[1]
Prior legislation: Ords. 1694, 1739 and 1749, repealed by Ord. 1762.
The purpose of this chapter is to establish standard procedures for land use and related decisions made by the city of Sumner or its designated hearing examiner, and to outline the procedure for potential appeals of said decisions. The procedures are designed to promote informed public participation, eliminate redundancy in the permit process, minimize permit review times, and implement the Sumner comprehensive plan. This chapter provides for an integrated and consolidated land use permit process as required by RCW 36.70B.060.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996; Ord. 2691 § 1 (part), 2019)
A. 
Land use decisions are classified into seven categories based on the amount of discretion and level of impact associated with each decision. Procedures for the seven categories are distinguished according to who makes the decision, the type and amount of public notice required, whether appeal opportunities are provided, which parties have standing for an appeal, and the venue of the appeal. For two of the seven types of decisions, there are additional subtypes which distinguish the venue for an appeal or further review of a decision. Land use decisions are categorized by type in SMC § 18.56.030. Exhibits provided are for reference only; in the case of a discrepancy, the text of the code controls.
B. 
Type I decisions are made by the director and are appealable only through the judicial system. They require the exercise of little or no discretion.
Example Type 1 flow chart:
C. 
Type II decisions are discretionary decisions made by the director following public notice. Type II decisions are not subject to an administrative appeal. These decisions relate to procedural and substantive compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act and certain wetland determinations according to SMC § 16.46.135.
Example Type II flow chart:
D. 
Type III decisions are discretionary decisions made by the director with an opportunity for an appeal and open record hearing by the applicant to the hearing examiner. Except for Type III.d decisions, there is no public comment period prior to the decision, and appeals from the hearing examiner's decision shall be made through the judicial system. Certain Type III decisions involving design issues may include advisory review by the design commission.
Example Type III flow charts:
E. 
Type IV decisions are discretionary decisions made by the hearing examiner following a recommendation from city staff and an open record predecision hearing. No administrative appeal is provided, and any appeal from the hearing examiner's decision shall be made through the judicial system.
Example Type IV flow chart:
F. 
Type V decisions are discretionary decisions made by the hearing examiner following a recommendation from staff and an open record predecision hearing. Type V decisions are appealable only through the judicial system.
Example Type V flow chart:
G. 
Type VI decisions are discretionary decisions made by the hearing examiner following a recommendation from staff and an open record predecision hearing. Type VI decisions are appealable only through the judicial system. Certain Type VI decisions involving design issues require advisory review by the design commission.
Example Type VI flow charts:
H. 
Type VII decisions are legislative decisions made by the city council in its capacity to establish policy and create legislation. The city council will generally seek broad public participation and review by the planning commission or other advisory groups on these decisions.
Example Type VII flow chart:
I. 
Optional Consolidated Review. Consistent with the requirements of RCW 36.70B.060, the city offers an optional integrated and consolidated review process. If an applicant submits a project permit application that involves two or more of the land use decision processes set forth in this chapter, the applicant may, at the time of the application submittal, elect to have the project permit applications processed collectively under the highest numbered process required for any of the project permit applications submitted. If no such election is made at the time of application, each project permit application will be processed individually under each of the procedures and timelines in SMC § 18.56.030. If the application is processed under the individual procedure option, the highest numbered land use decision type procedure will be processed prior to and separately from the subsequent lower numbered land use decision procedure(s). Consolidated review shall not be permitted where a variance or shoreline variance must be granted in order to allow the development to proceed.
(Ord. 2472 § 3, 2014; Ord. 2691 § 1 (part), 2019; Ord. 2715 § 9, 2019; Ord. 2901 § 3, 2024; Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996)
A. 
Except as provided in subsection M of this section, land use permits may be composed of one or more classifications of land use decisions. A land use permit shall be required for all projects requiring one or more of these decisions.
B. 
The following decisions are Type I decisions which require no public notice and are appealable only through the judicial system, except shoreline permits may be appealed per SMC § 18.56.182:
1. 
Establishments or change of use for uses permitted outright and temporary uses in zones where the use is permitted;
2. 
Establishment of an outdoor seating area;
3. 
Lot line adjustments;
4. 
Manufactured home for resident during the construction of a single-family residence;
5. 
Temporary structure containing office and retail uses during the life of a building permit;
6. 
Minor revisions to an approved preliminary plat;
7. 
Resource, wildlife, and hazard area determinations;
8. 
Shoreline statement of exemption;
9. 
Revision to a shoreline substantial development permit;
10. 
Revision to a shoreline variance or shoreline conditional use permit; provided, that the revisions must be reviewed and approved by the Department of Ecology in accordance with chapter 173-27 WAC;
11. 
Signs.
C. 
The following decisions are Type II decisions which require public notice and are appealable only through the judicial system:
1. 
Determination of significance that an environmental impact statement is required pursuant to the city SEPA regulations, chapter 16.04 SMC;
2. 
Determination of nonsignificance that an environmental impact statement is not required pursuant to the city SEPA regulations, chapter 16.04 SMC;
3. 
The decision to approve, condition, or deny any land use permit (other than for shoreline decisions) based on the city's SEPA policies pursuant to chapter 16.04 SMC;
4. 
Certain wetland determinations according to SMC § 16.46.135.
D. 
The following decisions are Type III.a decisions which require no public notice and are appealable to the hearing examiner:
1. 
Short subdivisions up to four lots;
2. 
Revocation of a land use permit pursuant to SMC § 18.56.230;
3. 
Approvals pursuant to the resource, wildlife and hazard areas, Chapter 16.40 SMC;
4. 
Zoning code interpretation;
5. 
Renewal of a land use permit pursuant to SMC § 18.56.220;
6. 
Temporary caretaker's quarters;
7. 
Temporary continuing care quarters;
8. 
Final subdivisions;
9. 
Relocation report and plans pursuant to SMC § 18.34.090.
E. 
The following decisions are Type III.b decisions which may be reviewed by the design commission pursuant to SMC § 18.56.140 and are appealable to the hearing examiner: Applications for development subject to the thresholds of SMC § 18.40.020(B), called design commission requested review.
F. 
The following decisions are Type III.c decisions which shall be reviewed by the design commission pursuant to SMC § 18.56.145 and which are appealable to the hearing examiner: Applications for development subject to the thresholds of SMC § 18.40.020(C), called design commission mandatory review.
G. 
The following decisions are Type III.d decisions which shall require public notice and be reviewed administratively and are appealable to the hearing examiner:
1. 
Administrative use permit;
2. 
Administrative variance;
3. 
Application of IDEA district overlay;
4. 
Short subdivisions of five or more lots.
H. 
The following decisions are Type IV decisions which require public notice and a public hearing before the hearing examiner and are appealable only through the judicial system:
1. 
Variances;
2. 
Special exception;
3. 
Reasonable use exceptions pursuant to the resource, wildlife and hazard areas regulations.
