CITY OF SEATTLE
ORDINANCE __________________
COUNCIL BILL __________________
title
AN ORDINANCE relating to land use and zoning; updating timelines for City review of land use permits; amending Sections 23.76.005 and 23.76.010 of the Seattle Municipal Code; and amending Resolution 31602 to update the City Council Rules for Quasi-Judicial Proceedings.
body
WHEREAS, Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 36.70B.080 identifies timelines for local review of project permits; and
WHEREAS, RCW 36.70B.140 allows local governments by ordinance to exclude landmark designations, street vacations, or other approvals relating to the use of public areas or facilities, or other project permits, whether administrative or quasi-judicial, that the local government by ordinance or resolution has determined present special circumstances that warrant a review process or time periods for approval that are different from that provided in RCW 36.70B.080; and
WHEREAS, the City Council Rules for Quasi-Judicial Proceedings were last updated in 2015, since which time the City Clerk has started to accept electronic filing of documents; and
WHEREAS, filing documents electronically allows for shorter timelines for filing of responses to those filings; NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF SEATTLE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Section 23.76.005 of the Seattle Municipal Code, last amended by Ordinance 125587, is amended as follows:
23.76.005 Time for decisions
A. Except as otherwise provided in this Section 23.76.005 or otherwise agreed to by the applicant, land use decisions on applications shall be made under the following timelines:
1. Type I: within ((120)) 65 days after the applicant has been notified that the application is complete((,)) ;
2. Type II: within 100 days after the applicant has been notified that the application is complete;
3. Type III: within 170 days after the applicant has been notified that the application is complete, provided that the Director shall issue a recommendation within 100 days;
4. Type IV: as provided in subsection 23.76.005.E.2; and
5. Type V: no timeline for final decision.
B. In determining the number of days that have elapsed ((after the notification that the application is complete)) for purposes of subsection 23.76.005.A, the following periods shall be excluded:
1. All periods of time during which ((the applicant has been requested by)) the Director ((to)) or Hearing Examiner has requested that the applicant correct plans, perform required studies, or provide additional required information, until ((the Director determines that the request has been satisfied)) the day responsive information is resubmitted by the applicant;
2. Any extension of time mutually agreed upon by the Director or Hearing Examiner and the applicant;
3. For projects for which an EIS has been required, the EIS process time period established in subsection 23.76.005.((B))C; and
4. Any time period for filing an appeal or request for further consideration of the land use decision to the Hearing Examiner or City Council as applicable, and the time period to consider and decide the appeal ((; and)) .
((5. All periods of time during which the applicant has been requested by the Director to pay past-due permit fees, until the Director determines that the request has been satisfied or until the permit is cancelled for failure to pay fees.))
((B))C. The time required to prepare an EIS shall be agreed to by the Director and applicant in writing. Unless otherwise agreed to by the applicant, a final environmental impact statement shall be issued by the Director within one year following the issuance of a Determination of Significance for the proposal, unless the EIS consultant advises that a longer time period is necessary. In that case, the additional time shall be that recommended by the consultant, not to exceed an additional year.
((C))D. The time limits established by subsections 23.76.005.A, ((and)) 23.76.005.B, and 23.76.005.C do not apply if a permit application:
1. Requires an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan or the Land Use Code; ((or))
2. Requires the siting of an essential public facility;
3. Is substantially revised by the applicant, in which case the time period shall start from the date at which the revised project application is determined to be complete; or
4. Requires the vacation of public right-of-way.
((D))E. Exclusions pursuant to RCW 36.70B.140(1)((.))
1. Type II decisions. There is no time limit for a decision on an application that includes an exception from ((the regulations for Environmentally Critical Areas,)) Chapter 25.09.
2. ((Type III decisions.
a. The Director shall issue a recommendation within 120 days as that time is calculated pursuant to subsections 23.76.005.A, B, and C; and
b. The Hearing Examiner shall issue a decision within 90 days of issuance of the Director's recommendation, except that in determining the time limits for Type III decisions established in this subsection 23.76.005.D.2.b, the following periods shall be excluded:
1) The time during which a Type III decision is remanded by the Hearing Examiner for further information or analysis. The Hearing Examiner shall set a reasonable period for the remand after consideration of the nature and complexity of the issues, and, if practicable, after consultation with the parties about the reasonableness of the remand period;
2) All periods of time during which the applicant has been requested by the Director to pay past-due permit fees, until the Director determines that the request has been satisfied; and
3) Any extension of time mutually agreed upon by the Hearing Examiner and the applicant.
