Ordinance 2212-97 - Laserfiche WebLink

drainage ordinances, traffic ordinance, etc. The proposal is also reviewed for any SEPA issues that go beyond the impacts projected or addressed in the Southwest Everett Subarea Plan and EIS. Responses are returned to the Planner. Application Revised If Necessary If necessary, City provides comments to applicant. Applicant revises project to meet zoning and other ordinance standards and to meet EIS mitigation standards. City conducts new 10-day circulation to review revised proposal. Application Complete Within 28 days of the application submittal, the City must issue a written determination of completion or notify the applicant that additional information is required. Issue Decision A. Proposal is Within EIS Impact/Threshold Ranges. Complies with All Applicable Mitigation Measures and City Codes. and No New Issues Raised A SEPA threshold determination is not required. City issues Determination of Consistency and Compliance with Subarea Plan and Information for Developer&handout. A courtesy notice would be provided to neighborhood groups and owners of contiguous properties. No administrative appeal would be provided. The city issues all administrative decisions9 needed for the proposal and proceeds to public hearing for any project where it is required. Public Notice: When the project requires a Special Property Use (SPU) Permit, public notice will be provided per the requirements of the City's administrative procedures ordinance in effect at the time of application, including notice for administrative decisions and public hearings. For example, current notice requirements for an administrative decision includes mailing notice to contiguous property owners and posting signs on the property. When a Hearing Examiner decision is required, property owners within 300 feet must be notified, signs must be posted on the property, and a legal notice must be published in the paper. For projects that are consistent with the Subarea Plan, but that require an administrative decision or Hearing Examiner decision, SEPA issues would not be addressed in the decision. For example, if a Special Property Use (SPU) permit is required for a park or aboveground utility facility, the permit decision would address the project's compliance with the SPU criteria only. 8The Information for Developer Attachment to the SEPA determination tells the developer what ordinance requirements apply to their project, provides comments regarding minor revisions that need to be made to plans and states items the city will be expecting to see in final permit review. 9Administrative decisions include such things as Review Process II applications. Review Process II applications allow the Planning Director to approve some Special Property Use permits or modify certain zoning code standards when specific criteria are met, but requires that notice be provided by mailing to contiguous property owners and posting signs on the site. If a property owner appeals, a hearing would be held by the Hearing Examiner on the modification. Examples of standards that may be modified include stream and wetland filling with mitigation. Under the proposed permit process, some of the Review Process II decisions would no longer require public notice. 28