I. 
The following decisions are Type V decisions which require a public hearing and decision by the hearing examiner, and are appealable only through the judicial system:
1. 
Conditional use;
2. 
Shoreline conditional use; provided, that supplemental procedures for shoreline decisions are provided in SMC § 18.56.150;
3. 
Subdivision preliminary plats; provided, that supplemental procedures for subdivision approval are established in SMC Title 17;
4. 
Binding site plans;
5. 
Shoreline substantial development[1] permits and shoreline variances; provided, that supplemental procedures for shoreline decisions are provided in SMC § 18.56.150;
[1]
Shoreline substantial development permit, variances, and conditional uses have additional requirements to comply with the state Shoreline Management Act.
6. 
Planned residential development per SMC § 18.24.070.
J. 
The following decisions are Type VI.a decisions which require a public hearing and decision by the hearing examiner and are appealable only through the judicial system:
1. 
Amendments to the zoning map;
2. 
Amendments to overlay districts mapping;
3. 
Amendments to shoreline environment designations, except those initiated by the city to implement new policies.
K. 
The following decisions are Type VI.b decisions which require a public hearing and decision by the hearing examiner following review by the design commission pursuant to SMC § 18.56.145 and are appealable only through the judicial system: applications for development subject to the thresholds of SMC § 18.40.020(D).
1. 
Planned mixed-use development.
L. 
The following decisions are Type VII decisions which require city council approval, generally after broad public participation and review by the planning commission:
1. 
Amendments to the zoning regulations, SMC Title 18.
2. 
Amendments to the comprehensive plan and subsequent policy document.
M. 
Interior alterations of a legal structure are exempt from land use review if the interior alterations do not result in:
1. 
Modification of the existing site layout;
2. 
Modification of the current use;
3. 
Expansion of the existing building footprint;
4. 
Additional sleeping quarters or bedrooms;
5. 
The need for additional parking as required by city parking standards;
6. 
Nonconformity with Federal Emergency Management Agency substantial improvement thresholds; or
7. 
An increase in the total square footage or valuation of the structure thereby requiring upgraded fire access or fire suppression systems.
Nothing in this section exempts interior alterations from otherwise applicable requirements, including, but not limited to, building, plumbing, mechanical, or electrical codes.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996; Ord. 2090 § 1, 2004; Ord. 2196 § 6, 2007; Ord. 2314 § 3, 2010; Ord. 2472 § 4, 2014; Ord. 2691 § 1 (part), 2019; Ord. 2715 § 10, 2019; Ord. 2774 § 35, 2021; Ord. 2851 § 14, 2023; Ord. 2901 § 3, 2024; Ord. 2936, 10/20/2025)
Preapplication meetings are not a requirement for the submission of a project permit application. However, in order to streamline application development efforts and promote more efficient city review processes, all applicants are encouraged to request preliminary site plan review by city departments. The preliminary site plan review shall be conducted according to procedures established by the director.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996; Ord. 2901 § 4, 2024)
A. 
Applications for land use permits shall be made by the property owner, lessee, contract purchaser, or a city agency, or by an authorized agent thereof; provided, that any interested person may request to the city council that a Type VII decision be considered, or the city council may initiate such a Type VII decision.
B. 
All applications for land use permits shall be on forms provided by the director.
C. 
Applications shall be accompanied by payment of the applicable fees, if any, according to this chapter.
D. 
Land use permits include all components necessary for the project. An applicant at his/her discretion may choose to proceed with separate applications for each of the components associated with a project.
E. 
All applications shall be accompanied with appropriate drawings, plans, legal descriptions, and other information as determined necessary by the director and to satisfy the specific application requirements of the Sumner Municipal Code.
F. 
The following shall be required at a minimum:
1. 
Project application, indicating project address, legal description or parcel number, property owner name and address, proposed use of the property, project description, name and address of a single project contact person or entity to receive notices and correspondence;
2. 
Proof of ownership, if required;
3. 
Site plan showing building footprints, access areas, parking locations and dimensions, landscape areas, street locations, and other information necessary for a specific permit. For additional requirements for a shoreline permit application see SMC § 18.56.150;
4. 
Architectural drawings when a structure is proposed, showing elevations and floor plans; and
5. 
If applicable, completed and signed environmental checklist, including responses to all questions and describing the nature of potential impacts, or reasons why there would not be impacts as well as supplying specific mitigation where necessary.
G. 
The timing of application submittals and review is governed by SMC § 18.56.185, Timing of land use decisions.
H. 
Within 28 calendar days of receiving a land use permit application, the director shall determine if the application is complete and provide a written determination of completeness identifying whether or not the procedural submission requirements have been met. In the event the application is determined to be an incomplete application, the city shall outline the specific requirements and/or corrections needed for a complete application, and include notice of the deadline for responding identified in subsection I of this section. If the director does not provide a written determination of completeness within the 28 calendar days, the application shall be deemed procedurally complete on the twenty-ninth calendar day after receiving a project permit application. If additional information is needed to make the application complete, the applicant shall provide the information within 60 calendar days of the written determination of incomplete application. Within 14 calendar days after an applicant has submitted the requested information following a determination of incomplete application, the director shall provide a written determination notifying the applicant whether the application is complete or remains an incomplete application and identifying what additional information is necessary for a complete application. An application is complete for purposes of this section when it (1) meets the procedural submission requirements of subsection F of this section, (2) contains the documents and information identified in the applicable checklist established by the director pursuant to subsection E of this section, and (3) is sufficient for continued processing even though additional information may be required or project modifications may be undertaken subsequently. The need for additional information or studies not included in the director's submission requirements, provided pursuant to subsection E of this section, shall not be a basis for a determination of incomplete application. Any determination of completeness shall not preclude the director from requesting additional information or studies either at the time of the notice of completeness or, subsequently, if new information is required to complete review of the application or substantial changes in the permit applications are proposed. A determination under this section that an application is complete for purposes of continued processing is not a determination that the application is vested.
I. 
If an applicant is nonresponsive for more than 60 consecutive calendar days after the director has provided a written determination of completeness that additional information is required to further process the application, the director may:
1. 
Deem the application abandoned and close the application on the sixty-first calendar day. Upon abandonment and closure of an application, a new project application must be submitted in order to receive project review; or
2. 
Add a minimum of 30 calendar days to the time period for the city to issue a final decision. If the applicant is nonresponsive during the extension period, the application may be determined abandoned and closed on the day following the extension period.
For the purposes of this subsection, "nonresponsive" means that an applicant is not making demonstrable progress providing additional requested information to the city, or that there is no ongoing meaningful communication from the applicant with the city on the applicant's ability or willingness to provide the additional information.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996; Ord. 2090 § 2, 2004; Ord. 2901 § 5, 2024)
A. 
Unless otherwise noted, all applicable fees for land use permits and components shall be paid at the time of application. Sign permit fees shall be paid at the time of permit issuance.
