modifies the time periods provided in (d) of this subsection by providing for a review period of more than 170 days for any project permit. (1)(i) When permit time periods provided for in (d) of this subsection, as may be amended by a local government, and as may be extended as provided for in (i) of this subsection, are not met, a portion of the permit fee must be refunded to the applicant as provided in this subsection. A local government may provide for the collection of only 80 percent of a permit fee initially, and for the collection of the remaining balance if the permitting time periods are met. The portion of the fee refunded for missina time periods shall be: P. 9 2 S S packet Pg. 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 6.A.a (AA) 10 percent if the final decision of the project permit application was made after the applicable deadline but the period a from the passage of the deadline to the time of issuance of the final 3 s decision did not exceed 20 percent of the original time period; or C c 20 percent if the period from the passage of the deadline to C u the time of the issuance of the final decision exceeded 20 percent of a u the original time period. c ii Except as provided in RCW 36.70B.160, the provisions in c c c subsection (1)(i) of this section are not applicable to cities and c counties which have implemented at least three of the options in RCW s 36.70B.160(1) (a) through (j) at the time an application is deemed s Procedurally complete. i (2)(a) Counties subject to the requirements of RCW 36.70A.215 and t the cities within those counties that have populations of at least = c (( )) 20,000 must, for each type of permit application, c identify the total number of project permit applications for which decisions are issued according to the provisions of this chapter. For c each type of project permit application identified, these counties c and cities must establish and implement a deadline for issuing a E s notice of final decision as required by subsection (1) of this i E section and minimum requirements for applications to be deemed c c complete under RCW 36.70B.070 as required by subsection (1) of this section. _ c (b) Counties and cities subject to the requirements of this = 'i subsection also must prepare an annual performance report((ma)) that i ((ineluele, at a fftiniffiu ,tee—€ed4ewing in€eLcfacltren fer eahtype e-f �� s p r-e ' Lcffti t app l e a a t i-enrdentif ieel ±n aeeei=eIanee with 0 r r n s. f +a+— ef this su� e e t i en F +i+ 'Fet ntdFabeLef e-efftplete--applications 33eee-ivec�dtrLin e : yeai=; ii) Pier f l to--ap lre t i-ens3e =eel the ( e ee f tp e p a ee-i elurinef yew= est-alal; sl,eE neer }1,; siilaseetie NieLe f t i f {iii:} applre-a e n s—r-e ee-iv eel-duri n ear- e3a ri:a ,dnEiei= this 9,c sseetien; N ,,,�Lef the (iv) applreatiens i f t iffte 3=eee-i� eEl eluLaing yeaLa€eia whd:ehan idpenb the a an4 the even s e n o was ffiiitiially agLaeeel y --ap-p3A e P. 10 2 S S packet Pg. 27 6.A.a I -(-v}VaLcianee—e f a e� p ei=€e re e e meltrdingapp3 e a t i ear 2 3 4 5 7 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 afficee4 tiffie—extensrens have ee-eurre emote- the Eieaelline e ".stala l i ..1-, e r 4 e tl� ., u� s e eti e ,n eiia iinye cry —airy +e-��zrti-es--Qirce-rtre-s sidbj-e-e-t tethe requireRients 6-f this +i+ Pic-evi4e netree ef anel aeeess the ai,iiiaal per fe-ffia - - rye i c s cirr-e ie-i} lam' s .: la i tc ; i,}y' s .. lasite in4ieatinff that the LcepeLcts—aram--analalele—I—y si e£`tien flees net ffiailltoin a welaite, netiee—ef the Lelaer-tS- fftiis be {3+)) includes information outlining time periods for certain Permit types associated with housing. The report must provide: Permit time periods for certain permit processes in the county or city in relation to those established under this section, including whether the county or city has established shorter time periods than those provided in this section; ii The total number of decisions issued during the year for the following permit types: Preliminary subdivisions, final subdivisions, binding site plans, permit processes associated with the approval of multifamily housing, and construction plan review for each of these Permit types when submitted separately; iii The total number of decisions for each permit type which included consolidated project permit review, such as concurrent review of a rezone or construction plans; iv The average number of days from a submittal to a decision being issued for the project permit types listed in subsection (2)(a)(ii) of this section. This shall be calculated from the day completeness is determined under RCW 36.70B.070 to the date a decision is issued on the application. The number of days shall be calculated by counting every calendar day; (y) The total number of days each project permit application of a type listed in subsection (2)(a)(ii) of this section was in review p . 11 2 S S packet Pg. 28 6.A.a 1 with the county or city. This shall be calculated from the day 2 completeness is determined under RCW 36.70B.070 to the date a final a 3 decision is issued on the application. The number of days shall be 3 s 4 calculated by counting every calendar day. The days the application C 5 is in review with the county or city does not include c the time C u 6 periods in subsection (1)(g)(i)-(iii) of this section; a u 7 vi The total number of days that were excluded from the time s 8 period calculation under subsection (1)(g)(i)-(iii) of this section c 9 for each project permit application of a type listed in subsection 10 (2)(a)(ii) of this section. c i s 11 (c) Counties and cities subject to the requirements of this 12 subsection must: c 13 14 15 (i) Post the annual performance report city's website; and ii Submit the annual performance report through to the county's or the department of 16 17 commerce by March 1st each year. (d)_No later than July 1st each year, the department of commerce 18 shall publish a report which includes the annual performance report 19 data for each county and city subject to the requirements of this 20 subsection and a list of those counties and cities whose time periods 21 are shorter than those provided for in this section. 22 The annual report must also include key metrics and findings from 23 the information collected. 24 (e) The initial annual report required under this subsection must 25 be submitted to the department of commerce by March 1, 2025, and must 26 include information from permitting in 2024. 27 (3) Nothing in this section prohibits a county or city from 28 extending a deadline for issuing a decision for a specific project 29 permit application for any reasonable period of time mutually agreed 30 upon by the applicant and the local government. 31 ( (f4} , }ti Fkevele=�.-�i�} shall: -a�: 6aei=kwl�rtti, the ceiiirti-ems--crirce-rti-e-s te :FE-;Frevd--crrc 33 p$tential ifftplementatien ees-ts ef the— iL-effients ef siseetien (2) 34 ez this seetien.The elepaLaa-,,,,e }, in eeeper-atienwi}h }1-•e leech 35 Ejeve Lcnfft� -� , hall: p i=epar-e—arse r t suffiffiarizing the p r-e j ee teei ee s ts, 36 tegethci with eeeffff.ene,}tenser—state—€idnelinff-arssist-anee fe= 37 iffile l effie n tat -re n eests, anel lareviele he —rye rt—te the —gave i=nez—ana 38 aI9I9i=eI9i=±ate—eem i tees—e f the -senate anel he ;, of Lcep Le s e n tat i ��es by 39 . ) ) p . 12 2 S S packet Pg. 29 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 6.A.a Sec. 8. RCW 36.70B.160 and 1995 c 347 s 420 are each amended to read as follows: m (1) Each local government is encouraged to adopt further project = review and code provisions to provide prompt, coordinated review and ensure accountability to applicants and the public((, inelud;„g 0 LO i €erp t 3 t i that- empediteclLev ew re j ee e a ens er Pe j eets M tent t n n the6. are —e e n-si s witl=t aelepte(4-die-1 e 3�egtrl acre el within a eapaeity ef systefftwiele infi=a9ti=,ater ) ) by (a) Expediting review for project permit applications for N m projects that are consistent with adopted development regulations; a (b) Imposing reasonable fees, consistent with RCW 82.02.020, on L applicants for permits or other governmental approvals to cover the a cost to the city, town, county, or other municipal corporation of processing applications, inspecting and reviewing plans, or preparing = detailed statements required by chapter 43.21C RCW. The fees imposed ) may not include a fee for the cost of processing administrative R appeals. Nothing in this subsection limits the ability of a county or a 0 r city to impose a fee for the processing of administrative appeals as w otherwise authorized by law; c a) E (cZ Entering into an interlocal agreement with another jurisdiction to share permitting staff and resources; R (dZ Maintaining and budgeting for on -call permitting assistance a� 0 for when permit volumes or staffing levels change rapidly; c (e) _Having new positions budgeted that are contingent on = increased permit revenue; L. (f) Adopting development regulations which only require public hearings for permit applications that are required to have a public a hearing by statute; (g) Adopting development regulations which make preapplication a 0 meetings optional rather than a requirement of permit application a submittal; (h)_Adopting development regulations which make housing types an 0 N outright permitted use in all zones where the housing type is m permitted; (i) Adopting a program to allow for outside professionals with N appropriate professional licenses to certify components of r applications consistent with their license; or as (�f Meeting with the applicant to attempt to resolve outstanding issues during the review process. The meeting must be scheduled a within 14 days of a second request for corrections during permit p . 13 2 S S packet Pg. 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 6.A.a review. If the meetina cannot resolve the issues and a local overnment proceeds with a third request for additional information a or corrections, the local government must approve or deny the 3 s application upon receiving the additional information or corrections. C c (2)(a) After January 1, 2026, a county or city must adopt C u additional measures under subsection (1) of this section at the time a u of its next comprehensive plan update under RCW 36.70A.130 if it s meets the following conditions: c _The county or city has adopted at least three project review c and code provisions under subsection (1) of this section more than s five years prior; and 2 s ii The county or city is not meeting the permitting deadlines i established in RCW 36.70B.080 at least half of the time over the o period since its most recent comprehensive plan update under RCW = c 36.70A.130. c (bb)_A city or county that is required to adopt new measures under z s (a) of this subsection but fails to do so becomes subject to the c provisions of RCW 36.70B.080(1)(1), notwithstanding RCW s c 36.70B.080 (1) (1) (ii) . E s ((+2+)) (3) Nothing in this chapter is intended or shall be construed to prevent a local government from requiring a c c preapplication conference or a public meeting by rule, ordinance, or s resolution. c ((+3+)) (4) Each local government shall adopt procedures to = 'i monitor and enforce permit decisions and conditions. i (({4+)) (5) Nothing in this chapter modifies any independent s statutory authority for a government agency to appeal a project c permit issued by a local government. NEW SECTION. Sec. 9. A new section is added to chapter 36.70B RCW to read as follows: (1) The department of commerce shall develop and provide technical assistance and guidance to counties and cities in setting fee structures under RCW 36.70B.160(1) to ensure that the fees are reasonable and sufficient to recover true costs. The guidance must include information on how to utilize growth factors or other measures to reflect cost increases over time. (2) When providing technical assistance under subsection (1) of this section, the department of commerce must prioritize local p. 14 2 S S packet Pg. 