Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4980 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 ORDINANCE NO. 4 9 8 0 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO PLANNING; ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS TO COMPLY WITH THE CENTP~AL PUGET SOUND GROWTH MANAGEMENT HEARINGS BOARD ORDER IN CASE NO. 95-3-0075C, DATED FEBRUARY 13, 1997, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF R.C.W. CHAPTERS 36.70A AND 35A.63 OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON; DESIGNATING THESE AMENDMENTS AS GUIDELINES FOR EXERCISING THE CITY'S AUTHORITY UNDER THE WASHINGTON STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA); DIRECTING THAT THIS ORDINANCE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLA~ AMENDMENTS IT ADOPTS AND APPROVES BE FILED WITH THE AUBURN CITY CLERK AND BE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION. WHEREAS, the City of Auburn on August 18, 1986 adopted a Comprehensive Plan by Resolution No. 1703 which includes Map establishing the location of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations throughout the City; and WHEREAS, the City of Auburn on April 17, 1995 adopted Comprehensive Plan Amendments by Resolution No. 2635 to comply with the Washington State Growth Management Act; and WHEREAS, the City of Auburn on September 5, 1995 reaffirmed that action by Ordinance No. 4788; and WHEREAS, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad challenged the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan in front of the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board; and Ordinance No. 4980 June 9, 1997 Page 1 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 WHEREAS, the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board in Case No. 95-3-0075C ruled that the City's Comprehensive Plan was in compliance with the Growth Management Act, but remanded to the City four (4) specific sections of the Plan; and WHEREAS, the City adopted amendments to comply with the Board's order; and WHEREAS, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad challenged the City's Comprehensive Plan Amendments; and WHEREAS, on February 13, of Non-Compliance and which the Board found the Growth Management provisions of the City's Process; and WHEREAS, Draft comply with the Hearings Planning Department as Auburn Comprehensive Plan; again 1997, the board issued a Finding notice of Second Compliance Hearing in the City's Plan to largely comply with Act with the exception of two minor Essential Public Facility Siting Comprehensive Plan text amendments to Board decision were prepared by the proposed revisions to the City of and Ordinance No. 4980 Ju/~e 9, 1997 Page 2 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 WHEREAS, transmitted to 1997; and WHEREAS, Comprehensive the Comprehensive Plan text amendments were the Auburn City Planning Commission in April, accordance with procedures of the Act; and WHEREAS, after proper notice official newspaper at least ten the environmental impacts of the Draft Plan text amendments were considered in State Environmental Policy published in the City's (10) days prior to the date of hearing, the Auburn Planning Commission on May 6, 1997, conducted public hearings on the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, at the hearing, the Auburn City Planning Commission heard public testimony and took evidence and exhibits into consideration of said proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, thereafter the Auburn City Planning Commission recommended approval of the Draft Comprehensive Plan text amendments, and transmitted a copy of its recommendation to the Auburn City Council through the Mayor, who acknowledged receipt thereof and directed the Clerk to certify thereon the date of receipt; and Ordinance NO. 4980 June 9, 1997 Page 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 WHEREAS, of the Auburn recommendations Council; and WHEREAS, Auburn City proposed meeting, the Plannin9 and Community Development Committee City Council reviewed the Plannin9 Commission's and recommended approval to the Auburn City within sixty (60) days from the receipt of the Plannin9 Commission recommendation for the amendments the Auburn City Council, at a public held after proper notice published in the City's official newspaper at beast ten hearin9 on June amendments as Commission and the and Committee. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: ~ The Plannin~ and (10) 2, 1997, considered and voted recommended by the Auburn Plannin9 days prior to the date of on the proposed City Plannin9 Community Development OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, Community Development Committee's Recommended Amendments, hereto attached as Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof as though set forth in full, are herewith adopted and approved and it is herewith directed that Ordinance No. 4980 Ju~le 9, 1997 Page 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 l0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 they be Clerk and be available for public inspection. ~ The Comprehensive Plan text the Comprehensive Plan adopted on August filed alon9 with this Ordinance with the Auburn City amendments modify 18, 1986 by Resolution 1703 and readopted by Ordinance No. 4788 on September 5,1995. ~ The Comprehensive Plan and amendments is herewith designated as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority under the Washington State Environmental Policy Act by the