Chapter 18.70


18.70.010    Purpose.

18.70.020    Applicability.

18.70.030    Review process.

18.70.040    Transportation concurrency mitigation methods.

18.70.010 Purpose.

This chapter sets forth specific standards providing for city compliance with the concurrency requirements of the state Growth Management Act (GMA) and for consistency between city and countywide planning policies under the GMA. The GMA requires that the city of Roslyn must adopt and enforce ordinances which prohibit development approval if the proposed development causes the level of service on a city-owned transportation facility to decline below LOS D in accordance with the provisions of the Roslyn comprehensive plan, unless transportation improvements or strategies to accommodate the impacts of development are made concurrent with the development. [Ord. 1060 §§ 5, 6, 2010; Ord. 1059 § 2 (Exh. A (12.70.010)), 2010.]

18.70.020 Applicability.

All proposed projects or development activities must be reviewed for transportation concurrency; provided, that the city may establish an expedited concurrency review process for activities that do not meet SEPA thresholds. [Ord. 1060 §§ 5, 6, 2010; Ord. 1059 § 2 (Exh. A (12.70.020)), 2010.]

18.70.030 Review process.

The city shall utilize the following procedures for evaluating all projects or development activities for concurrency, unless the applicant is otherwise given notice in writing:

A. Certificate of Transportation Concurrency.

1. The planning official shall complete a transportation concurrency evaluation for all proposed development activities that generate new trips. If the review concludes with a determination that the proposed project meets the level of service standards a certificate of concurrency shall be issued and attached or incorporated to the development permit approval. When a project is determined to have not passed level of service standards the certificate of concurrency shall be conditioned in a manner that satisfies the requirements of this chapter, or the project shall not be approved.

The level of service standard for city-owned roads is LOS D, as established in the Roslyn comprehensive plan.

2. The applicant shall provide the city with all information as requested by the city in order to complete the concurrency evaluation on the proposed development. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to provide studies, surveys, traffic counts, engineering review or any other items determined to be necessary for an accurate concurrency evaluation.

3. A certificate of transportation concurrency shall be accorded the same terms and conditions as those for the underlying development permit. If a development permit time line is extended the certificate shall also be extended for the same time duration. A certificate of concurrency shall be valid only for the development permit approved for the same parcel and may at the discretion of the planning official be transferable to any new owner(s) of the parcel to which it was issued. Changes in the type or intensity of use may, at the discretion of the planning official, be subject to a new concurrency review.

B. Traffic Impact Calculations.

1. Trip Generation. Traffic calculations shall be based on the trip generation average described within the latest available edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation manual for the particular type and extent of the development being proposed.

2. Concurrency Test. Concurrency tests shall be conducted using volume to capacity ratios and/or length of delay methodologies in accordance with the provisions of the latest available edition of the highway capacity manual as determined by the city.

The planned capacity of a roadway may be used only if the city finds that full funding for the planned improvements has been secured and that the planned improvements are scheduled for completion within six years of the proposed new development being approved for occupancy. [Ord. 1060 §§ 5, 6, 2010; Ord. 1059 § 2 (Exh. A (12.70.030)), 2010.]

18.70.040 Transportation concurrency mitigation methods.

The city shall use the following procedures and criteria to review and approve the adequacy of mitigation methods unless the applicant is otherwise given notice in writing:

A. If mitigation is determined necessary to maintain level of service standards for an impacted transportation facility the applicant may choose among the following actions:

1. Reduce the size of the project until levels of service standards are met; or

2. Enter into a legally binding development agreement with the city whereby all required improvements will be constructed and completed within six years of the development approval date which also ensures that the financing will be available to pay for the improvements; or

3. Be subject to a development approval conditioned that the required improvements be completed prior to the issuance of building permits, final plat or site plan approvals associated with the development; or

4. Propose transportation demand management strategies to reduce vehicle trips generated by the project development; or

5. Await the city’s completion of mitigating improvements if such improvements are underway or planned as part of the city’s six-year transportation improvement plan; or

6. Any combination of the above.

B. Acceptable impact mitigation requires a finding of the following:

1. The mitigation contributes to transportation facility performance and established level of service standards;

2. The mitigation is consistent with the city’s comprehensive plan;

3. Any improvements to an intersection or roadway do not shift traffic to residential areas or to other intersections where there is no mitigation being proposed;

4. Any adverse environmental impacts of the facility improvements may be reasonably minimized or eliminated; and

5. The improvements are consistent with the city’s engineering standards. [Ord. 1060 §§ 5, 6, 2010; Ord. 1059 § 2 (Exh. A (12.70.040)), 2010.]