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 governments that RCW 36.70B.160(1). 6.A.a have implemented at least three of the options in Sec. 10. RCW 36.70B.110 and 1997 c 429 s 48 and 1997 c 396 s 1 C c are each reenacted and amended to read as follows: C u (1) Not later than April 1, 1996, a local government planning u under RCW 36.70A.040 shall provide a notice of application to the c public and the departments and agencies with jurisdiction as provided c in this section. If a local government has made a threshold c determination under chapter 43.21C RCW concurrently with the notice s of application, the notice of application may be combined with the s threshold determination and the scoping notice for a determination of i significance. Nothing in this section prevents a determination of o significance and scoping notice from being issued prior to the notice = of application. Nothing in this section or this chapter prevents a c lead agency, when it is a project proponent or is funding a project, z from conducting its review under chapter 43.21C RCW or from allowing c appeals of procedural determinations prior to submitting a project c permit ( (,p p liea i_-n)) . E s (2) The notice of application shall be provided within ((feidLcteen)) 14 days after the determination of completeness as c c provided in RCW 36.70B.070 and, except as limited by the provisions of subsection (4)(b) of this section, ((l)) must include the following in whatever sequence or format the local government deems = 'i appropriate: i (a) The date of application, the date of the notice of completion c- s for the application, and the date of the notice of application; c (b) A description of the proposed project action and a list of F the project permits included in the application and, if applicable, a c list of any studies requested under RCW 36.70B.070 ((eL=6.�GB.090)); (c) The identification of other permits not included in the c application to the extent known by the local government; u (d) The identification of existing environmental documents that a evaluate the proposed project, and, if not otherwise stated on the document providing the notice of application, such as a city land use bulletin, the location where the application and any studies can be t reviewed; c (e) A statement of the public comment period, which shall be not less than fourteen nor more than thirty days following the date of notice of application, and statements of the right of any person to p . 15 2 S S packet Pg. 32 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 6.A.a comment on the application, receive notice of and participate in any hearings, request a copy of the decision once made, and any appeal m rights. A local government may accept public comments at any time = prior to the closing of the record of an open record predecision M hearing, if any, or, if no open record predecision hearing is 0 N provided, prior to the decision on the project permit; LO m (f) The date, time, place, and type of hearing, if applicable and a scheduled at the date of notice of the application; (g) A statement of the preliminary determination, if one has been N m made at the time of notice, of those development regulations that a will be used for project mitigation and of consistency as provided in L RCW 36.70B.030(2) and 36.70B.040; and aD a (h) Any other information determined appropriate by the local N government. (3) If an open record predecision hearing is required for the requested project permits, the notice of application shall be provided at least fifteen days prior to the open record hearing. (4) A local government shall use reasonable methods to give the notice of application to the public and agencies with jurisdiction and may use its existing notice procedures. A local government may use different types of notice for different categories of project permits or types of project actions. If a local government by resolution or ordinance does not specify its method of public notice, the local government shall use the methods provided for in (a) and (b) of this subsection. Examples of reasonable methods to inform the public are: (a) Posting the property for site -specific proposals; (b) Publishing notice, including at least the project location, description, type of permit(s) required, comment period dates, and location where the notice of application required by subsection (2) of this section and the complete application may be reviewed, in the newspaper of general circulation in the general area where the proposal is located or in a local land use newsletter published by the local government; (c) Notifying public or private groups with known interest in a certain proposal or in the type of proposal being considered; (d) Notifying the news media; (e) Placing notices in appropriate regional or neighborhood newspapers or trade journals; p. 16 2 S S packet Pg. 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 6.A.a (f) Publishing notice in agency newsletters or sending notice to agency mailing lists, either general lists or lists for specific m proposals or subject areas; and = (g) Mailing to neighboring property owners. _ M (5) A notice of application shall not be required for project 0 N permits that are categorically exempt under chapter 43.21C RCW, LO M unless an open record predecision hearing is required or an open a record appeal hearing is allowed on the project permit decision. (6) A local government shall integrate the permit procedures in N m this section with ((ems)) environmental review under chapter 43.21C a RCW as follows: L (a) Except for a threshold determination and except as otherwise a expressly allowed in this section, the local government may not issue a decision or a recommendation on a project permit until the = M expiration of the public comment period on the notice of application. r, (b) If an open record predecision hearing is required, the local R a government shall issue its threshold determination at least fifteen 0 r days prior to the open record predecision hearing. w c (c) Comments shall be as specific as possible. as E (d) A local government is not required to provide for administrative appeals of its threshold determination. If provided, R an administrative appeal ((shall)) must be filed within fourteen days a� 0 after notice that the determination has been made and is appealable. c Except as otherwise expressly provided in this section, the appeal = hearing on a threshold determination ((eznensi gnifr anee sha 1M) L M must be consolidated with any open record hearing on the project permit. a (7) At the request of the applicant, a local government may combine any hearing on a project permit with any hearing that may be 0 held by another local, state, regional, federal, or other agency, if: N (a) The hearing is held within the geographic boundary of the in local government; and 0 N (b ) ( (The fie int he aLingeeire-ldwitl=rinthe tifftr " - - i . , m speeifieei in Rrr 6.�7$B90—eL= tl=te) ) The applicant agrees to the schedule in the event that additional time is needed in order to a Cn combine the hearings. All agencies of the state of Washington, r including municipal corporations and counties participating in a combined hearing, are hereby authorized to issue joint hearing notices and develop a joint format, select a mutually acceptable a hearing body or officer, and take such other actions as may be p . 17 2 S S packet Pg. 34 6.A.a I necessary to hold joint hearings consistent with each of their 2 respective statutory obligations. 3 (8) All state and local agencies shall cooperate to the fullest 4 extent possible with the local government in holding a joint hearing 5 if requested to do so, as long as: 6 (a) The agency is not expressly prohibited by statute from doing 7 so; 8 (b) Sufficient notice of the hearing is given to meet each of the 9 agencies' adopted notice requirements as set forth in statute, 10 ordinance, or rule; and 11 (c) The agency has received the necessary information about the 12 proposed project from the applicant to hold its hearing at the same 13 time as the local government hearing. 14 (9) A local government is not required to provide for 15 administrative appeals. If provided, an administrative appeal of the 16 project decision and of any environmental determination issued at the 17 same time as the project decision, shall be filed within fourteen 18 days after the notice of the decision or after other notice that the 19 decision has been made and is appealable. The local government shall 20 extend the appeal period for an additional seven days, if state or 21 local rules adopted pursuant to chapter 43.21C RCW allow public 22 comment on a determination of nonsignificance issued as part of the 23 appealable project permit decision. 24 (10) The applicant for a project permit is deemed to be a 25 participant in any comment period, open record hearing, or closed 26 record appeal. 27 (11) Each local government planning under RCW 36.70A.040 shall 28 adopt procedures for administrative interpretation of its development 29 regulations. 30 NEW SECTION. Sec. 11. The department of commerce shall develop 31 a template for counties and cities subject to the requirements in RCW 32 36.70B.080, which will be utilized for reporting data. 33 34 35 36 37 38 NEW SECTION. Sec. 12. The department of commerce shall develop N a plan to provide local governments with appropriately trained staff r to provide temporary support or hard to find expertise for timely a processing of residential housing permit applications. The plan shall include consideration of how local governments can be provided with a staff that have experience with providing substitute staff support or p . 18 2 S S packet Pg. 