HomeMy WebLinkAboutITEM V-A
CitY OF ~
WA$HINGTOhT AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FOFtM
Agenda Subject Date:
Title 17 (Subdivision) Amendments for Compliance to Substitute Senate May 27, 2010
Bill 6544..
Department: Planning & Attachments: Refer to Exhibit List Budget Impact: N/A
Develo ment on Pa e 2 of 9
' Administrative Recommendation: Planning Commission recommends to City Council approval of
amendments'to Title 17 (Subdivision) for.compliance to Substitute Senate Bill 6544
Background Summary:
The Washington State Legislature passed $ubstitute Senafe Bill 6544 in Februa.ry 2010 . thaf was
approved by Govemor Gregoire on March 17, 2010 and is effect'ive on June 10, 2010. Substitufe S.enate Bill 6544 extendS the pteliminary plat approval' specified in RC1IN 58.17.140 frorn fve (5) to seven (7)
years and the final plat validity period specified in RCW 58.17.170 from five (5) to seven (7) years).
Substitute Senate Bill 6544 specifies that these extensions shall be in effect through December 31, 2014.,
Chapters 17.09 , (Short Subdivisions), Chapter 17.10 (Preliminary Subdivisions) and Cha,pter 17.12 (Final
Subdivisions) of the Auburn City Code contain applicable provisions that are affected by Substitute
Senate Bill 6544.. For compliance to Substitute Senate Bill 6544, the City stiould amend these chapters. .
The extensions specified in Substitute Senate Bill 6544 are not retroactive, but would only apply to
subdivisions and short subdivisions filed after the effect date of the Bill.
The effective date of Substitute Senate. Bill 6544 is June 10, 2010. The City Attorney's Office has advised
that #he City is required to begin applying these extensions on this date even if the code amendments
contained herein have not been adopted by the Auburn City Council.
Reviswed by Council & Committees: Rediewed by Departments & Divisions:
❑ Arts Commission COUNCIL COMMITTEES: ❑ Building ❑ M&O
❑ Airport ❑ Finance ❑ Cemetery ❑ Mayor
❑ Hearing Examiner ❑ Municipal Services ❑ Finance ❑ Parks
❑ Human Services ❑ Planning & CD p Fire Z Planning
❑ Park Board ❑ Public Works Z Legal ❑ Police
❑ Planning Comm. ❑ Other ❑ Public Works ❑ Human Resources
Action:
Committee ApprovaL• ❑Yes ❑No
Council Approval: F]Yes ❑No Call for Public Hearing
Referred to Until
Tabled Until
Councilmember. Staff: Sn der
Meetin Date: June 8, 2010 Item Number:
EXHIBIT 1: Staff Report for Amendmen..ts to Title 17 (Land Adjustrnents and Divisions) for - ,
Compliance to Substitute Senate Bill 6544)
A. EXHIBIT LIST
Exhibit 1: Staff Report
Exhibit 2: Proposed Amendments to Titles 17 (Land Adjustments and Divisions)
Exhibit 3: Substitute Senate Bill 6544 Exhibit 4: Request to Publish Notice of Public Hearing
Exhibit 5: Affidavit of Publication for Notice of Public Hearing
Exhibit 6: Affidavif of Publication fot Notice of Determination of Non-Significance (DNS)
Exhibit 7: Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for SEP10-0011
Exhibit 8: SEPA Environmental Checklistfor SEP10-011
Exhibit 9: May 19, 2010 Receipt and Acknowledgmenf Letter from the Washington
State Department of Community Trade and Economic Development
B. RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT
City of Aubum Planning and Development Department, Kevin Snyder, AICP, Interim Director
C. RESPONSIBLE STAFF Kevin Snyder, AICP, Interim Director, City of Aubum Planning and Development Department
D. AREA OF IMPACT
Citywide ,
E. PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING DATE
June 8, 2010
F. CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE COiVSIDERATION DATE
Currently scheduled for June 21, 2010
G. FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The City of Aubum is a Mayor/Council form of govemment subject to the provisions of
RCW 35A (Optional Municipal Code) and more specifically is classified as a non-charter
code city. -
2. The City of Aubum conducts land use planning in accordance with applicable provisions
of RCW 36.70A (Growth Management - Planning by Selected Counties and Cities).
3. Vision 2040 and Multi-County Planning Policies - Puget Sound Regional Council. (PSRC)
Vision 2040 is an update of Vision 2020, the long-range growth, economic, and
transportation strategy for the 4-county central Puget Sound region. The Aubum City
Council recognized Vision 2020 in 2007 with the adoption ofi the 2007 Comprehensive
Plan Update. The new Vision 2040 update establishes a regional vision for the desired
pattern ofi population and job growth through 2040 within the four counties. Vision 2040
also contains new and amended Multi-County Planning Policies (MPPs) that provide a
framework and guidance for other regional plans, for Countywide Planning Policies, and
for local comprehensive plans. MPPs also guide PSRC programmatic decisions, such as
June 8, 2010 Page 2 of 8.
EXHIBIT 1: Staff Report for Amendments to Title 17 (Land Adjustments and Divisions) for
Compliance to Substitute Senate Bill 6544)
plan certification and project evaluation for funding. MPPs address a number of topic
areas, with policy chapters covering the environment, development patterns, housing,
economic development, transportation, and public services.
4. RCW 58.17.275 (Proposals to Adopt, Amend or Repeal Local Ordinances -Advance
Notice) specifies that all cities, towns, and counties shall establish procedures to provide
reasonable advance notice of proposals to adopt, amend, or repeal local ordinances
adopted in accordance with this chapter. These procedures shall include but not be
limited to advance notice to individuals or organizations which have submitted requests
for notice.
5. The City of Auburn has through previous ordinance action (Ord. 6198 § 1, 2008; Ord.
6006 § 5, 2006; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4296 § 2, 1988) adopted and amended
Chapter 17.24 (Amendments) pertaining to required processes and procedures for the
amendment of any portion or all of Title 17 (Land Adjustments and Divisions) of the
Auburn City Code (ACC).
6. ACC 14.03.060 (Legislative Non-Project Decisions} specifies that legislative non-project
decisions made by the City Council under its authority to establish policies and
regulations are not classified as a "type" of project permit decision. Legislative non-
projectdecisions include, but are not limited to, the following legislative actions:
a. Amendments to the text and map of the comprehensive plan or development
regulations.
b. Amendments to the zoning map (rezones} on a city-wide orarea-wide basis.
ACC 17.24.010 (Public Hearing and Notice} specifies the following:
a. With the exception of purely administrative or procedural amendments, the planning
director shall schedule a public hearing to be held before the planning commission
for any proposal to amend this title or to adopt or repeal any ordinance under the
authority established by Chapter 58.17 RCW. The director shall cause notice of such
hearing to be given as follows:
1. By sending to any individual or organization which has submitted a request for
notification a notice indicating the time and place of public hearing, describing the
general nature of the proposal, and indicating how copies of the proposed
ordinance or amendment can be obtained; and 2. By publishing in a newspaper of general circulation in the area a notice indicating
the time and place of public hearing, describing the general nature of the
proposal, and indicating how copies of the proposed ordinance or amendment
may be obtained.
8. For all proposals to make purely administrative or procedural amendments to this title,
the planning director shall cause notice of such proposed amendment to be given as
follows:
a. By sending to any individual or organization which has submitted a request for notification, advance notice of the proposed amendment that indicates how copies of
the proposed amendment can be obtained.
June 8, 2010 Page 3 of 8
EXHIBIT 1: Staff Report for Amendments to Title 17 (Land Adjustments and Divisions) for
Compliance to Substitute Senate Bill 6544)
b. By publishing in a newspaper of general circulation in the area advance notice of the
proposed amendment that indicates how copies of the proposed amendment can be
obtained.
9. For the purposes of this chapter, substantive amendments shall be distinguished from
procedural or administrative amendments in accordance with the following: "Substantive"
matters relate to regulations that define or limit what can be done in terms of conduct, use or action (e.g., what use may be made of land, what requirements apply to
development, what public infrastructure may be required of certain developments), and
"procedural" or "administrative" matters are those that relate to the process of how an
application to take such action must be pursued (e.g., time limits for applications and
appeals, what forms must be used, and where or how applications must be submitted.
