|
|
Memorandum...
TO:
Robert Schaub, Chairman
Eatonville Planning Commission
FROM: Mart Kask, AICP, PE
Consulting Town Planner
SUBJECT: Proposed Revisions to the Eatonville Municipal Code Chapter
17.55 – Concurrency
Management System and Chapter 17.60 – Impact Fees
DATE: 17 April 2008
At Issue
The Town Attorney, Edward Hudson, suggested that the Town updates the
concurrency management and impact fee chapters
(Chapters 17.55 and 17.60) in the Eatonville Municipal Code, to bring them
up to date with the state statutes and proven practices at municipal
level.
Responding to the Town Attorney’s request, the Mayor
commissioned Mart Kask to prepare the appropriate
draft revisions to Chapters 17.55 and 17.60. Attached to this memo, please
find draft revisions to the existing Chapter 17.55, presented in cross-out
and underlined version. Further, attached to this memo, please find a
draft of the total rewrite of Chapter 17.60. This means that the current
Chapter 17.60 is to be deleted in its entirety form the Eatonville
Municipal Code and the rewrite be substituted in its place. Please note
that Chapter 17.60 has a number of appendices, which are either referenced
or attached to the Chapter, in their entireties.
Public Hearing
Since the requirements for concurrency management and impact fees
originate in the Growth Management Act, it is quite appropriate that
the Planning Commission takes the lead in reviewing the draft chapters as
a commission and also consults with the citizens of the community in a
formal public hearing. Once having completed its review, the Planning
Commission makes a recommendation to the Town Council as to approve,
disapprove, or approve with amendments the two draft chapters (17.55 and
17.60).
Requirements
Concurrency requirements in planning and development are found in the
Growth Management Act. The concurrency doctrine is found in RCW
36.070A.020(12) and reads as follows:
“Public Facilities and Services – ensure that those public facilities
and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to
serve development at the time development is available for occupancy
without decreasing current service levels below the established minimum
standards.”
“Public Facilities” are defined to include: streets roads, highways,
sidewalks, street and road lighting systems, traffic signals, domestic
water systems, storm and sanitary sewer systems, parks and recreation
facilities and schools.” “Public Services are defined to include: fire
protection and suppression, law enforcement, public health, education,
recreation, environmental protection, and other governmental services.”
Project level concurrency requirements are found in the platting
statutes. No plat or short plat may be approved unless the approving
authority makes written findings that “……appropriate provisions have been
made for, but not limited to, the public health, safety, and general
welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other
public ways, transit stops, potable water, sanitary wastes, parks and
recreation, playgrounds, schools, and school grounds ……” RCW
58.17.110(1)(a).
In order to make written findings that appropriate provisions have been
made, a community must have standards against which the judgment can
be measured (level of service standards). If a project causes local
facilities to fall below local level of service standards, then the
“appropriate provision” will be met by the developer by paying a fee in
lieu of development (impact fee), or an agreement to participate in a
local improvement district or other financing techniques designed to
assure adequate facilities.
If the findings of adequate facilities can not be made, the project
must be denied. The requirement for a finding of adequacy in any
platting action brings the concurrency requirement into consideration.
Recommended Action
Approve as presented ______
Approve with amendments ______
CC: Mayor Tom Smallwood
Town Attorney, Edward Hudson
Town Administrator, Gary Armstrong
Planning Director, Nicholas Bond
Town Clerk, Christal McGowan
Attachments: (Can be found at
http://www.s-lind.com/pc42108.pdf
)
Draft B – Chapter 17.55 EMC
Draft B – Chapter 17.60 EMC
Appendix A Six-Year Transportation Improvment Program, 2008-2013
Appendix B Summary – Traffic Impact Fee Rate Study
Appendix C Park Impact Fee Rates
Appendix D School Impact Fee Rates
Appendix E Fire Impact Fee Rates
Back
to Top
Back
to Front Page
|
|
|
|