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6.A.a that possess expertise in permitting policies and regulations in the local government's geographic area or with jurisdictions of the local m government's size or population. The plan and a proposal for = implementation shall be presented to the legislature by December 1, 0 2023. Q NEW SECTION. Sec. 13. Section 7 of this act takes effect January 1, 2025. Passed by the Senate April 17, 2023. Passed by the House April 10, 2023. Approved by the Governor May 8, 2023. Filed in Office of Secretary of State May 10, 2023. --- END --- p. 19 2 S S packet Pg. 36 Attachment B 6.A.b GROWTH MANAGEMENT SERVICES LOCAL GOVERNMENT DIVISION SB 5290 (2023) - KEY REQUIREMENTS Local Project Review Update Background In 2023, Senate Bill 5290 updated portions of the Local Project Review Act, RCW 36.70B. The intent of the new update is to strengthen and improve project review and permitting for construction and land use project permits, with an emphasis on housing development. New Requirements for Local Project Review Included in these updates are a new series of requirements for local governments and the Department of Commerce. Key requirements are summarized, with effective dates, and provided in the following table. For further updates and requirements, local jurisdictions are encouraged to read Senate Bill 5290 and the new sections in RCW 36.70B. Commerce will publish a project review guide to serve as a resource to counties and cities planning under the GMA, with an expected publish date of June 30, 2025. A Local Project Review webpage will be available by March 1, 2024, to serve as a landing place for Commerce guidance, grant information and other tools to assist jurisdictions with project permit implementation. . ' Washington State of V409 co pI7 coerce We strengthen communities V3.1 6.A.b Local Jurisdiction Requirements Section 6 RCW 36.7013.070 Section 7(1)(a)-(k) RCW 36.7013.080 Section 7(1)(1) RCW 36.7013.080 Section 7(2) RCW 36.7013.080 Section 8(1) RCW 36.70B.160 Section 8(2) RCW 36.70B.160 Clarify determination of completeness procedural requirements — the determination must be based solely on the procedural requirements as outlined on the project permit application. Revise the existing 120-day time period for project review from the date an application is determined complete. The default time periods listed in the section apply automatically if the local government does not adopt an ordinance setting or changing the time periods. Refund 10-20% of permit fees if the new time periods described in section 7 are not met, unless they have adopted at least 3 measures per section 8. Also, allows a local government to only collect 80% of a permit fee upon application, and the remainder only if time periods are met. Modifies the existing annual performance report requirement for jurisdictions to include data on compliance with the new permit time periods. Applies to counties and cities subject to RCW 36.70A.215 and cities/towns greater than 20,000 population within those counties. Adopt some of 10 listed measures to expedite permit review by the next comprehensive plan update under certain circumstances. Adopt additional measures to expedite permit review if the local government had adopted at least 3 project review and code measures more than five years earlier, and the local government is not meeting the permit deadlines at least 50% of the time since its most recent comprehensive plan update. July 23, 2023 January 1, 2025 January 1, 2025 March 1, 2025 At the next comprehensive plan update after January 1, 2026. At the next comprehensive plan update after January 1, 2026. LOCAL PROJECT REVIEW UPDATE, JANUARY 2024 Packet Pg. 38 6.A.b Commerce Requirements Sections 2 and 3 Administer two grant programs - Grant 1: RCW 36.70B.240 consolidated permit review for acceleration of RCW 36.70B.241 residential building permits; Grant 2: for permitting systems updates from paper to digital platforms. Convene a digital permitting work group to report to the legislature and governor on the need for digital permitting systems for local governments; the Section 4 barriers to adoption of digital permitting systems; the costs/benefits of a statewide permitting software system; and budgetary, administrative, and legislative recommendations to establish a statewide system of digital permit review. Section 9 Provide technical assistance and guidance to local RCW 36.70B.245 governments regarding the structure of their application and permit fees. Section 11 Create a template and guidance for those local RCW 36.70B.250 governments required by section 7(2) to submit annual performance reports. Develop a plan to provide local governments with Section 12 temporary permit staff for residential housing permit applications. Report due to the legislature December 1, 2023. April 2024 Report to the legislature due by August 1, 2024. The permitting work group will continue to meet and work with Commerce until June 30, 2025. August 1, 2023 through June 30, 2025 March 2024 March 2024 December 1, 2023 LOCAL PROJECT REVIEW UPDATE, JANUARY 2024 Packet Pg. 39 6.A.c CERTIFICATION OF ENROLLMENT SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL 1105 Chapter 171, Laws of 2024 68th Legislature 2024 Regular Session NOTICE OF PUBLIC COMMENT PERIODS EFFECTIVE DATE: June 6, 2024 Passed by the House March 4, 2024 Yeas 97 Nays 0 LAURIE JINKINS Speaker of the House of Representatives Passed by the Senate February 28, 2024 Yeas 49 Nays 0 DENNY HECK President of the Senate Approved March 18, 2024 3:39 PM JAY INSLEE Governor of the State of Washington CERTIFICATE I, Bernard Dean, Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives of the State of Washington, do hereby certify that the attached is SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL 1105 as passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate on the dates hereon set forth. BERNARD DEAN Chief Clerk FILED March 19, 2024 Secretary of State State of Washington Packet Pg. 40 6.A.c SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL 1105 AS AMENDED BY THE SENATE Passed Legislature - 2024 Regular Session State of Washington 68th Legislature 2023 Regular Session By House State Government & Tribal Relations (originally sponsored by Representatives Kloba, Abbarno, and Thai) READ FIRST TIME 02/02/23. 1 AN ACT Relating to requiring public agencies to provide notice 2 for public comment that includes the first and last date and time by 3 which such public comment must be submitted; and adding a new section 4 to chapter 42.30 RCW. 5 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON: 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. A new section is added to chapter 42.30 RCW to read as follows: (1) A public agency that is required by state law to solicit public comment for a statutorily specified period of time, and is required by state law to provide notice that it is soliciting public comment, must specify the first and last date and time by which written public comment may be submitted. (2) An agency that provides a notice that violates this section is subject to the same fines under the same procedures as other violations of this chapter are subject to under RCW 42.30.120. Passed by the House March 4, 2024. Passed by the Senate February 28, 2024. Approved by the Governor March 18, 2024. Filed in Office of Secretary of State March 19, 2024. --- END --- P. 1 SH packet Pg. 41 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update — SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 Chapter 20.01 TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PERMITS Sections: 20.01.000 Purpose and general provisions. 20.01.001 Types of actions. 20.01.002 Determination of proper procedure type. 20.01.003 Permit type and decision framework. 20.01.006 Legislative enactments not restricted. 20.01.007 Exempt projects. 20.01.000 Purpose and general provisions. A. The purpose of this chapter is to establish standard procedures, decision criteria, public notification, and timing for development project permit application decisions made by the city of Edmonds. These procedures are intended to: 1. Promote timely and informed public participation; 2. Eliminate redundancy in the application, permit review, and appeals processes; 3. Process permits equitably and expediently; 4. Balance the needs of permit applicants with neighbors; 5. Ensure that decisions are made consistently and predictably; and 6. Result in development that furthers city goals as set forth in the comprehensive plan. These procedures provide for an integrated and consolidated land use permit process. The procedures integrate the environmental review process with land use procedures, decisions, and consolidated appeal processes. B. The provisions of this title supersede all other procedural requirements that may exist in other sections of the city code. When interpreting and applying the standards of this title, its provisions shall be the minimum requirements. Where conflicts occur within provisions of this Packet Pg. 42 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 title and/or between this title and other city code provisions and regulations, the more restrictive provisions shall apply. Where conflict between the text of this title and the zoning map ensue, the text of this title shall prevail. C. Unless otherwise specified, all references to days shall be calendar days. Whenever the last day of a deadline falls on a Saturday, Sunday, legal holiday designated by RCW 1.16.050 or by a city ordinance, or any day when City Hall or the citys planning and development department is closed to the public by formal executive or legislative action, the deadline shall run until the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or holiday or closed day. [Ord. 4299 § 37 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord 4154 § 1 (Att. A), 2019; Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010]. 20.01.001 Types of actions. There are five main types of actions (or permits) that are reviewed under the provisions of this chapter. The types of actions are based on who makes the decision, the amount of discretion exercised by the decision -making body, the level of impact associated with the decision, the amount and type of public input sought, and the type of appeal opportunity. A. Administrative Decisions. Type I and II decisions are administrative decisions made by the planning and development director or his/her designee (hereinafter the "director"). Type I permits are ministerial decisions and are based on compliance with specific, nondiscretionary and/or technical standards that are clearly enumerated. Type II permits are administrative decisions where the director makes a decision based on standards and clearly identified criteria, but where public notice is required. Unless otherwise provided, appeals of Type II decisions shall be initiated as set forth in ECDC 20.06.030. B. Quasi-judicial Decisions. Type III, Type IV and appeal of Type II decisions are quasi-judicial decisions that involve the use of discretionary judgment in the review of each specific application. Quasi-judicial decisions are made by the hearing examiner, the architectural design board, and/or the city council. C. Legislative Decisions. Type V actions are legislative decisions made by the city council under its authority to establish policies and regulations regarding future private and public developments, and management of public lands. 