B. 
The following fees shall be paid by any applicant for a land use permit based on the requested land use decisions:
Additional published notice:
$120
Administrative use:
$550
Administrative variance:
$200
Binding site plan:
$2,500
Change in zoning map:
$3,000
Comprehensive plan amendment:
$2,600
Conditional use:
$1,100
Full subdivision – Preliminary plat:
$2,500
Full subdivision – Final plat:
$1,000
Land use review –
Permits less than $200,000:
$30
Permits $200,000 – $1,000,000:
$150
Permits over $1,000,000:
$250
Lot line adjustment:
$185
Planned community:
$3,000
Nonexempt Resource, Wildlife and Hazard Area Approvals
Wetland projects involving public notice:
$250
Nonexempt projects involving:
– Nonincidental grading < 100 cy;
– Single-family residence by owner;
– Public facilities;
– Commercial use < 4,000 sq. ft.:
$30
Nonexempt projects involving:
– Nonincidental grading or other; permanent fill 100 – 5,000 cu;
– Single-family residence;
– Commercial use 4,000 – 12,000 sq. ft.;
– Industrial use < 12,000 sq. ft.;
– Short subdivision exempt from SEPA:
$100
Nonexempt projects involving:
– Grading > 5,000 cy;
– Commercial use > 12,000 sq. ft.;
– Industrial use > 12,000 sq. ft.;
$210
SEPA review (DNS) – minor projects:
$400
SEPA review (DNS) – major projects:
$1,200
Shoreline revision:
$240
Shoreline substantial development permit:
$2,600
Shoreline variance or conditional use with development permit:
$220
Shoreline variance or conditional use without development permit:
$2,800
Short subdivision:
$600
Special exception:
$500
Street vacation:
$650 plus land costs
Temporary uses:
See land use review
Time extension by hearing examiner or council:
$250
Urban village wetlands delineation:
See subsection J
Variance:
$400
Zoning code interpretation:
$185
Zoning code interpretation appeal:
$615
Zoning code text amendment:
$1,000
C. 
For purposes of this section, "minor project" shall be defined as less than 500 cubic yards of nonincidental grading, less than 6,000 square feet of commercial or industrial use, public facilities, fewer than five residential units, subdivisions of less than 10 lots, and all other projects of similar scope.
D. 
For purposes of this section, "major projects" shall be defined as greater than or equal to 500 cubic yards of nonincidental grading, greater than or equal to 6,000 square feet of commercial or industrial use, subdivisions of 10 or more lots, five or more residential units, and all other projects of similar scope.
E. 
Sign permit fees shall be as established in SMC § 18.44.320.
F. 
The fees for an environmental impact statement shall be based on the costs of preparation of the document, plus 20 percent of the preparation costs to cover the costs of staff time, notice and other city costs. Any costs associated with an appeal of an environmental impact statement shall be borne by the permit applicant.
G. 
In addition to the above fees, if the director determines that studies or review by a consultant with expertise is required to complete the review of a proposed development, then the city shall bill such costs and expenses directly to the applicant. The director shall advise the applicant of the projected costs of the project prior to actual preparation. The city shall require the applicant to post a bond, deposit cash or otherwise ensure payment of the project costs. Such consultant shall be selected by mutual agreement of the city and the applicant after a call for proposals.
H. 
The director may issue a refund up to 50 percent of the application fee if the application is withdrawn in writing prior to any work being done on the review of the permit.
I. 
For purposes of this chapter, a land use review fee shall be charged whenever a land use permit results in any of the following:
1. 
Establishment of a new principal use which was not the subject of a conditional use approval;
2. 
Change of a principal use;
3. 
A nonincidental expansion of a commercial or industrial building; or
4. 
An increase to a multifamily structure which increases the number of units.
J. 
Urban village delineation fees in the amount of $300.00 for each lot which was included in the wetlands study titled "Sumner Urban Village Wetland Delineation Report – April 11, 1995" shall be paid at the time any such parcel obtains a land use permit of any type. Such payment shall be made only once.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996; Ord. 2019 § 1, 2002; Ord. 2715 § 11, 2019; Ord. 2830 § 6, 2022)
A. 
When a land use permit application requiring a Type II, IV, V, VI.a and VI.b decision is submitted, the director shall provide notice of application and an opportunity for public comment as described in this section. No notice or public comment period shall be required for Type I, III.a, III.b, or III.c decisions. Notice for Type VII permits shall be appropriate for applicable legislative process. In addition to the notice requirements in this section, the director may require any other manner of public notice deemed appropriate to accomplish the objectives of reasonable notice to the adjacent landowners and the public.
B. 
Types of Notice. The following classes of notice shall be provided for the appropriate type of decision:
1. 
Class A notice includes the following:
a. 
Publication using two electronic methods, as established by the director, at least 15 days prior to the hearing or close of the comment period. Such notice need only include project identification number, project description, nature of the requested approval, applicant name, time and location of hearing, if applicable, deadline for submitting comments, project location, and instructions for additional information;
b. 
Posting of notice at public information centers and the city's official website at least 15 days prior to the hearing or close of the comment period;
c. 
Mailing notice to other local, state, regional, and federal jurisdictions and agencies which to the knowledge of the director have jurisdiction over the project;
d. 
Posting on-site; and
e. 
Mailed notice.
2. 
Class B notice includes the following:
a. 
Publication using two electronic methods, established by the director, providing at least 10 days for public comment;
b. 
Posting on site;
c. 
Posting of notice at public information centers and on the city's official website; and
d. 
Mailed notice.
3. 
Class C notice shall include the following:
a. 
Publication of the notice using two electronic methods, established by the director;
b. 
Publication in the SEPA register and filing with the SEPA public information center;
c. 
Mailing notice to persons previously submitting substantive comments on the proposal; and
d. 
Posting of notice at public information centers and on the city's official website.
4. 
Class D notice shall include the following at least 10 days prior to the hearing, except that when the notice of application and the notice of an open record predecision hearing are simultaneous, at least 15 days' notice shall be provided:
a. 
Publication using two electronic methods, established by the director;
b. 
Mailed notice;
c. 
Posting of the notice for comment at public information centers and on the city's official website;
d. 
Posting on site; and
e. 
Mailing notice to persons previously submitting substantive comments on the proposal.
5. 
Class E notice shall include the following:
a. 
Publication once a week for two consecutive weeks, on the same day of the week, using two electronic methods, established by the director, at least 30 days prior to the hearing;
b. 
Posting on-site notice of the hearing at least 30 days prior to the hearing and at a minimum of two locations within 300 feet of the project location;
c. 
For shoreline variances notice shall be sent to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service; and
d. 
Mailed notice.
6. 
Class F notice shall include the following:
a. 
Mailing notice of the decision to parties of record; and
b. 
Sending the hearing examiner's final order, including findings and conclusions, to the Department of Ecology and State Attorney General within five days of the final decision; and
c. 
