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).