1. Planning Board. The planning board shall hold a public hearing and make recommendations to the city council on Type V actions, except that the city council may Packet Pg. 43 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 hold a public hearing itself on area -wide rezones to implement city policies, or amendments to zoning code text, development regulations or the zoning map. The public hearing shall be held in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 20.06 ECDC, RCW 36.70A.035 and all other applicable law. 2. City Council. The city council may consider the planning board's recommendation in a public hearing held in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 20.06 ECDC and RCW 36.70A.035 and all other applicable law. If the city council desires to hold a public hearing on area -wide rezones to implement city policies, or amendments to zoning code text, development regulations or the zoning map, it may do so without forwarding the proposed decision to the planning board for a hearing. 3. Public Notice. Notice of the public hearing or public meeting shall be provided to the public as set forth in Chapter 20.03 ECDC. 4. Implementation. City council Type V decision shall be by ordinance or resolution and shall become effective on the effective date of the ordinance or resolution. [Ord. 4299 § 38 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 4154 § 1 (Att. A), 2019; Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010], 20.01.002 Determination of proper procedure type. A. Determination by Director. The director shall determine the proper procedure for all project applications. Questions concerning the appropriate procedure shall be resolved in favor of the higher numbered procedure. B. Optional Consolidated Permit Processing. An application that involves two or more procedures may be processed collectively under the highest numbered procedure required for any part of the application or may be processed individually under each of the application procedures identified in ECDC 20.01.003. The applicant may determine whether the application will be processed collectively or individually. If the applications are processed individually, the highest numbered type procedure shall be undertaken first, followed by the other procedures in sequence from the highest numbered to the lowest. When Type III -A and Type III-B permits are consolidated under this subsection, the project shall proceed under the Type III -A permit process. When two or more permits are consolidated under this subsection, the permit timelines for decisions on individual permits in ECDC 20.01.003.13; do not apply. C. Decisionmaker(s). Applications processed in accordance with subsection (B) of this section which have the same procedure number, but are assigned to different hearing bodies, shall be Commented [MCI]: Updated for consistency wit 5290 as codified in RCW 36.7013 (Local Project Revie Packet Pg. 44 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update —SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 heard collectively by the highest decisionmaker; the city council being the highest body, followed by the hearing examiner, architectural design board or planning board, as applicable, and then the director. joint public hearings with other agencies shall be processed according to ECDC 20.06.010. Concurrent public hearings held with the architectural design board and any other decisionmaker shall proceed with both decisionmakers present. [Ord. 4154 § 1 (Att. A), 2019; Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 20.01.003 Permit type and decision framework. A. Permit Types. TYPE I TYPE II -A TYPE II-B TYPE III -A TYPE III-B TYPE IV TYPE V Zoning Contingent Essential Site specific compliance critical area public rezone letter review facilities Lot line Formal Shoreline Technological Development Zoning text adjustment interpretation substantial impracticality agreements amendment; of the text of development waiver for area -wide the ECDC by the permit, amateur zoning map director where public radio amendments hearing not antennas required per ECDC 24.80.100 Critical area SEPA Critical area Comprehensive determinations determinations variance plan amendments Shoreline Preliminary Contingent Conditional Annexations exemptions short plat critical area use permits review if (where public public hearing by hearing Packet Pg. 45 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update —SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 TYPE I TYPE II -A TYPE II-B TYPE III -A TYPE III-B TYPE IV TYPE V hearing examiner is requested required) Minor Land Shoreline Variances Development amendments clearing/grading substantial regulations to planned development residential permit, where development public hearing is required per ECDC 24.80.100 Minor Revisions to Shoreline preliminary shoreline conditional plat management use amendment permits Staff design Administrative Shoreline review, variances variance including signs Final short plat Land use Design review permit (where public extension hearing by requests architectural design board is required) Sales Preliminary office/model formal plat (ECDC 17.70.005) Final formal Innocent Preliminary plats purchaser planned determination Packet Pg. 46 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update —SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 TYPE I TYPE II -A TYPE II-B TYPE III -A TYPE III-B TYPE IV TYPE V residential development Final planned Staff design residential review pursuant development to ECDC 20.12.010(B)(2) B. Decision Table. PROCEDURE FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PERMIT APPLICATIONS (TYPE LEGISLATIVE I - IV) TYPE III - TYPE I TYPE II -A TYPE II-B TYPE III -A TYPE IV TYPE V B Recommendation N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Planning board Planning board by: Final decision by: Director Director Director Hearing Hearing City council City council examiner/ADB examiner Notice of No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No application: Open record No Only if (1) If Yes, before Yes, Yes, before Yes, before planning public hearing or appealed, director hearing before planning board board which makes open record open decision examiner or hearing which makes recommendation to appeal of a final record is board to examiner recommendation council or council decision: hearing appealed, render final or board to council could hold its own before open decision to render hearing hearing record final examiner hearing decision before Packet Pg. 47 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 PROCEDURE FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PERMIT APPLICATIONS (TYPE LEGISLATIVE I - IV) TYPE III - TYPE I TYPE II -A TYPE II-B TYPE III -A TYPE IV TYPE V B hearing examiner (2) If converted to Type III -A process Closed record No No No No Yes, Yes, before the review: before council the council Permit review 65� 100 days 100 days 170 days 170 days 170 days Not applicable timelines (per ECDC 20.02):1 Judicial appeal: Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes C. Any reference to "Type II" in the Edmonds Community Development Code without expressly being modified as "Type II-B" shall be construed to mean Type II -A for the purposes of this section unless the context clearly suggests otherwise. [Ord. 4360 § 7 (Exh. A), 2024; Ord. 4302 § 2 (Att. A), 2023; Ord. 4299 § 39 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 4154 § 1 (Att. A), 2019; Ord. 4072 § 7 (Att. G), 2017; Ord. 4026 § 4, 2016; Ord. 3982 § 4, 2014; Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3806 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 20.01.006 Legislative enactments not restricted. Nothing in this chapter or the permit processing procedures shall limit the authority of the city council to make changes to the city's comprehensive plan or the city's development regulations Commented [MC2]: SB 5290 Packet Pg. 48 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 as part of the annual revision process. [Ord. 4154 § 1 (Att. A), 2019; Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 20.01.007 Exempt projects. A. The following projects are specifically excluded from the procedures set forth in this chapter: historic register designations, building permits, street vacations, street use permits, encroachment permits, and other public works permits issued under ECDC Title 18. B. Pursuant to RCW 36.70B.140(2), lot line or boundary adjustments, building and/or other construction permits, or similar administrative approvals categorically exempt from environmental review under SEPA (Chapter 43.21 C RCW and the city's SEPA/environmental policy ordinance, Chapter 20.15A ECDC), or permits/approvals for which environmental review has been completed in connection with other project permits, are excluded from the requirements of RCW 36.70B.060 and 36.70B.110 through 36.70B.130, which includes the following procedures: Notice of application (ECDC 20.03.002) unless an open record hearing is allowed on the permit decision; 2. Except as provided in RCW 36.70B.140, optional consolidated permit review processing (ECDC 20.01.002(B)); 3. Joint public hearings (ECDC 20.06.010); 4. Single report stating all of the decisions and recommendations made as of the date of the report that do not require an open public record hearing (ECDC 20.06.050(C)); and 5. Notice of decision (ECDC 20.02.007). [Ord. 4154 § 1 (Att. A), 2019; Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 20091. 8 Packet Pg. 49 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update — SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 Chapter 20.02 DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PERMIT APPLICATIONS Sections: 20.02.001 Optional preapplication conference. 20.02.002 Permit application requirements. 20.02.003 Suhm -and acceptance o a. plicationComplete and incomplete applications, requesting additional information. 20.02.004 Effect of irreconcilable applications on the same property. 20.02.005 Referral and review of development project permit applications. 20.02.006 Resubmission of application after denial. 20.02.007 Notice of final decision. 20.02.008 Permit review timelines. 