Posting of the notice of decision at public information centers and on the city's official website.
7. 
Class G notice shall include the following:
a. 
Publication using two electronic methods, established by the director, at least 10 days prior to the hearing or close of the comment period; and
b. 
Posting of notice at public information centers at least 10 days prior to the hearing or close of the comment period and on the city's official website.
8. 
Class H notice shall include the following:
a. 
Publication once a week for two consecutive weeks, on the same day of the week, using two electronic methods, established by the director; and
b. 
Repealed by Ord. 2625.
c. 
Posting at public information centers and on the city's official website.
C. 
"Mailed notice"
means notice mailed via U.S. Mail to all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of a specific site, except that, in the M-1 zone, "mailed notice" means notice to all property owners within 1,000 feet of the boundaries of a specific site.
D. 
"Public information centers"
means the Sumner City Hall and other locations as designated by the city council.
E. 
"Posting on site"
means posting of a placard at least two feet by three feet in size on the site of the proposed project within visibility of the adjacent street. If the proposed site is adjacent to more than one street, notice shall be posted adjacent to each street. When posting on site is not feasible, the posting shall occur in reasonable proximity to the site. When the project involves an areawide proposal or is not physically possible, posting on site shall not be required.
F. 
"Electronic methods"
means publication that is available on the internet and may be hosted by local newspapers, websites, social media and other methods that reach a wide circulation of the general public and contain formal public and legal notices and announcements.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996; Ord. 2090 § 3, 2004; Ord. 2304 § 1, 2009; Ord. 2369 § 1, 2012; Ord. 2472 § 5, 2014; Ord. 2625 § 1, 2018)
When an application for a land use permit containing a Type II, III.d, IV, V, or VI decision is filed, the director shall execute Class A notice within 15 days of the determination of completeness pursuant to SMC § 18.56.050(H). Notice pursuant to this section shall constitute compliance with the required notice of application under RCW 36.70B.110. If an open record predecision hearing is required, additional notice may be required for said hearing.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996; Ord. 2715 § 12, 2019)
A. 
Unless otherwise noted in this chapter, notices of application pursuant to SMC § 18.56.075 shall contain the following:
1. 
The date of application, the date of the notice of completion, and the date of the notice of application;
2. 
A description of the proposed project action and a list of the project permits included in the application and, if applicable, a list of any studies requested;
3. 
The identification of other permits not included in the application to the extent known by the local government;
4. 
The identification of existing environmental documents that evaluate the proposed project, and the location where the application and any studies can be reviewed;
5. 
A statement of the public comment period;
6. 
The date, time, place, and type of hearing, if applicable, and scheduled at the date of notice of the application;
7. 
A statement of the preliminary determination, if one has been made at the time of notice, of those development regulations that will be used for project mitigation and of consistency with development regulations as provided in RCW 36.70B.040; and
8. 
Additional information may be required if the optional DNS process is used pursuant to SMC § 16.04.080.
B. 
All other public notices of project hearings or comment periods shall include project identification number, project description, nature of the requested approval, applicant name, time and location of hearing, if applicable, deadline for submitting comments, project location, and instructions for additional information.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996; Ord. 1831 § 8, 1998)
When a determination of significance (DS) is issued on a land use permit application, Class B notice shall be provided as established by SMC § 18.56.070(C), except that the comment period shall be 21 days. Copies of the scoping notice shall be mailed as required by SMC § 16.04.150.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996)
When a draft environmental impact statement is published by the city, Class C notice of draft EIS availability shall be provided as established by SMC § 18.56.070(C), except that the public comment period shall be 30 days. The director may extend the comment period to 60 days for complex projects. Copies of the draft EIS shall be distributed according to chapter 16.04 SMC.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996)
Notice of the availability of a final EIS on a proposed project shall be provided by the director according to the standards for Class C notice. Copies of the final EIS shall be distributed according to chapter 16.04 SMC.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996)
A. 
Draft EIS. As required by chapter 16.04 SMC, SEPA procedures and policies, a public meeting shall be held by the director on all draft EISs for which the department is the lead agency. The meeting shall be no earlier than 21 days from the date the draft EIS is issued. Class D notice shall be provided for such meetings, except that notice may be integrated with notice per SMC § 18.56.090.
B. 
Type IV, V, and VI Decisions. The open record predecision hearing before the hearing examiner for all Type IV, V, and VI decisions shall be conducted according to this chapter and the provisions of chapter 2.58 SMC, Hearing examiner. Class D notice shall be provided for such open record predecision hearings.
C. 
Open record meetings and hearings conducted by the city council and planning commission regarding land use decisions shall be held according to the city council's rules for such proceedings. The city council shall provide at least Class G notice for hearings.
D. 
The director shall provide opportunities for consolidation of public meetings required by this chapter and any other public meetings which may be required by another local, state, regional, federal, or other agency. When this occurs, the public meetings shall be held in the city of Sumner and within agreed upon time limits between the director and the applicant as specified in RCW 36.70B.110.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996)
When a proposal involves a Type IV, V, VI.a or VI.b decision, the director shall make available to the public a staff report describing the proposal, stating the criteria for approval, giving an analysis of the proposal relative to the criteria, providing a recommendation for approval or denial, and listing recommended conditions of approval. Such recommendation shall be made available to the public at least seven days prior to the hearing and shall be mailed to the applicant.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996)
The director, hearing examiner, or city council shall have the authority to grant, deny, or conditionally grant approval of a land use permit based on the proposal's compliance with the city's development regulations. The director, hearing examiner, or city council may impose conditions in order to ensure compliance of the proposal with development regulations.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996)
When a proposal involves a Type II, or any Type III decision, the director shall make available to the applicant and any person submitting substantive comments on the proposal, a staff report briefly describing the proposal, stating the criteria for approval, giving an analysis of the proposal relative to the criteria for approval, providing a decision approving, denying, or approving the proposal with conditions, as appropriate. For decisions issued pursuant to SEPA, the DS or DNS with attached conditions shall satisfy this requirement. All appealable decisions shall state the process and deadlines for appeal.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996)
A. 
No notice of decision shall be required for Type I decisions.
B. 
For Type II decisions, the director shall provide:
1. 
Class C notice of the decision; and
2. 
If the director's decision includes a mitigated DNS or other DNS requiring a 15-day comment period pursuant to chapter 16.04 SMC, SEPA procedures and policies, the notice of decision shall include notice of the comment period. The director shall distribute copies of the DNS as required by chapter 16.04 SMC.
C. 
For Type III decisions, the director shall provide for:
1. 
Mailing notice of the decision to the applicant; and
2. 
Mailing notice to persons previously submitting substantive comments on the proposal.
D. 
For Type IV and V decisions, the director shall provide for:
1. 
Mailing notice of the decision to the applicant;
2. 
