HomeMy WebLinkAboutO-2928 - Rezone (Special)CITY OF MARYSVILLE
Marysville,Washington
ORDINANCE NO,).O'I'2.g'
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MARYSVILLE,WASHINGTON,AFFIRMING
THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER AND REZONING THE
EASTERN PORTION OF 8021 STATE AVENUE TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL,
AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY.
WHEREAS,Larry and Teresa Trivett own approximately 0.41 acres of property within the
City of Marysville generally located at 8021 State Avenue,said property being legally described
in Exhibit A attached hereto;and
WHEREAS,Larry and Teresa Trivett submitted an application to the City of Marysville
requesting a site specific NON-PROJECT action Rezone requesting a rezone classification of the
eastern portion of the of the property from R-6.5,Single Family,High Density to General
Commercial so that if approved,the entire property will be zoned General Commercial;and
WHEREAS,following notice as required by law,the City of Marysville Hearing Examiner
held a public hearing on said rezone application on April 25,2013 and adopted Findings,
Conclusions and Recommendation recommending approvai of the rezone request subject to one
condition;and
WHEREAS,the Marysville City Council held a public meeting on said rezone on June 10,
2013 and concurred with the Findings,Conclusions and Recommendation of the Hearing
Examiner;
NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARYSVILLE,WASHINGTON DO
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.The Findings,Conclusions and Recommendation of the Hearing Examiner
with respect to the above-referenced rezone are hereby approved,and the property described In
the attached Exhibit A is hereby rezoned from R-6.5,Single Family,High Density to General
Commercial.
Section 2.The zoning classification for the property described in Exhibit A shall be
perpetually conditioned upon strict compliance with the condition set forth in the Findings,
Conclusions and Recommendation of the Hearing Examiner all of which are incorporated herein
by this reference.Violation of the condition of said decision may result in reversion of the
property to the previous zoning classification and/or may result in enforcement action being
brought by the City of MarySVille.
Section 3.The official zoning map of the City of MarySVille Is hereby amended to
reflect the reclassification of the property described in Exhibit A.
Section 4.This decision shall be final and conclusive with the right of appeal by any
aggrieved party to Superior Court of Snollomish County by filing a Land Use Petition pursuant to
the Land Use Petition Act within twenty-one (21)days after passage of this ordinance.
Section 5.Severability.If any section,subsection!sentence/clause,phrase or work
of this ordinance sllould be Ileld to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent
Effective Date:
jurisdiction,such invalidity or unconstitutionality thereof shall not affect the validity or
constitutionality of any other section,subsection,clause,phrase or word of this ordinance.
Section 6.Effective Date.This ordinance shall become effective five days after the
date of its publication by summary.
'"t/:f,PASSED by the City Council and APPROVED by the Mayor this Iv day of
=;:[-.-'vA"'N:?--=--=-,2013.
CITY OF MARYSVILLEJ
By:
Approved as to form:
By:NltrA6 tic tA:J»c!!
'GRANT K.WEED,CITY ATTORNEY
Date of Publication:uIIVIJO /3
&b4-l:2013
(5 days after publication)
EXHIBIT A
THE WEST 196,00 feET Of THE SOUTH HALF OF THE FOlLOWING DESCRIBED TRACT:
COMMENCING ATTHE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE
NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 21,TOWNSHIP 30 NORTH,
RANGE 5 EAST,W.M.,IN SNOHOMISH COUNTY,WASHINGfONj
THENCE SOUTH 89°48'48"WEST ALONG TIlE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF
TIlE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER FOR 329,81 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 1°17'34"WEST FOR 166.99 FEETTO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE CONTINUE ON THE SAME STRAIGHT LINE NORTH 1"17'34"WEST FOR 182.53 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 89°50'41"WEST FOR 597.21 FEET TO AN INTERSECfION Wffil THE EASTERLY
MARGIN OF PAOFIC HIGHWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY;
THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE LEFT,HAVING A RADIUS OF 1800,1
FEET AND CONSUMING AN ANGLE OF 1°33'35"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 51.18 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 1°24'50"EAST FOR 131.35 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 89°50'41"EAST FOR 597.51 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
ALSO KNOWN /IS PARCEL 2 OF BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT NO.01-005 RECORDED ON
DECEMBER 10,2001 AS RECORDING NO.200112105004,IN THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF
SNOHOMISH COUNTY,WASHINGTON.