20.02.001 Optional preapplication conference. A. Prior to filing applications for Type II actions requiring a preliminary plat and Type III and IV actions, applicants are encouraged to participate in a preapplication conference. Preapplication meetings with staff provide an opportunity to discuss the proposal in general terms, identify the applicable city requirements and the project review process including the permits required by the action, timing of the permits and the approval process. Plans presented at the preapplication meeting are nonbinding and do not "vest" an application. B. The conference shall be held within 28 days of the request, upon payment of applicable fee(s) as set forth in the city's adopted fee resolution. C. The planning and development director or his/her designee (hereinafter the "director") shall provide the applicant with the following during the conference: Commented [MC3]: 5B 5290 Packet Pg. 50 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update — SIB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 1. A form which lists the requirements for a completed application; 2. A general summary of the procedures to be used to process the application; 3. The references to the relevant code provisions or development standards which may apply to approval of the application; and 4. The city's design guidelines. D. Neither the discussions at the conference nor the information on the form provided by the director to the applicant under subsection u of this section shall bind the city in any manner or prevent the city's future application or enforcement of all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations. E. Requests for preapplication conferences for all other types of applications will be considered on a time -available basis by the director. [Ord. 4299 § 40 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 3817 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 20.02.002 Permit application requirements. An application shall consist of all materials required by the applicable development regulations and shall include the following general information: A. A completed land use application form; B. A verified statement by the applicant that the property affected by the application is in the exclusive ownership of the applicant, or that the applicant has submitted the application with the consent of all owners of the affected property; C. A property and/or legal description of the site for all applications, as required by the applicable development regulations; D. The applicable fee; and E. Cover letter describing how the proposal satisfies the applicable standards, requirements and criteria in the development regulations. [Ord. 3817 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 10 Packet Pg. 51 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update — SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 20.02.003 and acceptance of application Complete and incomplete applications, requesting additional information. A. Determination of Completeness. Within 28 days after receiving an application, the director must shall Mail ^r ^ers^^=iiy deliver to the applicant _ determination ^/h'cF,*=toc that o'thor• provide a written determination t0 the applicant stating that:. The o.fr1ttPn dpt rm4n;;t'^^ ^ -,; tate ejther• 1. The application is complete; or 2. The application is incomplete and -because that -the procedural submission requirements have not been met. The determination sha4-G u*i ^emust specifically describe what information is needed %^/hat is ^oco«=ry to make the application complete. When an application is determined to be complete, the director shall note the date of acceptance for continued processing. B. Identification of Other Agencies with Jurisdiction. To the extent known by the city, other agencies with jurisdiction over the project shall be identified in the determination of completeness. C. Failure to Provide Determination of Completeness. An application is deemed procedurally complete on the 29th day after receiving a project permit application under this section if the director does not provide a written determination to the applicant that the application is incomplete as provided in subsection (A)(2) of this section. D. Incomplete Applications. 11 Commented [MC4]: Updated for consistency wit 5290 and RCW 36.70B.080. Some existing language reorganized for clarity d 3 c M m r �a a 3 O N c d C d E R m O 0 c 0 c m t 3 a Packet Pg. 52 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 1. Whenever the applicant receives a determination from the city pursuant to subsection (AM of this section that the application is incomplete, the applicant shall have 90 days to submit the rlecessary-requested information. If circumstances warrant, the applicant may apply in writing to the director requesting a one-time 90-day extension. The extension reauest must be received by the citv prior to the end of the initial 90-dav period W'th'n 1 n 2. Within 14 days after an applicant has submitted the requested additional information, the director shall make a determination of completeness and notify the applicant in the manner provided in subsection (A) of this section Whenever the applicant receives a nptice that the coptents of the application, ..which had been previously dpterm'npd nder Qr nthenewise of the inform atinn being sow fight the applicant shall have QQ days to submit the ReGeSSary information. If riro--rA4@ncLQs; viarrant, the applicant ma apply in writing to the director requesting a one_time 90-day extension The e.rtens'n request must he received by the city prierd. to the enof the initial 90 day compliance A. 3. If the applicant does not submit the additional information requested within the 90-day period (or within the 90-day extension period, as applicable), the director shall make findings and issue a decision, according to the Type I procedure, that the application has lapsed for lack of information necessary to complete the review. The decision shall state that no further action will be taken on the application. 4. When the director determines that an application has lapsed because the applicant has failed to submit required information within the necessary time period, the applicant may request a refund of the application fee remaining after the city s determination of completeness. E. Requesting Additional Information. The determination of completeness does not preclude the director's ability to request additional information or ask for corrections to submitted materials whenever additional or updated information is required, or when substantial changes are made to the proposed rp oject. 12 Packet Pg. 53 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 1. Whenever the applicant receives a notice that the contents of the application, which had been previously determined to be complete under subsection (A)(1) of this section, is insufficient, ambiguous, undecipherable, or otherwise unresponsive of the information being sought, the applicant shall have 90 days to submit the requested information. If circumstances warrant, the applicant may apply in writing to the director requesting a one- time 90-day extension. The extension request must be received by the city prior to the end of the initial 90-day period. 2. If the applicant does not submit the additional information requested within the 90-day period (or within the 90-day extension period, as applicable), the director shall make findings and issue a decision, according to the Type I procedure, that the application has lapsed for lack of information necessary to complete the review. The decision shall state that no further action will be taken on the application. 3. When the director determines that an application has lapsed because the applicant has failed to submit required information within the necessary time period, the applicant may request a refund of the application fee remaining after the citys determination of completeness. r .61 GF. City Must Review, Applicant may Suspend Review. After the application is determined to be complete or additional materials are accepted following a request for additional information, ceptaRGethe city shall begin or resume processing the application. I n.GIPr r,^ shall the city place aRY application on "hold" to be processed at serne later date, even if the request for the "hold-." is; m.-ade by the applicant, and regardless of the requested length of the "heldiRg" ^^ri^rl This si h-sects^^ deeS n^t apply W a^pkatiGRS placed ^^ "held, U4944 13 Packet Pg. 54 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update — SIB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 (Ord. 4299 § 41 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 3817 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. However, if, at any time, an applicant informs the city, in writing, that the applicant would like to temporarily suspend the review of the project for more than 60 days, or if an applicant is not responsive for more than 60 consecutive days after the city has notified the applicant, in writing, that additional information is required to further process the application, an additional 30 days may be added to the time periods for city action to issue a final decision for the permit. 4D Any written notice from the city to the applicant that additional information is required to further process the application must include a notice that non responsiveness for 60 consecutive days may result in 30 days being added to the time for review. For the purposes of this subsection, "non responsiveness" means that an applicant is not making demonstrable progress on providing additional requested information to the city, or that there is no ongoing communication from the applicant to the city on the applicant's ability or willingness to provide the additional information. 20.02.004 Effect of irreconcilable applications on the same property. A. If an applicant submits an application that cannot be reconciled with a previously submitted application on the same property, the previously submitted application shall be deemed withdrawn by the applicant and it shall be rendered null and void. The director shall notify the applicant that the previously submitted application has been deemed withdrawn and will not be processed any further. Withdrawal shall be deemed to occur even when the city has finished processing the previously submitted application. B. Many inconsistencies between applications can be reconciled through corrections that are made during the development review process. This section is not intended to treat all inconsistencies as effecting a withdrawal of the earlier application. 