Essentially, "procedural" or "administrative" matters are the mechanical rules by which
substantive issues may be pursued
10. ACC 17.24.020 (Planning Commission Recommendation) specifies that after the public
hearing has been closed, the Planning Commission shall recommend to the council either adoption, adoption with modifications, or rejection of the proposed ordinance or
amendment. In formulating its recommendation, the commission shall consider, among
other things, the relationship between the proposed ordinance or amendment and the
comprehensive plan, other applicable city policies, and other existing land use controls.
11. ACC 17.24.030 (Council Action) specifies that the planning director shall forward the
Planning Commission's recommendation, in writing, to the Council. The Council may
elect to hold its own public hearing, either before the full council or before a council
committee, in which case the City Clerk shall cause adequate notice to be given. The
Council shall consider, but shall not be bound by, the planning commission's recommendation in reaching its own decision.
12. ACC 17.24.040 (Initiation of Amendments) specifies the following:
a. The city council, or planning and community development committee of the city
council, upon its own motion may request the planning commission to conduct a
public hearing to amend any portion or all of this title; provided, that no public hearing
is required for a purely administrative or procedural amendment of any portion of this
title;
b. The planning commission may upon its own motion call for a public hearing to amend any portion or all of this title, with the exception of purely administrative or
procedural amendments;
c. Any resident or property owner of the city may petition the city to request an
amendment to the text of this title.
13. Goal 11 (Citizen Participation and Coordination) of the Growth Management Act as
specified in RCW 36.70A.020 encourages the involvement of citizens in the planning
process and ensure coordination between communities and jurisdictions to reconcile
conflicts.
14. RCW 36.70A.035.2.a specifies that except as otherwise provided in (b} of the statute, if
the legislative body for a county or city chooses to consider a change to an amendment
to a comprehensive plan or development regulation, and the change is proposed after
June 8, 2010 Page 4 of 8
EXHIBIT 1: Staff Report for Amendments to Title 17 (Land Adjustments and Divisions) for
Compliance to Substitute Senate Bill 6544)
the opportunity for review and comment has passed under the county's or city's
procedures, an opportunity for review and comment on the proposed change shall be
provided before the local legislative body votes on the proposed change.
15. The City of Auburn has adopted standards and regulations pertaining to the subdivision
of land contained in Title 17 (Land Adjustments and Divisions) that was most recently
updated in June 2009.
16. Amendments to Title 17 (Land Adjustments and Divisions) addressed by this agenda bill
are scheduled for public hearing on June 8, 2010 that was advertised in the May 24,
2010 edition of the Seattle Times.
17. A Determination of Non-Significance was issued for the City initiated amendments to
Title 17 of the Auburn City Code on May 27, 2010 under city file SEP10-0011. The
Determination of Non-Significance was published in the May 27, 2010 edition of the
Seattle Times. The comment period ends June 12, 2010 at 5:00 p.m.
18. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, the proposed amendments to Title 17 outlined in this agenda bill and specified in detail in Exhibit "A" were sent to the Growth Management
Services Division of the Washington State Commerce Department and other state
agencies as required for expedited review on May 18, 2010. Commerce transmitted a
receipt and acknowledgment letter (Material ID # 15694) on May 19, 2010 to the City
indicating that the procedural requirement of RCW 36.70A.106 had been complied with.
No comments have been received from Commerce or other state agencies as of the
writing of this report.
19. The public hearing notice was published on May 24, 2010 in the Seattle Times at least
10-days priorto the Planning Commission public hearing scheduled for June 8, 2010.
20. The City of Auburn has previously engaged in substantive planning, environmental
analysis and policy analysis that have created a substantive policy background for
current consideration of potential amendments to Title 17. These include:
a. City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan: Last Revised on December 2009; Amended to
Comply with the Growth ManagementAct in April 1995 and Amended Annually
Subsequently.
b. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance-2007 Comprehensive
Plan amendments. August 2007.
c. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance - 2006 Comprehensive
Plan amendments. August 2006.
d. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance - 2005 Comprehensive
Plan amendments. September 2005.
e. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance - 2004 Comprehensive Plan amendments. September 2004.
f. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance - 2003 Comprehensive Plan
amendments. October 2003.
g. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance - 2002 Comprehensive Plan
amendments. October 2002.
June 8, 2010 Page 5 of 8
EXHIBIT 1: Staff Report for Amendments to Title 17 (Land Adjustments and Divisions) for
Compliance to Substitute Senate Bill 6544)
h. City of Auburn. Final Determination of Non-Significance - 2001 Comprehensive Plan
amendments. October 2001.
i. City of Auburn -Auburn Downtown Plan/Final EIS. April 2001.
j. City of Auburn -Final Determination of Non-Significance - 2000 Comprehensive Plan
amendments. October 2000.
k. City of Auburn -Final Determination of Non-Significance -1999 Comprehensive Plan
amendments. September 1999.
I. City of Auburn -Final Determination of Non-Significance -1998 Comprehensive Plan
amendments. November 1998.
m. City of Auburn - Addendum to the Final Determination of Non-Significance -1997
Comprehensive Plan amendments. November 1997.
n. City of Auburn - Addendum to the Final Determination of Non-Significance -1996 Comprehensive Plan Amendments. November 1996.
o. City of Auburn -Addendum to the Final Determination of Non-Significance -
Comprehensive Plan Amendments to Comply with the Central Puget Sound Growth
Management Hearings Board Decision. October 1996.
p. City of Auburn - Addendum to the Final Determination of Non-Significance -1995
Comprehensive Plan Amendments. November 1995.
q. City of Auburn -Final Determination of Non-Significance -Comprehensive Plan
Amendments to Comply with the Washington State Growth Management Act.
October 1994.
r. City of Auburn -Final Environmental Impact Statement -City of Auburn
Comprehensive Plan: Staff Draft and Recommendations. May 1986.
s. City of Auburn.-Final Determination of Non-Significance -Downtown Design Study.
April 1990.
t. City of Auburn -Final Determination of Non-Significance -Comprehensive Plan
Amendments on City Expansion and Urban Growth. July 1991. u. City of Auburn -Final Environmental Impact Statement: Auburn North CBD Analysis.
November 1991.
v. City of Auburn -Final Determination of Non-Significance -Comprehensive Plan
Amendments on Sensitive and Critical Lands. January 1992.
w. King County Parks, Planning and Resources Department -Final Environmental
Impact Statement: Soos Creek Community Plan Update. December 1991.
x. King County Parks, Planning and Resources Department -Final Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement: Countywide Planning Policies Proposed
Amendments. May 1994.
y. King County Parks, Planning and Resources Department -Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement: King County Comprehensive Plan. July 1994.
z. Pierce County, Department of Planning and Land Services -Proposed Lakeland Hills
South Mining and Reclamation Plan and Planned Community Development: Final
Environmental Impact Statement. July 21, 1992.
aa. Pierce County, Department of Planning and Land Services -Comprehensive Plan for Pierce County, Washington: Final EIS. September 20, 1993.
bb. Pierce County, Department of Planning and Land Services -Final Supplemental EIS
for the Comprehensive Plan for Pierce County, Washington. June 1994.
June 8, 2010 Page 6 of 8
EXHIBIT 1: Staff Report for Amendments to Title 17 (Land Adjustments and Divisions) for
Compliance to Substitute Senate Bill 6544)
cc. Puget Sound Council of Governments -Final Environmental Impact Statement -
Vision 2020: Growth Strategy and Transportation Plan for the Central Puget Sound
Region. September 1990.
H. CONCLUSIONS
General Conclusions
1. The amendments proposed for Title 17 are substantive in nature and would apply to all
properties located within in the current City of Auburn municipal boundaries, and as
amended through annexation of land within designated potential annexation areas
(PAAs) .
2. The proposed amendments to Title 17 are intended to extend the preliminary plat
approval period from 5 to 7 years and the validity period of a final plat from 5 to 7 years
for compliance to Substitute Senate Bill 6544 of the Washington State Legislature.
3. The proposed amendments to Title 17 do not require any changes to the City's current
critical area regulations contained in ACC 16.10 (Critical Areas}. Any future
development subject to the proposed amendments to Title 17 will still be required to
demonstrate compliance to applicable standards and regulation specified in ACC 16.10.