City's responsible environmental official in accordance with R.C.W. 43.21C.060. ~ If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance or any of the Comprehensive Plan amendments adopted herein, is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any Court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a distinct affect and independent provision, and such holdin9 the validity of the remaining portions separate, shall not thereof. Ordinance No. 4980 June 9, 1997 Page 5 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 such administrative procedures as out the directions of this The Mayor is hereby authorized to implement may be necessary to carry legislation to include incorporating into one document the adopted Comprehensive Plan text amendments, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and preparing and publishing the amended Comprehensive Plan. ~ This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force five days from and after its passage, approval, and publication as provided by law. INTRODUCED: PASSED: APPROVED: CHARLES A. BOOTH MAYOR Ordinance NO. 4980 Ju~e 9, 1997 Page 6 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 ATTEST: Robin Wohlhueter, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Michael J. Reynolds, City Attorney PUBLISHED: Ordinance NO. 4980 June 9, 1997 Page 7 May 8, 1997 Planning Commission Recommended Comprehensive Plan Amendments to Comply with the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board Decision of February 13, 1997 Note: There are no changes from the April 11, 1997 version of these amendments. CF-62 Essential Public Facility Siting Process. 1. The City will review proposals through the process outlined in parts (3) through (7) below, if the essential public facility largely serves a regional, countywide, statewide or national need and is included within an adopted state or regional plan which meets the following criteria: a. The state or regional plan was developed through an appropriate public process (including at least one local public hearing) and has undergone a NEPA and/or SEPA review; b. Appropriate alternative sites both in and outside Auburn must be considered and evaluated; c. Impacts of the proposed essential public facility must be identified and an appropriate mitigation plan developed with a financing strategy using non-local sources; .... t'--'* .......... ,. ............~ ...... !CC.a! ..... + ....... If the essential public facility largely serves a regional, countywide, statewide or national need and is not part of an adopted state or regional plan, the proponent will be required to request that the appropriate state or regional plan be amended to include the proposal meeting the criteria contained in part (1) above. The proposal will also be reviewed following the process outlined in parts (3) through (7). Essential public facilities of a regional, countywide, statewide or national nature will be reviewed by the City through the special area plan process. The boundaries of the Special Area Plan will be set at a scale directly related to the size and magnitude of the proposal. For facilities of regional, state, and national need, Auburn staff shall participate in the review process of part 1 (above), and use the data, analysis and environmental documents prepared in that process to aid in the City's special area plan review, if Auburn determines that those documents are adequate. If the facility requires other development permits, those approvals also shall be considered within the review process. The special area plan process to be used for essential public facilities of a regional, countywide, statewide or national nature shall follow the City's Comprehensive Plan amendment process which includes multiple opportunities for public involvement. Exhibit A to Ordinance 4980 Comprehensive Plan Amendments, Page 2. April 22, 1997 An analysis of the facility's impact on City finances shall be undertaken. If the study shows that locating a facility in a community would result in a disproportionate financial burden on the City of Auburn, an agreement with the project's proponents must be executed to mitigate the adverse financial impact or the approval shall be denied. If the essential public facility meets largely local needs (for example, in-patient facilities, including substance abuse facilities, mental health facilities and group homes), the facility shall be considered based upon section (7) below. The following criteria shall be used to evaluate all applications to site essential public facilities: a. Whether there is a public need for the facility. b. The impact of the facility on the surrounding uses and environment, the City and the region. c. Whether the design of the facility or the operation of the facility can be conditioned, or the impacts mitigated, in a similar manner as with a traditional private development, to make the facility compatible with the affected area and the environment. d. Whether a package of_mitigating measuresi-ae~v~ can be developed that would make siting the facility within the community more acceptable. e. Whether the factors that make the facility difficult to site can be modified to increase the range of available sites or to minimize impacts on affected areas and the environment. £ Whether the proposed essential public facility is consistent with the Auburn Comprehensive Plan. g. Essential public facilities shall comply with any applicable state siting and permitting requirements(e.g., hazardous waste facilities).