Chapter 23.76 - PROCEDURES FOR MASTER USE PERMITS AND COUNCIL LAND USE DECISIONS

Seattle Mun. Code — Chapter 23.76 - PROCEDURES FOR MASTER USE PERMITS AND COUNCIL LAND USE DECISIONS

in effect

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.002 Purpose.

The purpose of this chapter is to establish standard procedures for land use decisions made by The City of Seattle. The procedures are designed to promote informed public participation in discretionary land use decisions, eliminate redundancy in the application submittal process, and minimize delays and expense in appeals of land use decisions. As required by RCW 36.70B.060, these procedures provide for an integrated and consolidated land use permit process, integrate the environmental review process with the procedures for review of land use decisions, and provide for the consolidation of appeals for all land use decisions. (Ord. 118012 § 22, 1996: Ord. 112522 § 2(part), 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.004 Land use decision framework

A. Land use decisions are classified into five categories. Procedures for the five different categories are distinguished according to who makes the decision, the type and amount of public notice required, and whether appeal opportunities are provided. Land use decisions are generally categorized by type in Table A for 23.76.004. B. Type I and II decisions are made by the Director and are consolidated in Master Use Permits. Type I decisions are decisions made by the Director that are not appealable to the Hearing Examiner. Type II decisions are discretionary decisions made by the Director that are subject to an administrative open record appeal hearing to the Hearing Examiner; provided that Type II decisions enumerated in subsections 23.76.006.C.2.c, 23.76.006.C.2.d, 23.76.006.C.2.f, and 23.76.006.C.2.g, and SEPA decisions integrated with them as set forth in subsection 23.76.006.C.2.o, shall be made by the Council when associated with a Council land use decision and are not subject to administrative appeal. Type III decisions are made by the Hearing Examiner after conducting an open record hearing and not subject to administrative appeal. Type I, II, or III decisions may be subject to land use interpretation pursuant to Section 23.88.020 . C. Type IV and V decisions are Council land use decisions. Type IV decisions are quasi-judicial decisions made by the Council pursuant to existing legislative standards and based upon the Hearing Examiner's record and recommendation. Type IV decisions may be subject to land use interpretation pursuant to Section 23.88.020 . Type V decisions are legislative decisions made by the Council in its capacity to establish policy and manage public lands. D. For projects requiring both a Master Use Permit and a Council land use decision as described in this Chapter 23.76 , the Council decision must be made prior to issuance of the Master Use Permit. All conditions established by the Council in its decision shall be incorporated in any subsequently issued Master Use Permit for the project. E. Certain land use decisions are subject to additional procedural requirements beyond the standard procedures established in this Chapter 23.76 . These requirements may be prescribed in the regulations for the zone in which the proposal is located, in other provisions of this Title 23 , or in other titles of the Seattle Municipal Code. F. Shoreline appeals and appeals of related SEPA determinations shall be filed with the State Shoreline Hearings Board within 21 days of the receipt of the decision by the Department of Ecology as set forth in RCW 90.58.180. G. An applicant for a permit or permits requiring more than one decision contained in the land use decision framework listed in Section 23.76.004 may either: 1. Use the integrated and consolidated process established in this Chapter 23.76 ; 2. If the applicant includes a variance, lot boundary adjustment, or short subdivision approval and no environmental review is required for the proposed project pursuant to Chapter 25.05 , file a separate Master Use Permit application for the variance, lot boundary adjustment, or short subdivision sought and use the integrated and consolidated process established in this Chapter 23.76 for all other required decisions; or 3. Proceed with separate applications for each permit decision sought. H. If notice is required pursuant to this Chapter 23.76 , except mailed notice as defined in Section 23.84A.025 , it may be provided by electronic means if the recipient provides an e-mail address to the Department. Notice to City agencies may be provided through the City's interoffice mail or by electronic means. Table A for 23.76.004 LAND USE DECISION FRAMEWORK 1 Director's and Hearing Examiner's Decisions Requiring Master Use Permits TYPE I Director's Decision (Administrative review through land use interpretation as allowed by Section 23.88.020 2 ) * Application of development standards for decisions not otherwise designated Type II, III, IV, or V * Uses permitted outright * Temporary uses, four weeks or less, and temporary use for light rail transit facility construction pursuant to subsection 23.42.040.F * Renewals of temporary uses * Intermittent uses * Interim street activation use pursuant to Section 23.42.041 * Uses on vacant or underused lots pursuant to Section 23.42.038 * Transitional encampment interim use * Certain street uses * Lot boundary adjustments * Modifications of features bonused under Title 24 * Determinations of significance (EIS required) except for determinations of significance based solely on historic and cultural preservation * Temporary uses for relocation of police and fire stations * Exemptions from right-of-way improvement requirements * Reasonable accommodation * Minor amendment to a Major Phased Development permit * Determination of whether an amendment to a property use and development agreement is major or minor * Streamlined design review decisions pursuant to Section 23.41.018 ; if no development standard departures are requested, and design review decisions in an MPC zone pursuant to Section 23.41.020 if no development standard departures are requested * Shoreline special use approvals that are not part of a shoreline substantial development permit * Adjustments to major institution boundaries pursuant to subsection 23.69.023.B * Determination that a project is consistent with a planned action ordinance * Decision to approve, condition, or deny, based on SEPA policies, a permit for a project determined to be consistent with a planned action ordinance * Decision to increase the maximum height for residential uses in the DOC2 zone according to subsection 23.49.008.H * Decision to increase the maximum allowable FAR in the DOC2 zone according to subsection 23.49.011.A.2.n * Minor revisions to an issued and unexpired MUP that was subject to design review * Building height increase for minor communication utilities in downtown zones * Light rail transit facilities pursuant to subsection 23.80.004.C * Application of tree provisions pursuant to Chapter 25.11 * Director's acceptance of an eligibility letter for proposals subject to temporary design review exemption provisions, subject to the additional requirement to file a valid and complete Type I or II Master Use Permit application in subsection 23.41.004.E.3 * Director's application of development standards for decisions on Type I or II Master Use Permit applications subject to temporary design review exemption provisions in subsection 23.41.004.E.3 * Waiver or modification of development standards for development proposals subject to temporary design review exemption provisions in subsection 23.41.004.E.3 * Other Type I decisions that are identified as such in the Land Use Code TYPE II Director's Decision (Appealable to Hearing Examiner or Shorelines Hearing Board 3 ) * Temporary uses, more than four weeks, except for temporary relocation of police and fire stations, and except for temporary use for light rail transit facility construction pursuant to subsection 23.42.040.F * Variances * Administrative conditional uses * Shoreline decisions, except shoreline special use approvals that are not part of a shoreline substantial development permit 3 * Short subdivisions * Special exceptions * Design review decisions, except for streamlined design review pursuant to Section 23.41.018 if no development standard departures are requested, and minor revisions to an approved MUP that was subject to design review, building height increases for minor communication utilities in downtown zones, and design review decisions in an MPC zone pursuant to Section 23.41.020 if no development standard departures are requested * The following environmental determinations: 1. Determination of non-significance (EIS not required) 2. Determination of final EIS adequacy 3. Determinations of significance based solely on historic and cultural preservation 4. A decision to condition or deny a permit for a project based on SEPA policies, except for Type I decisions for a temporary use for light rail transit facility construction pursuant to subsection 23.42.040.F, a light rail transit facility pursuant to subsection 23.80.004.C, or a project determined to be consistent with a planned action ordinance * Major Phased Developments * Downtown Planned Community Developments * Determination of public benefit for combined lot development * Major revisions to an issued and unexpired MUP that was subject to design review * Other Type II decisions that are identified as such in the Land Use Code TYPE III Hearing Examiner's Decision (No Administrative Appeal) * Subdivisions (preliminary plats) COUNCIL LAND USE DECISIONS TYPE IV (Quasi-Judicial) * Amendments to the Official Land Use Map (rezones), except area-wide amendments and correction of errors * Public projects that require Council approval * Major Institution master plans, including major amendments, renewal of a master plan's development plan component, and master plans prepared pursuant to subsection 23.69.023.C after an acquisition, merger, or consolidation of major institutions * Major amendments to property use and development agreements * Council conditional uses * Other decisions listed in subsection 23.76.036.A TYPE V (Legislative) * Land Use Code text amendments * Area-wide amendments to the Official Land Use Map * Corrections of errors on the Official Land Use Map due to cartographic and clerical mistakes * Concept approvals for the location or expansion of City facilities requiring Council land use approval * Major Institution designations and revocations of Major Institution designations * Waivers or modifications of development standards for City facilities * Adoption of or amendments to Planned Action Ordinances * Other decisions listed in subsection 23.76.036.C Footnotes for Table A for 23.76.004 1 Sections 23.76.006 and 23.76.036 establish the types of land use decisions in each category. This Table A for 23.76.004 is intended to provide only a general description of land use decision types. 2 Type I decisions may be subject to administrative review through a land use interpretation pursuant to Section 23.88.020 . 3 Shoreline decisions, except shoreline special use approvals that are not part of a shoreline substantial development permit, are appealable to the Shorelines Hearings Board along with all related environmental appeals. (Ord. 127228 , § 22, 2025; Ord. 127198 , § 11, 2025; Ord. 127100 , § 3, 2024; Ord. 126821 , § 5, 2023; Ord. 126685 , § 54, 2022; Ord. 126421 , § 3, 2021; Ord. 126042 , § 4, 2020; Ord. 125603 , § 69, 2018 [cross-reference correction]; Ord. 125558 , § 58, 2018; Ord. 125429 , § 23, 2017; Ord. 125387 , § 1, 2017; Ord. 125374 , § 3, 2017; Ord. 125291 , § 46, 2017; Ord. 125272 , § 61, 2017; Ord. 124747 , § 4, 2015; Ord. 124378 , § 76, 2013; Ord. 123963, § 27, 2012; Ord. 123939, § 17, 2012; Ord. 123913, § 4, 2012; Ord. 123649, § 51, 2011; Ord. 123566, § 5, 2011; Ord. 123565, § 2, 2011; Ord. 123495, § 75, 2011; Ord. 123046, § 56, 2009; Ord. 122816, § 6, 2008; Ord. 122497 , § 4, 2007; Ord. 121828, § 13, 2005; Ord. 121362, § 11, 2003; Ord. 121278, § 7, 2003; Ord. 121277, § 1, 2003; Ord. 119974, § 1, 2000; Ord. 119618, § 7, 1999; Ord. 119096, § 4, 1998; Ord. 118672, § 23, 1997; Ord. 118012, § 23, 1996; Ord. 117598, § 3, 1995; Ord. 117263 , § 53, 1994; Ord. 117202 , § 11, 1994; Ord. 116909 , § 5, 1993; Ord. 113079 § 3, 1986; Ord. 112840, § 2, 1986; Ord. 112522, § 2, 1985.)

