Chapter 16.26
LAND USE DECISIONS PROCEDURES

Sections:

16.26.010    Purpose and application.

16.26.020    Definitions.

16.26.030    Classification of decisions.

16.26.035    Ministerial administrative decisions.

16.26.040    Applications.

16.26.050    Neighborhood meeting.

16.26.055    Open record appeal.

16.26.060    Consolidation of Types I, II and III applications.

16.26.070    Commencing activity.

16.26.080    Type I applications – Code administrator’s recommendation.

16.26.090    Type I – Notice of code administrator’s recommendation.

16.26.100    Type I – Hearing examiner – Open record predecision hearing.

16.26.110    Type I – Hearing examiner – Decision – Effect.

16.26.120    Type II applications – Code administrator’s recommendation.

16.26.130    Type II – Public notice of code administrator’s recommendation.

16.26.140    Type II – Hearing examiner – Open record predecision hearing.

16.26.150    Type II – Hearing examiner – Recommendation.

16.26.160    Type II – City council – Closed record hearing.

16.26.170    Type III applications.

16.26.180    Type III – Code administrator’s decision – Notice – Effect.

16.26.190    Type III – Appeal.

16.26.200    Type IV – City council legislative nonproject actions.

16.26.210    Planning commission procedure.

16.26.220    Planning commission – Public hearing.

16.26.230    City council review.

16.26.240    Rules.

16.26.250    Hold harmless and indemnification.

16.26.010 Purpose and application.

A. This chapter establishes standard procedures for land use and related decisions made by the city of Lake Forest Park. They provide for an integrated and consolidated permit review process to promote timely and informed public participation and to eliminate redundancy and thereby minimize delay and expense.

B. This chapter applies to all applications for land use and related decisions made under LFPMC Titles 15, 16, 17 and 18. (Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.020 Definitions.

A. “Closed record appeal” means an administrative appeal of a decision on an application for a permit to the body or officer designated in this chapter, following an open record hearing or the decision of a code administrator, held without submission of new evidence and limited to argument submitted on the record made at the open record hearing or before a code administrator.

B. “Code administrator” means the department head or city official with jurisdiction over an application.

C. “Dead-end street” means a street with only one inlet/outlet.

D. “Hearing examiner” means the official hired by the city to serve as a hearing examiner.

E. “Neighborhood meeting” means an informal meeting initiated by a project proponent to obtain comments from the public in order to consider the input received and report back to the city.

F. “Open record hearing” means a hearing conducted by the body designated in this chapter which creates the city’s record regarding the application through testimony and submission of evidence and information. An open record hearing held before the decision on an application is an open record predecision hearing. If no open record predecision hearing has been held on the project permit, an open record hearing held on an appeal is an open record appeal hearing.

G. “Person with standing” to appeal means people who are aggrieved or adversely affected by the land use decision, or who would be aggrieved or adversely affected if the land use decision were changed. A person is aggrieved or adversely affected when all of the following are satisfied:

1. The land use decision has or will likely result in harm or injury to the person;

2. That person’s asserted interests are among those that the city was required to consider when it made the land use decision; and

3. An appeal decision in favor of that person would substantially eliminate or remedy the harm to that person caused or likely to be caused by the land use decision. (Ord. 1132 § 2, 2016; Ord. 835 § 1, 2000; Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.030 Classification of decisions.

A. Type I – Quasi-Judicial Decisions of the Hearing Examiner.

1. Conditional use permits and shoreline conditional use permits;

2. Planned unit development approvals;

3. Variances, including shoreline variances;

4. Shoreline substantial development permits;

5. An appeal of a decision on the sufficiency of an environmental impact statement (EIS) related to a Type I application;

6. Preliminary subdivision (plat) approval;

7. An appeal of a decision on the sufficiency of an EIS related to a preliminary subdivision;

8. Requests for exemption under LFPMC 16.16.250; and

9. Commercial site development permits under Chapter 18.48 LFPMC.

B. Type II – Quasi-Judicial Decisions of the City Council.

1. Site-specific or project-specific rezones and changes to the zoning map that do not affect the comprehensive plan; and