Mailing notice of the decision to persons previously submitting substantive comments on the proposal;
3. 
Publication of notice of decision using two electronic methods, established by the director, within seven days of the decision;
4. 
Posting of the notice of decision at public information centers and on the city's official website; and
5. 
Mailed notice.
E. 
For Type VI decisions, the director shall provide for:
1. 
Mailing notice of the decision to the applicant;
2. 
Mailing notice to all persons previously submitting substantive comments on the proposal;
3. 
Posting of the notice of decision at public information centers and on the city's official website; and
4. 
Mailed notice.
F. 
For Type VII decision, no notice of decision is required.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996; Ord. 2472 § 6, 2014; Ord. 2625 § 2, 2018)
A. 
Whenever a proposal involves a Type III.b decision, the applicant at any time prior to issuance of the building permit may request review of the proposal by the design commission. A proposal may be reviewed prior to or concurrent with other project permits. Unless otherwise requested by the applicant in writing, the design review process shall not include more than one meeting before the design commission.
B. 
Whenever review of a Type III.b decision is requested from the design commission, the director shall prepare a staff report and make such report available at least seven days prior to the meeting of the design commission. The director shall provide notice of the design commission meeting to the applicant at least 10 days prior to the meeting to discuss the proposal.
C. 
The meetings of the design commission for such advisory review may be noticed to the public only by posting commission agendas at public information centers and on the official city website.
D. 
The design commission shall provide advisory review of the proposal to the director, who may concur, modify or overturn the advice of the design commission. The director shall give substantial weight to the recommendation of the design commission.
E. 
Advice of the design commission shall be based on the established guidelines for such review.
F. 
Following review by the design commission, the director shall issue a decision on the proposal. Such decision shall be appealable to the hearing examiner only. An appeal may be filed by the applicant only. In deciding the appeal of a Type III.b decision, the hearing examiner shall be guided by the criteria for design review.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996; Ord. 2625 § 3 (part), 2018; Ord. 2901 § 6, 2024)
A. 
Whenever a proposal involves a Type III.c or VI.b decision, the proposal shall be reviewed by the design commission, which may be reviewed prior to or concurrent with other project permits. Unless otherwise requested by the applicant in writing, the design review process shall not include more than one meeting before the design commission.
B. 
Whenever design commission review of a proposal is required, the director shall prepare a staff report to the commission and public and make such report available at least seven days prior to the meeting of the design commission. The director shall provide notice of the design commission meeting to the applicant at least 10 days prior to the meeting to discuss the proposal.
C. 
The meetings of the design commission for such review may be noticed to the public by posting commission agendas at public information centers and on the official city website. The design commission may decide to hold a public hearing or provide additional notice for a particular Type III.c or Type VI.b decision.
D. 
The design commission shall provide advisory review of the proposal to the director, who may concur, modify or overturn the advice of the design commission. The director shall give substantial weight to the recommendation of the design commission.
E. 
Advice of the design commission shall be based on the established guidelines for such review.
F. 
Following review by the design commission, the director shall issue a decision on the proposal. Such decision shall be appealable to the hearing examiner only. An appeal may be filed by the applicant only, except that for Type VI.b decisions, appeals may be sought by any other party with a substantial interest in the proceeding. In deciding the appeal of such a decision, the hearing examiner shall be guided by the criteria for design review.
G. 
For Type VI.b decisions, the review by the design commission shall precede the issuance of the staff recommendation in order to allow the decision on the design issues to be consolidated with the staff recommendation on the underlying action.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996; Ord. 2625 § 3 (part), 2018; Ord. 2901 § 7, 2024)
A. 
Amendments to the comprehensive plan may be proposed to any element including goals, policies, objectives, or plan maps. In some cases, amendments to the plan may necessitate and, as such, incorporate amendments to supporting documents such as capital facility plans.
B. 
In addition to the parties listed in SMC § 18.56.050(A), amendments to the comprehensive plan may be proposed by the hearing examiner, any member of the city council, any governmental commission or committee, any neighborhood or community council or other neighborhood or special purpose group, department or office, agency, official or employee of the city of Sumner, or any other general or special purpose government.
C. 
By April 1st of each year, the city council shall determine whether a plan amendment cycle will be conducted during that year. Amendment cycles shall be no less frequent than every other year and no more frequent than once per year, except that amendments may be considered more frequently for the following:
1. 
The initial adoption of a subarea plan;
2. 
The adoption or amendment of a shoreline master program under procedures of chapter 90.58 RCW.
D. 
The community development director shall broadly disseminate to the public a notice giving the procedures and timeline for proposing amendments or revisions to the comprehensive plan through the execution of Class H notice. The community development director shall allow for a reasonable time for requests to be submitted.
E. 
Applications for comprehensive plan amendments shall be submitted in writing and include the following:
1. 
The appropriate fee, except that there shall be no charge for a request made by a city department or a majority of the city council by resolution or any governmental entity. All applicants shall be responsible for the costs of any specialized studies including, but not limited to, traffic and transportation, critical areas, and environmental impact statements associated with their request. Payment of such costs shall be consistent with SMC § 18.56.060(G).
2. 
Responses to the following:
a. 
Description of the requested plan amendment;
b. 
An explanation of why the amendment is being proposed including specific areas needing change;
c. 
If appropriate, the proposed amendment should include amendatory language; and
d. 
An explanation of how the criteria of subsection N of this section are satisfied.
3. 
A mailing list per SMC § 18.56.070(C).
F. 
A proposed amendment shall be submitted to the community development department prior to the deadline established per subsection D of this section.
G. 
Subsequent to the application deadline, the community development director shall provide recommendations concerning all proposed amendments and forward proposed amendment requests with recommendations to the planning commission. The planning commission shall decide which amendments shall be considered. Applications which are not timely, are incomplete, are substantially similar to a request which was denied in the previous cycle, or on their face do not satisfy the criteria of subsection N of this section shall not be considered.
H. 
The amendment shall be accompanied by the necessary documents for compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act. If an environmental impact statement is required, the preparation of the statement and plan amendments shall be integrated to the extent possible.
I. 
Following the completion of the public comment period for the notice of application, the community development director shall prepare staff report(s) evaluating the amendments selected for consideration. Staff reports shall include data, analysis, public and agency comments, and staff recommendations.
J. 
The planning commission shall hold at least one public hearing on the amendment(s). Class G notice shall be provided for hearings involving comprehensive plan amendments. Where an amendment to the plan map is not areawide, but is site-specific, Class D notice shall also be provided.
K. 
The city council shall consider the recommendations of the planning commission. The city council may hold a public hearing prior to issuing a preliminary decision on the proposed amendments.
L. 
Upon selection of a preliminary decision on all proposed amendments, the community development director shall transmit the proposed amendments to the state of Washington in accordance with chapter 36.70A RCW.
M. 