Seattle Mun. Code § 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 according to the following time periods. If more than one land use decision is required for a project and there are multiple applicable permit review time periods for the project, the longest applicable time period for decision shall apply. References to days in this Section 23.76.005 shall be calculated by counting every calendar day. 1. Type I: within 65 days after the applicant has been notified that the application is complete, except that the following decisions shall be made within 150 days: a. A Type I land use decision that includes a public notice; and b. A Type I land use decision for a waiver or modification of development standards for Master Use Permit applications subject to temporary design review provisions in subsection 23.41.004.E.3. 2. Type II: within 120 days after the applicant has been notified that the application is complete, except that the following decisions shall be made within 170 days: a. A Type II design review permit decision; b. A Type II SEPA determination permit decision; c. A Type II Major Phased Development permit decision; and d. A Type II special exception permit decision. 3. Type III: the Director shall issue a recommendation within 170 days. There is no time period for a final decision on a Type III permit. 4. Type IV: as provided in subsection 23.76.005.E.2; and 5. Type V: no time period for a final decision. B. In determining the number of days that have elapsed for purposes of subsection 23.76.005.A, the following periods shall be excluded: 1. All periods of time during which the Director or Hearing Examiner has requested that the applicant correct plans, perform required studies, or provide additional required information, until the day responsive information is resubmitted by the applicant; 2. Any extension of time mutually agreed upon, in writing, by the Director or Hearing Examiner and the applicant; 3. Temporary suspensions of permit review requested by an applicant until such time that the applicant notifies the Director or Hearing Examiner in writing to resume permit review, provided that: a. A penalty of an additional 30 days may be added to the time period for a decision if the applicant requests the Director, in writing, to temporarily suspend the review of the project for more than 60 days; and b. A penalty of an additional 30 days may be added to the time period for a decision if the applicant is not responsive for more than 60 consecutive days after the Director has notified the applicant, in writing, that additional information is required to further process the application and that nonresponsiveness for 60 consecutive days may result in 30 days being added to the time for review. For the purposes of this subsection 23.76.005.B.3.b, "nonresponsiveness" means that an applicant is not making demonstrable progress on providing additional requested information to the City, or that there is no ongoing communication from the applicant to the City on the applicant's ability or willingness to provide the additional information; 4. For projects for which an EIS has been required, the EIS process time period established in subsection 23.76.005.C;. 5. 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; 6. All periods of time during which the Director has requested information from the applicant that confirms payment of due or past-due fees related to the application, until the day the applicant submits confirmation of payment. 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 responsible party advises that a longer time period is necessary. In that case, the additional time shall be that recommended by the responsible party, not to exceed an additional year. D. The time period established by subsections 23.76.005.A, 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; 2. Requires the siting of an essential public facility; 3. Requires the vacation of public right-of-way; 4. Requires a nomination for a landmark designation; 5. Includes an existing designated landmark on its site; 6. Is for a project located within a landmark district or a historical district; 7. Is subject to review under Chapter 23.66 ; or 8. Is for approvals relating to the use of public areas or facilities. E. Exclusions pursuant to RCW 36.70B.140(1) 1. Type II decisions. There is no time period for a decision on an application that: a. Includes a shoreline exception or shoreline variance from the Shoreline Master Program regulations in Chapter 23.60A , or a shoreline conditional use; or b. Includes an exception from Chapter 25.09 . 2. 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.E.1 and 23.76.005.E.2.c, shall be made within the following time periods: 1) The Director shall issue a recommendation within 100 days as that time period is calculated pursuant to subsections 23.76.005.A, 23.76.005.B, 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.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 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 Director has requested information from the applicant that confirms payment of due or past-due fees related to an application, until the day the applicant submits confirmation of payment; and3) Any extension of time mutually agreed upon by the Hearing Examiner and the applicant or the City Council and the applicant. F. Type V Council land use decisions are legislative decisions to which no time periods apply. G. If a permit application is revised by the applicant by adding or removing commercial or residential elements from the original application that would make the application fail to meet the determination of procedural completeness for the revised application, the time period shall start over on the date the revised application is determined to be complete. (Ord. 127300 , § 1, 2025; Ord. 125587 , § 2, 2018; Ord. 123913, § 5, 2012; Ord. 122497 , § 5, 2007; Ord. 120857, § 1, 2002; Ord. 120157, § 5, 2000; Ord. 118012, § 24, 1996)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.006 Master Use Permits required