4. The proposed amendments to Title 17 (Subdivision) will support current and future land
and shoreline uses that are consistent with the City's current Comprehensive Plan and
current Shoreline Master Program. Staff has not proposed substantive or non-
substantive amendments to Title 17 that would be deemed inconsistent with the City's
adopted plans and policies.
Specific Conclusions
1. The proposed amendments to Title 17 (Subdivision) have been processed in
accordance with RCW 58.17.275 (Proposals to Adopt, Amend or Repeal Local
Ordinances -Advance Notice) pursuant to Findings of Fact Nos. 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and
18.
2. The proposed amendments to Title 17 have been processed in accordance with ACC
17.24.010 (Public Hearing and Notice}. A public hearing notice was published on May
24, 2010 in the Seattle Times.
3. In formulating its recommendation, the commission shall consider, among other things,
the relationship between the proposed ordinance or amendment and the comprehensive
plan, other applicable city policies, and other existing land use controls. The following
conclusions address this requirement:
a. The proposed amendments to Title 17 (Subdivision} are consistent with current state
statutes and will implement a newly enacted statute.
b. The proposed amendments to Title 17 have been analyzed and prepared in accordance with applicable provisions of the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed amendments to Title 17 are for conformance to Substitute Senate Bill
6544 and would have no material effect or change to the City's adopted
Comprehensive Plan.
June 8, 2010 Page 7 of 8
EXHIBIT 1: Staff Report for Amendments to Title 17 (Land Adjustments and Divisions) for
Compliance to Substitute Senate Bill 6544)
c. This proposal will amend the City's current subdivision regulations. Taken as a
whole, the increase in impacts resulting from the proposed amendments to Title 17
from the current subdivisions standards will be minor. This is because the proposed
amendments to Title 17 are only addressing statutory procedural changes pertaining
to the allowable period for preliminary short subdivisions and subdivisions and the
validity period of final short subdivisions and final subdivisions. .
d. There are no proposed changes to the City's critical area regulations which govern environmentally sensitive areas (ACC 16.10} that will result from the proposed
amendments to Title 17
4. The proposed amendments to Title 17 will be processed in accordance with ACC
17.24.030 (Council Action). The Auburn City Council is currently scheduled to consider
the Planning Commission's recommendation at its June 21, 2010 regularly scheduled
meeting.
5. The proposed amendments to Title 17 were processed in accordance with ACC
17.24.040 (Initiation of Amendments) and specifically, ACC 17.24.040.A based on previous Council direction to staff to develop potential substantive amendments to Title
17 to comply with Substitute Senate Bill 6544 and conduct a required public hearing on
said amendments.
6. The proposed amendments to Title 17 satisfy the requirements of Goal 11 (Citizen
Participation and Coordination) of the Growth Management Act as specified in RCW
36.70A.020 because of the substantive public involvement efforts initiated for the Code
Update Project inclusive of the proposed amendments to Title 17. These efforts include:
a. Advertisement of the scheduled June 8, 2010 public hearing in the May 2, 2010
edition of the Seattle Times. b. Issuance of a Determination of Non-Significance for the City initiated amendments to
Title 17 of the Auburn City Code on May 27, 2010 under city file SEP10-0011. The
Determination of Non-Significance was published in the May 27, 2010 edition of the
Seattle Times. The comment period ends June 12, 2010 at 5:00 p.m.
I. RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed
amendments to Title 17 (Subdivision} to the Auburn City Council.
June 8, 2010 Page 8 of 8
Exhibit 2
Proposed Amendments to Titles 17
1 17.09.110 Time limitations.
2 A. Preliminary approvals for short subdivisions shall be valid for a period of
3 f+ve seven years, until December 31, 2014, following the date of the notice of final
4 decision.
5 B. Extensions. The director or designee may administratively authorize
6 through a Type I land use action extensions to preliminary short subdivision
7 approvals. For purposes of this section, the authority to issue extensions shall
8 apply to preliminary short subdivision approvals previously issued by the city.
9 Extensions shall be issued in one-year increments up to a maximum of three
10 years, subject to the following criteria and conditions:
11 1. An applicant for an extension shall make a written request for the
12 extension a minimum of 30 calendar days prior to expiration of the preliminary
13 short subdivision approval.
14 2. The director or designee shall in consideration of granting an extension
15 find:
16 a. There have not been any substantial changes in the laws governing the
17 development of the short subdivision, with which lack of compliance would be
18 contrary to the public health, safety and welfare; or
19 b. The applicant has pursued final platting in good faith. Good faith shall be
20 evidenced by progress on final surveying, engineering, construction or bonding of
21 improvements; or
22 c. There have been substantial changes in economic conditions and market
23 forces that have substantively limited the ability of the applicant to pursue final
24 platting.
25 3. A condition of any extension approval shall be thatthe subject short
26 subdivision shall comply with state or federal mandates required of the city
27 and/or life, health and safety requirements of the city in effect at the time of any
28 extension approval.
29 C. At the same time the director or designee is considering the extension, he
30 or she may add conditions or requirements upon factual determination that the
31 addition of conditions or requirements will benefit the public health, safety and
32 welfare.
33 D. A short subdivision granted preliminary approval, but not filed for final
34 short subdivision approval within the applicable time period or extended time
35 period, shall be void. (Ord. 6239 § 1, 2009.)
36
37 17.09.120 Terms of approval.
38 A short subdivision shall be governed by the terms of approval of the final short
39 subdivision, and the zoning ordinance and regulations in effect on the date of
40 preliminary short subdivision approval for a period of seven years, until
41 December 31, 2014, after final short subdivision approval unless the planning
42 director finds that a change in conditions creates a serious threat to the public
43 health or safety in the short plat.
44
45 17.10.110 Time limitations.
Revisions to Title 17 (Subdivisions) - SSB 6544 Response 1
City of Auburn, Washington
1 A. Preliminary approvals for subdivisions shall be valid for a period of #+~e
2 seven years, until December 31, 2014, following the date of the notice of final
3 decision.
4 B. Extensions. The director or designee may administratively authorize
5 through a Type I land use action extensions to preliminary plat approvals. For
6 purposes of this section, the authority to issue extensions shall apply to
7 preliminary plat approvals previously issued by the city. Extensions shall be
8 issued in one-year increments up to a maximum of three years, subject to the
9 following criteria and conditions:
10 1. An applicant for an extension shall make a written request for the
11 extension a minimum of 30 calendar days prior to expiration of the preliminary
12 plat approval.
13 2. The director or designee shall in consideration of granting an extension
14 find:
15 a. There have not been any substantial changes in the laws governing the
16 development of the plat, with which lack of compliance would be contrary to the
17 public health, safety and welfare; or
18 b. The applicant has pursued final platting diligently, as evidenced by
19 progress on final surveying, engineering, construction or the financial security of
20 improvements; or
21 c. There have been substantial changes in economic conditions and market
22 forces that have substantively limited the ability of the applicant to pursue final
23 platting.
24 3. A condition of any extension approval shall be that the subdivision shall
25 comply with state or federal mandates required of the city andlor life, health and
26 safety requirements of the city in effect at the time of any extension approval.
27 C. At the same time the director or designee is considering the extension, he
28 or she may add conditions or requirements upon factual determination that the
29 addition of conditions or requirements will benefit the public health, safety and
30 welfare.
31 D. A plat granted preliminary approval, but not filed for final plat approval
32 within the applicable time period or extended time period, shall be null and void.
33 (Ord. 6239 § 1, 2009; Ord. 6186 § 6, 2008; Ord. 5140 § 1, 1998; Ord. 4840 § 1,
34 1996; Ord. 4296 § 2, 1988. Formerly 17.06.110.}
35
36 17.12.040 Terms of approval.
37 A subdivision shall be governed by the terms of approval of the final plat, and the
38 zoning ordinance and regulations in effect on the date of preliminary plat
39 approval for a period of f+~e seven years, until December 31, 2014, after final plat
40 approval unless the hearing examiner finds that a change in conditions creates a
41 serious threat to the public health or safety in the subdivision. (Ord. 6239 § 1,
42 2009; Ord. 6186 § 8, 2008; Ord. 4296 § 2, 1988. Formerly 17.10.040.)