APN:300521-003-105'00
g .g d0J"~'~1j~o ••
!g.,,~,a,n~~£."';",~-ii,~~~~l;l it',~a~~i~~i~5 ~§~J~
~;3 a ~~
g ~!I'ia2~~§&~•
oae6 ';fM '311tt\SA~VW .3AV 31V1S IWli
18POW8<j 5u!Pllng 8:J!l!O tl8APl
,u
d"
I
.~;(~:Jc~~--;;JE!-ii1
!~
".:J
I ~ir~1:'~.,~.I
a'l ~1 L~I
"I..I:,
I::;
"I!!
~;~-,
~.~-t ,.
'1f;tr,
~",.,
~3 ~~j ?!~
..,
_A'~,g~g~~
~:i2 (7 u:;,l,
OLl"f/6 VM'llll!l\,AmW
3Nld P.i\:LLW9
NSlIS~a SlS3
APPLICANT:
CASE NO.:
LOCATION:
CITY OF MARYSVILLE
Hearing Examiner
Findings,Conclusions and Recommendation
Larry and Teresa Trivett
PA13008
8021 State Ave.
APPLICATION:Rezone ofa property presently split-zoned General Commercial
and R-6.5 Single Family,High Density to be zoned entirely
General Commercial.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION:
Plaoning StaffRecommendation:Approve with one condition
Hearing Examiner Decision:Approve with one condition
PUBLIC HEARING:
After reviewing the official file,which included the StaffAdvisory Report,and after visiting the
site,the Hearing Examiner conducted a public hearing on the application.The hearing on the
application was opened at 7:00 p.m.,April 25,2013,inthe Council Chambers,Marysville,
Washington,and closed at 7:06.p.m.Participants at the public hearing are listed in the minutes
ofthe hearing.A verbatim recording ofthe hearing and more complete minutes are available in
the Plaoning Department.A list ofexhibits offered and entered at the hearing and a list ofparties
ofrecord are attached to this report.
HEARING COMMENTS:
As noted in the minutes ofthe hearing,comments were offered by:
Angela Gemmer,Associate Plarmer
Larry Trivett,Applicant
WRITTEN COMMENTS:
No correspondence was received from members ofthe general public.
Hearing Examiner Recommendation
Case No.:PA 13008
FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION:
Having considered the entire record in this matter,the Hearing Examiner now makes and enters
the following:
A.FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS:
1.The information contained in SectionII ofthe StaffAdvisory Report (Hearing Examiner
Exhibit 20 is found by the Hearing Examinerto be supported by the evidence presented
during the hearing and by this reference is adopted as portion ofthe Hearing Examiner's
fmdings and conclusions.A copy ofsaid report is available in the Community
Development Department.
2.The minutes ofthe meeting accurately summarize the testimony offered at the hearing
and by this reference are entered into the official record.
3.The applicant expressed frustration with the fact the property had been split zoned by the
City,but complimented stafffor the work done on this application,and concurred with
the oner recommended conclusion.
B.RECOMMENDATION:
Based upon the foregoing findings offact and conclusions,it is recommended that the request for
a rezone to General Commercial be approved,subject to the following condition:
1.In order to utilize the existing garage for commercial purposes,the applicant shall be
required to apply for a change ofoccupancy from residential to commercial use.Future
change ofoccupancy proposals shall be required to comply with all ofthe applicable
development standards outlined in the Marysville Municipal Code (MMC),including but
not limited to,density and dimensions,building design,parking and loading,landscaping,
stormwater and building codes.
rz~vtlk~~
Ron McConnell,FAICP
Hearing Examiner
Hearing Examiner Recommendation
Case No.:PA 13008
RECONSIDERATION:
A party to a public hearing may seek reconsideration only ofa final decision by filing a written
request for reconsideration with the director within fonrteen (14)days ofthe final written
decision.The request shall comply with MMC 15.11.020(3).The examiner shall consider the
request within seven (7)days offiling the same.The request may be decided without public
comment or argument by the party filing the request.ifthe request is denled,the previous action
shall become final.Ifthe reqnest is granted,the hearing examiner may immediately revise and
reissue its decision.Reconsideration should be granted only when a legal error has occurred or a
material factual issue has been overlooked that would change the previous decision.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Recommendations by the Examiner onrezones or shoreline conditional use permits will
constitute a final action by the City unless a timely written request for a closed record appeal is
fLIed with the City Council within 14 days after issuance ofthe recommendation.In the event of
a timely appeal,the City Council will conduct a closed record hearing ofthis case.Closed
record hearings shall be on the record and no new evidence may be presented.The City
Council's action will be the fmal action ofthe City.