A. Type I, II, and III decisions are components of Master Use Permits. Master Use Permits are required for all projects requiring one or more of these decisions. B. The following decisions are Type I: 1. Determination that a proposal complies with development standards; 2. Establishment or change of use for uses permitted outright, uses allowed under Section 23.42.038 , temporary relocation of police and fire stations for 24 months or less, transitional encampment interim use, temporary uses for four weeks or less not otherwise permitted in the zone, renewals of temporary uses for up to six months, and temporary uses for light rail transit facility construction as provided in subsection 23.42.040.F; 3. The following street use approvals: a. Curb cut for access to parking, whether associated with a development proposal or not; b. Concept approval of street improvements associated with a development proposal, such as additional on-street parking, street landscaping, curbs and gutters, street drainage, sidewalks, and paving; c. Structural building overhangs associated with a development proposal; d. Areaways associated with a development proposal; 4. Lot boundary adjustments; 5. Modification of the following features bonused under Title 24 : a. Plazas; b. Shopping plazas; c. Arcades; d. Shopping arcades; and e. Voluntary building setbacks; 6. Determinations of significance (determination that an EIS is required) for Master Use Permits and for building, demolition, grading, and other construction permits (supplemental procedures for environmental review are established in Chapter 25.05 ), except for determinations of significance based solely on historic and cultural preservation; 7. Discretionary exceptions for certain business signs authorized by subsection 23.55.042.D; 8. Waiver or modification of required right-of-way improvements; 9. Reasonable accommodation; 10. Minor amendment to Major Phased Development Permit; 11. Streamlined design review decisions pursuant to Section 23.41.018 if no development standard departures are requested pursuant to Section 23.41.012 , and design review decisions in an MPC zone if no development standard departures are requested pursuant to Section 23.41.012 ; 12. Shoreline special use approvals that are not part of a shoreline substantial development permit; 13. Determination that a project is consistent with a planned action ordinance, except as provided in subsection 23.76.006.C; 14. Decision to approve, condition, or deny, based on SEPA policies, a permit for a project determined to be consistent with a planned action ordinance; 15. Determination of requirements according to subsections 23.58B.025.A.3.a, 23.58B.025.A.3.b, 23.58B.025.A.3.c, 23.58C.030.A.2.a, 23.58C.030.A.2.b, and 23.58C.030.A.2.c; 16. Determination that a light rail transit facility is consistent with the provisions of subsection 23.80.004.C; 17. Decision to increase the maximum height of a structure in the DOC2 500/300-550 zone according to subsection 23.49.008.F; 18. Decision to increase the maximum FAR of a structure in the DOC2 500/300-550 zone according to subsection 23.49.011.A.2.n; 19. Minor revisions to an issued and unexpired Master Use Permit that was subject to design review, pursuant to subsection 23.41.008.G; 20. Building height departures for minor communication facilities in downtown zones, pursuant to Section 23.57.013 ; 21. Application of tree provisions pursuant to Chapter 25.11 ; 22. Director's acceptance of an eligibility letter for proposals subject to temporary design review exemption provisions subject to the additional requirement to file a valid and complete Type I or II Master Use Permit application in subsection 23.41.004.E.3; 23. Director's application of development standards for decisions on Type I or II Master Use Permit applications subject to temporary design review exemption provisions in subsection 23.41.004.E.3; 24. Waiver or modification of development standards for development proposals subject to temporary design review exemption provisions in subsection 23.41.004.E.3; 25. Interim street activation uses pursuant to Section 23.42.041 ; and 26. Other Type I decisions. C. The following are Type II decisions: 1. The following procedural environmental decisions for Master Use Permits and for building, demolition, grading, and other construction permits are subject to appeal to the Hearing Examiner and are not subject to further appeal to the Council (supplemental procedures for environmental review are established in Chapter 25.05 ): a. Determination of Non-significance (DNS), including mitigated DNS; b. Determination that a final EIS is adequate; and c. Determination of significance based solely on historic and cultural preservation. 2. The following decisions are subject to appeal to the Hearing Examiner (except shoreline decisions and related environmental determinations that are appealable to the Shorelines Hearings Board): a. Establishment or change of use for temporary uses more than four weeks not otherwise permitted in the zone or not meeting development standards, except the establishment of temporary use for light rail transit facility construction, and temporary relocation of police and fire stations for 24 months or less; b. Short subdivisions; c. Variances, provided that the decision on variances sought as part of a Council land use decision shall be made by the Council pursuant to Section 23.76.036 ; d. Special exceptions, provided that the decision on special exceptions sought as part of a Council land use decision shall be made by the Council pursuant to Section 23.76.036 ; e. Design review decisions, except for streamlined design review decisions pursuant to Section 23.41.018 if no development standard departures are requested pursuant to Section 23.41.012 , and minor revisions to an issued and unexpired Master Use Permit that was subject to design review, building height increases for minor communication utilities in downtown zones, and design review decisions in an MPC zone pursuant to Section 23.41.020 if no development standard departures are requested pursuant to Section 23.41.012 ; f. Administrative conditional uses, provided that the decision on administrative conditional uses sought as part of a Council land use decision shall be made by the Council pursuant to Section 23.76.036 ; g. The following shoreline decisions, provided that these decisions shall be made by the Council pursuant to Section 23.76.036 when they are sought as part of a Council land use decision (supplemental procedures for shoreline decisions are established in Chapter 23.60A ): 1) Shoreline substantial development permits; 2) Shoreline variances; and 3) Shoreline conditional uses; h. Major Phased Developments; i. Determination of project consistency with a planned action ordinance, only if the project requires another Type II decision; j. Reserved; k. Downtown planned community developments; l. Establishment of temporary uses for transitional encampments, except transitional encampment interim uses provided for in subsection 23.76.006.B.2; m. Decision to waive or modify development standards relating to structure width or setbacks for a youth service center pursuant to subsection 23.51A.004.B.6; n. Determination of requirements according to subsections 23.58B.025.A.4 and 23.58C.030.A.3; o. Except for projects determined to be consistent with a planned action ordinance, and except for decisions related to light rail transit facilities as described in subsection 23.76.006.B, decisions to approve, condition, or deny based on SEPA policies if such decisions are integrated with the decisions listed in subsections 23.76.006.C.2.a through 23.76.006.C.2.m; provided that, for decisions listed in subsections 23.76.006.C.2.c, 23.76.006.C.2.d, 23.76.006.C.2.f, and 23.76.006.C.2.g that are made by the Council, integrated decisions to approve, condition, or deny based on SEPA policies are made by the Council pursuant to Section 23.76.036 ; p. Determination of public benefit for combined lot development; and q. Major revisions to an issued and unexpired Master Use Permit that was subject to design review, pursuant to subsection 23.41.008.G. (Ord. 127228 , § 23, 2025; Ord. 127198 , § 12, 2025; Ord. 127100 , § 4, 2024; Ord. 126821 , § 6, 2023; Ord. 126685 , § 55, 2022; Ord. 126421 , § 4, 2021; Ord. 126042 , § 5, 2020; Ord. 125603 , § 70, 2018 [cross-reference correction]; Ord. 125558 , § 59, 2018; Ord. 125429 , § 24, 2017; Ord. 125374 , § 4, 2017; Ord. 125319 , § 1, 2017; Ord. 125291 , § 47, 2017; Ord. 125272 , § 62, 2017; Ord. 125233 , § 12, 2016; Ord. 125108 , § 6, 2016; Ord. 124895 , § 4, 2015; Ord. 124843 , § 56, 2015; Ord. 124747 , § 5, 2015; Ord. 124105 , § 31, 2013; Ord. 123963, § 28, 2012; Ord. 123939, § 18, 2012; Ord. 123913, § 6, 2012; Ord. 123649, § 52, 2011; Ord. 123566, § 6, 2011; Ord. 123565, § 3, 2011; Ord. 123495, § 76, 2011; Ord. 122824, § 11, 2008; Ord. 122816, § 7, 2008; Ord. 122054, § 81, 2006; Ord. 121828, § 14, 2005; Ord. 121476, § 17, 2004; Ord. 121362, § 12, 2003; Ord. 121278, § 8, 2003; Ord. 120611 , § 18, 2001; Ord. 119974, § 2, 2000; Ord. 119904, § 2, 2000; Ord. 119618, § 8, 1999; Ord. 119096, § 5, 1998; Ord. 118012, § 25, 1996; Ord. 117598, § 4, 1995; Ord. 117263 , 54, 1994; Ord. 117202 , § 12, 1994; Ord. 116909 , § 6, 1993; Ord. 115326, § 29, 1990; Ord. 113079, § 4, 1986; Ord. 112840, § 3, 1986; Ord. 112830, § 53, 1986; Ord. 112522, § 2, 1985.)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.008 Preapplication conferences for Type II and Type III decisions

