Title
Comprehensive Plan Amendments of 2016 - Commission Proposals
Staff Recommended Action
None. Any action is at the Commission’s discretion.
Report
Issue:
The Washington Growth Management Act provides that cities like Olympia can generally only amend their Comprehensive Plans once each year. Pursuant to a schedule established by the City Council, preliminary proposals for amendments to be considered in 2016 are due on November 2, 2015. This agenda item will provide the Commission with an opportunity to discuss whether the Commission chooses to propose any amendments for consideration next year.
Staff Contact:
Todd Stamm, Principal Planner, Community Planning and Development Department, 360.753.8597
Presenter:
Todd Stamm, Principal Planner
Background and Analysis:
The Washington Growth Management Act provides that, subject to certain exceptions, the City of Olympia may only amend its Comprehensive Plan once each year. Chapter 18.59 of the Olympia Municipal Code sets forth the basic two-step review process.
Preliminary proposals are to be submitted by a date established by the City Council. For 2016, that date is Monday, November 2, 2015. The code provides that individuals and agencies may initiate proposals. Preliminary proposals will be ‘screened’ by the City Council early in 2016. For this step, proposals do not necessarily need to be detailed, but by January they do need sufficient clarity for preliminary review by the Council.
This ‘screening’ step includes (Ord. 5792 §1, 1998).a preliminary review and evaluation of proposed amendments, including rezones, that assesses the extent of review that would be required under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). The preliminary review and evaluation includes review by various city departments and is based on:
1. Is the proposed amendment consistent with the county-wide planning policies, the Growth Management Act (GMA), other state or federal law, or the Washington Administrative Code?
2. Would the proposed amendment cause little or no adverse environmental impacts and, is the time required to analyze impacts available within the time frame of the standard annual review process?
3. Is sufficient analysis completed to determine any need for additional capital improvements and revenues to maintain level-of-service, and is the time required for this analysis available within the time frame for this annual review process?
4. Can the proposed amendment be considered now without conflicting with some other Comprehensive Plan established timeline?
5. Can the proposed amendment be acted on without significant other amendments or revisions not anticipated by the proponents and is the time required for processing those amendments or revisions available within the time frame of this annual review process?
6. If the proposed amendment was previously reviewed, ruled upon or rejected, has the applicant identified reasons to review the proposed amendment again?
The City staff makes a recommendation to the City Council and the City Council reviews all proposals, determines which are appropriate and worthy of further review and consideration, and forwards those to the Planning Commission for review and public hearing. If the Council deems a proposal worthy of consideration, the proposing party is to prepare a final detailed proposal.
Final proposals are analyzed by City staff - including SEPA review - and presented to the Planning Commission for review, including public hearings, prior to the Commission making a recommendation to the City Council. Final decisions regarding any Plan amendments are made by the City Council.
Customarily the Planning Commission has reviewed, but not initiated, proposed Plan amendments. This agenda item is intended to provide the Commission with an opportunity to discuss any amendments the Commission may wish to propose for consideration in 2016.
Note, any Commission-initiated amendments should not be specific to one or two properties. Any proposals for amendments applicable to so few private properties as to be deemed ‘quasi-judicial’ in nature would be inappropriate for the Commission to propose since being the proponent could disqualify Commission members from fairly evaluating such proposals.
Neighborhood/Community Interests (if known):
No known interest. All recognized neighborhood associations, many agencies and other potentially interested parties are notified of the opportunity for them to propose amendments.
Options:
The Commission may propose to approve preliminary proposals at this meeting, or may postpone action until the November 2, 2015, meeting.
Financial Impact:
Impacts would depend on the scope and content of any specific proposed amendment.