2. An appeal of a decision on the sufficiency of an EIS related to a Type II application.

C. Type III – Administrative Decisions Made by a Code Administrator.

1. Threshold determinations under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA);

2. Administrative variances;

3. Shoreline exemption permits;

4. Sensitive area permits issued pursuant to Chapter 16.16 LFPMC, with the exception of requests for exemption under LFPMC 16.16.250 and the exception of minor sensitive area permits as described under LFPMC 16.16.080(A)(2); and

5. Short subdivisions.

D. Type IV – Legislative Nonproject Decisions Made by the City Council.

1. Amendments to the text of the land use code or comprehensive plan;

2. Amendments to the comprehensive plan map;

3. Site-specific or project-specific proposals affecting the comprehensive plan;

4. Amendments to the zoning map (rezones) on a city-wide or area-wide basis, or multiple site nonproject rezones; and

5. A decision on the sufficiency of an EIS related to any nonproject action.

E. Ministerial Administrative Decisions.

1. Final decisions of the city for which notice will be given by posting the property as provided in this chapter and by posting notice at City Hall:

a. Building permits for new construction of either multifamily residential or commercial structures;

b. Land clearing, grading, excavating, and tree-cutting permits; and

2. Final decisions of the city which are not subject to the notice provisions of this chapter:

a. All other building permits and minor sensitive area, land clearing, grading, excavating and tree-cutting permits;

b. Boundary line adjustment;

c. Final plats;

d. Temporary use permits;

e. Home occupation permits; and

f. Right-of-way permits;

3. Interpretations of LFPMC Titles 15, 16, 17, and 18, which are neither final decisions of the city nor subject to the notice provisions of this chapter. (Ord. 1132 § 3, 2016; Ord. 1057 § 5, 2013; Ord. 946 § 4, 2006; Ord. 876 § 1, 2002; Ord. 835 § 2, 2000; Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.035 Ministerial administrative decisions.

Decisions made by the code administrator or code enforcement officer under LFPMC 16.26.030(E)(1) or (2) may be appealed to the hearing examiner in an open record appeal. (Ord. 1132 § 4, 2016; Ord. 835 § 3, 2000)

16.26.040 Applications.

A. Submittal Requirements.

1. Applications shall be submitted on forms provided by the city. The code administrator shall specify submittal requirements, including type, detail, and number of copies for an application to be complete. Unless a project is determined to be categorically exempt, an environmental checklist shall be included in the application.

2. The code administrator may waive specific submittal requirements determined to be unnecessary for review of an application. The code administrator may require additional material such as maps, studies, or models when the code administrator determines such material is needed to adequately assess the proposed project. The code administrator may participate in preapplication meetings.

B. Notice of Complete Application.

1. Within 28 calendar days after receiving an application, the code administrator shall notify the applicant in writing whether the application is or is not complete and, if not, what is required to make it complete; otherwise, the application shall be deemed complete as of the end of the twenty-eighth day.

2. If additional information is requested, then within 14 calendar days after such information has been submitted, the code administrator shall notify the applicant as provided in LFPMC 16.26.040(B)(1) or the application shall be deemed complete.

3. A land use application is complete when it meets the submittal requirements established by the code administrator and it is sufficient for continued processing. A determination that an application is complete shall not preclude the code administrator from requesting additional information or studies at any time to facilitate complete review of the application or if substantial changes in the permit application are proposed.

C. Environmental Compliance.

1. If possible, the code administrator shall issue a threshold determination or a decision that the project is categorically exempt before publication of the notice of application, but in no event later than 90 calendar days from the notice of complete application. Notice of any threshold determination shall be published in conjunction with the notice of application.

2. The code administrator may use the optional DNS procedure authorized by WAC 197-11-355 and include in the notice of application that this optional process will be used; that a determination of nonsignificance is likely; and that the comment period applicable to the notice of application will be the only opportunity to comment upon environmental issues.

