20.210.020 Types of Development Applications.
Click here to view prior versions of this section.
A. General. All development applications shall be decided by using one of the following procedure types. The procedure type assigned to each action governs the decision-making procedure for that application, except to the extent otherwise required by applicable state or federal law.
B. Types defined. There are four types of decision-making procedures, as follows:
1. Type I procedure. Type I procedures apply to ministerial permits. Type I applications are decided by the planning official without public notice prior to the decision and without a public hearing. If any party with standing appeals a planning official’s Type I decision, the appeal of such decision will be heard by the hearings examiner, with further appeal to the superior court pursuant to applicable law.
2. Type II procedure. Type II procedures apply to quasi-judicial permits and actions that contain some discretionary criteria. Type II applications are decided by the planning official with public notice and an opportunity for comment. If any party with standing appeals a planning official’s Type II decision, the appeal of such decision will be heard by the hearings examiner, with further appeal to the superior court pursuant to VMC 20.210.130.
3. Type III procedure. Type III procedures apply to quasi-judicial permits and actions that predominantly contain discretionary approval criteria. Type III applications are decided by the hearings examiner or planning commission, depending on the permit. If any party with standing appeals a hearings examiner’s or planning commission’s Type III decision, the appeal of such decision will be heard by city council pursuant to VMC 20.210.130, with further appeal to superior court.
4. Type IV procedure. Type IV procedures apply to legislative matters, planned unit developments, and rezones. Legislative matters involve the creation, revision or large-scale implementation of public policy. Type IV applications are considered initially by the planning commission or hearings examiner with final decisions made by the city council, automatically or on appeal.
C. Summary of permits by type of decision-making procedure. Table 20.210.020-1 summarizes the various development applications by the type of decision-making procedure.
|
Type |
Development Application |
Cross Reference |
Review Body |
|---|---|---|---|
|
I |
Accessory Dwelling Units |
Planning Official |
|
|
Boundary Adjustments |
Planning Official |
||
|
Conditional Use – Minor Modification |
Planning Official |
||
|
Critical Areas Permit (Type I) |
Planning Official |
||
|
Design Review (without Site Plan Review) |
Planning Official |
||
|
Historic Property Certificate of Appropriateness/Administrative Review |
Planning Official |
||
|
Interpretations – Quasi-Judicial |
Planning Official |
||
|
Parking/Loading – Reduction of Minimum Ratios, Joint Parking |
Planning Official |
||
|
Planned Developments – 1 Year Extension |
Planning Official |
||
|
Site Plan Review – Minor Projects Below Type II Site Plan Review Thresholds |
Planning Official |
||
|
Site Plan Review – Extension/Phasing |
Planning Official |
||
|
Shoreline Permit Exemption |
Planning Official |
||
|
Subdivision/Short Subdivision – Phasing, 1st Extension |
Planning Official |
||
|
Temporary Use |
Planning Official |
||
|
Tree Plan/Removal – without Site Plan Review |
Planning Official |
||
|
Type I Variance |
Planning Official |
||
|
II |
Adult Entertainment Uses |
Planning Official |
|
|
Critical Areas Permit (Type II) |
Planning Official |
||
|
Critical Areas Permit – Minor Exception |
Planning Official |
||
|
Planned Developments – Detailed Plan, 2-Year Extension |
Planning Official |
||
|
Public Facility Master Plans – Concept Plan Subsequent Phases & Extensions |
Planning Official |
||
|
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit |
Planning Official |
||
|
Short Subdivision – Preliminary Plat |
Planning Official |
||
|
Site Plan Review |
Planning Official |
||
|
Subdivision – 2nd Extension |
Planning Official |
||
|
Type II Variance |
Planning Official |
||
|
III |
Conditional Uses – Initial, Major Modifications |
Hearings Examiner |
|
|
Critical Areas Permit – Reasonable Use Exception |
Hearings Examiner |
||
|
Historic District Nomination |
Clark County Historic Preservation Commission |
||
|
Historic District or Property Designation Removal |
Clark County Historic Preservation Commission |
||
|
Historic Register Nomination |
Clark County Historic Preservation Commission |
||
|
Historic Property Certificate of Appropriateness Public Review |
Clark County Historic Preservation Commission |
||
|
Public Facility Master Plans – Initial Approval |
Hearings Examiner |
||
|
Shoreline Conditional Use Permit (recommendation to State Department of Ecology) |
Hearings Examiner |
||
|
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit |
Hearings Examiner |
||
|
Shoreline Variance (recommendation to State Department of Ecology) |
Hearings Examiner |
||
|
Subdivisions – Preliminary Plat |
Hearings Examiner |
||
|
IV |
Annexations |
Planning Commission City Council |
|
|
Development Agreements |
Planning Commission, if Agreement is part of proposal before the Commission City Council |
||
|
Planned Developments |
Planning Commission, except Hearings Examiner for Planned Developments 25 acres or smaller in size City Council |
||
|
Master Plans in the Riverview Gateway and Section 30 subareas |
Planning Commission City Council |
||
|
Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Text/Map Amendment |
Planning Commission, except review of Chapter 20.180 VMC, Fees City Council |
||
|
Zoning Map Amendments |
20.285 |
Planning Commission, except Hearings Examiner review in cases of standalone zone changes from one single or multifamily residential designation to the next most or least dense that also involve a concurrent subdivision proposal City Council |
D. Concurrent review. When the city must approve more than one application for a given development, all applications required for the development pursuant to this chapter may be submitted for review at one time. When more than one application is submitted for a given development, and those applications are subject to different types of procedure, then all of the applications are subject to the highest type of procedure that applies to any of the applications; provided, however that each development application shall only be subject to the relevant criteria applicable to that particular development application. For example, a development proposal that includes a Type II application and a Type III application shall be wholly subject to the procedures applicable to a Type III application, but the Type II portion of the development proposal shall be decided according to the relevant approval criteria applicable to the Type II application.
E. Assignment of procedure type. Applications shall be processed according to the assigned review type in the above table. If the Vancouver Municipal Code does not expressly provide for review using one of the four types of decision-making procedures, and another specific procedure is not required by law, the planning official shall classify the application in question as one of the four types of decision-making procedure using the following criteria:
1. The act of classifying an application shall be a Type I decision;
2. Questions about what procedure is appropriate shall be resolved in favor of the decision-making procedure providing the greatest opportunity for public notice; and
3. The planning official shall classify the application by determining whether the application is similar in nature and degree to another type of application that has been classified by type as listed in Table 20.210.020-1 and under the same approval criteria applicable to the type of application most similar in nature and degree to the application.
F. Comprehensive Plan Amendments. New development applications or pre-applications which are inconsistent with the comprehensive plan shall not be accepted by the city, until the planning commission recommends approval of a comprehensive plan amendment or in the event that planning commission recommends denial, until the effective date of final action by the city council approving the comprehensive plan amendment on appeal. (Ord. M-4147 § 4, 12/07/2015; Ord. M-3959 § 7, 07/19/2010; Ord. M-3931 § 2, 11/02/2009; Ord. M-3922 § 8, 07/06/2009; Ord. M-3840 § 6, 08/06/2007; Ord. M-3692 § 11, 02/28/2005; Ord. M-3663 § 5, 08/02/2004; Ord. M-3643, 01/26/2004)