Chapter 21.25
PROJECT DESIGN REVIEW

Sections:

21.25.050    Procedure.

21.25.100    Administrative decision by community development department director.

21.25.105    Administration.

21.25.110    Purpose of review.

21.25.115    Applications.

21.25.120    Compliance with State Environmental Policy Act.

21.25.125    Official file.

21.25.130    Public notice of impending decision.

21.25.135    Burden of proof.

21.25.140    Written comments.

21.25.145    Director’s decision.

21.25.150    Design departure.

21.25.155    Limitation on modification.

21.25.160    Effect of the decision.

21.25.165    Lapse of approval – General.

21.25.170    Lapse of approval – Time extension.

21.25.175    Bonds or other financial security.

21.25.180    Complete compliance required.

21.25.185    Process on appeal to hearing examiner.

21.25.050 Procedure.

The issuance of any project design review must be in accordance with procedures set forth in Process III, LMC 1.35.300 et seq. (Ord. 3311 § 14, 2018)

21.25.100 Administrative decision by community development department director.

LMC 21.25.100 through 21.25.185 shall apply to multiple-family, commercial, industrial and other nonresidential project design review decisions of the community development department director whenever a provision of the Lynnwood Municipal Code requires project design review. (Ord. 2388 § 13, 2001)

21.25.105 Administration.

Various places in this title indicate that applications for certain multiple-family, commercial, industrial and other nonresidential development are permitted only if it complies with Lynnwood Citywide Design Guidelines and approved pursuant to the provision of this chapter. In addition, various parts of this title that also require design review for remodeling and expansion of existing multiple-family, commercial, industrial and other nonresidential development shall also comply with Lynnwood Citywide Design Guidelines and be approved pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. The community development director will make the decision on compliance with the Lynnwood

Citywide Design Guidelines based on written comments and information. Appeals of the decision will be decided by the hearing examiner (see LMC 21.25.185). (Ord. 2388 § 13, 2001)

21.25.110 Purpose of review.

Project design review has the following purposes:

A. To review the proposal for compliance with the provisions of this title, Lynnwood Citywide Design Guidelines and all other applicable laws and regulations.

B. To help insure that the proposal is coordinated, as is reasonable and appropriate, with other known or anticipated development on private properties in the area and with known or anticipated right-of-way and other public improvement projects within the area.

C. To encourage proposals that embody good design principles that will result in high quality development on the subject property. (Ord. 2388 § 13, 2001)

21.25.115 Applications.

A. Who May Apply? Any person may, personally or through an agent, apply for a decision regarding property he or she owns.

B. How to Apply. The applicant shall file a completed application on the form provided by the applicable department, and supply all the application materials specified in the form. The applicant shall also provide all information or material that is specified in applicable provisions of this title, and any additional information or material that the director determines is reasonably necessary for a decision on the matter.

C. Fee. With the application, the applicant shall submit a fee. The fee for a project design review application is as set forth in Chapter 3.104 LMC. The application will not be accepted unless it is accompanied by the required fee. (Ord. 2656 §§ 1, 2, 2006; Ord. 2388 § 13, 2001)

21.25.120 Compliance with State Environmental Policy Act.

The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) applies to some of the decisions that will be made using this process. The SEPA responsible official shall evaluate each application and, where applicable, comply with SEPA and with state regulations and city ordinances issued under the authority of SEPA. (Ord. 2909 § 1, 2011; Ord. 2388 § 13, 2001)

21.25.125 Official file.

A. Contents. The director shall compile an official file on the application containing the following:

1. All application material submitted by the applicant.

2. All written comments received on the matter.

3. The written decision of the director.

4. If the decision of the director is appealed, the following will be included in the file:

a. The letter of appeal;

b. All written comments received regarding the appeal;

c. The staff report on the appeal;

d. The decision of the hearing examiner on the appeal.

