16.18A.160 Exceptions – Reasonable use.
A. If the application of this chapter would deny all reasonable economic use of the subject property, the property owner may apply for an exception pursuant to this chapter.
B. Exception Request and Review Process. An application for a reasonable use exception shall be made to the city and shall include a critical area identification form, critical area report, including mitigation plan, if necessary, and any other related project documents, such as permit applications to other agencies, special studies, and environmental documents prepared pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (Chapter 43.21C RCW) (SEPA document). The mayor or his/her designee shall prepare a decision based on review of the submitted information, a site inspection, and the proposal’s ability to comply with reasonable use exception criteria in subsection D of this section. The decision can be appealed to the board of adjustment.
C. Board of Adjustment. The board of adjustment shall review the application and conduct a public hearing pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 14.04. The board of adjustment shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the request based on the proposal’s ability to comply with all of the reasonable use exception criteria in subsection D of this section.
D. Reasonable Use Review Criteria. Criteria for review and approval of reasonable use exceptions follow; one or more may apply:
1. The application of this chapter would deny all reasonable economic use of the property. A literal interpretation of the provisions of this chapter would deprive the applicant of all reasonable economic uses and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and zone of the subject property under the terms of this chapter, and the exception requested is the minimum necessary to provide the applicant with such rights;
2. No other reasonable economic use of the property has less impact on the critical area;
3. The proposed impact to the critical area is the minimum necessary to allow for reasonable economic use of the property;
4. The inability of the applicant to derive reasonable economic use of the property is not the result of actions by the applicant, property owner or its predecessor;
5. The proposal does not pose an unreasonable threat to the public health, safety, or welfare on or off the development proposal site;
6. The proposal will result in no net loss of critical area functions and values determined in a manner consistent with the best available science; or
7. The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulations and standards.
E. Burden of Proof. The burden of proof is on the applicant to submit evidence in support of the application and provide sufficient information to make a decision on the application. (Ord. 1104-15 § 1 (Att. A)).