D. Notice of Application.

1. The code administrator shall provide notice of application within 14 calendar days of issuance of the notice of complete application by:

a. Publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city of a notice containing the date of the application, the date of the notice of complete application, the date of any public hearing, describing the project, its location, other city permits or approvals sought or required, and providing the address where the complete application file may be reviewed;

b. Mailing to agencies with jurisdiction, owners of real property within 300 feet of the project site, each person or organization which has requested such notice for the calendar year and paid any applicable fee as established by the council, and to the chairs of the planning commission and the environmental quality commission, a notice which includes:

i. The date of the application and of the notice of complete application,

ii. The project description and location,

iii. City permits or approvals sought,

iv. The date of any public hearing, and

v. The code administrator may include other information to the extent known at the time of notice of application, such as any decision under the State Environmental Policy Act, related permits required by other agencies or jurisdictions, identification of studies requested for application review, existing environmental documents applicable to the project, and a statement of the preliminary determination, if one has been made, of those development regulations that will be used for project mitigation; and

c. Posting one sign immediately adjacent to each street frontage on or immediately adjacent to the site for any site specific application. The code administrator shall establish standards for size, color, layout, design, and wording of the signs and approve the location of the signs; provided, that no sign shall be posted higher than six feet from ground level;

2. A notice of application is not required for projects for which public comment or hearing are not required and that are categorically exempt under the State Environmental Protection Act.

E. Minimum Comment Period.

1. The notice of application shall be subject to a minimum comment period of 14 calendar days from the date of publication. The code administrator’s recommendation or decision will not be issued prior to the expiration of the comment period.

2. The code administrator may accept and respond to public comments at any time prior to the closing of the public hearing record.

3. A single comment letter may be submitted to the code administrator addressing environmental impacts and other issues subject to review for those projects requiring review under the State Environmental Policy Act.

F. Project Time Limits.

1. The code administrator shall establish reasonable and predictable times for review of applications and decisions thereon not to exceed 120 days, except as provided in RCW 36.70B.090 (2).

2. For purposes of counting days of permit processing, the applicable time period shall begin on the first working day following the date the application is determined to be complete and shall exclude the following:

a. Any period during which the applicant is correcting plans, conducting studies, or providing additional information at the request or direction of the city and up to 14 days after the information has been provided, unless the city has earlier notified the applicant the information is complete.

b. Any period required to complete an EIS; provided, that the applicant and the city agree upon such time or that the city has adopted a resolution specifying such time;

c. Any period for administrative appeals; and

d. Any period excluded by agreement of the city and the applicant. (Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.050 Neighborhood meeting.

A. The applicant for a short subdivision creating two or more lots, or a Type III commercial site development permit, shall conduct a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposed development prior to submission of the development proposal to the city. A preapplication meeting is required prior to the neighborhood meeting. The purpose of the meeting is to receive neighborhood input and suggestions prior to submission of the application and give the applicant the opportunity to try to mitigate impacts the proposal may have on the neighborhood.

B. At least 10 days prior to the neighborhood meeting, the applicant shall give notice of the date, time, and location of the meeting to the planning director and to the following by mailing notice:

1. Owners of real property within 500 feet of the project site, and

2. If the project site is located on a dead-end street, to all owners of real property on the dead end street.

C. The neighborhood meeting shall meet the following requirements:

1. The notice shall be on a form provided by the planning director and shall briefly describe the proposal; provide its location; include a vicinity map; and provide the name, address, and telephone number of the applicant or a representative of the applicant who may be contacted for additional information about the proposal.

2. The notice shall be postmarked 10 to 14 days prior to the meeting.

3. The neighborhood meeting shall be held in the city limits of Lake Forest Park and shall be held any time between the hours of 5:30 p.m. and 9:30 p.m. on weekdays or any time between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. on weekends.