Revisions to Title 17 (Subdivisions) - SSB 6544 Response 2
City of Auburn, Washington
Exhibit 3
Substitute Senate Bill 6544
~~~~rr~~~~~roN of E~~o~~~~~~r
~ST~TUTE ~E~TE B~~~,
hapt~~ 7 ~a~rs of ~ D .
~~st ~egi~atuxe
~~1~ ~~~u~.ar es.~~
~~PRO~'I~ P~,A`~-~E~`~~TON TAME
t ~ ~FF~cT~~~ o~1~oR~~~
gassed tie Senate ~'ebruar~r G, ~ ~ ~ ~ERT~ F~~ATE
YFAS 4~ NAYS ~ Thomas Hocmann, Sccretar~r o~
the Senate of the State o~
~RAb O6~~EN ~~ash.~ngtar~, da hex~e~~r ce~t~.~~r that the attached is SUB~T~~UTE S~NAT~
P~esidertt o~ the Sen~~e BTI~~ X54 ~ as passed by the Sene.te
and the House o~ R~p~esentat~.ves passed the House Feb~uar~r 28, 20~.~ on the dates hea~con set forth,
YEAS G NAYS 4
THOMAS HOE~IAN~i
F~ANI~ CH~pP 5ec~eta~c~r
Speaker a~ the House o~ ~epresentat~.ves
Approved March. 17, 20~.~, ~3 p.r~. F~~EB
Max'ch ~01~
~H1~ZST~NE ~R~G~~~~ ecretar~r off' State date off' Wash~.ngton
avernor o~ the State o~ 'ashington
SC~~~'~~~T~' ~N~~~ BALL ~4~
Passed ~,~~.~s1.at~~e 20.0 regular Session
State o~ 'as~a.~ngta~ ~6~st Leis~.ature ~~4 ~egul.ar ssi~n
~~r Senate ~'~.n~ncia~. Tnstitntions, Housing & ~nsv~~ance ~ originally
sponsored by Senators Ber~ke~r, N~ar'~`~ Hobbs, ~a.1.r~er, and Tom}
READ ~'ZRS~' ~~~H o~ J05/~0 .
1 .~N Ac's Relatino~ to time ~.a~~n~.tat.~or~ for appro~ral af~plats; ar~end~.n
~ C~ ~ 8.17 . ~.4 D and 8.17 . D; and pro~riding an e~p~.~ata~an date .
3 BE ~~AC~~~ HY ~H~ ~~~~ATU~~ off` ~H~ STATE of ~H~N'~oN
4 lea, , ~C'~ S .17 ~ i4~ end ~.~95 o G8 s are eaoh amended to read
5 as fo~.~.~~~ ~ .
G Prelim~.n~r~r p~.ats of any proposed subdi~ri~sion and ded~.cat~.o~ shall
7 be appro~r~d, disapp~ovcd, o~ returned to t~.e app~.icant for modif~.cat~.on < <
$ or correotior~ ~r~.t,~n n~.nety da~rs from date of fil~.ng t~.ex~eof un~.ess the
app~.~.cant consents to an e~tens~.on of such t~.m~ per~.od or the n~.nety
day ~.~.mitat~.on 's extended to ino~.ude up to twenty ono dais as
1 pei f ~.ed ~ndor 5 ~ . , 0 9 ~ } ; PRO~~ D~ ~~at f an environmental.
l impact stateent a s x~e~u~.~ed as ro~r~.ded in R~ ~~.21.O~o, the ninet~r
day period shall not include the tame spent prepar~.ng and oirc~lating
l.4 the environmental. ~.mpact statement bar the , looal go~rea~n~et a~enoy .
1 Final l.ats and shoat platy shall. be a~px~o~red, disapproved, or returned
to th.e applicant ~rithin thirt~r days from the date of fa~la~r~g thereof,
17 un~.ess the applicant consents to an e~tens~.on of such time period. A
18 f~.nal plat meeting re~ul.re~ents o~ th.~s chapter shall. be submitted
19 to the ~.eg~.s~.at~.~e bod~r o~ the c~.t~, torn, or cou~nt~r for apro~ra~.
SB 54~ , STS
rl 7
w~.thin ~ years of the date of preliminary flat apprav~a~..
~ nothing canta.~ned in. th~.s sect~.on shall to prevent any city, tawr~,
3 or caunty from adopting y ordinance procedures which would a~.~.aw
~ extens~.ons of time that mad ar ray not contain add~.ta.anal ox~ altered
5 cand~,tions and requa.rements ,
~ ~ , ~ . ~Cw 5 . 7.17 0 and 198 c 2 9 ~ D ar.e each amended to read
~ as follows ;
8 when the ~.ega.slati~e body of the city, fawn or court finds that
9 the subdi~ris~.on proposed for final. p~.at appra~ral conforms to a1.~. terms
1~ o~ the preliminary plat apro~al., and that sa~.d subdi~is~.on meets the
x'eq~€~.rements of this chapter, other app~.~.ca~le state laws, and an
12 local. ard~.nances adapted under tha. chapter ~~h~.ch ~Tere it effect at the
y } F ~ x r ' , ~ a , ` 1~ ~ ~ ~ 13 time of prel,~,m~.nary plat approval., ~t shall. su~.tably inscr~.be and
execute a is written appr~o~ral on the face of the plat. The ari ~.nal of
l.5 said final plat shall, be filed for record with the county auda~tor . one
1 ~ reproducible copy sha1.1, be furn~.shed to the city, ta~~n or court
17 eng~.neer , one paper copy ha~.l be filed Faith the count assessor .
gaper cop~.es shah, be pro~r~.ded to such other agencies as ma. be
19 required by ox~d.inance . Any lots in a final p.iat filed for record shall.
20 be a va~,.id land use notw~.thstanding any change .in. zon~.r~g lags far a
~l period of ~ } se~ren ~ea~cs from the date of f~.1.~.ng, ~ subdiva.s.ian
2~ shah. be governed by the terms of approval, of the final lot, and the p
~ statutes, ord~.nances, aid regu.iations .in effect at the time of a ra~ra~.
under: 58 ,17 , x.50 ~ 1 ~ and ~ ~ } far a period of { } s gears
~5 after final, plat appro~ral unless the leg~.sl.ative bad finds that a
~G change in cond~.tians creates a serious threat to the public health ox~ l y L i i S
27 safety ~.n the subdi~rision.
~8 NFL ~~T~Q~1, ~c. ect~.ans ~ and ~ of this act expire ~ecerl~ex~ .
~9 1, ~a14,
Passed by the senate ~`ebruary 1 G, ~ 0 a .
Passed by the Haase February 2 8, ~ 0 .0 .
~ppra~red by the o~rernor March 17, 01~ ,
F.il,ed ~.n office of Secretary of State Marc1~ 17, 20~.a .
SSB G~~.S~ ~
Exhibit 4
Request to Publish Notice of Public Hearing
REQUEST TO PUBLISH
ATTN: Legal Ads. Please publish in the Seattle Times on May 28, 2010
Send the bill for the cost of publishing to: City of Auburn
Finance Department 25 West Main
Auburn, WA 98001-4998
Two Affidavits of Publication are requested for this notice. Please send both Affidavits to:
City Clerk City of Auburn
25 West Main
Auburn, WA 98001-4998
Please publish below line only
Determination ofNon-Significance SEP10-011
Proposal: Proposed amendments to Title 17 (Subdivisions) of the Auburn City Code for compliance to
Senate Substitute Bill 6544 of the Washington State Legislature extending the preliminary plat approval
period from 5 to 7 years and the validity period of a final plat from 5 to 7 years.
Proponent: Kevin Snyder, AICP, Interim Planning & Development Director, City of Auburn Planning & Development Department
Location: City-wide and within the City of Auburn's potential annexation areas.
Lead Agency: City of Auburn
The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have probable significant adverse impact
on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW
43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the
public on request.
This DNS is issued under 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the
date issued below. Comments must be submitted by 5:00 p.m. on June 12, 2010 and should be submitted
to the Responsible Official listed below.
