CHAPTER 2
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
SECTION:
14-2-3: Application Timeline And Review Period
14-2-4: Application Requirements
14-2-5: Exceptions To Yearly Amendments
14-2-7: Review And Approval Criteria
14-2-1 PURPOSE:
The purpose of this chapter is to provide for amendments of the Roy comprehensive plan and to ensure those amendments are consistent with state, county and local laws and plans. (Sub. Ord. 928, 8-24-2015)
14-2-2 TYPES OF AMENDMENTS:
A. Map amendments are any proposed amendments to the Roy comprehensive plan land use map.
B. Text amendments are any amendments to the Roy comprehensive plan that do not constitute a map amendment. (Sub. Ord. 928, 8-24-2015)
14-2-3 APPLICATION TIMELINE AND REVIEW PERIOD:
A. All amendments to the comprehensive plan shall be considered concurrently and no more frequently than once each calendar year except as provided for in RCW 36.70A.130.
B. The city shall broadly disseminate to the public a notice giving the procedures and timeline for proposing amendments or revisions to the comprehensive plan. At a minimum, notice shall be given through the placement of a display ad in the official newspaper of the city. The city shall allow a reasonable time period for requests to be submitted. Except as provided for in subsections C and D of this section, amendment requests received after the deadline will not be considered during that year’s amendment process unless the request satisfies one of the criteria identified in RCW 36.70A.130.
C. Proposed amendments to the capital facilities element may be incorporated any time prior to the adoption of the comprehensive plan amendments because of the relationship of the capital facilities element to decisions made in the city’s budget process.
D. Text amendment requests may be initiated any time during the annual amendment cycle process; however, text amendment requests received after the planning commission has forwarded its recommendation to the city council may be deferred for consideration until the subsequent amendment cycle if the city council so chooses.
E. Amendment requests may be submitted by private parties; however, requests for map amendments by private parties may only be submitted by the owner or an authorized agent. Amendment requests may also be initiated by the commission or council upon a formal motion and approval by the body.
F. Applications shall be considered as a group for purposes of analysis and processing. The planning commission shall set an estimated schedule for review of the applications, including the public hearing and special meetings, in order to prepare and forward a recommendation to council in a timely fashion.
G. Upon completion of the SEPA process, public meeting, state review, and council consideration, the council shall adopt an ordinance incorporating the proposed amendments, in whole or in part or as modified by the council, into the Roy comprehensive plan. At the same meeting, the council shall also adopt an ordinance for any concurrent rezones necessary for consistency. (Sub. Ord. 928, 8-24-2015)
14-2-4 APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS:
Applications shall include the following:
A. A detailed statement of the proposed change and why it is to be changed;
B. A statement of anticipated impacts of the change, including geographic area affected and issues presented;
C. A statement of how the request is or is not consistent with the adopted Roy comprehensive plan, pertinent subarea and functional plans and countywide planning policies, and the goals of the GMA;
D. A description of any changes to development regulations, modifications to capital improvement programs, subarea, neighborhood, and functional plans required for implementation so that these will be consistent with the plan; and
E. A description of any zoning map amendment or development regulation amendment that is related to the comprehensive plan amendment. (Sub. Ord. 928, 8-24-2015)
14-2-5 EXCEPTIONS TO YEARLY AMENDMENTS:
A. There are four (4) exceptions to the rule of considering comprehensive plan amendments only once per year. The process for adoptions of these four (4) exceptions is the same as stated in section 14-2-3. These four (4) exceptions are:
1. For the amendment of the capital facilities element of the comprehensive plan occurring concurrently with the adoption or amendment of the city’s budget; or
2. For an amendment to resolve a growth management hearings board appeal or other court order; or
3. In the event of an emergency; or
4. The adoption of comprehensive plan amendments necessary to enact a planned action under RCW 43.21C.031(2), as outlined in RCW 36.70A.130(2)(v).
B. Findings must be made indicating that the amendment is in the public interest and not detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare. The city planner shall prepare written findings for approval of the Roy planning commission.
C. Applications shall be considered as a group for purposes of analysis and processing. Staff shall present a brief description of each application. The commission shall set an estimated schedule for review of the applications, including the public hearing and special meetings, in order to prepare and forward a recommendation to council in a timely fashion. (Sub. Ord. 928, 8-24-2015)
14-2-6 REVIEW PROCESS:
The planning commission shall review applications for comprehensive plan amendments pursuant to Process Type V of section 11-4-3. The planning commission shall forward its recommendation to the city council for the final decision. (Sub. Ord. 928, 8-24-2015)
14-2-7 REVIEW AND APPROVAL CRITERIA:
The city council may adopt any comprehensive plan amendment if it (1) is in the public interest and complies with the Growth Management Act, and (2) is in the public interest and not contrary to the public health, safety and welfare. In making this determination, the council shall weigh the following factors:
A. Whether the proposal is consistent with the adopted Roy comprehensive plan;
B. Whether the proposal is consistent with pertinent plans for adjacent jurisdictions and countywide planning policies;
C. Whether the proposal eliminates conflicts with existing elements or policies;
D. Whether the proposal establishes a logical, compatible extension of existing land use designations;
E. Whether the proposal clarifies or amplifies existing policy or accommodates new policy directives of the city council;
F. Whether a change of conditions has occurred within the neighborhood or community since adoption of the comprehensive plan, this title, and amendments thereto, to warrant a determination that the proposed amendment is in the public interest. (Sub. Ord. 928, 8-24-2015)