4. The neighborhood meeting agenda shall cover the following items:

a. Introduction of neighborhood meeting organizer (i.e., developer, property owner, etc.);

b. Description of proposed project;

c. Listing of permits that are anticipated for the project;

d. Description of how comments made at the neighborhood meeting are used;

e. Provide meeting attendees with the city’s contact information;

f. Provide a sign-up sheet for attendees.

D. The applicant shall provide to the city a written summary or checklist of the neighborhood meeting. The summary shall include the following:

1. A copy of the mailed notice of the neighborhood meeting with a mailing list of homeowners who were notified;

2. A list of persons and their addresses who attended the meeting;

3. A summary of concerns, issues, and problems expressed during the meeting;

4. A summary of concerns, issues, and problems the applicant is unwilling or unable to address and why; and

5. A summary of proposed modifications, or site plan revisions, addressing concerns expressed at the meeting.

The city will mail the summary of the neighborhood meeting to all persons who attended the neighborhood meeting, signed in and provided a legible address. (Ord. 1132 § 5, 2016; Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.055 Open record appeal.

A. Open record appeals are heard by the hearing examiner.

B. Only the applicant, owner of the real property, and persons with standing may initiate an appeal on a project permit application.

C. An appeal of a project permit decision must be filed within 14 calendar days following issuance of the notice of decision. An appeal of a determination under SEPA issued at the same time as the decision on a project action shall be filed within 14 days after a notice of decision, unless it is an appeal of a DNS for which public comment is required, in which case this appeal period shall be extended for an additional seven days. For threshold determinations issued prior to a decision on a project action, any appeal shall be filed within 14 days after notice that the determination has been made and is appealable.

D. Appeals must be delivered to the clerk’s office by mail or personal delivery by the last business day of the appeal period.

E. For the purposes of computing the time for filing an appeal, the day the notice of decision is rendered shall not be included. The last day of the appeal period shall be included unless it is a Saturday, Sunday, or a day designated by RCW 1.16.050 or by the city’s ordinances as a legal holiday, then it also is excluded and the filing must be completed on the next business day (RCW 35A.28.070).

F. Appeals shall be in writing, be accompanied by an appeal fee as set by the city council, and contain the following information:

1. Appellant’s name, address, and phone number;

2. Appellant’s statement describing his or her standing to appeal;

3. Identification of the application and decision that is the subject of the appeal;

4. Appellant’s statement of grounds for appeal and the facts upon which the appeal is based;

5. The relief sought, including the specific nature and extent; and

6. A statement that the appellant has read the appeal and believes the contents to be true, followed by the appellant’s signature.

G. The timely filing of an appeal shall stay the effective date of the decision until such time as the appeal is adjudicated by the hearing examiner.

H. Unless the parties to an appeal have agreed to an extended time period, the administrative appeal shall be completed within 90 days from the date the original administrative appeal period closed.

I. The appeal shall be scheduled before the hearing examiner, and a notice thereof shall be mailed to all parties of record by the code administrator no less than 14 days before the date of the hearing.

J. The burden of proof is on the appellant. (Ord. 1132 § 6, 2016)

16.26.060 Consolidation of Types I, II and III applications.

A. At the request of an applicant, whenever a single project includes a combination of Type I, Type II, or Type III applications, the city shall combine review of the type components. A consolidated report setting forth the recommendation and decisions of the code administrator(s) will be issued.

B. Consolidated Type I and Type II applications shall be reviewed and appealed under provisions applicable to Type II applications. (Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.070 Commencing activity.

A. An applicant may commence activity or obtain other required approvals on the day following the effective date of a decision approving a project or approving it with modifications.

B. Activity commenced prior to the expiration of any appeal period is at the sole risk of the applicant. (Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.080 Type I applications – Code administrator’s recommendation.

A. Except as provided in subsection C of this section, after the expiration of the comment period for the notice of application, the code administrator shall prepare and submit to the hearing examiner for each Type I application a written recommendation thereon based upon applicable decision criteria. The code administrator shall include any conditions necessary to ensure consistency with city development regulations, and may include mitigation measures proposed under the provisions of the State Environmental Policy Act.