A. Prior to official filing with the Director of an application for a Master Use Permit requiring a Type II or III decision, the applicant may request or the Director may require a preapplication conference. The conference shall be held in a timely manner between a Department representative(s) and the applicant to determine the appropriate procedures and review criteria for the proposed project. Preapplication conferences may be subject to fees as established in Subtitle IX of Title 22 . B. Design Review. A preapplication conference between Department representative(s) and an applicant for a structure subject to design review, as provided in Chapter 23.41 , is required. (Ord. 125603 , § 70, 2018; Ord. 125429 , § 25, 2017; Ord. 123913, § 7, 2012; Ord. 118012, § 26, 1996; Ord. 116909 , § 7, 1993; Ord. 112522, § 2(part), 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.010 Applications for Master Use Permits

A. 1. Applications for Master Use Permits shall be made by the property owner, lessee, contract purchaser, a City agency, or other public agency, or by an authorized agent of any of them. A public agency, or an authorized agent of the agency, proposing a project with a location that must be approved by the Council, may apply for a Master Use Permit after the project's location is identified in a Council Bill or resolution that has been referred to the Council, or one of its committees, to consider approving the project. 2. A claim made by a person that the person possesses title to any portion of the property for which a Master Use Permit application has been submitted, whether the claim is made by a judicially-filed pleading or not, is not grounds for the Department to suspend processing the application unless: a. A court injunction has been issued and is delivered to the Department; or b. The application is for a subdivision or short subdivision, the claim is made in a pleading to quiet title to a portion of the property that has been filed in court, and a copy of the pleading has been delivered to the Department. B. All applications for Master Use Permits shall be made to the Director on a form provided by the Department. C. Applications shall be accompanied by payment of the applicable filing fees, if any, as established in Subtitle IX of Title 22 . Payment of applicable filing fees is required for a determination that an application is procedurally complete. D. All applications shall contain the submittal information required by the applicable sections of this Title 23 ; Title 15 ; Chapter 25.05 ; Chapter 25.09 ; Chapter 25.12 ; Chapter 25.16 ; Chapter 25.20 ; Chapter 25.22 ; Chapter 25.24 ; 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 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 procedurally 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 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 shall 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. F. If the applicant fails to supply all required information or data within 60 days of a written request from the Director, the Director may provide the applicant a notice of intent to cancel. The Director may cancel the application if the requested information is not provided within the time required by the notice of intent to cancel. G. A letter of eligibility for exemption from design review is required for applications subject to temporary provisions in subsection 23.41.004.E.3. This letter of eligibility shall document a proposal's consistency with the qualifications for design review exemption in subsection 23.41.004.E.3.a, including: 1. Describing the proposed uses within the proposal per subsection 23.41.004.E.3.a.1; 2. Identifying the location of the development site within the area subject to temporary design review exemption per subsection 23.41.004.E.3.a.2; 3. A statement that the proposal does not involve a Type IV or Type V Council land use decision; and 4. An acknowledgement that complete Master Use Permit application materials must be submitted within 90 days to establish vesting as indicated in subsection 23.76.026.A.4. (Ord. 127300 , § 2, 2025; Ord. 127228 , § 24, 2025; Ord. 127100 , § 5, 2024; Ord. 126685 , § 56, 2022; Ord. 123963, § 29, 2012; Ord. 123913, § 8, 2012; Ord. 123668, § 1, 2011; Ord. 123649, § 53, 2011; Ord. 121476, § 18, 2004; Ord. 120857, § 2, 2002; Ord. 119904, § 3, 2000; Ord. 118794, § 47, 1997; Ord. 118012, § 27, 1996; Ord. 117570, § 20, 1995; Ord. 117430 , § 80, 1994; Ord. 117263 , 55, 1994; Ord. 115751 , § 1, 1991; Ord. 114473, § 2, 1989; Ord. 112522, § 2, 1985.)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.011 Notice of design guidance and planned community development process