The city council shall adopt by ordinance amendments to the comprehensive plan after consideration of comments from the state of Washington. The city council may hold an additional public hearing(s) prior to adoption of amendments. Adopted amendments shall be transmitted to the state of Washington per chapter 36.70A RCW.
N. 
The following criteria shall be evaluated when considering plan amendments. Only those amendments which are found to be in substantial compliance with all criteria shall be approved.
1. 
An amendment is necessary to resolve inconsistencies between the Sumner comprehensive plan and other city plans or ordinances; or to resolve inconsistencies between the Sumner comprehensive plan and other jurisdictions' plans or ordinances.
2. 
Conditions have so changed since the adoption of the Sumner comprehensive plan that the existing goals, policies, objectives, and/or map classifications are inappropriate.
3. 
The proposed amendment is consistent with the overall intent of the goals of the Sumner comprehensive plan.
4. 
The proposed amendment is consistent with chapter 36.70A RCW, the countywide planning policies for Pierce County, and the applicable multicounty planning policies.
5. 
Where an amendment to the comprehensive plan map is proposed, the proposed designation is adjacent to property having a similar and compatible designation, or the subject property is of sufficient size, or other conditions are present.
6. 
Environmental impacts have been disclosed, and measures have been included to reduce possible adverse impacts.
7. 
Potential ramifications of the proposed amendment to other comprehensive plan elements and supporting plans have been considered and satisfactorily addressed.
O. 
As appropriate, where an amendment of the comprehensive plan is granted by the city council and a subsequent rezone or amendment to development regulations is required, the planning commission may consider them and make recommendations to the city council for consideration concurrent with the final approval of the comprehensive plan.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996; Ord. 2684 § 1, 2019; Ord. 2788 § 49, 2021)
A. 
Text amendments to the Sumner Municipal Code may be proposed by the parties listed in SMC § 18.56.050(A), hearing examiner, any member of the city council, any governmental commission or committee, any neighborhood or community council or other neighborhood or special purpose group, department or office, agency, official or employee of the city of Sumner, or any other general or special purpose government during the established comprehensive plan amendment cycle with no fee.
B. 
Outside of the established amendment cycle, the fee shown in SMC § 18.56.060 shall be charged when the zoning code text amendment proposal is submitted.
C. 
Applications for zoning code text amendments shall be submitted in writing and include the following:
1. 
The appropriate fee, if required, except that there shall be no charge for a request made by a city department or a majority of the city council by resolution or any governmental entity. All applicants shall be responsible for the costs of any specialized studies including, but not limited to, traffic and transportation, critical areas, and environmental impact statements associated with their request. Payment of such costs shall be consistent with SMC § 18.56.060(G).
2. 
Responses to the following:
a. 
Description of the requested code amendment;
b. 
An explanation of why the amendment is being proposed including specific areas needing change;
c. 
If appropriate, the proposed amendment should include amendatory language; and
d. 
An explanation of how the proposed amendment implements the comprehensive plan.
D. 
Following the completion of the public comment period for the notice of application, the director shall prepare staff report(s) evaluating the proposed amendments. Staff reports shall include data, analysis, public and agency comments, and staff recommendations.
E. 
The planning commission shall hold at least one public hearing on the proposed amendment(s). Class G notice shall be provided for public hearings.
F. 
The city council shall consider the recommendations of the planning commission. The city council may hold a public hearing prior to issuing a preliminary decision on the proposed amendment(s).
(Ord. 2019 § 2, 2002; Ord. 2684 § 2, 2019)
A. 
Notice of application for all shoreline substantial development permits, shoreline variances and shoreline conditional use permits shall be Class E notice. The notice of application shall describe the location of the project and include a statement that any person desiring to present their views to the hearing examiner may do so in writing within 30 days of the final electronic publication. The notice shall also provide a date when the public hearing will be held on the application and state that any person may submit oral or written comments at the hearing.
B. 
Notice for all shoreline substantial development permits, shoreline variances and shoreline conditional use permit final decisions shall be Class F notice.
C. 
Applications for a substantial development permit or shoreline conditional use permit or variance shall be in accordance with the city of Sumner adopted shoreline master program.
D. 
Revision to Shoreline Permits. Any revisions to a shoreline permit or permit process shall be in accordance with the city of Sumner adopted shoreline master program.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996; Ord. 2090 § 4, 2004; Ord. 2531 § 10, 2015; Ord. 2548 § 6, 2015; Ord. 2625 § 4, 2018)
A. 
Type I and II decisions as listed in SMC § 18.56.030 are not subject to appeal.
B. 
Type III.a, III.b, and III.c decisions, and Type VI.b decisions related to design review of the director, as listed in SMC § 18.56.030, shall be subject to an administrative open record appeal hearing to the hearing examiner only.
C. 
Type IV decisions of the hearing examiner, as listed in SMC § 18.56.030, shall not be subject to appeal.
D. 
Type V decisions of the hearing examiner, as listed in SMC § 18.56.030, shall be subject to appeal only through the judicial system.
E. 
Type VI decisions of the hearing examiner, as listed in SMC § 18.56.030, shall be subject to appeal only through the judicial system.
F. 
Type VII decisions are decisions of the city council and are not subject to appeal.
G. 
Type IV and V decisions related to implementation of the shoreline master program must be appealed to the Shorelines Hearings Board in accordance with the provisions of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, chapter 90.58 RCW, and the rules established under its authority, chapter 173-14 WAC.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996; Ord. 2691 § 1 (part), 2019)
A decision of the director involving a Type III.a, III.b, III.c, III.d, and Type VI.b decision may be appealed to the hearing examiner subject to the following provisions:
A. 
Appeals shall be submitted in writing to the city clerk by 5:00 p.m. of the fifteenth calendar day following the date of the decision. When the last day of the appeal period so computed is a Saturday, Sunday, or federal or city holiday, the period shall run until 5:00 p.m. on the next business day. The appeal shall be in writing and shall state specific objections to the decision and the relief sought. The appeal shall be accompanied with any applicable filing fees.
B. 
At the hearing examiner's initiative, or at the request of any party of record, the hearing examiner may have a conference prior to the hearing in order to entertain and act on motions, clarify issues, or consider other relevant matters.
C. 
Notice of filing of the appeal and the date of an open record appeal hearing shall be mailed to the applicant and any persons submitting substantive comments on the proposal.
D. 
Appeals shall be considered de novo. The hearing examiner shall entertain only those issues cited in the written appeal which relate to compliance with the applicable appealable provisions of the municipal code.
E. 
The director's decision on appeal shall be given substantial weight.
F. 
The decision of the hearing examiner shall be rendered within 15 days of the close of the record.
G. 
When a proposal before the examiner involves multiple decision components or appeals, the examiner shall strive to consolidate the hearings to the extent possible.
H. 