JlJDICIALAPPEAL:
(l)Appeals from the fmal decision ofthe hearing examiner,or other city board or body
involving MMC Titles 15 to 20 and for which all other appeals specifically authorized
have been timely exhausted,shall be made to Snohomish County superior court pursuant
to the Land Use Petition Act,RCW 36.70C within 21 days ofthe date the decision or
action became fmal,unless another applicable appeal process or time period is
established by state law or local ordinance.
(2)Notice ofthe appeal and any other pleadings required to be filed with the court shall be
served as required by law within the applicable time period.This requirement is
jurisdictional.
(3)The cost oftranscribing and preparing all records ordered certified by the court or desired
by the appellant for such appeal shall be borne by the appellant.The record of the
proceedings shall be prepared by the City or such qualified person as it selects.TIle
appellant shall post with the city clerk prior to the preparation ofany records an advance
fee deposit in the amount specified by the city clerk.Any overage will be promptly
returned to the appellant.
Page 3
Hearing Examiner Recommendation
Case No.:PA 13008
EXHIBITS:
The following exhibits were offered and entered intothe record:
1.24 x 36 Site Plan
2.Land Use Permit Application,03.05.13
3.Rezone Checklist
4.Letter explaining purchased responsibility for Rezone app,03.06.13
5.Arial view map,03.05.13
6.Applicants response to Comprehensive Planrequirements,03.05.13
7.Applicants response to MMC 22G.10.420,03.05.13
8.Rezone cover letter,03.05.13
9.Receipt
10.8 liz x 11 parcel map
11.Statntory Warranty Deed.
12.FirstAmerican-Title report,03.05.13
13.Environmental Checklist,03.05.13
14.Letter ofCompleteness,03.22.13
15.Affidavit ofPosting-NOA
16.RFR and Agency responses
17.Affidavit ofPosting-DNS
18.DNS,03.26.13
19.Affidavit ofPosting-NOH
20.StaffRecommendation,04.19.13
PARTIES of RECORD:
Larry &Teresa Trivett
7604 83rdAve.NE
Marysville,WA 98270
Planning Department
Page 4
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Community Development Department 9-80 Columbia Avenue·Marysville,WA 98270
(360)363-8100 •(360)651-5099 FAX.Office Hours:Mon -Fri 7:30 AM -4:00 PM
05
City
Proposed
N/A
Otheo'
D Tulalip TribesoStiliaguamish
Tribe
30
City
County
Township
Site plan
April 18,2013
Health District
D Planning
D Public Works ~
Land Development
D PUblic Works
Section 21
Shoreline Envircmme:nt
APN(s)30052100310500
Current
D US Army Corps of
Engineers
DBNSF
DDOE
DWDFW
DWSOOT
DWUTC
GC&R-
6.5
osed
City
Zoning
ProCurrent
City
GC &SFH
local Ageric,ies,&:
,Districts
8021 State Avenue
Approve the request to rezone the east portion ofthe site from R-6.5,Single Family,High Density
to General Commercial.
Larry and Teresa Trivett
Vacant single family residence which had been converted toan office in the past and a garage.
PAR 2 CITY OF MAR BLA 01-005
REC AFN 200112105004
Determination of Non-Significance issued March 26,2013;appeal period expired April 10,2013
with no appeal filed.
Non~project action rezone in orderto rezone the east portion of the site from R-6.S,Single Family,
High Density to General Commercial so that the entire property is zoned General Commercial.
PA13008
DArlington (citv)o Community Transit
D Everett (city)
D Frontier
D lake Stevens (city)o Lake Stevens SD 4
D Lakewood SD 306oMarysvilleSD25
D PUD No.1
Trivett Rezone
VVater SupplV
Rectuest
legal.i)escription:
(abbreviated)
Cpn1prehensive Plan'
Building
~Fire District
IZJ Land
Development
[;g]PlanningDPolice
[8J Public Works
D Administrative D City Council IZJ Quasi-Judicial D Planning Commission
L.--..__
D DeniedDateofHearing
Name Angela Gemmer Title Associate Planner Phone 360.363.8240
D Continued
E-mail i1qernrner(6}marysvillewa.9pv
PA1300S StaffReconimendation for Trivett Rezone
Land Use
Convenience store,gas
station and strip mall on GC
parcel;office and automotive
re air and service on R-6.S.