A. The Director shall provide the following notice for the required early design guidance process or streamlined administrative design review (SDR) guidance process for design review projects subject to Sections 23.41.014 , 23.41.016 , or 23.41.018 , and for the preparation of priorities for planned community developments: 1. Publication of notice in the Land Use Information Bulletin; and 2. Mailed notice. B. The applicant shall post one land use sign visible to the public at each street frontage abutting the site except that if there is no street frontage or the site abuts an unimproved street, the Director shall require either more than one sign and/or an alternative posting location so that notice is clearly visible to the public. C. For the required meeting for the preparation of priorities for a planned community development, and for a public meeting required for early design guidance, the time, date, location, virtual location if applicable, and purpose of the meeting shall be included with the mailed notice. D. The land use sign may be removed by the applicant the day after the public meeting. (Ord. 126684 , § 4, 2022; Ord. 125429 , § 26, 2017; Ord. 123495, § 77, 2011; Ord. 122054, § 82, 2006; Ord. 121476, § 19, 2004; Ord. 118980, § 6, 1998; Ord. 118672, § 24, 1997; Ord. 116909 , § 8, 1993)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.012 Notice of application

A. Notice 1. No notice of application is required for Type I decisions, except a notice of application is required for: a. All projects in MPC zones that are subject to Master Planned Community design review in Section 23.41.020 , as described in subsection 23.76.012.B.6; b. An application for a Type I permit with an interim design review exemption as described in subsection 23.41.004.E.3; and c. An application for a light rail transit facilities Type I permit as described in subsection 23.76.006.B. 2. Within 14 days after the Director determines that an application is complete, for the following types of applications, the Director shall provide notice of the application and an opportunity for public comment as described in this Section 23.76.012 : a. An application for a Type I permit with an interim design review exemption as described in subsection 23.41.004.E.3; b. An application for a light rail transit facilities Type I permit as described in subsection 23.76.006.B; c. Type II Master Use Permits; d. Type III Master Use Permits; e. Type IV Council land use decisions, provided that for amendments to property use and development agreements, additional notice shall be given pursuant to subsection 23.76.058.C; and f. The following Type V Council land use decisions: 1) Major Institution designations and revocation of Major Institution designations; 2) Concept approvals for the location or expansion of City facilities requiring Council land use approval; and 3) Waivers or modification of development standards for City facilities. 3. Other agencies with jurisdiction. The Director shall provide notice to other agencies of local, state, or federal governments that may have jurisdiction over some aspect of the project to the extent known by the Director. 4. Early review determination of nonsignificance (DNS). In addition to the requirements of subsection 23.76.012.A.3, the Director shall provide a copy of the early review DNS notice of application and environmental checklist to the following: a. State Department of Ecology; b. Affected tribes; c. Each local agency or political subdivision whose public services would be changed as a result of implementation of the proposal; and d. Persons who submit a written request for this information and who provide an address for notice. B. Types of notice required 1. For projects subject to a Type II environmental determination pursuant to Section 23.76.006 or design review pursuant to Section 23.41.004 , a Type I permit with an interim design review exemption as described in subsection 23.41.004.E.3, or light rail transit facilities Type I permits described in subsection 23.76.006.B, the Department shall direct the installation of a large notice sign on the site, unless an exemption or alternative posting as set forth in this subsection 23.76.012.B is applicable. The large notice sign shall be located so as to be clearly visible from the adjacent street or sidewalk, and shall be removed by the applicant at the direction of the Department after final City action on the application is completed. a. In the case of submerged land, the large notice sign shall be posted on adjacent dry land, if any, owned or controlled by the applicant. If there is no adjacent dry land owned or controlled by the applicant, notice shall be provided according to subsection 23.76.012.B.1.c. b. Projects limited to interior remodeling, or that are subject to a Type II environmental determination pursuant to Section 23.76.006 only because of location over water or location in an environmentally critical area, are exempt from the large notice sign requirement. c. If use of a large notice sign is neither feasible nor practicable to ensure that notice is clearly visible to the public, the Department shall post ten placards within 300 feet of the site. d. The Director may require both a large notice sign and the alternative posting measures described in subsection 23.76.012.B.1.c, or may require that more than one large notice sign be posted, if necessary to ensure that notice is clearly visible to the public. 2. For projects that are categorically exempt from environmental review, the Director shall post one land use sign visible to the public at each street frontage abutting the site except that if there is no street frontage or the site abuts an unimproved street, the Director shall post more than one sign and/or use an alternative posting location so that notice is clearly visible to the public. The land use sign shall be removed by the applicant after final action on the application is completed. 3. For all projects requiring notice of application, the Director shall provide notice in the Land Use Information Bulletin. For projects requiring installation of a large notice sign or subject to design review pursuant to Section 23.41.014 , notice in the Land Use Information Bulletin shall be published after installation of the large notice sign required in subsection 23.76.012.B.1. 4. The Director shall provide mailed notice of: a. Applications for variances, administrative conditional uses, special exceptions, temporary uses for more than four weeks, light rail transit facilities that are Type I and Type II decisions, shoreline variances, shoreline conditional uses, short plats that do not exclusively create unit lots, early design guidance process for administrative design review and streamlined administrative design review, subdivisions, Type IV Council land use decisions, amendments to property use and development agreements, Major Institution designations and revocation of Major Institution designations, concept approvals for the location or expansion of City facilities requiring Council land use approval, and waivers or modification of development standards for City facilities, and applications receiving an exemption from design review pursuant to temporary provisions in subsection 23.41.004.E.3; and b. The first early design guidance meeting for a project subject to design review pursuant to Section 23.76.014 . C. Contents of notice 1. The City's official notice of application is the notice placed in the Land Use Information Bulletin, which shall include the following required elements as specified in RCW 36.70B.110: a. Date of application, date of notice of completion for the application, and the date of the notice of application; b. A description of the proposed project action and a list of the project permits included in the application, including if applicable: 1) A list of any studies requested by the Director; 2) A statement that the project relies on the adoption of a Type V Council land use decision to amend the text of Title 23 ; c. The identification of other permits not included in the application to the extent known by the Director; d. The identification of existing environmental documents that evaluate the proposed project, and the location where the application and any studies can be reviewed; e. A statement of the public comment period and the right of any person to comment on the application, request an extension of the comment period, receive notice of and participate in any hearings, and request a copy of the decision once made, and a statement of any administrative appeal rights; f. The date, time, location, virtual location if applicable, and type of hearing, if applicable and if scheduled at the date of notice of the application; g. 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 the proposed project's consistency with development regulations; h. A statement that an advisory committee is to be formed as provided in Section 23.69.032 , for notices of intent to file a Major Institution master plan application; i. Any other information determined appropriate by the Director; and j. The following additional information if the early review DNS process is used: 1) A statement that the early review DNS process is being used and the Director expects to issue a DNS for the proposal; 2) A statement that this is the only opportunity to comment on the environment impacts of the proposal; 3) A statement that the proposal may include mitigation measures under applicable codes, and the project review process may incorporate or require mitigation measures regardless of whether an EIS is prepared; and 4) A statement that a copy of the subsequent threshold determination for the proposal may be obtained upon written request. 2. All other forms of notice, including but not limited to large notice and land use signs, placards, and mailed notice, shall include the following information: the project description, location of the project, date of application, location where the complete application file may be reviewed, and a statement that persons who desire to submit comments on the application or who request notification of the decision may so inform the Director in writing within the comment period specified in subsection 23.76.012.D. The Director may, but need not, include other information to the extent known at the time of notice of application. Except for the large notice sign, each notice shall also include a list of the land use decisions sought. The Director shall specify detailed requirements for large notice and land use signs. D. Comment period. The Director shall provide a 14-day public comment period prior to making a threshold DNS or publishing a decision on the project; provided that the comment period shall be extended by 14 days if a written request for extension is submitted within the initial 14-day comment period; provided further that the comment period shall be 30 days for applications requiring shoreline decisions except that for limited utility extensions and bulkheads subject to Section 23.60A.064 , the comment period shall be 20 days as specified in Section 23.60A.064 . The comment period shall begin on the date notice is published in the Land Use Information Bulletin. Comments shall be filed with the Director by 5 p.m. of the last day of the comment period. If the last day of the comment period is a Saturday, Sunday, or federal or City holiday, the comment period shall run until 5 p.m. the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or federal or City holiday. Any comments received after the end of the official comment period may be considered if the comment is material to review yet to be conducted. E. If a Master Use Permit application includes more than one decision component, notice requirements shall be consolidated and the broadest applicable notice requirements imposed. F. The mailing list used for the Land Use Information Bulletin shall be updated annually in consultation with the Director of the Department of Neighborhoods. (Ord. 127228 , § 25, 2025; Ord. 127100 , § 6, 2024; Ord. 126684 , § 5, 2022; Ord. 125603 , § 71, 2018; Ord. 125429 , § 27, 2017; Ord. 124843 , § 57, 2015; Ord. 124378 , § 77, 2013; Ord. 123963, § 30, 2012; Ord. 123913, § 9, 2012; Ord. 123495, § 78, 2011; Ord. 121477 § 46, 2004; Ord. 121476 § 20, 2004; Ord. 119096 § 6, 1998; Ord. 118980 § 7, 1998; Ord. 118794 § 48, 1997; Ord. 118672 § 25, 1997; Ord. 118181 § 4, 1996; Ord. 118012 § 28, 1996; Ord. 117789 § 9, 1995; Ord. 116909 § 9, 1993; Ord. 115244 § 1, 1990; Ord. 112522 § 2, 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.014 Notice of scoping and draft EIS