The appointment of hearing examiners, conduct of hearings, and other rules related to the hearing examiner shall be governed by chapter 2.58 SMC.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996; Ord. 2691 § 1 (part), 2019; Ord. 2851 § 15, 2023)
Whenever a proposal involves a Type IV, V, VI.a or VI.b decision, the hearing examiner shall conduct an open record hearing. In the case of Type IV, V, VI.a or VI.b decisions, the hearing examiner shall issue written findings and a decision. The decision shall be subject to the following provisions:
A. 
At the hearing examiner's initiative, or at the request of any party of record, the hearing examiner may have a conference prior to the hearing in order to entertain and act on motions, clarify issues, or consider other relevant matters.
B. 
Hearings shall be considered de novo. The record shall be based on the record established at the hearing and any other information submitted consistent with sound administrative hearing practice.
C. 
The staff recommendation shall be given the same weight as all other evidence presented during the hearing.
D. 
The decision of the hearing examiner shall be rendered within 14 days of the close of the record.
E. 
When a proposal before the examiner involves multiple decision components or appeals, the examiner shall strive to consolidate the hearings to the extent possible.
F. 
The appointment of hearing examiners, conduct of hearings, and other rules related to the hearing examiner shall be governed by chapter 2.58 SMC.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996; Ord. 2691 § 1 (part), 2019)
A decision of the hearing examiner on a Type VI.b decision on a major amendment to a planned mixed-use development per SMC § 18.26.100(H)(2) may be appealed to the city council subject to the following provisions:
A. 
Appeals shall be submitted in writing to the city clerk by 5:00 p.m. of the fifteenth calendar day following the date of the decision. When the last day of the comment period so computed is a Saturday, Sunday, or federal or city holiday, the period shall run until 5:00 p.m. on the next business day. The appeal shall be in writing and shall state specific objections to the decision and the relief sought. The appeal shall be accompanied with any applicable filing fees.
B. 
The record established by the hearing examiner (including testimony, exhibits, comment letters, plans, staff reports, etc.) shall be the record used by council unless it is supplemented by the city council pursuant to this section. A request to supplement the record shall be made in a separate document that is attached to the appeal. The appeal shall not mention or refer to the material that is proposed to be added to the record. A request to supplement the record shall include a brief description of the nature of the material to be added and a separate, attached copy of the material to be added. The request to supplement the record must clearly establish that the new evidence or information to be added to the record was not available or could not have been reasonably produced at the time of the open record hearing before the hearing examiner.
C. 
The council may affirm, modify, reverse the hearing examiner's decision, remand to the hearing examiner with directions for further proceedings, or grant other relief that it determines is appropriate under the individual facts and circumstances of the matter before it on appeal. If the council reverses or modifies the hearing examiner's decision, the council shall enter findings and/or conclusions to support the decision.
D. 
The hearing examiner's decision on appeal shall be given substantial weight.
E. 
The city council shall establish rules for council appeals.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996; Ord. 2343 § 3, 2010; Ord. 2691 § 1 (part), 2019)
A. 
Any person aggrieved by the granting, denying, rescission, or modification of a shoreline permit may seek review from the State Shorelines Hearings Board. An appeal of a shoreline substantial development permit shall be initiated by filing an original and one copy of request for review with the Hearings Board within 21 days of the Department of Ecology's receipt of the final decision by the city council. An appeal of a variance or conditional use permit shall be filed with the Hearings Board within 21 days of the Department of Ecology's decision. The request for review shall be in the form required by the rules for practice and procedure before the Shorelines Hearings Board. The person seeking review shall also file a copy of the request for review with the State Department of Ecology and the Attorney General.
B. 
The city of Sumner or the Department of Ecology decision on revision to a shoreline permit may be appealed within 21 days of such decision, in accordance with WAC 173-27-190. Construction allowed by the revised shoreline permit that is not authorized under the original permit is undertaken at the applicant's own risk until the expiration of the appeals deadline.
(Ord. 2090 § 5, 2004)
When considering a Type VII decision, the city council or planning commission may establish additional advisory committees or task forces to make recommendations and provide input.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996)
A. 
When a project involves compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act, the city shall complete its review of applications received, and make threshold determinations as follows:
1. 
A SEPA checklist will not commence processing nor be accepted as complete until the SEPA responsible official provides, in writing, certification of completeness and acceptance of the SEPA checklist. This certification will be accomplished through transmittal of a form signed by the responsible official.
2. 
If after review of the SEPA checklist it is determined that there is insufficient information to make a threshold determination, additional information will be required using any one of the following actions in accordance with WAC 197-11-335:
a. 
The applicant will provide more information on subjects in the checklist.
b. 
The city makes its own further study.
c. 
The city will consult with other agencies, requesting information on the proposal's potential impacts which lie within other agency's jurisdiction or expertise.
3. 
The certificate of SEPA checklist completeness, or a request for further information by the responsible official, will be mailed to the project applicant within 15 calendar days of submittal.
4. 
The responsible official shall make a threshold determination within 90 days after the applicant and supporting documents are complete.
a. 
The applicant may request in writing an additional 30 days for the threshold determination.
B. 
The time required to prepare an environmental impact statement associated with a land use permit application shall be agreed to by the director and applicant in writing.
C. 
Except as otherwise provided in this section or otherwise agreed to by the applicant, pursuant to RCW 36.70B.080 notice of final decision for land use decisions on applications filed on or after January 1, 2025, shall be made within the decision timeframes detailed below starting from the date an application is complete under SMC § 18.56.050. To determine the number of days that have elapsed after an application is complete, periods for pending plan corrections, environmental impact statement preparation, submission of additional information, temporary suspension of review requested in writing by the applicant, and administrative appeals shall be excluded, consistent with RCW 36.70B.080. Except as noted in subsection (D) of this section, and unless the applicant provides the city with a written request to extend the decision timeline, the director shall issue a land use decision within the following calendar days:
1. 
Type I decisions: 65.
2. 
Type II decisions: 100 (except as otherwise provided in this section for SEPA).
3. 
Type III decisions: 100.
4. 
Type IV decisions: 170.
5. 
Type V decisions: 170.
6. 
Type VI decisions: 170.
7. 
Type VII decisions: no decision timeline.
D. 
The number of days shall be calculated by counting every calendar day and excluding the following time periods:
1. 
Any period between the date of the city's written notice to the applicant that additional information is required to further process the application and the day when responsive information is received by the city;
2. 
Any period between the date an administrative appeal is filed and the date the administrative appeal is resolved and any additional time period provided by the administrative appeal.
3. 
Any applicable decision timeline adjustment pursuant to subsection (E) of this section.
E. 
Decision Timeline Adjustments.
1. 
Change of Scope. The timelines in subsection (C) of this section shall start over if an applicant proposes a change in use that adds or removes commercial or residential elements from the original land use application that would make the application fail to meet the determination of procedural completeness for the new use. In the event the director makes such determination, the director shall provide the applicant a determination of completeness for an incomplete application pursuant to the procedures of SMC § 18.56.050.
2. 