3.)) Type IV Council land use decisions((.))
a. There is no time limit for decisions on Major Institution master plans.
b. All other Type IV Council land use decisions and any associated Type II decisions listed in subsection 23.76.006.C.2, except for the exclusions listed in subsections 23.76.005.((D))E.1 and 23.76.005.((D))E.3.c, shall be made within the following time periods:
1) The Director shall issue a recommendation within ((120)) 100 days as that time period is calculated pursuant to subsections 23.76.005.A, 23.76.005.B, ((and)) 23.76.005.C, and 23.76.005.D;
2) The Hearing Examiner shall issue a recommendation within 90 days of issuance of the Director’s recommendation; and
3) The Council shall issue its decision within 90 days of receipt of the Hearing Examiner recommendation, except that if a timely appeal is filed with the City Clerk, the Council shall issue its decision within 120 days of receipt of the Hearing Examiner recommendation.
c. In determining the time limits for Type IV Council land use decisions established in this subsection 23.76.005.((D))E, the following periods shall be excluded:
1) The time during which a Type IV Council land use decision is remanded by the Hearing Examiner or the City Council for further information or analysis. The Hearing Examiner or the Council shall set a reasonable period for the remand after consideration of the nature and complexity of the issues, and, if practicable, after consultation with the parties about the reasonableness of the remand period; and
2) ((All periods of time during which the applicant has been requested by the Director to pay past-due permit fees, until the Director determines that the request has been satisfied; and
3)))Any extension of time mutually agreed upon by the Hearing Examiner and the applicant or the City Council and the applicant.
((E))F. Type V Council land use decisions are legislative decisions to which no time limits apply.
Section 2. Section 23.76.010 of the Seattle Municipal Code, last amended by Ordinance 127288, is amended as follows:
23.76.010 Applications for Master Use Permits
* * *
D. All applications shall contain the submittal information required by the applicable sections of this Title 23, Land Use Code; Title 15, Street and Sidewalk Use; Chapter 25.05, Environmental Policies and Procedures; Chapter 25.09, Regulations for Environmentally Critical Areas; Chapter 25.12, Landmarks Preservation; Chapter 25.16, Ballard Avenue Landmark District; Chapter 25.20, Columbia City Landmark District; Chapter 25.22, Harvard-Belmont Landmark District; Chapter 25.24, Pike Place Market Historical District; and other codes as determined applicable and necessary for review by the Director. All shoreline substantial development, conditional use or variance applications shall also include applicable submittal information as specified in WAC 173-27-180. The Director shall ((make available, in writing, a general list of)) outline the submittal requirements for a complete application in the permit application.
E. Notice of Complete Application.
1. The Director shall determine whether an application is complete and shall notify the applicant in writing within 28 days of the date the application is filed whether the application is complete or that the application is incomplete and what additional information is required before the application will be complete. Within 14 days of receiving the additional information, the Director shall notify the applicant in writing if the application is still incomplete and what additional information is necessary. An application shall be deemed to be complete if the Director does not notify the applicant in writing that the application is incomplete by the deadlines in this subsection 23.76.010.E. A determination that the application is complete is not a determination that the application is vested.
2. A Master Use Permit application is procedurally complete for purposes of this Section 23.76.010 if it meets the submittal requirements ((established by the Director in subsection 23.76.010.D and is sufficient for continued processing even though additional information may be required or project modifications may be undertaken subsequently)) outlined on the permit application. The determination of completeness shall not preclude the Director from requesting additional information or studies either at the time the application is determined complete or subsequently, if additional information is required to complete review of the application or substantial changes in the permit application are proposed. However, if the submittal requirements outlined on the permit application have been met the need for additional information or studies may not preclude a determination of completeness.
3. A determination under this Section 23.76.010 that an application is complete is not a determination that the application is vested. A vesting determination shall be made only if needed because of a change in applicable laws and shall entail review of the application for compliance with RCW 19.27.095, RCW 58.17.033, and Section 23.76.026.
* * *
Section 3. Exhibit A to Resolution 31602 is amended as shown in Exhibit A to this ordinance.
Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect as provided by Seattle Municipal Code Sections 1.04.020 and 1.04.070.
Passed by the City Council the ________ day of _________________________, 2025, and signed by me in open session in authentication of its passage this ________ day of _________________________, 2025.
____________________________________
President ____________ of the City Council
Approved / returned unsigned / vetoed this ___ day of _________________, 2025.
____________________________________
Bruce A. Harrell, Mayor
Filed by me this ________ day of _________________________, 2025.
____________________________________
Scheereen Dedman, City Clerk
(Seal)
Exhibits:
Exhibit A - City Council Rules for Quasi-Judicial Proceedings (2025 Rules), As Amended