If a Determination of Significance (DS) is issued on an application for a Master Use Permit or Council land use decision, the following notice and comment procedures apply: A. Scoping. 1. The Director shall determine the range of proposed actions, alternatives, and impacts to be discussed in an EIS, as provided by Section 25.05.408 , Scoping, and/or Section 25.05.410 , Expanded scoping. A comment period at least 21 days from the date of DS issuance shall be provided. 2. Notice of scoping and of the period during which the Director will accept written comments shall be provided by the Director in the following manner: a. Inclusion in the Land Use Information Bulletin; b. Publication in the City official newspaper; c. Notice provided to those persons who have submitted a written request for it and provided an address for notice; and d. Filing with the SEPA Public Information Center. 3. The Director shall also circulate copies of the DS as required by Section 25.05.360 . B. Draft EISs. 1. Notice of the availability of a draft EIS, the 30 day period during which the Department will accept comments, the public hearing on the draft EIS, and any other Department public hearing as provided in Section 23.76.016 shall be provided by the Director in the following manner: a. Inclusion in the Land Use Information Bulletin; b. Publication in the City official newspaper; c. Mailed notice; d. Notice provided to those persons who provided an address for notice and either submitted a written request for it or who submitted written comments during the comment period on the scope of the EIS; and e. Filing with the SEPA Public Information Center. 2. Notice of the public hearing shall be given by the Director at least 21 days prior to the hearing date. 3. The Director shall also distribute copies of the draft EIS as required by Section 25.05.455 . (Ord. 123913, § 10, 2012; Ord. 121477 § 47, 2004; Ord. 118012 § 29, 1996: Ord. 112522 § 2(part), 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.015 Public meetings for Type I light rail transit facilities, Type II, and Type III Master Use Permits

A. The Director may hold a public meeting on Master Use Permit applications requiring Type II or III decisions if: 1. The meeting is otherwise provided for in this Title 23 , including meetings for projects subject to design review; 2. The proposed development is of broad public significance; 3. Fifty or more persons file a written request for a meeting not later than the 14 th day after notice of the application is provided; or 4. The proposed development will require a shoreline conditional use or a shoreline variance. B. The Director may combine a public meeting on a project application with any other public meetings that may be held on the project by another local, state, regional, federal or other agency, and shall do so if requested by the applicant, provided that: 1. The meeting if convened in-person shall be held within Seattle; and 2. The joint meeting can be held within the time periods specified in Section 23.76.005 , or the applicant agrees in writing to additional time, if needed, to combine the meetings. C. The Director shall provide notice of all public meetings by: 1. Inclusion in the Land Use Information Bulletin; 2. Posting of at least four placards within 300 feet of the site; and 3. Provision of notice to all persons who provided an address for notice and either attended an early design guidance public meeting for the project or wrote to the Department about the proposed project before the date that notice of the meeting is distributed in the Land Use Information Bulletin. D. The Director may hold a public meeting on all Master Use Permit applications for light rail transit facilities and temporary use for light rail transit facility construction applications. Public meetings held for light rail transit facilities applications pursuant to this subsection 23.76.015.D shall be subject to the public notice requirements of subsection 23.76.015.C. (Ord. 127228 , § 26, 2025; Ord. 126684 , § 6, 2022; Ord. 123913, § 11, 2012; Ord. 120157, § 6, 2000; Ord. 118012, § 30, 1996)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.016 Public hearings for draft EISs

A. Draft Environmental Impact Statements (EISs). As required by Section 25.05.535 , the Director shall hold a public hearing on all draft EISs for Master Use Permit applications for which the Department is the Lead Agency. If convened in-person, the Director may hold the hearing near the site of the proposed project. B. The Director may combine the public hearing on the draft EIS with any other public hearings that may be held on the project by another local, state, regional, federal, or other agency, and shall do so if requested by the applicant, provided that: 1. The joint hearing if convened in-person shall be held within the city of Seattle; and 2. The joint hearing can be held within the time periods specified in Section 23.76.005 , or the applicant agrees in writing to additional time, if needed, to combine the hearings. (Ord. 126684 , § 7, 2022; Ord. 123913, § 12, 2012; Ord. 120157, § 7, 2000; Ord. 118012, § 31, 1996; Ord. 117570, § 21, 1995; Ord. 112522, § 2, 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.018 Notice of final EISs

A. Notice of the availability of any final EIS on a proposed project shall be provided by the Director in the following manner: 1. Inclusion in the Land Use Information Bulletin; 2. Publication in the City official newspaper; 3. Notice provided to those persons who provided an address for notice and either received the draft EIS, submitted written comments on the draft EIS, or made a written request for notice; and 4. Filing with the SEPA Public Information Center. B. The Director shall also distribute copies of the final EIS as required by Section 25.05.460 . (Ord. 123913, § 13, 2012; Ord. 112522 § 2(part), 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.020 Director's decisions on Type I and Type II Master Use Permits