Document is also available: Planning & Development Department, City of Auburn, One Main St., Auburn, WA 98001. Auburn SEPA contact: Kevin Snyder, AICP, Interim Planning & Development
Director,
ksnyder@auburnwa.gov or at 253-876-1982.
Published in the Seattle Times May 28, 2010.
Exhibit 5
Affidavit of Publication for Notice of Public Hearing
From: Le als
To: Renee Tobias;
Subject: Confirming Ad# 4078061 for Title 17SS66544 (5/24) FW: Notices of Public Hearings -Seattle Times
Date: Wednesday, May 19, 2010 2:21:50 PM
This is confirmed for Mon 5124 in The Seattle Times.
It is $134,16 to your account.
Thankyou,
Jenni for Kathy Baldwin
Seattle Times Legal Notices
206-652-6018
I~als@seattletimes.com
Exhibit 6
Affidavit of Publication for Notice of Determination of Non-Significance
From: Legals
To: Renee Tobias;
Subject: CONFIRMING AD# 4078976 RE: (5/27) City of Auburn May 27, 2010
Date: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 2:15:37 PM
This is confirmed for Thurs 5/27 in The Seattle Times.
It is $98.04 to your account.
Thank you,
Jenni for Kathy Baldwin
Seattle Times Legal Notices
206-652-6018
le~c. als@seattletimes.com
r
Exhibit 7
Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for SEP10-0011
f
. . .
Peter Lewis, M~~rar
~ ~ A~~~T~N ~5 wept Main Street ~ Auburn WA 9~~D] y4~~~ ~ www.puburnwa,gov ~ ~~3~93~ -3~D~
~t~r'~r~~rorr o .o~~'r~trr`ca~c `PAD-0~~
s
Descrip#ion of
~'raposal; Atnet~dtr~ettts to Title 17 ~S~hdivisians} of tl~e Aubl~rn pity bode for car~~pliance
to Senate Substit€~t~ Bill ~5~~ afthe asllingtatl State I~egislatu~~e extet~di~~g the
prelimin~r~y plat approval pe~~iod f~•om 5 to 7 yea~~s azad tl7e validity period of ~
final plat ft~am ~ to 7 yea~•s~
~~•opor~ent; Kevin S~~yd~k, A~~P, interim Pla~~ning Deveopmet~t Director
pity of Aui~urn I~lannit~g & Develapxnerat Depa~~tr~~et~t
~acafiax~; pity-vide atld 4~~t1~1~1 the i of Auhl~rn's potential al~t~exatlon areas,
~►ead Agency; pity ofAt~burn .
The lead agency fox ti~is p~~aposal leas deterrr~itled tl}at it does r7ot l~a~re probable significant adve~~se impact
ox7 the er~viron~~~ent. An et~virat~t~~etltal impact tatrr~~nt LEIS} is not re~uit~ed under ~
4.~1.030~~~~c}. This decision eras ~~~ade afte~4 re~rie~v ofa compl~te~ envi~•or~n~e~Ytal checklist a~~d other
izafarmatia~~ oil f ale ~~it}~ tl~e lead aget~c~. This i~~farrrlatian is ~v~ilabl to the public a~~ ~~equest.
Ti~is DNS is is~zed ender i97-1 I-34a~2}; tl~e lead ae~~cy ~~ill not act otY this proposal far ~4 days fi~or~n
the date issued belo~~r~ olnfncnts must be subtnitted by 5;00 p.~7~, a~~ J~~x~e ~a~Ii at~d sl~auld be
si~htr~itted to tl~e R~pol~sible official litcd bela~v,
~espox~sible Official; Sevin Sr~y~let~, AIP
l~asitiar~ITitie; ~~~teritr~ Director, PlannitYg Dcvelopmen# Department
Address: 25 hest 1Vla.in Sheet
A~~bur~l, asllll~gta~n 9$00
X53-931-490
Date issued; ~iay 2'7, 2o~D Signatu~~e;
Nate, This dctcrmilYatiori does not cons#i#u#e approval of #i~e proposal Approval of #hc praposa~
cola ol~ly be ~~Yade by tl~e Ieg~slative o~• adrui~~ist~~ative body vested ~vitl~ #ha# utlio~~ity, Tl~e p~~oposal
~vill be rc~ui~~c~I to t~xeet aII applicable ~{eguIa#ian,
Gov tA~~~~
Exhibit 8
SEPA Environmental checklist for SEP10-0011
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
WAC 197-11-960 Environmental checklist.
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Purpose of checklist:
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21 C RCW, requires all
governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making
decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with
probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this
checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your
proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required.
Instructions for applicants:
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your
proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental
impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions
briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can.
You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge.
Inmost cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project
plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does
not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply." Complete answers to the
questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later.
Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and
landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the
governmental agencies can assist you.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them
over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will
help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this
checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably
related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact.
Use of checklist for nonproject proposals:
Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR
NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D).
For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant,"
and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area,"
respectively.
1
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
A BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable:
Title 17 (Subdivisions) of the Auburn City Code Amendments for Compliance to Senate
Substitute Bill 6544 of the Washington State Legislature
2. Name of applicant:
City o f Auburn
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
Planning & Development Department
City o f Auburn
25 West Main Street
Auburn, WA 98001
(253) 876-1982
Attn: Kevin Snyder, AICP, Interim Planning & Development Director
4. Date checklist prepared:
May 24, 2010
5. Agency requesting checklist:
City o f Auburn
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
To be implemented in June 2010.
Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or
connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
Nonproject action. This nonproject SEPA Environmental Checklist addresses proposed
amendments to Title 17 (Subdivisions) of the Auburn City Code for compliance to Senate
Substitute Bill 6544 of the Washington State Legislature extending the preliminary plat
approval period from 5 to 7 years and the validity period of a final plat from 5 to 7 years.
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal.
No environmental documentation has been prepared or will be prepared directly related to
this proposal other than this Environmental Checklist.
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other
proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain.
Non-project action. The proposed amendments would be applicable City-wide to all
properties.
2
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if
known.
The City of Auburn Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the proposed
amendments addressed in this environmental checklist and will forward a recommendation to
the Auburn City Council. The City Council may or may not hold a public hearing prior to
taking action adopting, adopting in part, or not adopting the amendments.
Although not an approval or permit, the proposed amendments area also subject to the State
Agency review process pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106.
11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the
size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask
you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those
answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional
specific information on project description.)
Proposed amendments to Title 17 (Subdivisions) of the Auburn City Code for compliance to
Senate Substitute Bill 6544 of the Washington State Legislature extending the preliminary
plat approval period from 5 to 7 years and the validity period of a final plat from 5 to 7 years.
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the
precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide
the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity
map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans
required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans
submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist.
This is a nonproject action located in the City of Auburn municipal boundaries and potential
annexation areas (PAAs).
3
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
B ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes,
mountainous, other
The City of Auburn is characterized by a relatively flat valley floor bordered by steep
hillsides and upland plateaus overlooking the valley. See Section D, Nonproject Action.
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
The slopes vary in the city and PAA areas, but in some locations slopes associated with the
valley walls reach 100%. See Section D, Nonproject Action.
c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat,
muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any
prime farmland.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. The valley floor is made up primarily of soils of the
Oridia, Renton, Snohomish, and Briscott series. These soils are poorly drained and formed in the alluvium (river sediments) associated with the White and Green rivers. These are
considered good agricultural soils, though in many areas, are not well-drained. There is no
designated farmland within the City of Auburn.
The hillsides and plateaus are made up of primarily Alderwood associated soils and a small
amount of Everett associated soils (U.S. Department of Agriculture,1973). Alderwood soils
are moderately well drained gravelly sandy loams 20-40 inches deep. Beneath these soils is
glacial til with low permeability. Roots penetrate easily to the hardpan layer. Runoff
potential is slow to medium. Erosion and slippage hazard is moderate, ranging to severe on
steeper slope phases The Everett series consists of somewhat excessively drained soils that are underlain by very gravelly sand. These soils formed in very gravelly glacial outwash
deposits under conifers. They are found on terraces and terrace fronts and are gently
undulating to moderately steep.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If
so, describe.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Many factors affect slope stability including soil type,
parent material, slope and drainage. These factors can be further affected by human intervention such as slope alteration, and vegetation removal. The city has identified
categories of geologic hazard areas and inventoried these areas. Maps of the erosion and
landslide hazard areas are provided as Maps 9.6 and 9.7, respectively in the City's
Comprehensive Plan.