14 Packet Pg. 55 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update — SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 C. Without limiting the generality of subsection (A) of this section, the following examples are intended to illustrate whether a subsequent application shall be deemed irreconcilable with an earlier application: 1. Examples of Irreconcilable Applications That Result in Withdrawal. a. Applicant submits an application for a four -lot short plat on a particular property. Subsequently, another application is submitted for a three -lot short plat on the same property. Assuming there is not enough land area for seven lots, the two applications are irreconcilable because one could not construct both short plats. Hence, the four -lot short plat is deemed withdrawn. b. Applicant submits a design review application for a 20-unit multifamily housing development. Subsequently, another design review application is submitted for a 30- unit multifamily housing development whose footprint would substantially overlap with the footprint of the structure shown for the 20-unit application. Because both structures would occupy substantially the same space they are irreconcilable and the 20-unit application would be deemed withdrawn. 2. Examples of Applications That May Be Inconsistent but Are Not Irreconcilable Resulting in Withdrawal. a. Applicant submits an application for a four -lot short plat on a particular property. Subsequently, a building permit application is submitted for a single-family home the footprint of which would encroach into the setbacks as measured from the proposed short plat lot lines. Because the building permit application could be corrected to properly locate the footprint, the applications are reconcilable and do not effect a withdrawal of the short plat application. b. Applicant submits a landscaping plan that is inconsistent in an insignificant way with civil site -improvement plans that are submitted for the same property. If the two sets of plans can be reconciled by submitting a corrected version of at least one of the two plans, then city staff would seek corrections and withdrawal would not be deemed to occur. [Ord. 4006 § 1, 2015]. 15 Packet Pg. 56 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update — SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 20.02.005 Referral and review of development project permit applications. Within 10 days of accepting an application, the director shall transmit a copy of the application, or appropriate parts of the application, to each affected government agency and city department for review and comment, including those responsible for determining compliance with state and federal requirements. [Ord. 3817 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 20.02.006 Resubmission of application after denial. Any permit application or other request for approval submitted pursuant to this title that is denied shall not be resubmitted or accepted by the director for review for a period of 12 months from the date of the last action by the city on the application or request unless, in the opinion of the director, there has been a significant change in the application or a significant change in conditions related to the impacts of the proposed project. [Ord. 4006 § 2, 2015; Ord. 3817 § 6, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009. Formerly 20.07.0071. 20.02.007 Notice of final decision. A. The director shall must issue a notice of final decision within days and a fiRal short plat 30 daysthe timelines found in the Decision Table in ECDC 20.01.003.B. The notice shall include the SEPA threshold determination for the proposal and a description of any available administrative appeals. For Type II, III and IV permits, the notice shall contain the requirements set forth in ECDC 20.06.060(C) and explain that affected property owners may request a change in property tax valuation notwithstanding any program of revaluation. B.I—The notice of final decision shall be mailed or otherwise delivered to the applicant, and to any person who submitted comments on the application or requested a copy of the decision, and to the Snohomish County assessor. 16 Packet Pg. 57 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 17 Packet Pg. 58 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 20.02.008 Permit review timelines. A. Required Timelines. Permit review timelines are in the Decision Table in ECDC 20.01.003.B. The time periods for the city to process a permit start over if an applicant proposes a change in use that adds or removes commercial or residential elements from the original application that new use. B. Calculation of Days. 1 The number of days an application is in review with the city is calculated from the day completeness is determined to the date a final decision is issued on the permit application, consistent with ECDC 20.02.007. The number of days is calculated by counting every calendar day and excluding the following time period: 1. Any period between the day that the city has notified the applicant, in writing. that additional information is required to further process the application and the day when responsive information is resubmitted by the applicant; 2. Any period after an applicant informs the city, in writing, that they would like to temporarily suspend review of the permit application until the time that the applicant notifies the city, in writing, that they would like to resume the application. The city may set conditions for the temporary suspension of a permit application: and 3. Any period after an administrative appeal is filed until the administrative appeal is resolved and any additional time period provided by the administrative appeal has expired. C. Permit Application Fee Refunds. 1. When the permit review time periods provided in ECDC 20.01.003.B are not met, a portion of the permit application fee must be refunded to the applicant, unless the city has implemented at least three of the permit review streamlining options in RCW 36.70B.160(1) (a) through (i) at the time an application is deemed procedurally complete. The portion of the fee refunded for missing time periods is: 18 Packet Pg. 59 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update - SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 a. 10 percent: if the final decision of the project permit application was made after the applicable deadline but the period from the passage of the deadline to the time of issuance of the final decision did not exceed 20 percent of the original time period: or b. 20 percent: if the period from the passage of the deadline to the time of the issuance of the final decision exceeded 20 percent of the original time period. D. Annual Performance Report. Consistent with RCW 36.7013.080, the City must prepare an annual project permit performance report. Chapter 20.03 PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS Sections: 20.03.002 Notice of application. 20.03.003 Notice of public hearing. 20.03.004 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) notice. 20.03.005 Shoreline master program (SMP) notice. 20.03.006 Optional public notice. 20.03.002 Notice of application. A. Generally. A notice of application shall be provided by the director to the public, all city departments and agencies with jurisdiction of all Type II, III and IV development project permit applications in accordance with this chapter. The notice of application for these permits shall also be provided to the public by posting, publishing and mailing. B. Issuance of Notice of Application. 1. A notice of application shall be issued within 14 days after the city has made a determination of completeness pursuant to ECDC 20.02.003. 2. If any open record predecision hearing is required for the requested development project permit(s), the notice of application shall be provided at least 15 days prior to the open record hearing. 19 N c d E C d E Q d O U 0 0 Commented [MCS]: Update for consistency with 05 public comment dates/times m 2 06 0 rn N 0 m t 3 O L t d Y •L rn O c d H u_ Q i� C d E t V �4 r r.+ Q Packet Pg. 60 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 C. Contents. The notice of application shall include the following information in a format determined by the director: 1. The date of submission of the initial application, the date of the notice of completion and acceptance of the application, and the date of the notice of application; 2. A description of the proposed project and a list of the development project permits requested in the application and, if applicable, a list of any studies requested under Chapter 36.70E RCW; 3. A description of other required permits not included in the application, to the extent known by the city at that time; 4. A description of existing environmental documents that evaluate the proposed project, and, if not otherwise stated on the document providing notice of application, the location where the application and any studies can be reviewed; 5. A statement setting forth: (a) the time for the public comment period, which shall be not less than 14 days following the date of notice of application; (b) the right of any person to comment on the application, receive notice of and participate in any hearings, and request a copy of the decision on the application; and (c) any appeal rights; 6. The date, time, place and type of hearing, if a hearing has been scheduled when the date of notice of application is issued. For Type II-B processes, the notice shall provide information regarding the process for requesting a public hearing in accordance with the applicable Type II-B permit application; 7. Any other information determined appropriate by the director such as the director's threshold determination, if complete at the time of issuance of the notice of application. D. Mailed Notice. Notice of application shall be mailed to: 1. The owners of the property involved if different from applicant; and 2. The owners of real property within 300 feet of the boundaries of the property(ies) involved in the application (the distance is extended to 500 feet for Type II -A design review applications in the general commercial zone). Addresses for a mailed notice required by this code shall be obtained from the applicable county's real property tax records. The 20 Packet Pg. 61 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update — SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 adjacent property owners list must be current to within six months of the date of initial application. 