A. Master Use Permit review criteria. The Director shall grant, deny, or conditionally grant approval of a Type II decision, or Type I decision for a light rail transit facility if applicable, based on the applicant's compliance with the applicable SEPA policies pursuant to Section 25.05.660 , and with the applicable substantive requirements of the Seattle Municipal Code pursuant to Section 23.76.026 . If an EIS is required, the application shall be subject to only those SEPA policies in effect when the draft EIS is issued. The Director may also impose conditions in order to mitigate adverse environmental impacts associated with the construction process. The Director shall not issue a light rail transit facilities Type I decision until the alignment, transit station locations, and maintenance base location of the light rail transit system have been approved by the Council by ordinance or resolution. B. Timing of decisions subject to environmental review 1. If an EIS is required, the Director's decision shall not be issued until at least seven days after publication of the final EIS, as provided by Chapter 25.05 . 2. If no EIS is required, the Director's decision shall include issuance of a determination of nonsignificance (DNS) for the project if not previously issued pursuant to subsection 25.05.310.C.2. C. Notice of decisions 1. Type I. No notice of decision is required for Type I decisions, except for Type I decisions for light rail transit facilities, which shall provide notice as described in subsection 23.76.020.C.2. 2. Type II. The Director shall provide notice of all Type II decisions by: a. Inclusion in the Land Use Information Bulletin; b. Publication in the City official newspaper; c. Notice provided to the applicant and to persons who provided an address for notice and either submitted written comments on the application, or made a written request for notice; d. Filing of DNSs with the SEPA Public Information Center and distribution of DNSs as required by Section 25.05.340 ; and e. Filing of any shoreline decision in a Master Use Permit with the Department of Ecology according to the requirements in WAC 173-27-130. D. Contents of notice 1. The notice of the Director's Type I decision for a light rail transit facility shall state the nature of the applicant's proposal, a description sufficient to locate the property, and the decision of the Director. The notice shall also state that the decision is not subject to administrative appeal and identify that there may be an opportunity for judicial appeal. 2. The notice of the Director's Type II decision shall state the nature of the applicant's proposal, a description sufficient to locate the property, and the decision of the Director. The notice shall also state that the decision is subject to administrative appeal or administrative review and shall describe the appropriate administrative appeal procedure. 3. If the Director's decision includes a mitigated DNS or other DNS requiring a 14-day comment period pursuant to Chapter 25.05 , the notice of decision shall include notice of the comment period. (Ord. 127228 , § 27, 2025; Ord. 124378 , § 78, 2013; Ord. 123913, § 15, 2012; Ord. 121477 § 48, 2004; Ord. 119096 § 7, 1998; Ord. 118794 § 49, 1997; Ord. 118012 § 33, 1996; Ord. 112522, § 2, 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.022 Administrative reviews and appeals for Type I and Type II Master Use Permits

A. Appealable decisions 1. Type I decisions may be subject to administrative review through a land use interpretation pursuant to Section 23.88.020 . 2. All Type II decisions listed in subsection 23.76.006.C are subject to an administrative open record appeal as described in this Section 23.76.022 . B. Shoreline Appeal Procedures. An appeal of the Director's decision to issue, condition, or deny a shoreline substantial development permit, shoreline variance, or shoreline conditional use as a part of a Master Use Permit shall be filed by the appellant with 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 173-27 WAC. An appeal of related environmental actions, including a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS), determination that an EIS is adequate, and the decision to grant, condition or deny the shoreline proposal based on the City's SEPA Policies pursuant to Section 25.05.660 , shall be consolidated in the appeal to the Shorelines Hearings Board. An appeal of a decision for limited utility extensions and bulkheads subject to Section 23.60A.064 shall be finally determined within 30 days as specified in that Section 23.60A.064 . C. Hearing Examiner Appeal Procedures 1. Consolidated Appeals. All appeals of Type II Master Use Permit decisions other than shoreline decisions shall be considered together in a consolidated hearing before the Hearing Examiner. 2. Standing. Appeals may be initiated by any person significantly affected by or interested in the permit. 3. Filing of Appeals. a. Appeals shall be filed with the Hearing Examiner by 5 p.m. of the fourteenth calendar day following publication of notice of the decision except that if a 14 day DNS comment period is required pursuant to Chapter 25.05 , appeals shall be filed by 5 p.m. of the 21 st calendar day following publication of notice of the decision. If the last day of the appeal period so computed is a Saturday, Sunday, or federal or City holiday, the period shall run until 5 p.m. on the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or federal or City holiday. The appeal shall be in writing and clearly identify each component of the Type II Master Use Permit being appealed. The appeal shall be accompanied by payment of the filing fee as set forth in Section 3.02.125 , Hearing Examiner filing fees. Specific objections to the Director's decision and the relief sought shall be stated in the written appeal. b. In form and content, the appeal shall conform with the rules of the Hearing Examiner. c. The Hearing Examiner shall not accept any request for an interpretation included in the appeal unless it complies with the requirements of subsection 23.88.020.C.3.c. 4. Pre-hearing Conference. 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 pre-hearing motions, clarify issues, or consider other relevant matters. 5. Notice of Hearing. Notice of the hearing on the appeal shall be provided by the Director at least 20 days prior to the scheduled hearing date to parties of record and those who request notice writing and provide an address for notice. Notice shall also be included in the Land Use Information Bulletin. 6. Scope of Review. Appeals shall be considered de novo. The Hearing Examiner shall entertain issues cited in the appeal that relate to compliance with the procedures for Type II decisions as required in this Chapter 23.76 , compliance with substantive criteria, determinations of nonsignificance (DNSs), adequacy of an EIS upon which the decision was made, or failure to properly approve, condition, or deny a permit based on disclosed adverse environmental impacts, and any requests for an interpretation included in the appeal or consolidated appeal pursuant to Section 23.88.020.C.3. 7. Standard of Review. The Director's decisions made on a Type II Master Use Permit shall be given substantial weight, except for determinations on variances, conditional uses, and special exceptions, which shall be given no deference. 8. The Record. The record shall be established at the hearing before the Hearing Examiner. The Hearing Examiner shall either close the record after the hearing or leave it open to a specified date for additional testimony, written argument, or exhibits. 9. Postponement or Continuance of Hearing. The Hearing Examiner shall not grant requests for postponement or continuance of an appeal hearing to allow an applicant to proceed with an alternative development proposal under separate application, unless all parties to the appeal agree in writing to such postponement or continuance. 10. Hearing Examiner's Decision. The Hearing Examiner shall issue a written decision, including written findings and conclusions supporting the decision, within 15 days after closing the record. The Hearing Examiner may affirm, reverse, remand, or modify the Director's decision. The Director and all parties of record shall be bound by the terms and conditions of the Hearing Examiner's decision. 11. Notice of Hearing Examiner Decision. The Hearing Examiner's decision shall be provided by the Hearing Examiner on the day the decision is issued to the parties of record and to all those who request notice in writing and provide an address for notice. If environmental issues were raised in the appeal, the decision shall also be filed with the SEPA Public Information Center. The decision shall contain information regarding judicial review. To the extent such information is available to the Hearing Examiner, the decision shall contain the name and address of the owner of the property at issue, of the applicant, and of each person who filed an appeal with the Hearing Examiner, unless such person abandoned the appeal or such person's claims were dismissed before the hearing. 12. Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision. The Hearing Examiner's decision shall be final and conclusive unless the Hearing Examiner retains jurisdiction or the decision is reversed or remanded on judicial appeal. Any judicial review must be commenced as provided by state law, and if the appeal concerns a decision on personal wireless service, the appeal shall be filed within 30 days of the Hearing Examiner's or Council's final decision. (Ord. 125603 , § 72, 2018; Ord. 125387 , § 2, 2017; Ord. 124378 , § 79, 2013; Ord. 123913, § 16, 2012; Ord. 121477, § 49, 2004; Ord. 120928, § 42, 2002; Ord. 119096, § 8, 1998; Ord. 118794, § 50, 1997; Ord. 118012, § 34, 1996; Ord. 117789, § 10, 1995; Ord. 117263 56, 1994; Ord. 112522, § 2(part), 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.023 Report and recommendation of the Director on subdivisions.