B. Along with the recommendation the code administrator shall transmit to the hearing examiner a copy of the department file on the application, including all information reviewed or relied upon by the code administrator; and all written comments received by the code administrator. The file shall also include verification that notice requirements have been met. The code administrator shall schedule an open record predecision hearing on the application before the hearing examiner no sooner than 10 days after publication of the notice of hearing.

C. A Type I application that is consolidated with a Type II application shall be reviewed and decided under those provisions applicable to a Type II application. (Ord. 924 § 3, 2005; Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.090 Type I – Notice of code administrator’s recommendation.

A. Notice of the recommendation, the determination under the State Environmental Policy Act, and of the date of the hearing examiner’s hearing shall be included in the notice of hearing.

B. In addition, written notice shall be provided to each person who submitted comments during the comment period or at any time prior to the publication of the notice of recommendation. (Ord. 924 § 4, 2005; Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.100 Type I – Hearing examiner – Open record predecision hearing.

A. The hearing examiner shall conduct an open record predecision hearing on the application. All exhibits introduced at the hearing shall be retained and an electronic sound recording of each hearing shall be made.

B. Any person may participate by submitting written comments to the code administrator before the hearing or by submitting written comments or by testifying at the hearing.

C. The applicant must demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that a Type I application merits approval or approval with modifications.

D. An appeal of a Type III application consolidated with a Type I application shall be heard and decided as provided in LFPMC 16.26.190 in conjunction with the open record predecision hearing on the Type I application as provided in LFPMC 16.26.190. (Ord. 835 § 4, 2000; Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.110 Type I – Hearing examiner – Decision – Effect.

A. After the close of an open record predecision hearing, the hearing examiner shall enter its decision. A Type I application that complies with the applicable decision criteria shall be approved; provided, that the examiner may modify or condition a proposal to ensure conformity with the relevant decision criteria.

B. The hearing examiner shall file with the code administrator a written report, which shall contain:

1. The decision on the Type I application; and

2. Any conditions included as part of the decision(s); and

3. Findings of fact upon which the decision(s), including any conditions, was based and the conclusions derived from those facts; and

4. The decision on any appeal of a Type III application consolidated with the Type I application.

C. The code administrator shall mail the written decision(s) to each person who participated in the open record predecision hearing.

D. The decision of the hearing examiner is the final decision of the city. (Ord. 835 § 5, 2000; Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.120 Type II applications – Code administrator’s recommendation.

A. After the expiration of the comment period for the notice of application, the code administrator shall prepare and submit to the hearing examiner for each Type II application a written recommendation thereon based upon applicable decision criteria. The code administrator shall include any conditions necessary to ensure consistency with city development regulations, and may include any mitigation measures proposed under the provisions of the State Environmental Policy Act.

B. Along with the recommendation, the code administrator shall transmit to the hearing examiner a copy of the department file on the application including all information reviewed by or relied upon by the code administrator and all written comments received by the code administrator. The file shall also include verification that notice requirements have been met. The code administrator shall schedule an open record predecision hearing before the hearing examiner no sooner than 10 days after publication of the notice of hearing. (Ord. 835 § 6, 2000; Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.130 Type II – Public notice of code administrator’s recommendation.

A. Notice of the recommendation, the determination under the State Environmental Policy Act, and of the date of the hearing examiner’s hearing shall be included in the notice of hearing.

B. In addition, written notice shall be provided to each person who submitted comments during the comment period or at any time prior to the publication of the notice of recommendation. (Ord. 835 § 7, 2000; Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.140 Type II – Hearing examiner – Open record predecision hearing.

A. The hearing examiner shall conduct an open record predecision hearing on the application. All exhibits introduced at the hearing shall be retained and an electronic sound recording of each hearing shall be made.

B. Any person may participate in the hearing by submitting written comments to the code administrator before the hearing or by submitting written comments or by testifying at the hearing.

C. The applicant must demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that a Type II application merits approval or approval with modifications. (Ord. 835 § 8, 2000; Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.150 Type II – Hearing examiner – Recommendation.