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading
proposed. Indicate source of fill.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. The proposed amendments to Title 18
are non-project actions, no site alteration, construction, or earthwork is proposed.
4
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally
describe.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is anon-project action.
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project
construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. The action does not involve site specific
development proposals.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any:
See Section D, Nonproject Action. This is anon-project action, no site specific erosion
control is proposed. However, the existing comprehensive plan includes numerous policies
to reduce or control erosion through the use of best management practices, landscaping
requirements, limitations on alteration of steep slopes and other critical areas protections. Impacts to earth will be identified and, if necessary, mitigated during the development
review
process as specific development proposals are made that might be associated with these plan
amendments.
The city also has adopted City [engineering] Design Standards Manual and a City
[engineering] Construction Standards Manual that address erosion impacts (ACC Chapter
12.04 as referenced by ACC 15.74).
2. Air
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile,
odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed?
If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is anon-project action.
b. Are there any off site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so,
generally describe.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is anon-project action.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any:
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is anon-project action.
3. Water
a. Surface:
1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including
year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe
type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into.
Citywide nonproject action -See Section D, Nonproject Action. The major bodies of water
within Auburn are the Green River, the White River, Mill Creek, Bowman Creek, and White
5
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Lake. The city has conducted an inventory of wetlands within the city limits. These are
shown on Map 9.3 of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Shorelines of the State are reflected in
Auburn's adopted Shorelines Master Program (April 2009).
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) of the
described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is anon-project action.
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed
from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected.
Indicate the source of fill material.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is non-project action.
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is non-project action.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Several areas within Auburn lie within the 100-year
floodplain of the Green or White River and Mill Creek. The 100-year floodplain areas as
well as frequently flooded areas are shown on Map 9.4 of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
On April 5, 2010, the Auburn City Council adopted updated floodplain regulations for consistency and compliance to the finding (Biological Opinion) issued by the National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) that administration of the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP) jeopardizes species protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). As a
result of the NMFS finding, FEMA and communities participating in the NFIP were required
to implement a series of actions, including adoption of regulations to ensure compliance with
the ESA. The purpose of the moratorium was to give these federal agencies time to complete
a model floodplain ordinance and other technical assistance for local jurisdictions, and in the
interim, to limit liability to private parties and the City.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so,
describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is non-project action.
b. Ground:
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give
general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is non-project action.
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or
other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the
following chemicals; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the
6
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the
number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is non-project action.
c. Water runoff (including stormwater):
1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this
water flow into other waters? If so, describe.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is non-project action.
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is non-project action.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if
any:
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is non-project action.
4. Plants
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
X evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
X Shrubs
X Grass
X Pasture
X crop or grain
X wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other
X water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
X other types of vegetation
See Section D, Nonproject Action.
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
See Section D, Nonproject Action. However, in general urban development can result in the
removal or alteration of vegetation. City standards address critical areas protection, e.g.
wetlands, and landscaping.
c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. None known at this time.
7
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance
vegetation on the site, if any:
The City Comprehensive Plan includes policies on retaining vegetation, ACC Chapter 15.74
governs tree and vegetation retention, and the City's landscaping regulations (ACC 18.50)
govern landscaping within the City. See Section D, Nonproject Action. This is anon-project
action.
5. Animals
a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are
known to be on or near the site:
hawk, heron, eagle, son birds, other: geese, ducks,
crows, etc.
mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: urban
animals such as dogs, cats, squirrels, rodents,
opossums, raccoons, etc. are also present in the city
fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other:
See Section D, Nonproject Action.
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. There are nesting/breeding sites of bald eagles, great blue
herons and green back heron within Auburn as shown on Map 9.2 of the City's
Comprehensive Plan. The Environmental Impact Statement for the Auburn Thoroughbred
Racetrack indicates that peregrine falcons, bald eagles, and the Aleutian Canadian Goose
have been seen in the Auburn area.
Chinook salmon are currently listed as a threatened species by the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS). Bull trout are also listed. Chinook salmon are known to use the Green and
White Rivers.
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Auburn is a portion of the Pacific Flyway for migratory
birds.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
The City's Comprehensive Plan includes policies that encourage preservation of wildlife
habitat and environmental features supportive of wildlife habitat. In addition, the City's
critical areas regulations (Chapter 16.10 of the ACC) offers protection for critical wildlife
habitat, among other things. See Section D, Nonproject Action. This is anon-project action.
8
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
6. Energy and natural resources
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet
the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating,
manufacturing, etc.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is anon-project action.
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If
so, generally describe.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is anon-project action.
c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal?
List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any:
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is anon-project action. This action.
Environmental health
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk
of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this
proposal? If so, describe.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is anon-project action.
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is anon-project action.
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is anon-project action.
8. Noise
a. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example:
traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is anon-project action.
b. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a
short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is anon-project action.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is anon-project action.
9
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
9. Land and shoreline use
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
See Section D, Nonproject Action. The City contains a variety of land uses including
residential, industrial, commercial, open space, and public land uses.
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Much of Green River Valley and the City of Auburn were
used for agriculture at some time in the past. Over the last several decades, rapid growth in
the area resulted in much of the agricultural land converting to urban uses. No land within
the city is designated as agricultural in city plans or zoning code, though some parcels
continue to be farmed.
c. Describe any structures on the site.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Structures within the City and Potential Annexation
Areas (PAA) range from small single family detached homes to large industrial and
warehousing facilities.
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is anon-project action.
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
See Section D, Nonproject Action. The proposed amendments would be applicable to the C-
1 Light Commercial District.
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
See Section D, Nonproject Action. A Comprehensive Plan map of the City is contained in
the City's Comprehensive Plan and includes 13 different plan designations.
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site?
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Portions of the City along the Green and White Rivers
fall under the Shoreline Master Program. A map of the shoreline designations for those areas
is Map 9.1 of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Shorelines of the State are reflected in
Auburn's recently adopted revised Shorelines Master Program in April 2009.
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so,
specify.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is anon-project action. However,
areas of the city do contain sensitive areas and the regulation and protection of sensitive areas
are addressed through the city's critical areas ordinance.
10
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This is anon-project action and no
specific development is proposed.
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This proposal is anon-project action and no specific development is proposed.
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This proposal is anon-project action and
no specific development is proposed.
1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected
land uses and plans, if any:
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Also, the proposed amendments are circulated to State
agencies for a State Agency review process in accordance with RCW 36.70A.106.
10. Housing
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high,
middle, orlow-income housing.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This proposal is anon-project action.
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high,
middle, orlow-income housing.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. This proposal would not eliminate any housing units.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
See Section D, Nonproject Action. None specifically, as this is anon-project action. The
proposed amendments will extend the preliminary plat approval period from 5 to 7 years and
the validity period of a final plat from 5 to 7 years for compliance to Senate Substitute Bill
6544 of the Washington State Legislature.
11. Aesthetics
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed?
See Section D, Nonproject Action. This proposal is anon-project action.
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This proposal is anon-project action.
11
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
See Section D, Nonproject Action.
12. Light and glare
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it
mainly occur?
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This proposal is anon-project action.
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with
views?
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This proposal is anon-project action.
c. What existing off site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This proposal is anon-project action.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
See Section D, Nonproject Action.
13. Recreation
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
See Section D, Nonproject Action. The City of Auburn provides a full range of parks and
recreational facilities. Map 11.1 of the City's Comprehensive Plan shows the location of
these facilities.
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. The proposal would not displace any existing recreational
uses.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation
opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable.
14. Historic and cultural preservation
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local
preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. The following sites in the City of Auburn are listed on the
National Register of Historic Places and the Washington State Heritage Register: Auburn
Public Library, 306 Auburn Avenue NE; Auburn Post Office, 20 Auburn Avenue NE; Oscar
Blomeen House, 324 B Street NE; Mary Olson Farm, 28728 Green River Road NE.
12
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Additionally, the Auburn Masonic Temple located at 310 East Main Street is designated as a
City of Auburn Landmark.