State Avenue right-oF-way
and automotive canopy sales
sho
Vacant office (single family
residence converted to office
use and ara e.
Church assembly building.
Vacant land owned by
adjacent church,
GC
R-6.5
GC &R-6.5
GC &R-6.5
R4.5 Single Family Medium
R6-18 Multi-Family Low III Public-Institutional
R8 Single Family High Small Lot Recreation
R6.5 Single Family High Open
R4--8 Single Family High
88 ~Mixed Use
General Industrial
LightIndustrial
R28 Multi-Family High
R18 Multi-Family Medium
General Commercial and
Single family,hig/1 density
General Commercial and
Single famlly,high density
Single family,high density
General Commercial and
Single family,high density
General Commercial
Downtown Commercial
Community Business
lX'Q~~Neighborhood Business
Mixed Use
PA13008 StaffRecommendation forTnvctt Rezone Page2
I.EVALUATION
1.Description of Proposal:The applicant is proposing a NON-PROJECT action,requesting
a Rezone of the eastern portion (approximately 43%of the site square footage or 0.18
acres)of the subject property from R-6.5,Single Family,High Density to General
Commercial.Rezoning the property would allow future commercial utilization of the site,
under a separate application,upon granting of a favorable decision on the rezone.
2;Location of Proposal:The subject property is located on the east side of State Avenue
one parcel north of 80th Street NE at a site address of 8021 State Avenue,on Assessor's
Parcel Number 30052100310500.
3.Site Description:The subject property is approximately 0.41 acres and is developed
with an office,which was originally a single family residence,and a garage.Topography of
the site is flat.According to the Soil Survey of Snohomish County,on-site soils are identified
as Ragnar fine sandy loam.
4.Critical Areas:There are no critical areas on-site and no known critical areas within a
400 foot radius of the subject property.
5.Project History:An application was submitted on March 5,2013 and deemed complete
on March 8,2013.Notice of application was provided in accordance with MMC Section
22G.01O.090.Written comments on the application were solicited;however,no written
comments or phone calls from the public were received as of the date of this report.
6.Traffic and Circulation:The proposed rezone is a NON-PROJECT action and will not
create any additional daily vehicular trips nor have an adverse impact on the adjacent street
traffic.However,future project actions will be required to be reviewed in accordance with
Chapter 22D.030,Traffic Impact Fees and Mitigation.
7.City of Marysville Comprehensive Plan:The proposed project is located within
Planning Area 6 -Pinewood Neighborhood.This Planning Area is bounded by 76th Street NE
to the south,Interstate 5 to the west,100th Street to the north when west of Quilceda
Creek,and 92"'Street to the east of Quilceda Creek and by Allen Creek to the west.The
majority of commercial in this Planning Area is General Commercial.It is located along
State Avenue,primarily on the east side,and between Quilceda Creek and State Avenue
north of 88th Street NE.
General Commercial is the primary zoning Within the immediate vicinity to the north,west
and south of the property proposed to be rezoned,and R-6.S,Single Family,High Density is
the primary zoning to the immediate east.As conditioned herein,the proposed non-project
action rezone and future uses of the property will be consistent with the pertinent
development policies outlined in the MarySVille Comprehensive Plan.
8.Title 22 MMC,Unified Development Code.MMC Section 22G.01O.420(1)requires the
applicant to demonstrate that the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan,and
applicable functional plans,and complies with the following criteria:
(a)There is a demonstrated need for additional zoning as the type proposed;
(b)The zone reclassification is consistent and compatible with uses and zoning of the
surrounding properties;
PA13008 StaffRecommendationfor Trivett Rezone Page 3
(c)There have been significant changes in the circumstances of the property to be
rezoned,or surrounding properties,to warrant a change in classification;and
(d)The property is practically and physically suited for the uses allowed in the
proposed zone reclassification.
The applicant submitted a written response to the rezone criteria outlined above (Exhibit 7).
After evaluation of the applicant's written response,and other supporting documentation
and application materials,the proposed rezone,as conditioned herein complies with the
rezone criteria and applicable development standards outlined in Title 22 MMC,Unified
Development Code.