Requests for Extension or Temporary Suspension. Applicants may request an extension or temporary suspension of a final decision timeframe as follows:
a. 
The applicant may provide a written request for extension of the review decision timeline for a maximum of 60 calendar days. If approved, the extension of the time for issuance of a final decision may be increased by the director in minimum 15-day increments; or
b. 
The applicant may provide a written request to temporarily suspend review of the project permit application for more than 60 days until the applicant provides written notice to the city that the applicant would like to resume processing. If approved, the timeframes in subsection (C) of this section for issuance of a final decision may be increased by the director in minimum 30-day increments.
F. 
The following land use applications shall be exempt from the decision timelines of subsection (C) of this section:
1. 
Street vacations or other approvals relating to the use of public areas or facilities.
2. 
Applications for those lot line adjustments and building and other construction permits, or similar administrative approvals, that are categorically exempt from environmental review under chapter 43.21C RCW, or for which environmental review has been completed in connection with other project permits.
G. 
Corrections Review Meeting (CRM). Within 14 calendar days following the city's second project permit application review request for additional information and/or corrections, an applicant may request, in writing, a corrections review meeting (CRM) with applicable city staff. If the CRM does not resolve the issues and the city later completes a third review of a complete resubmittal that again results in a request(s) for additional information and/or correction(s), the city shall take final action to approve or deny the application, unless otherwise agreed to by the applicant and the director.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996; Ord. 2901 § 8, 2024)
A. 
Applications for all land use permit components, except subdivisions, shall vest to the zoning code and land use control ordinances in effect at the time a fully complete building permit application substantially based on the subject land use permit is filed, or on the date of the decision on the subject application, if the decision can be appealed, or prior to the date of the director's decision if no appeal is available.
B. 
An application for approval of a full subdivision or short subdivision of land shall be considered under the land use code and other land use control ordinances in effect on the land when a fully completed land use permit application for such approval which satisfied the requirements for such application is submitted to the director.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996)
When a land use permit is approved for issuance, the applicant shall be so notified. Land use permits which are not subject to appeal shall be approved for issuance at the time of the director's decision that the application conforms to all applicable laws. A land use permit which includes appealable decisions shall be approved for issuance on the day following expiration of the applicable appeal period or, if appealed, on the fourth day following a final appeal decision to grant or conditionally grant the permit. Land use permits shall not be issued until all outstanding fees are paid.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996)
The applicant for the proposals listed below shall be responsible for recording the necessary documents with the county. All recording costs shall be borne by the applicant. Failure to record the necessary documents within 120 days of approval shall render the approval void.
A. 
Short subdivision;
B. 
Full subdivision;
C. 
Lot line adjustment;
D. 
Binding site plan.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996)
A. 
Expiration.
1. 
A land use permit shall expire 18 months from the date a permit is approved for issuance as described in SMC § 18.56.200, except as follows:
a. 
Expiration of the shoreline components shall be governed by SMC § 18.56.240.
b. 
Expiration of subdivisions shall be governed by SMC § 17.16.160.
2. 
At the end of the 18-month term, land use permits shall expire unless:
a. 
A building permit is issued before the end of the 18-month term, or a completed application for a building permit meeting the requirements of the Sumner building code, which is subsequently issued, is submitted at least 60 days before the end of the 18-month term. In such cases, the land use permit
shall be extended for the same term as the building permit is issued. If a building permit is issued and renewed within the original 18-month term of a land use permit, the land use permit shall be extended in the same manner; or
b. 
For projects which do not require a building permit, the use has been established prior to the expiration date of the land use permit and is not terminated by abandonment or otherwise. In such cases, the land use permit shall not expire; or
c. 
The land use permit is extended pursuant to subsection (A)(3) of this section; or
d. 
The land use permit is renewed as provided in subsection B of this section.
3. 
When a building permit is issued and construction is substantially underway and progressing at a satisfactory rate prior to the expiration of a land use permit, the land use permit shall automatically be extended for the life of the building permit and no land use permit renewal shall be required.
B. 
Renewal.
1. 
The director shall renew land use permits for projects which are in conformance with applicable regulations, including land use and environmental regulations, and SEPA policies in effect at the time renewal is sought. The director shall not renew land use permits for projects which are not in conformance with applicable regulations, including land use and environmental regulations, or SEPA policies in effect at the time renewal is sought.
2. 
If a building permit has been issued for a project, any subsequent land use permit renewals as permitted by this section shall be concurrent with and for the same term as renewal of the building permit.
3. 
If no building permit has been issued, land use permit renewals shall be for a period of one year. In no case shall a land use permit be renewed beyond a period of five years from the original date of permit issuance without an issued building permit.
4. 
Such decisions to renew a land use permit shall be Type III.a decisions and subject to appeal by the applicant to the hearing examiner.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996; Ord. 2090 § 6, 2004)
A. 
A land use permit may be revoked or suspended by the director if any of the following conditions are found:
1. 
The permittee has developed the site in a manner not authorized by the permit; or
2. 
The permittee has not complied with the conditions of the permit; or
3. 
The permittee has secured the permit with false or misleading information; or
4. 
The permit was issued in violation of city ordinances.
B. 
Whenever the director determines upon inspection of the site that there are grounds for suspending or revoking a permit, the director may order the work stopped. A written stop work order shall be served on the person(s) doing or causing the work to be done. All work shall then be stopped until the director finds that the violations and deficiencies have been rectified.
C. 
The procedures for appealing a suspension or revocation of a land use permit component shall be as follows:
1. 
Persons who receive notice of a suspension or revocation of a permit under subsection B above may appeal the order to the hearing examiner. Appeals shall be filed with the city clerk by 5:00 p.m. of the fifteenth calendar day following service of the notice. When the last day of the appeal period so computed is a Saturday, Sunday, or federal or city holiday, the appeal period shall run until 5:00 p.m. on the next business day.
(Ord. 1762 § 2 (part), 1996)
The city of Sumner may issue shoreline permits with termination dates of up to five years. If a permit does not specify a termination date, the following requirements apply, consistent with chapter 173-27 WAC:
A. 
Time Limit for Substantial Progress. Construction, or substantial progress toward completion, must begin within two years after approval of the permits.
B. 
Extension for Substantial Progress. The city of Sumner may, at its discretion, with prior notice to parties of record and the Department of Ecology, extend the two-year time period for the substantial progress for a reasonable time up to one year based on factors, including the inability to expeditiously obtain other governmental permits which are required prior to the commencement of construction.
C. 
Five-Year Permit Authorization. If construction has not been completed within five years of approval by the city of Sumner, the city will review the permit and, upon showing of good cause, either extend the permit for one year, or terminate the permit. Prior to the city authorizing any permit extensions, it shall notify any parties of record and the Department of Ecology. Note: Only one single extension is permitted.
(Ord. 2090 § 7, 2004; Ord. 2691 § 1 (part), 2019)