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or
cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Several Indian campsites have been identified along the
Green and White rivers in the Auburn Thoroughbred Racetrack EIS and in preliminary work for the Army Corps of Engineers' Special Area Management Plan.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
See Section D, Nonproject Action. This proposal is anon-project action. All non-exempt
projects will be required to conduct future project-level SEPA analysis.
15. Transportation
a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to
the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Figure 2-1 of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan
(transportation element) shows the City's current and future classified street system.
b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to
the nearest transit stop?
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Figure 4-1 of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan
(transportation element) shows the location of public transit routes within the City. Also, a
Sound Transit Sounder regional commuter rail station exists along the Burlington Northern
Santa Fe railroad right-of way just south of West Main Street and east of C Street SW.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the
project eliminate?
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This proposal is anon-project action.
d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads
or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or
private).
See Section D, Nonproject Action. Not applicable. This proposal is anon-project action.
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of7 water, rail, or air
transportation? If so, generally describe.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. There is no water transportation in the Auburn area other
than for recreational uses. The area is particularly well served by rail. At this time, local
freight service is available. Burlington Northern Santa Fe and Union Pacific both operate
freight lines within Auburn. Auburn is also a commuter rail station site for the Sounder
commuter rail line between Tacoma and Seattle. Amtrak trains pass through, but do not stop
in Auburn. The Auburn Municipal Airport is located north of 15th Street NE.
13
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If
known, indicate when peak volumes would occur.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. The proposed amendments are not expected change the
total number of housing units that could be built in the City. The proposed amendments
would not eliminate residential uses in areas where they are currently allowed, nor would
they introduce additional residential uses in areas where they are not currently allowed.
See Section D, Nonproject Action for additional discussion.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
See Section D, Nonproject Action.
16. Public services
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe.
The proposal is not expected to affect the total number of housing units, the number or types
of commercial developments that could be built, or to result in an increased need for public
services.
See Section D, Nonproject Action.
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any.
See Section D, Nonproject Action. The comprehensive plan contains policies that seek to
maintain a sufficient level of service for public services as development occurs. Also,
Auburn reviews the impacts of significant development on these public services during
project-level review and SEPA. Mitigation measures are required to reduce significant
adverse impacts.
17. Utilities
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electrici ,natural has, water, refuse
service, tele hone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other.
All of the above utilities are available within the City of Auburn.
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service,
and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which
might be needed.
This is anon-project action. However, the Comprehensive Plan includes a utilities element
(as required by the Growth Management Act), which describes the utilities that serve the
Auburn area and includes policies for their provision.
Also, the city actively engages in planning for public facilities. The Comprehensive Water
Plan and Comprehensive Sewer Plan and the Comprehensive Drainage Plan were updated in
2009. Anew six year Capital Facilities Plan was adopted in 2009 (2010-2015).
14
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
These plans ensure that utility impacts are adequately monitored and evaluated on a project
level and city-wide basis.
C SIGNATURE
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision.
Signature:
Date Submitted:
15
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
D SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS
(Do not use this sheet for project actions)
Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with
the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the
extent the proposal or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect
the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented.
Respond briefly and in general terms.
1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air;
production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise?
The proposal would not be likely to increase discharge to water, emissions to air, production,
storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise. This nonproject
action does not affect the existing City performance standards currently contained in ACC
18.31 that regulate noise, emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or
hazardous substances.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are:
The City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan contains provisions to reduce increases or emissions
caused by new development. Emphasis in the Comprehensive Plan on reducing the reliance
on the automobile for transportation should reduce the amount of emissions to the air.
Policies in the Environment Chapter also provide guidance in the review of development
proposals to encourage native vegetation. This supports wildlife habitat areas, particularly
near streams, as the policies assist the City in addressing adverse impacts to water quality and
wildlife habitat from runoff since native plantings may require less pesticide use.
Non-exempt development will be subject to SEPA requirements to evaluate and mitigate
impacts related to discharges, emissions, and the release of toxic substances. Evaluation of
the site specific proposals will be based on the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and
appropriate mitigation will take place on a case by case basis.
City development standards including but not limited to the critical areas ordinance (ACC
16.10), shoreline master program regulations (ACC 16.08), the City's Engineering Design
Standard and Construction Standard Manuals (ACC 12.04) also provide additional protection
for these types of impacts.
2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life?
Generally, the proposal will not directly affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life.
The proposed amendments would not affect the City's critical areas regulations and they are
not expected change the developable area of the City. The proposed amendments would not
eliminate any existing uses in areas where they are currently allowed, nor would they
introduce any new uses in areas where they are not currently allowed.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are:
16
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Generally, the adopted Auburn Comprehensive Plan and critical areas ordinance seek to
protect and conserve plants, animals, fish, and marine life. SEPA environmental review of all
non-exempt development is conducted to measure and mitigate impacts. Evaluation based on
the policies of the Auburn Comprehensive Plan and appropriate mitigation will take place on
a case-by-case basis.
Policies within the Environment Chapter also provide guidance in the review of development
proposals to encourage native vegetation be used and/or retained. This should support
wildlife habitat areas, particularly near streams as the policies assist the city in addressing adverse runoff impacts to water quality and wildlife habitat since native plantings may
require less pesticide use.
City development standards including but not limited to the critical areas ordinance and the
shoreline master program regulations also provide additional protection for these types of
impacts.
3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?
Future development will use natural gas and electricity and could result in increased
automobile uses. However, there does not appear to be any significant adverse increases in
the use of energy of natural resources resulting from the amendments being proposed to the
existing comprehensive plan over what might occur under existing plan designations
Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are:
None specifically, as this is anon-project action. The proposed action will result in the
extension of the preliminary plat approval period from 5 to 7 years and the validity period of a final plat from 5 to 7 years for compliance to Senate Substitute Bill 6544 of the Washington
State Legislature. An environmental review under SEPA of all non-exempt development will
be conducted to measure the project impacts.
4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or
areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as
parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat,
historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands?
This proposal will amend the City's building and fire safety regulations. There are no proposed changes to the City's critical area regulations which govern environmentally
sensitive areas (ACC 16.10). The proposal is unlikely to affect environmentally sensitive
areas or areas designated for governmental protection.
Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are:
The comprehensive plan and, in particular, the critical areas ordinance (ACC 16.10), seek to
protect environmentally sensitive areas (wetlands, streams, geologically hazard areas,
floodplain, wildlife habitat, and aquifer recharge areas) and to reduce the impacts of development on them. The Auburn Comprehensive Plan provides for the implementation of
innovative land management techniques to protect these resources. SEPA environmental
review for all future non-exempt development will be conducted to evaluate impacts.
17
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it
would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans?
The proposed amendments are not expected to have an impact on the number of residential units that could be built in the City.
The proposed amendments to Title 17 (Subdivisions) of the Auburn City Code for
compliance to Senate Substitute Bill 6544 of the Washington State Legislature extending the
preliminary plat approval period from 5 to 7 years and the validity period of a final plat from
5 to 7 years.
The comprehensive plan, critical areas ordinance, and other development regulations, such as
the zoning ordinance and shoreline master program, seek to protect these land and shoreline
resources and to reduce the effects of development on them. An environmental review under
SEPA of all future development that is non-exempt will also be conducted to evaluate a proposal's land use and environmental impacts.
6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public
services and utilities?
The proposal is not expected to increase demands on transportation or public services and
utilities as compared with the current zoning regulations.
The proposed amendments to Title 17 (Subdivisions) of the Auburn City Code for compliance to Senate Substitute Bill 6544 of the Washington State Legislature extending the
preliminary plat approval period from 5 to 7 years and the validity period of a final plat from
5 to 7 years.
Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are:
The City has adopted asix-year Transportation Improvement Program (2010-2015) that
identifies projects to meet safety needs, capacity needs, access needs, projected funding. The
Comprehensive Transportation Plan is an element of the City's overall Comprehensive Plan.
It is the City's long-range plan for developing its transportation system over the next 15 years.
This plan helps ensure that transportation impacts are adequately monitored and evaluated on
a project level and city-wide basis.