5. Any other information relevant to the matter.

B. Availability. The official file is a public record. It is available for inspection and copying in the community development department during regular business hours. (Ord. 2388 § 13, 2001)

21.25.130 Public notice of impending decision.

A. Content of Notice. The director shall prepare a notice of an impending decision on an application for project design review containing the following information:

1. The name of the applicant and, if applicable, the project name; the date of application;

2. The street address of the subject property or, if this is not available, a locational description in nonlegal language sufficient to identify its location;

3. The citation of applicable provision of the Lynnwood Municipal Code;

4. A brief description of the impending decision;

5. A statement of the availability of the official file;

6. The date on which the public comment period ends;

7. A statement of the right of any person to submit written comments to the director regarding the application within 14 days of the date of the notice;

8. A statement that only persons who submit written comments to the director or specifically request a copy of the original decision may appeal the director’s decision.

B. Time of Notice. The director shall provide such notice at least 17 days prior to the decision.

C. The director shall provide such notice by:

1. Publishing it in the official daily newspaper of the city (see Chapter 1.08 LMC);

2. Posting it at each official posting place of the city (see Chapter 1.12 LMC), and posting it on or near the subject property;

3. Mailing the notice to each owner of real property within 300 feet of any boundary of the subject property and of any property contiguous thereto which is in the applicant’s ownership. Notice mailed to the addressee found on the city of Lynnwood utility billing records, or if there is no such record for any given lot, then notice mailed to the last owner of record in the office of the county treasurer shall be deemed proper notice;

4. Mailing the notice addressed to “occupant/tenant” of each address in a multiple-residential building or mobile home park within the applicant’s property or contiguous to the subject property and to each address in a multiple-residential building or mobile home park within 300 feet of any boundary of the subject property and any property contiguous thereto which is in the applicant’s ownership. “Occupant/tenant” must be addressed by unit in a multiple-unit building or mobile home park but need not be identified by name;

5. Mailing the notice to each person who has requested such notice in writing for the calendar year and who has paid the fee shown in Chapter 3.104 LMC.

D. Notice by mail requirements shall be satisfied by substantial compliance with this section. (Ord. 2699 § 30, 2007; Ord. 2388 § 13, 2001)

21.25.135 Burden of proof.

The applicant has the responsibility of convincing the director that, under the provisions of this process, the applicant is entitled to the requested decision. (Ord. 2388 § 13, 2001)

21.25.140 Written comments.

The director shall consider all written comments and information regarding the requested decision that is received by the community development department prior to the date on which the decision is to be made. (Ord. 2388 § 13, 2001)

21.25.145 Director’s decision.

A. General.

1. Coordination with Decisions Under SEPA. If a SEPA threshold determination is required to be issued, the threshold determination must precede the director’s decision on the project. If the SEPA threshold determination is appealed, the director’s decision shall be issued prior to the open record hearing on the threshold determination appeal.

B. Decisional Criteria. The director shall use the criteria listed in this section.

1. It is consistent with the comprehensive plan.

2. It is consistent with all applicable provisions of this chapter.

3. It is consistent with the applicable design guidelines found in the Lynnwood Citywide Design Guidelines, adopted by this reference and incorporated in the provisions of the LMC and this chapter as fully as if herein set forth.

4. For development applications for remodeling or expansion of an existing development, it is consistent with those provisions in the Lynnwood Citywide Design Guidelines identified by the director as being applicable.

5. For such applications, the director may modify applicable design standards and guidelines to provide continuity between existing and new development and/or proposed phases of development.

C. Conditions and Restrictions. The director shall include in the written decision any conditions and restrictions that are necessary to ensure compliance with the decisional criteria listed in subsection (B) of this section.

D. Content and Notice of Decision. The decision of the director shall be prepared and distributed as specified by Chapter 1.35 LMC. (Ord. 3140 § 4, 2015; Ord. 2388 § 13, 2001)

21.25.150 Design departure.

An applicant may propose, and the director may approve an alternative project design that does not strictly comply with applicable design guidelines, but is consistent with the intent of the design guidelines. In evaluating the project, the director shall determine if the alternative design provides equivalent or superior results when compared with strict compliance with applicable guidelines. The director may also approve an alternative project design on the basis of physical constraints of the project site. The director may also approve an alternative design for special types of public facility projects such as park-and-ride lots and transit centers on the basis of the unique functions they are designed to serve. Zoning code requirements and standards are not subject to design departure. (Ord. 2388 § 13, 2001)

21.25.155 Limitation on modification.

If the director modifies or imposes conditions upon the application which results in a proposal not reasonably foreseeable from the description of the proposal contained in the public notice provided pursuant to LMC 1.35.330, the director shall provide a new notice of an impending decision and obtain public comment prior to making a decision. (Ord. 2388 § 13, 2001)