A. The hearing examiner shall make a recommended decision on a Type II application based upon applicable decision criteria; provided, that in its recommendation, the hearing examiner may modify or condition a proposal to ensure conformity with the relevant decision criteria.

B. Following the close of the record, the hearing examiner shall file with the code administrator a written report, which shall contain:

1. The recommendation on the Type II application; and

2. Any conditions included as part of the recommendation; and

3. Findings of fact upon which the recommendation, including any conditions, was based and the conclusions derived from those facts; and

C. The code administrator shall mail the written recommendation to each person who participated in the open record predecision hearing. (Ord. 835 § 9, 2000; Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.160 Type II – City council – Closed record hearing.

A. General. The city council shall review each Type II application on a closed record hearing.

B. Type II – Elements to be Considered.

1. After the hearing examiner’s recommendation is filed with the code administrator, the code administrator shall forward the complete record of proceedings before the hearing examiner to the city administrator who shall schedule a hearing on the recommendation before the city council. The code administrator shall notify any participant in proceedings before the hearing examiner of the date of the city council hearing on the recommendation.

2. The city council shall consider the following in deciding upon an application:

a. The complete record developed before the hearing examiner on a Type II application, and the code administrator on a Type III application; and

b. The recommendation of the hearing examiner on the Type II application.

3. Written and oral argument submitted by a participant in the proceedings before the hearing examiner and such new information or evidence as the council in its discretion should choose to hear. Argument shall be based upon the record only.

4. The city council shall adopt an ordinance that:

a. Approves the application; or

b. Approves the application with modifications or conditions; or

c. Remands the application to the hearing examiner for an additional hearing limited to specific issues identified by the council; or

d. Denies the application.

5. The city council shall include findings of fact and conclusions which support the decision of the council, including any conditions, in the ordinance approving or approving with modifications the application. The city council may by reference adopt some or all of the findings and conclusions of the hearing examiner.

C. Type III Consolidated with Type II – Appeal.

1. An appeal of a decision on a Type III application that has been consolidated with a Type II shall be heard and decided as provided in LFPMC 16.26.190 in conjunction with the council’s hearing on the Type II application.

2. The city council shall adopt an ordinance incorporating its decision on the appeal of the Type III application. The city council may incorporate the findings and conclusions of the code administrator.

D. Distribution and Effect of Decision.

1. The city clerk shall mail the decision(s) of the city council to any person who participated in the open predecision hearing on the application or who was a party to the decision of the code administrator.

2. The decision(s) of the city council is the final decision of the city. (Ord. 835 § 10, 2000; Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.170 Type III applications.

A. If required by the State Environmental Policy Act, a threshold determination will be issued by the code administrator prior to or in conjunction with the code administrator’s decision on the accompanying application.

B. Whenever an EIS is required, the threshold determination will be issued early and the EIS will be completed prior to a decision on the accompanying application.

C. An appeal of the requirement to prepare an EIS or a supplemental EIS must be heard and decided prior to a decision on the underlying application. (Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.180 Type III – Code administrator’s decision – Notice – Effect.

A. The code administrator shall prepare a written decision approving, approving with conditions, or denying the application based upon applicable decision criteria. The decision shall include conditions to ensure consistency with city development regulations, and may include mitigation measures proposed under the provisions of the State Environmental Policy Act.

B. The code administrator’s decision shall be published as prescribed in LFPMC 16.26.040(D) (1)(a), (b), and (c). (Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.190 Type III – Appeal.

A. Unless an appeal to the Shoreline Hearings Board is required by law or the Type III application has been consolidated with a Type I or II application, the code administrator’s decision may be appealed to the hearing examiner by the applicant, owner, or person with standing.

B. The hearing examiner shall conduct an open record appeal hearing. All proceedings shall be electronically recorded and all exhibits shall be maintained by the city.

C. An appeal of a Type III decision shall be consolidated with and heard (1) at the open record predecision hearing on any underlying Type I decision; or (2) at the open record predecision hearing on any underlying Type II application; provided, that an appeal of determination of significance shall be heard by the hearing examiner in an open record hearing before any decision on the underlying application is made.