9.Comprehensive Plan Rezone Criteria.Pursuant to MMC Section 22G.OtO.420(2),
properties at the edges of land use districts can make application to rezone property to the
bordering zone without applying for a Comprehensive Plan map amendment is the
proponent can demonstrate the following:
(a)The proposed land use district will provide a more effective transition point and
edge for the proposed land use district than strict application of the comprehensive
plan map would provide due to neighboring land uses,topography,access,parcel
lines or other property characteristics;
(b)The proposed land use district supports and implements the goals,objectives,
policies and text of the comprehensive plan more effectively than strict application
of the comprehensive plan map;and
(c)The proposed land use change will not affect an area greater than to acres,
exclusive of critical areas.
The applicant submitted written responses to the criteria outlined above (Exhibit 6).After
evaluation of the applicant's written response,and other supporting documentation and
application materials,the proposed rezone,as conditioned herein,will be consistent with the
applicable development goals and policies outlined in the Marysville Comprehensive Plan.
10.Conformance with State Environmental Policy Act:After evaluation of the
environmental checklist,and review of information on file with the City,a Determination of
Non-Significance (DNS)was issued on February 25,2008.No appeals on the DNS were filed
on or before the April to,2013 deadline.This determination is hereby adopted by reference
as part of this report.
II.FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
1.The applicant is proposing a NON-PROJECT action,requesting a rezone of
approximately 0.18 acres from R-6.5 to General Commercial.
2.Rezoning the property would allow a future administrative project action proposal in
order to develop the portion of the site with the garage and vacant land for
commercial purposes.
3.The proposed rezone would have no impacts to critical areas.
4.The rezone application was submitted on March 5,2013 and deemed complete on
March 8,2013.
5.Future project actions will be required to be reviewed in accordance with Chapter
22D.030,Traffic Impact Fees and Mitigation.
6.The proposed rezone,as conditioned herein,will be consistent with the pertinent
development goals and policies outlined in the Comprehensive Plan.
PM3008 StaffRecommendation for Trivett Rezone Page 4
7.The proposed rezone,as conditioned herein,complies with the rezone criteria and
pertinent development standards outlined in Title 22,Unified Development Code.
8.A DNS was issued on March 26,2013.No appeals on the DNS were filed on or before
the April 10,2013 deadline.
9.The public hearing for the proposed rezone was advertised in accordance with MMC
Section 22G.Ol0.110,Notice ofpublic hearing.
10.After evaluation of the application materials and other supporting documentation
available to the City,Staff concludes that,as conditioned,the proposed non-project
action rezone is beneficial to the public health,safety and welfare and Is in the pu blic
interest.
11.After evaluation of the application materials and other supporting documentation
available to the City,Staff concludes that,as conditioned,the proposed non-project
action rezone does not lower the level of service of transportation and/or
neighborhood park facilities below the minimum standards established within the
Comprehensive Plan.
III.STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Based on the foregoing findings and conclusions,the Community Development Department
recommends APPROVAL of the site specific NON-PROJECT action rezone from R-6.5,Single
Family,High Density to General Commercial,subject to the following condition:
In order to utilize the existing garage for commercial purposes,the applicant shail be
required to apply for a change of occupancy from residential and commercial use.
Future change of occupancy proposals shall be required to comply with all of the
applicable development standards outlined in the Marysville Municipal Code (MMe),
including but not limited to,density and dimensions,building design,parking and
loading,landscaping,stormwater and building codes.
Prepared by:!r.~ii'
Reviewed by:C'A'J
PA13008 StaffRecommendation for Trivett Rezone PageS
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
80 Columbia Avenue.Marysville,WA 98270
(360)363-8100'(360)651-5099 FAX
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
File Number:
Proponent!Contact:
LeadAgency:
SEPA Contact:
PA13-008
Larry and Teresa Trivett
7604 83'0 Avenue NE
Maqsville,WA 98270
City of Marysville
COrntllunity Developlnent Department
Angela Gemmer,Associate Planner
360.363.8240 or "rcemmcridimarvsvillcwa.gQY
Description ofProposal:The applicant is proposing a NON-PROJECT actionrequesting a
rezone ofthe eastern portion ofa split-zoned property from R-4.5,Single Family,MediumDensity to
General Commercial so that the entire property will be zoned General Commercial.Rezoning ofthe
property would allow a future administrative project action in order to convert the entire property to
commercialuse,under a separate action,upon granting ofa favorable decision on the rezone.