The City has an adopted 2010-2015 Capital Facilities Plan. Also, the city actively engages in
planning for public facilities. The Comprehensive Water Plan and Comprehensive Sewer
Plan and the Comprehensive Drainage Plan were updated in 2009. The Comprehensive
Transportation Plan was also updated in 2009. These plans help ensure that utility and street
impacts are adequately monitored and evaluated on a project level and city-wide basis.
To ensure potential traffic impacts for each new multi-family residential development are
adequately addressed, the proposed amendments include requirements for the submittal of applications for multi-family residential mixed use development to include transportation and
traffic analyses appropriate to the type and scale of the proposed development based on the
concurrent determination of the Planning Director and City Engineer. The Planning Director
and City Engineer may require the analyses to address, including but not limited to, AM or
PM traffic impacts or circulation planning for motorized and non-motorized modes of travel
and connectivity or Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies.
18
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
An environmental review under SEPA for all future non-exempt development will be
conducted to evaluate environmental impacts. Environmental impacts that must be addressed
during the SEPA review process include traffic, public services, and utilities.
Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws
or requirements for the protection of the environment.
The proposal does not conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for protection
of the environment. The proposal will ensure that the City is compliant with Senate Substitute
Bill 6544 of the Washington State Legislature.
19
Exhibit 9
May 19, 2010 Receipt and Acknowledgement Letter
from the WA State DOCT & ED
~T~T E ~ F ~~~H ICI ~ T~ N
E~TI~IEI~T ~F ~I~IlI~1~E
May 19, 2010
Kevin Snyder Assistant Director
City of Auburn
25 W Main Street
Auburn, Washington 98001-4998
Dear Mr. Snyder:
Thank you for sending the Washington State Department of Commerce (Commerce) the following materials
as required under RCW 36.70A.106. Please keep this letter as documentation that you have met this
procedural requirement.
City of Auburn -Proposed 2009 International Codes issued by the Washington State Building Code
Council to comply with RCW 19.27.031. These materials were received on May 18, 2010 and
processed with the material ID # 15694. Expedited Review is requested under RCW 36.70A.106(3)(b).
If this submitted material is an adopted amendment, then please keep this letter as documentation that you have met the procedural requirement under RCW 36.70A.106.
If you have submitted this material as a draft amendment requesting expedited review, then we have
forwarded a copy of this notice to other state agencies for expedited review and comment. If one or more state agencies indicate that they will be commenting, then Commerce will deny
expedited review and the
standard 60-day review period (from date received) will apply. Commerce will notify you by e-mail regarding
of approval or denial of your expedited review request. If approved for expedited review, then final adoption
may occur no earlier than fifteen calendar days after the original date of receipt by Commerce. Please
remember to submit the final adopted amendment to Commerce within ten days of adoption.
If you have any questions, please call me at 360.725.3064.
Sincerely,
Anne Fritzel
Growth Management Planner
Growth Management Services
Exhibit 10
Memorandum
To:
Planning Commission
From:
Kevin Snyder, AICP, Interim Director, Planning & Development Department
Date:
June 1, 2010
Re:
Revised Title 17 (Land Adjustments & Divisions) Amendments
Please find attached an updated version of the proposed amendments to Title 17 (Land
Adjustments & Divisions). Following additional consultation with the City Attorney’s Office,
staff has revised the recommended amendments to further clarify the time limited applicability
of the provisions of Substitute Senate Bill 6544. Please use the attached amendments in
place of the amendments in Exhibit 2 of your June 8, 2010 public hearing packet.
Page 1 of 1
1 17.09.110 Time limitations.
2 A. Preliminary approvals for short subdivisions shall be valid for a period of
3 five years, following the date of the notice of final decision. Provided, that if the
4 date of the notice of the final decision is between June 10, 2010 and December
5 31, 2014 the approvals shall be for a period of seven years following the date of
6 the notice.
7
8 B. Extensions. The director or designee may administratively authorize
9 through a Type I land use action extensions to preliminary short subdivision
10 approvals. For purposes of this section, the authority to issue extensions shall
11 apply to preliminary short subdivision approvals previously issued by the city.
12 Extensions shall be issued in one-year increments up to a maximum of three
13 years, subject to the following criteria and conditions:
14 1. An applicant for an extension shall make a written request for the
15 extension a minimum of 30 calendar days prior to expiration of the preliminary
16 short subdivision approval.
17 2. The director or designee shall in consideration of granting an extension
18 find:
19 a. There have not been any substantial changes in the laws governing the
20 development of the short subdivision, with which lack of compliance would be
21 contrary to the public health, safety and welfare; or
22 b. The applicant has pursued final platting in good faith. Good faith shall be
23 evidenced by progress on final surveying, engineering, construction or bonding of
24 improvements; or
25 c. There have been substantial changes in economic conditions and market
26 forces that have substantively limited the ability of the applicant to pursue final
27 platting.
28 3. A condition of any extension approval shall be that the subject short
29 subdivision shall comply with state or federal mandates required of the city
30 and/or life, health and safety requirements of the city in effect at the time of any
31 extension approval.
32 C. At the same time the director or designee is considering the extension, he
33 or she may add conditions or requirements upon factual determination that the
34 addition of conditions or requirements will benefit the public health, safety and
35 welfare.
36 D. A short subdivision granted preliminary approval, but not filed for final
37 short subdivision approval within the applicable time period or extended time
38 period, shall be void. (Ord. 6239 § 1, 2009.)
39
40 17.10.110 Time limitations.
41 A. Preliminary approvals for subdivisions shall be valid for a period of five
years, following the date of the notice of final decision. Provided, that if the date
42
43 of the notice of the final decision is between June 10, 2010 and December 31,
44 14 the approvals shall be for a period of seven years following the date of the
20
notice.
45
46
Revisions to Title 17 (Subdivisions) – SSB 6544 Response 1
City of Auburn, Washington
1 B. Extensions. The director or designee may administratively authorize
2 through a Type I land use action extensions to preliminary plat approvals. For
3 purposes of this section, the authority to issue extensions shall apply to
4 preliminary plat approvals previously issued by the city. Extensions shall be
5 issued in one-year increments up to a maximum of three years, subject to the
6 following criteria and conditions:
7 1. An applicant for an extension shall make a written request for the
8 extension a minimum of 30 calendar days prior to expiration of the preliminary
9 plat approval.
10 2. The director or designee shall in consideration of granting an extension
11 find:
12 a. There have not been any substantial changes in the laws governing the
13 development of the plat, with which lack of compliance would be contrary to the
14 public health, safety and welfare; or
15 b. The applicant has pursued final platting diligently, as evidenced by
16 progress on final surveying, engineering, construction or the financial security of
17 improvements; or
18 c. There have been substantial changes in economic conditions and market
19 forces that have substantively limited the ability of the applicant to pursue final
20 platting.
21 3. A condition of any extension approval shall be that the subdivision shall
22 comply with state or federal mandates required of the city and/or life, health and
23 safety requirements of the city in effect at the time of any extension approval.
24 C. At the same time the director or designee is considering the extension, he
25 or she may add conditions or requirements upon factual determination that the
26 addition of conditions or requirements will benefit the public health, safety and
27 welfare.
28 D. A plat granted preliminary approval, but not filed for final plat approval
29 within the applicable time period or extended time period, shall be null and void.
30(Ord. 6239 § 1, 2009; Ord. 6186 § 6, 2008; Ord. 5140 § 1, 1998; Ord. 4840 § 1,
31 1996; Ord. 4296 § 2, 1988. Formerly 17.06.110.)
32
33 17.12.040 Terms of approval.
34 A subdivision shall be governed by the terms of approval of the final plat, and the
35 zoning ordinance and regulations in effect on the date of preliminary plat
36 approval for a period of five years, after final plat approval unless the hearing
37 examiner finds that a change in conditions creates a serious threat to the public
health or safety in the subdivision. Provided, that if the date of final plat approval
38
39 is between June 10, 2010 and December 31, 2014 the terms of approval shall be
40 (Ord. 6239 § 1, 2009;
for a period of seven years following the date of the notice.
41 Ord. 6186 § 8, 2008; Ord. 4296 § 2, 1988. Formerly 17.10.040.)
Revisions to Title 17 (Subdivisions) – SSB 6544 Response 2
City of Auburn, Washington