3. Type 111 Preliminary Plat Actions. In addition to the above, requirements for mailed notice of filing for preliminary plats and proposed subdivisions shall also include the following: a. Notice of the filing of a preliminary plat adjacent to or within one mile of the municipal boundaries of any city or town, or which contemplates the use of any city or town utilities, shall be given to the appropriate city or town authorities; b. Notice of the filing of a preliminary plat of a proposed subdivision adjoining the boundaries of Snohomish County shall be given to the appropriate county officials; c. Notice of the filing of a preliminary plat of a proposed subdivision located adjacent to the right-of-way of a state highway shall be given to the Secretary of Transportation; 4. For a plat alteration or a plat vacation, notice shall be as provided in RCW 58.17.080 and 58.17.090. All mailed public notices shall be deemed to have been received on the next business day following the day that the notice is deposited in the mail. E. Published Notice. Notice of application shall be published in the city's official newspaper (The Everett Herald, as identified in Chapter 1.03 ECC). The format shall be determined by the director and the notice must contain the information listed in subsection (C) of this section. F. Posting. Posting of the property for site specific proposals shall consist of one or more notice boards as follows: 1. A single notice board shall be placed: a. At the midpoint of the street fronting the site or as otherwise directed by the director for maximum visibility; b. Five feet inside the street property line, except when the board is structurally attached to an existing building; provided, that no notice board shall be placed more than five feet from the street without approval of the director; c. So that the bottom of the notice board is between two and four feet above grade; and 21 Packet Pg. 62 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update — SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 d. Where it is completely visible to pedestrians. e. The size of the notice board shall be determined by the director. 2. Additional notice boards may be required when: a. The site does not abut a public road; b. A large site abuts more than one public road; or c. The director determines that additional notice boards are necessary to provide adequate public notice. 3. Notice boards shall be: a. Maintained in good condition during the notice period; b. In place at least 14 days prior to the date of any hearing, and at least 14 days prior to the end of any required comment period; c. Removed within 30 days of the date of the project decision, unless the decision is appealed. If the project decision is appealed, the sign must be removed 30 days after the appeal decision is issued. 4. Removal of the notice board prior to the end of the notice period shall be cause for discontinuance of the department review until the notice board is replaced and remains in place for the specified time period. G. PifbUr- Gom,,o„+ when to comment on the Notice of Application. All public comments in response to the notice of application must be received by the city's planning and development department between the day the notice is issued and 11:59 p.m. by - . Ton the last day of the comment period. Comments in response to the notice of application received after the comment period has expired will not be accepted no matter when they were mailed or postmarked. Comments shall be mailed, emailed or personally delivered. Comments should be as specific as possible. [Ord. 4302 § 3 (Att. A), 2023; Ord. 4299 § 42 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 4026 § 5, 2016; Ord. 4021 § 1, 2016; Ord. 3817 § 3, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 22 Packet Pg. 63 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update — SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 20.03.003 Notice of public hearing. A. A notice of public hearing shall be provided by the city for Type III or Type IV actions, as well as appeals of Type II actions, by mailing, posting and publishing. B. Content of Notice of Public Hearing forAll Applications. The notice of a public hearing required by this chapter shall contain: 1. The name and address of the applicant and the applicant's representative; 2. A description of the subject property reasonably sufficient to inform the public of its location, including but not limited to a vicinity location or written description, a map or postal address, and a subdivision lot and block designation (complete legal description not required); 3. The date, time and place of the hearing; 4. The nature of the proposed use or development; S. A statement that all interested persons may appear and provide testimony; 6. The sections of the code that are pertinent to the hearing procedure; 7. A statement explaining when information may be examined, and when and how written comments addressing findings required for a decision by the hearing body may be admitted; 8. The name of a city representative to contact and the telephone number where additional information may be obtained; 9. A statement that a copy of the application, all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant, and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and that copies will be provided at the requestor's cost; and 10. A statement explaining that a copy of the staff report will be available for inspection at no cost at least seven days prior to the hearing and that copies will be provided at the requestor's cost. C. Mailed Notice. Mailed notice of the public hearing shall be provided as follows: 23 Commented [MC6]: Update for consistency with public comment dates/times d 3 C M Packet Pg. 64 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update — SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 1. The notice of the public hearing shall be mailed to: a. The applicant; b. The owner of the subject property, if different from applicant; c. All owners of real property, as shown by the records of the county assessor, within 300 feet of the boundaries of the property(ies) involved in the application; and d. Any person who submits public comments on an application; 2. Type 111 Preliminary Plat Actions. In addition to the above, requirements for mailed notice of public hearing for preliminary plats and proposed subdivisions shall also include the following: a. If the owner of the real property which is proposed to be subdivided owns another parcel or parcels of real property which lie adjacent to the real property proposed to be subdivided, notice under RCW 58.17.090(1)(b) shall be given to owners of real property located with 300 feet from any portion of the boundaries of the adjacent parcels owned by the owner of the real property to be subdivided. 3. For a plat alteration or a plat vacation, notice shall be as provided in RCW 58.17.080 and 58.17.090. 4. Procedure for Mailed Notice of Public Hearing. a. The records of the Snohomish County assessor's office shall be used for determining the property owner of record. Addresses for a mailed notice required by this code shall be obtained from the applicable county's real property tax records. b. All mailed public notices shall be deemed to have been received on the next business day following the day that the notice is deposited in the mail. D. Procedure for Posted or Published Notice of Public Hearing. 1. Posted notice of the public hearing shall comply with requirements set forth in ECDC 20.03.002(F). 24 Packet Pg. 65 6.A.d d 3 c M m to DRAFT CODE Update — SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 Q 3 O 2. Notice of public hearing shall be published in the city's official newspaper (The Everett c Herald, as identified in Chapter 1.03 ECC). The format shall be determined by the director E and the notice must contain the information listed in subsection LB) of this section. m E. Time of Notice of Public Hearing. Notice shall be mailed, posted and first published not less E than 14 or more than 30 days prior to the hearing date. [Ord. 3817 § 3, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009. Formerly 20.03.004]. V C F. When to Comment on the Notice of Public Hearing. All public comments in response to the O notice of public hearing must be received by the citys planning and development department L between the day the notice is issued and the close of the public hearing co ) t� 20.03.004 State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) notice. commented [Mc7]: Update for consistency with os public comment dates/times 3 a A. Whenever possible, the city shall integrate the public notice required under this subsection N with existing notice procedures for the city's nonexempt permit(s) or approval(s) required for > the proposal. c � B. Whenever the city issues a determination of nonsignificance (DNS) under WAC 197-11- 340(2) or a determination of significance (DS) under WAC 197-11-360(3) the city shall give public notice as follows: 1. If public notice is required for a nonexempt license, the notice shall state whether a IDS or DNS has been issued and when comments are due. 2. If an environmental document is issued concurrently with the notice of application, the public notice requirements for the notice of application in RCW 36.70B.110(4) will suffice to meet the SEPA public notice requirements in WAC 197-11-5100 ). 3. If no public notice is otherwise required for the permit or approval, the city shall give notice of the DNS or IDS by: a. Posting the property, for site specific proposals; b. Mailed to real property owners as shown by the records of the county assessor within 300 feet of the boundary of the property, for site specific proposals; and c. Publishing notice in the city's official newspaper (or if one has not been designated, in a newspaper of general circulation within the city). 25 Packet Pg. 66 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update — SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 4. Whenever the city issues a IDS under WAC 197-11-360(3), the city shall state the scoping procedure for the proposal in the IDS as required in WAC 197-11-408 and in the public notice. C. If a DNS is issued using the optional DNS process, the public notice requirements for a notice of application in RCW 36.70B.110(4) as supplemented by the requirements in WAC 197- 11-355 will suffice to meet the SEPA public notice requirements in WAC 197-11-51000). D. Whenever the city issues a draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) under WAC 197-11- 455(5) or a supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) under WAC 197-11-620, notice of the availability of those documents shall be given by: 1. Indicating the availability of the DEIS in any public notice required for a nonexempt license; 2. Posting the property, for site specific proposals; 3. Mailed to real property owners as shown by the records of the county assessor within 300 feet of the boundary of the property, for site specific proposals; and 4. Publishing notice in the city's official newspaper (or if one has not been designated, in a newspaper of general circulation within the city). E. Public notice for projects that qualify as planned actions shall be tied to underlying permit; the notice shall state that the project has qualified as a planned action. If notice is not otherwise required for the underlying permit, no special notice is required. F. The city may require an applicant to complete the public notice requirements for the applicant's proposal at his or her expense. [Ord. 3818 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3817 § 3, 2010]. 