Location ofProposal:The proposed rezone projectis located at 8021 State Avenue and is also
identified as Assessor's Parcel Number (APN)30052100310500.
Site Description:The proposed rezone is ofthe eastern P011l011 ofa 0,41 acre site.The site is
developed with a house which was previously converted to a comnlerdal office,a garage,and a paved
parking area.The subject propertyis flat.According to the soil survey ofSnohomish County,on-site
soils are identified as Ragnar fine sandyloam.Permeability ofthe Ragnar soil is moderately rapid.Runoff
is mediuul,and the hazard ofwater etosion is 1110derate.
Surrounding uses consist ofa church to the north,vacant residelltially~zoned land to the east,a
convemence store and strip retail to the south,and right-of~way to the west.
CriticalAreas:There are no known regulated critical areas on orwithin 400 feet ofrhe subject
property.
Threshold Determination:The lead agency has determined that this proposal does not have a
probable significant adverse impact on the environment.An envirorunental impact statement (ElS)is
NOT reqotted under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c).This decision was made after review by the City of
Marysville ofa completed environmental checklist and other information on file with this agency.This
information is available for pUblic review upon request.
Prepared by:
Reviewedby:
This DNS is issued lmder WAC 197-11-355;there is no comment period for tlus DNS.
P.A13-008 Optional DNS Tri"w Rc:.wne
Responsible Official:
Position:
Address:
Gloria Hirashima
Community Development Director
80 Columbia Avenue,Ma1J'sville,WA 98270
r,
Signature:C.P-_(!L~"V
Chris TlotJat1c4 Plan"ing lVlanager,for 1t1Jponsible qfficial
The issuance ofthis Detem1ination ofNon~Significanceshould not be interpreted as acceptance or
approval ofti,e subject proposal as presented,The City ofMaqsville reserves the right to deny or
approve said proposal subject to conditions ifit is determined to be in the best interests ofthe City
and/or necessaq to the gelleral health,safety and welfare of the public to do so,For further
information,contact the J\1arysville PlanningDepartment at 360,363.8100,
Distribution:
State Agencies:
Department ofEcology -Olympia SEPA register
Department of C0111merce
CityGovernment:
City ofEverett -Planning and Community Development Department
City ofLake Stevens -Department "fPlanning and Community Development
City ofMarysville -Public Works Department
Tribal Government:
Tulalip Tribes
Private Parties:
Larry and Teresa Trivett)applicants
News Media.'
Marysville Globe
SEPAAppeal Procedure:
A fee of$500.00 must accompany all SEPA appeals that require a separate public hearing.
lY1MC Section 22E.030,180,AppeaLr.
(1)Any agency or agg1ieved person may appeal the procedures or substance of an envitonmental
determination of the responsible official under SEPA as fonows:
(a)Only one administrative appeal of a threshold determination 01'of the adequacy of an EIS is
allowed;successive administrative appeals on these issues within the same agency are notallowed.
Ths limitation docs not apply to administrative appeals before another agency.
(b)A DNS.Written notice of such an appeal shall be filed with the responsible official within 15
days after the date of issuance of the DNS.The appeal hearing shall be consolidated with the
hearing(s)on the merits ofthe governmental action for which the enmonnlental dete.rmi.nation was
n1ade.
r;\1:HI08 Optional DNS 'l'riy{,tt Rezone
(c)A DS.Written notice ofthe appeal shall be flled with the responsible official withio 15 days after
the date of issuance of the DS.The appeal shall be heard by the city council within 30 days
thereafter.
(d)The Adequacy of an EIS.Written notice of appeal shall be filed with the responsible official
within 15 days after the issuance ofthe final EIS.The appeal hearing shall be consolidated with the
hearing(s)on the merits ofthe governmental action for which the EIS was issued.
(e)Appeals of intermecfute steps under SEPA (e.g.,lead agency determination,scoping,draft EIS
adequacy)shall not be allowed.
(f)For any appeal under this section,the city shall provide for a record that shall consist of the
following:
(i)Findings and conclusions;
(il)Testimony under oath;and
(iii)A taped or WrittC1l transcript.
(g)Determination by the responsible official shall carry substantial weight in any appeal proceeding.
PA13--00H Optional DNSTrivctt Rezone Page 3