21.25.160 Effect of the decision.

The applicant may not engage in any activity based on the decision until the third working day after the time to appeal has expired. If the decision is appealed, the applicant may not engage in any activity based on the decision until the third working day after the city issues a final decision on the matter. If the decision of the director is not appealed, that decision is the final decision of the city. (Ord. 2388 § 13, 2001)

21.25.165 Lapse of approval – General.

The applicant under this process must begin construction or submit to the city a complete building permit application for the development activity, or remodel or expansion of existing development approved under this process within two years after the final decision on the matter, or the decision becomes void. The applicant must substantially complete construction for the development activity, remodel or expansion of existing development approved under this process and complete the applicable conditions listed in the decision within five years after the final decision of the city on the matter, or the decision becomes void. If litigation is initiated pursuant to LMC 1.35.260, Appeal of hearing examiner’s decision to superior court, the time limits of this section are automatically extended by the length of time between the commencement and final termination of that litigation. If the development activity, remodel or expansion of existing development approved under this process includes phased construction, the time limits of this section may be extended in the decision on the application to allow the completion of subsequent phases. (Ord. 2824 § 5, 2010; Ord. 2388 § 13, 2001)

21.25.170 Lapse of approval – Time extension.

A. Application. Prior to the lapse of approval under LMC 21.25.165, the applicant may submit a written application in the form of a letter with supporting documentation to the community development department requesting a one-time extension of those time limits of up to one year.

B. Criteria. The request must demonstrate that the applicant is making substantial progress on the development activity, remodel or expansion of existing development approved under this process and that circumstances beyond the applicant’s control prevent compliance with the time limits of LMC 21.25.165.

C. Review Process. An application of a time extension will be reviewed and decided upon by the director.

D. Appeals. Any person who is aggrieved by the granting or denying of a request for a time extension under this section may appeal that decision. The appellant must file a letter of appeal indicating how the decision on the time extension affects the appellant’s property and presenting any relevant material or information supporting the appellant’s contention. The appeal will be heard and decided upon using Process II as identified in LMC 1.35.200.

E. Exception. Effective until June 1, 2010, the applicant or agent of record for any unexpired project design review approval granted on or before the effective date of the ordinance codified in this section, or expired project design review valid as of January 1, 2009, may submit a written application in the form of a letter with supporting documentation to the community development department requesting a one-time, one-year time extension. The extension for a currently unexpired project design review approval shall be one year from the expiration date, for a total of two one-year extensions. The extension for an expired project design review approval shall be valid for one year from the date of the retroactive extension approval. The department director shall make a decision using the procedures set forth for extensions in this section. (Ord. 2824 § 6, 2010; Ord. 2388 § 13, 2001)

21.25.175 Bonds or other financial security.

The city may require a bond or other financial security to insure compliance with any aspect of a permit or approval under this process. (Ord. 2388 § 13, 2001)

21.25.180 Complete compliance required.

A. Generally. Except as specified in subsection (B) of this section, the applicant must comply with all aspects, including conditions and restrictions, of an approval granted under this process in order to do everything authorized by that approval.

B. Exception, Subsequent Modification. If a specific site configuration for the subject property was approved under this process or any quasi-judicial process, the applicant is not required to apply for and obtain approval through this process for a subsequent change in site configuration unless:

1. There is a change in use and this title establishes different or more rigorous standards for the new use than for the existing use; or

2. The director determines that there will be substantial changes in the impacts on the neighborhood or the city as a result of the change.

C. Maintenance. The developer, its successor and/or subsequent owners and their agents shall be responsible for the maintenance of the site in compliance with the approval granted under this process on a continuing basis for the life of the development in order to do everything authorized by that approval. (Ord. 3311 § 15, 2018; Ord. 2388 § 13, 2001)

21.25.185 Process on appeal to hearing examiner.

Any party of record may appeal the decision of the director by filing a written request for appeal with the community development department within 14 calendar days of the date of issuance of the decision. An appeal filed within this time limit shall be processed pursuant to Process II, as identified in LMC 1.35.200. (Ord. 2388 § 13, 2001)