20.03.005 Shoreline master program (SMP) notice. A. Methods of Providing SMP Notice. Notice of the application of a permit under the purview of the citys shoreline master program shall be given by one or more of the following methods: 1. Mailing of the notice to real property owners as shown by the records of the county assessor within 300 feet of the boundary of the property upon which the proposed project is to be built; 26 Commented [MC8]: Update for consistency with public comment dates/times Packet Pg. 67 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update — SIB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 2. Posting of the notice in a conspicuous manner, as determined by the director, on the property upon which the project is to be constructed; or 3. Any other manner deemed appropriate by the director to accomplish the objectives of reasonable notice to adjacent landowners and the public. B. Content of SMP Notice. SMP notices shall include: 1. A statement that any person desiring to submit written comments concerning an application, or desiring to receive notification of the final decision concerning an application, may submit comments, or requests for the decision, to the director within 30 days of the last date that notice is published pursuant to this subsection; 2. A statement that any person may submit oral or written comments at the hearing; 3. An explanation of the manner in which the public may obtain a copy of the city's decision on the application no later than two days after its issuance. C. When to Comment on on SMP Notice.P601ir Comment .pe•ioo. The public comment period shall be 30 days from the date of issuance of the notice until 11:59 p.m. on the final day of the notice period or until the close of any required public hearing. D. The director shall mail or otherwise deliver a copy of the decision to each person who submits comments or a written request for the decision. [Ord. 3817 § 3, 2010]. 20.03.006 Optional public notice. The director, in his or her sole discretion, may: A. Notify the public or private groups with known interest in a proposal or type of proposal; B. Notify the news media; C. Place notices in appropriate regional or neighborhood newspapers or trade journals; D. Publish notice in agency newsletters or send notice to agency mailing lists, either general lists or lists for specific proposals or subject areas; and 27 Packet Pg. 68 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update — SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 E. Mail notice to additional neighboring property owners. [Ord. 3817 § 3, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009. Formerly 20.03.003]. Chapter 20.12 DISTRICT -BASED DESIGN REVIEW 20.12.005 Outline of process and statement of intent. The architectural design board (ADB) process has been developed in order to provide for public and design professional input prior to the expense incurred by a developer in preparation of detailed design. In combination, Chapter 20.10 ECDC and this chapter are intended to permit public and ADB input at an early point in the process while providing greater assurance to a developer that his general project design has been approved before the final significant expense of detailed project design is incurred. In general, the process is as follows: A. Public Hearing (Phase 1). The applicant shall submit a preliminary conceptual design to the city. Staff shall schedule the first phase of the ADB hearing within 30 days of staffs determination that the application is complete. Upon receipt, staff shall provide full notice of a public hearing, noting that the public hearing shall be conducted in two phases. The entire single public hearing on the conceptual design shall be on the record. At the initial phase, the applicant shall present facts which describe in detail the tract of land to be developed noting all significant characteristics. The ADB shall make factual findings regarding the particular characteristics of the property and shall prioritize the design guideline checklist based upon these facts, the provisions of the city's design guideline elements of the comprehensive plan and the Edmonds Community Development Code. Following establishment of the design guideline checklist, the public hearing shall be continued to a date certain requested by the applicant, not to exceed 120 days from the meeting date. The " l70�day city review period required by RCW 36.7013.080 commences with the application for Phase 1 of the public hearing. The 12day170-day time period is suspended, however, while the applicant further develops their application for Phase 2 of the public hearing. This suspension is based upon the finding of the city council, pursuant to RCW 36.7013.080, that additional time is required to process this project type. The city has no control over the length of time needed or taken by an applicant to complete its application. 28 Packet Pg. 69 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 B. Continued Public Hearing (Public Hearing, Phase 2). The purpose of the continuance is to permit the applicant to design or redesign his initial conceptual design to address the input of the public and the ADB by complying with the prioritized design guideline checklist criteria. When the applicant has completed his design or redesign, he shall submit that design for final review. The matter shall be set for the next available regular ADB meeting date. If the applicant fails to submit his or her design within 180 days, the staff shall report the matter to the ADB who shall note that the applicant has failed to comply with the requirements of the code and find that the original design checklist criteria approval is void. The applicant may reapply at any time. Such reapplication shall establish a new 120 day-170-day review period and establish a new vesting date. C. After completing the hearing process, the final detailed design shall be presented to the city in conjunction with the applicable building permit application. The city staffs decision on the building permit shall be a ministerial act applying the specific conditions or requirements set forth in the ADB's approval, but only those requirements. A staff decision on the building permit shall be final and appealable only as provided in the Land Use Petition Act. No other internal appeal of the staffs ministerial decisions on the building permit is allowed. [Ord. 4302 § a (Att. A), 2023; Ord. 3636 § 3, 2007]. Chapter 20.75 SUBDIVISIONS 20.75.065 Preliminary review. A. Responsibility for Review. The planning and development director, or a designated planning staff member, is in charge of administering the preliminary review of all subdivisions. The public works director and the fire department, and other departments if needed, shall participate in preliminary review by appropriate recommendations on subjects within their respective areas of expertise. B. Repealed by Ord. 4314. Repealed, C. Time Limitsfor Staff Review, -Staff reviev.f shall be completed within 120 days frorn the date of f ng-. 29 Commented [MC9]: Repeal. Duplicative of the uF permit decision table in ECDC 20.01.003.E Packet Pg. 70 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update —5B 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 DC. Formal Subdivision Review. The hearing examiner shall review a formal subdivision as a Type 111-A decision in accordance with provisions of Chapter 20.06 ECDC. €D. Short Subdivisions -Staff Review. The director of planning and development shall review a short subdivision as a Type II decision (Staff decision - Notice required). €E. Appeal of Staff Decision. Any person may appeal to the hearing examiner a Type II decision of the planning and development director on a short subdivision under the procedure set forth In Chapter 20.06 ECDC. [Ord. 4314 § 85 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 4299 § 57 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 4154 § 4 (Att. C), 2019; Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017; Ord. 3817 § 12, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 65, 2009; Ord. 3211 §§ 4, 5, 1998; Ord. 3112 §§ 17, 18, 19, 1996; Ord. 2379 § 2, 1983]. 20.75.070 Formal subdivision - Time limit. The city shall make its final decision on a proposed formal subdivision within one date of f "^g the timelines found in the Decision Table in ECDC 20.01.003.13 , unless the applicant agrees to extend the time. [Ord. 4154 § 4 (Att. Q, 2019; Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017]. Title 21 DEFINITIONS 21.80.095 Project permit or project permit application. Project permit or project permit application for purposes of the ECDC means any land use or environmental permit or license required by the ECDC for a project action, including but not limited to building permits subdivisions, binding site plans, planned unit developments, conditional uses, shoreline substantial development permits, site plan review, permits or approvals required by critical areas ordinances, site -specific rezones awtherized byz rehensive ^'_^ or s, ib =re= ^'_ ,which do not require a comprehensive plan amendment, but excluding the adoption or amendment of a comprehensive plan, subarea 30 Commented [MCI 0]: Repeal. Duplicative of the t permit decision table in ECDC 20.01.003.E Commented [MC11]: Updated for consistency w 5290 Packet Pg. 71 6.A.d DRAFT CODE Update — SB 5290 & HB 1105 v.2 plan, or development regulations except as otherwise specifically included in this subsection. [Ord. 3112 § 36, 1996]. 31 Packet Pg. 72 10.A Planning Board Agenda Item Meeting Date: 08/28/2024 Extended Agenda Staff Lead: Michael Clugston Department: Planning Division Prepared By: Michael Clugston Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Discuss the attached extended agenda. Narrative N/A Attachments: August 28 Extended Agenda Packet Pg. 73 10.A.a Planning Board Extended Agenda - August 28, 2024 Comprehensive Plan Joint Discussion w/EDC Final Review Draft Alternatives Housing Policy Discussion Transportation Draft DEIS Impacts and Preliminary Mitigations Environment and Community Design Waterfront Vision Draft EIS Comments Summary FEIS/Preferred Plan Framework Preferred Plan Recommendation Code Updates Critical Aquifer Recharge Tree Code Update Detached Accessory Dwelling Units (HB 1337 - mid 2025) Green Building Incentives Climate Legislative : Land use permit timelines (SB 5290 - end r HousingMiddle Design standards and processes (HB 1293 - mid 2025), including design standards Tree Canopy Policy Administrative Site specific rezone request Election of Officers Planning & Developmentmultfamily Annual Retreat CouncilPlanning Board report to City Parks, Recreation & Human Services Report Future Items I -Introduction & Discussion Neighborhood Center/Hub Plans PH- Public Hearing Code Modernization Projects: D/R- Discussion/Recommendation 1. Unified Development Code (late 2025 - 2026) B- Briefing/Q&A Comp Plan Implementation R- Report with no briefing/presentation Highway 99 Community Renewal Program Regular meeting cancelled September 11, 2024 is a special meeting at 6PM December 16, 2024 is a special meeting January 28, 2025 is a presentation to Council Packet Pg. 74