D. After the close of the record, the hearing examiner shall issue a decision to affirm, affirm with modifications, or reverse the decision. The decision may be reversed or modified only if, after according substantial weight to the decision, a finding is made that the appellant has established that the decision is not supported by a preponderance of the evidence.

E. The decision of the hearing examiner on an appeal of a Type III application is the final decision of the city. (Ord. 1132 § 7, 2016; Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.200 Type IV – City council legislative nonproject actions.

A. Type IV actions of the city council usually will be prefaced by a hearing before and recommendation of the planning commission.

B. The city council may hold substitute or additional hearings regarding proposals concerning legislative nonproject actions. (Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.210 Planning commission procedure.

A. Type IV proposals usually will be introduced to the planning commission, which may schedule study sessions as needed to consider the proposal.

B. Before making a recommendation, the planning commission shall schedule a public hearing. After the public hearing, and after any further study sessions, the planning commission shall transmit its recommendation to the city council through the applicable code administrator.

C. The planning commission may recommend the council adopt or adopt with modifications a proposal if it complies with the applicable decision criteria of the Lake Forest Park Municipal Code. In all other cases, the planning commission shall recommend denial of the proposal.

D. A vote to recommend adoption of the proposal or adoption with modification must be by a majority vote of the planning commission members present and voting. (Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.220 Planning commission – Public hearing.

A. Notice of the public hearing shall be given by the code administrator as provided in LFPMC 16.26.040(D)(1)(a), (b), and (c).

B. Any person may participate in the public hearing by submitting written comments to the code administrator prior to the hearing or by submitting written or making oral comments to the planning commission or the council at the hearing. All written comments received by the applicable department code administrator shall be transmitted to the planning commission or city council not later than the date of the public hearing.

C. The planning commission shall compile written minutes of each hearing.

D. The planning commission’s recommendation, along with the record created by planning commission shall be forwarded to the city council by the code administrator. (Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.230 City council review.

A. The city council shall consider at a public meeting each recommendation transmitted by the planning commission and each proposal before the council at the council’s own direction. The council shall take legislative action on the proposal in accordance with state law.

B. The city council may take one of the following actions:

1. Adopt an ordinance or resolution adopting the proposal or adopting the proposal with modifications; or

2. Adopt an ordinance denying the proposal; or

3. Refer the proposal back to the planning commission for further proceedings, in which case the city council shall specify the time within which the planning commission shall report back to the city council with a recommendation. (Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.240 Rules.

A. When necessary or convenient for the implementation of this chapter by the executive, the mayor shall cause administrative rules and regulations to be adopted and published in a book kept for that purpose, which shall be available to the public for inspection and copying as provided in the Open Public Records Act.

B. Copies of rules and regulations adopted pursuant to this section shall be filed with the clerk of the city council within 14 days of adoption, and the clerk shall submit a copy thereof to the city council at is next regularly scheduled meeting. (Ord. 768 § 1, 1999)

16.26.250 Hold harmless and indemnification.

A. The city administration is authorized to accept a hold harmless and indemnification agreement and to issue permits and approvals when:

1. The property for which the permit or approval is sought is located in an identified and mapped steep slope or slide hazard area;

2. A geotechnical report concerning the property which was submitted as part of the application for such permit or approval contains a disclaimer of liability that would preclude granting the permit or approval;

3. Except for the condition in subsections (A)(1) or (A)(2) of this section the requested permit or approval could be issued under city ordinances; and

4. The official charged with issuing the permit or approval concludes that the public health, safety and welfare would not be unreasonably placed at risk by issuing the permit or approval and that the city’s interest can be protected by acceptance of an indemnification and hold harmless agreement.

B. Permits issued and approvals given under subsection A of this section shall be in consideration of the agreements of the party seeking the permit or approval in the form authorized and approved by the mayor and the city attorney. (Ord. 782, 1999)