Chapter 14.90
PROVISIONS RELEVANT TO ALL PERMITS
Sections:
14.90.010 Acknowledgement of owner.
14.90.020 Consolidation of permits.
14.90.030 Concurrency and wellhead protection.
14.90.040 Method of publication.
14.90.050 120-day time limit – Exceptions.
14.90.060 Repealed.
14.90.070 Permit conditions.
14.90.080 Assignability of permits.
14.90.090 Permit expiration.
14.90.100 All aspects of the application are binding.
14.90.110 Minor changes.
14.90.120 Time deadlines falling on nonbusiness days.
14.90.130 Minor procedural errors shall not invalidate proceedings.
14.90.140 Stay of further permits in the event of appeal.
14.90.150 Cost of providing records.
14.90.010 Acknowledgement of owner.
All applications shall be signed by the property owner or an authorized representative. (Ord. 988 § 2, 2003).
14.90.020 Consolidation of permits.
If a proposal requires more than one permit, all permits shall be consolidated, as follows:
A. Such information as name, address, and legal description need only be entered once, by such means as a master permit application form or master cover sheet.
B. Reports, hearings, notices, recommendations, and decisions shall address the project as a whole except where expediency requires otherwise, such as where the proponent requires one authorization before another.
C. The director(s) shall utilize the process of that permit type which includes all reviews required for the various permits, and no more.
D. If one permit cannot be reasonably processed until another is issued, such as a building permit that cannot be processed until a variance is issued, the 120 days within which a notice of decision must be issued for the contingent permit (in this example, the building permit) shall not begin until the other permit has been issued.
E. Appeals of more than one of the permits required for a project shall be consolidated in a single appeal, to the extent that the appeals bodies are identical. (Ord. 988 § 2, 2003).
14.90.030 Concurrency and wellhead protection.
A. For permit processes which could trigger a concurrency review in accordance with BLMC 19.02.070(B)(1), the permit application forms shall require the information necessary to determine whether BLMC 19.02.070(B)(1) applies, such as whether the proposal will create 10 or more peak-hour trips. If BLMC 19.02.070(B)(1) does apply, the director(s) may delay issuance of a determination of completeness until the director(s) has received any traffic study or other information necessary to issue a concurrency determination in accordance with BLMC 19.02.070. The director(s) shall issue the concurrency determination, if applicable, at any appropriate point in the permit process prior to or concurrent with the decision on the permit application.
B. See Chapter 16.24 BLMC for additional permit processing required for wellhead protection. (Ord. 988 § 2, 2003).
14.90.040 Method of publication.
A. All notices required by this development code shall include:
1. The information required by RCW 36.70B.110(2), except that SEPA-related information shall not be required for Type 1, 2, and 4 permits;
2. The appeal information required by WAC 197-11-680(5) if applicable;
3. The general location of the property in question; and
4. Other information as the director(s) deems necessary.
B. The public comment period shall be at least 15 days.
C. The applicant shall bear all publication costs.
D. Notices of application, hearing, and/or determination of significance/scoping shall be:
1. Mailed by first class mail to the applicant and all owners of property within 600 feet of any portion of the proposed action according to the current county assessor’s records;
2. Posted on the development site, at the location(s) which the director(s) deems best suited to reach the attention of whoever may be affected, on a large sign(s) containing a heading such as “NOTICE OF LAND USE ACTION”; and
3. Posted at City Hall.
E. Notices of decision shall be:
1. Mailed to the applicant, the county assessor, and anyone who, prior to the decision, requested notice of the decision or submitted substantive comments on the application or was otherwise a party of record;
2. Posted on the development site on the same large sign(s) on which was posted the previous notice(s); and
3. Posted at City Hall.
F. The director(s) may publicize a given permit proposal more broadly or by additional means than stated herein if a greater level of public awareness is deemed necessary. (Ord. 1027 § 1, 2004; Ord. 988 § 2, 2003).
14.90.050 120-day time limit – Exceptions.
The following time periods shall not count toward the maximum of 120 days which can expire between the determination of completeness and the notice of decision (the decision itself in case of Type 1 permits):
A. Any period commencing with a request by the city that the applicant provide any further information or an environmental impact statement until the applicant provides said information.
B. Any period during which the applicant is not current in payment of city permit review fees.
C. Any period during which a comprehensive plan or development regulation amendment is being processed preliminary to deciding upon a permit application.
D. Any period between the initial determination of completeness and any subsequent determination of completeness should the applicant substantially revise the proposal.
E. Any period during which any decision related to the permit application is being appealed.
F. Any period mutually agreed upon by the applicant and the city. (Ord. 988 § 2, 2003).
14.90.060 If the director(s) is unable to make a threshold determination within 14 days of determination of completeness.
Repealed by Ord. 1322. (Ord. 988 § 2, 2003).
14.90.070 Permit conditions.
A. In granting a permit, the grantor may attach thereto such conditions as necessary to make the permit compatible with the criteria applicable to that permit.
B. The city may require, as a condition of any permit approval, the posting of a cash performance bond or other security sufficient to fulfill the requirements of this development code and any conditions upon which the permit is granted. (Ord. 988 § 2, 2003).
14.90.080 Assignability of permits.
Development permits shall run with the land and be freely assignable. (Ord. 988 § 2, 2003).
14.90.090 Permit expiration.
A. This section shall apply to all permits except:
1. Building permits; and
2. Any permits for which this development code establishes a specific permit expiration.
B. Permit applications not excepted above shall expire one year after any application dormancy or hold status initiated by the applicant. “Dormancy or hold status” shall include periods during which the city waits for information it has requested of the applicant which is needed in order to process the application.
C. Approved permits not excepted above shall expire two years after the date of issuance if substantial progress has not been made toward realizing the permitted use or project, or within five years if construction has not been completed.
D. The body charged with granting the permit may extend the date of permit expiration for one year upon request by the applicant prior to said permit’s expiration. (Ord. 1245 § 1, 2007; Ord. 988 § 2, 2003).
14.90.100 All aspects of the application are binding.
All aspects of the application are binding, including graphic representations such as site plans, building elevations, and related required materials. (Ord. 988 § 2, 2003).
14.90.110 Minor changes.
The director(s) may approve minor changes to the permitted proposal that do not create any additional lots or impacts, provided those changes are so insignificant that, in the director(s)’s judgment, the changes would not have affected the decision of the original decision-makers, and; provided, that the proposal still complies with this development code. More substantial changes shall require a new permit. (Ord. 988 § 2, 2003).
14.90.120 Time deadlines falling on nonbusiness days.
Any time deadline established by this development code that falls on a day in which the Bonney Lake City Hall is closed shall extend to the next business day. (Ord. 988 § 2, 2003).
14.90.130 Minor procedural errors shall not invalidate proceedings.
Minor errors in permit procedures, such as unintended inaccuracies in any public notice, shall not invalidate a permit proceeding. (Ord. 988 § 2, 2003).
14.90.140 Stay of further permits in the event of appeal.
When any city action taken pursuant to these development regulations is administratively or judicially appealed, the director may stay further permit issuances for the use or improvement to which the appeal relates until the appeal has been settled. (Ord. 988 § 2, 2003).
14.90.150 Cost of providing records.
Parties requesting written certified records, copies of the hearing examiner proceedings, or information from the permit files shall pay all costs of providing or copying said information per BLMC 3.90.020, not exceeding the maximums stated in RCW 42.17.260. (Ord. 988 § 2, 2003).