A. The Director shall prepare a written report on subdivision applications. The report shall include: 1. The written recommendations or comments of any affected City departments and other governmental agencies having an interest in the application; 2. Responses to written comments submitted by interested citizens; 3. An evaluation of the proposal based on the standards and criteria for subdivisions contained in SMC Chapter 23.22 ; 4. All environmental documentation, including any checklist, EIS or DNS; and 5. The Director's recommendation to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application. B. A DNS or the Director's determination that an EIS is adequate shall be subject to appeal pursuant to the procedures in subsection C of Section 23.76.022 . C. The Director's report shall be submitted to the Hearing Examiner and made available for public inspection at least thirty (30) days prior to the Hearing Examiner's public hearing described in Section 23.76.024 . (Ord. 120691 , § 28, 2001; Ord. 118012 § 35, 1996)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.024 Hearing Examiner open record hearing and decision for subdivisions

A. Consolidation with environmental appeal. The Hearing Examiner shall conduct a public hearing, which shall constitute a hearing by the Council on the application for preliminary approval of the subdivision. At the same hearing the Hearing Examiner shall also hear any appeals of the Director's procedural environmental determination (determination of nonsignificance or determination of adequacy of a final environmental impact statement) and other Type II decisions. B. The Hearing Examiner may combine a public hearing on a subdivision application with any other public hearings that may be held on the project by another local, state, regional, federal, or other agency, and shall do so if requested by the applicant, provided that: 1. The joint hearing if convened in-person shall be held within the city of Seattle; and 2. The joint hearing can be held within the time periods specified in Section 23.76.005 , or the applicant agrees in writing to additional time, if needed, to combine the hearings. C. Notice. The Director shall give notice of the Hearing Examiner's hearing, the Director's environmental determination, and the availability of the Director's report at least 30 days prior to the hearing by: 1. Inclusion in the Land Use Information Bulletin; 2. Mailed notice; and 3. Notice provided to: a. The applicant and each of the recipients of the preliminary plat listed in Section 23.22.024 ; b. All persons who provided an address for notice and who either submitted written comments on the application to the Director or made a written request for notice; and c. All owners of real property located within 300 feet of: 1) any portion of the boundaries of the property to be subdivided; or 2) any parcels of real property adjacent to the property to be subdivided that are owned by the owner of the property to be subdivided. D. Request for Further Consideration or Appeal. Any person significantly interested in or affected by the proposed subdivision may request further consideration of the Director's recommendation and may appeal the Director's procedural environmental determination and other Type II decisions. Such request for further consideration or appeal: 1. Shall be in writing, clearly state specific objections to the recommendation or environmental determination or other Type II decisions, and state the relief sought; 2. Shall be submitted to the Hearing Examiner by 5 p.m. of the fourteenth calendar day following publication of notice of the Director's report, provided that if a 14-day DNS comment period is required pursuant to Chapter 25.05 , appeals may be filed until 5 p.m. of the twenty-first calendar day following publication of notice of the Director's report. If the last day of the appeal period so computed is a Saturday, Sunday, or federal or City holiday, the period runs until 5 p.m. the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or federal or City holiday. The request or appeal shall be accompanied by payment of any filing fee set forth in Section 3.02.125 , Hearing Examiner filing fees, and in form and content shall conform with the rules of the Hearing Examiner. E. Notice of Appeals and Requests for Further Consideration. The Hearing Examiner shall promptly provide notice of the filing of all requests for further consideration and appeals to all parties of record and to those who have requested notice in writing and have provided an address for notice. F. Pre-hearing Conference. At the Hearing Examiner's initiative, or at the request of any party of record, the Hearing Examiner may conduct a conference prior to the hearing in order to entertain and act on motions, clarify issues, or consider other relevant matters. G. Written Comments. Written comments on the proposed subdivision and the Director's report and recommendation may be sent to the Hearing Examiner. Only those comments received prior to the conclusion of the hearing shall be considered by the Hearing Examiner. H. Hearing. 1. The Hearing Examiner shall limit the evidence, comments, and argument at the combined hearing to those issues that are fairly raised in any written request for further consideration or appeal, as clarified at any pre-hearing conference, and that are relevant to: a. The compliance of the proposed subdivision with the procedures and standards of this Chapter 23.76 and Chapter 23.22 ; b. The appropriateness of any mitigation or denial pursuant to the City's SEPA policies; and c. The correctness of the Director's procedural environmental determination and other Type II decisions. Appeals of the Director's decisions shall be considered do novo, but the Director's determination shall be given substantial weight. 2. The Hearing Examiner shall establish the record at the hearing. The Hearing Examiner may either close the record after the hearing or leave it open to a specified date to receive additional testimony, exhibits, or written argument. I. Decision. From the information gained at the hearing, from timely written comments submitted to the Department or the Hearing Examiner, and from the report and recommendation of the Director, all of which shall be made part of the record, the Hearing Examiner shall issue a decision to approve, approve with conditions, remand, or deny the proposed subdivision. On any appeal, the Hearing Examiner may affirm, reverse, remand, or modify the Director's decision. The Hearing Examiner's decision shall be in writing, include findings and conclusions, and be filed by the Hearing Examiner with the City Clerk within ten working days of the close of the record, unless a longer period is agreed to among the parties. J. Effect of the Hearing Examiner decision. The Hearing Examiner's decision shall be final and conclusive unless the Hearing Examiner retains jurisdiction or the decision is reversed or remanded on appeal or appealed to the Shorelines Hearings Board. Any judicial review of decisions shall be commenced as provided by state law. Pursuant to RCW 58.17.330, the Hearing Examiner's decision on an application for a subdivision shall have the effect of a final decision of the City Council. K. Distribution of Decision. On the same date that the Hearing Examiner files the decision with the City Clerk, copies of the decision shall be provided by the Hearing Examiner to the applicant, the Director, the Director of Transportation, all persons testifying or submitting information at the hearing, all persons who submitted written comments on the application to either the Director or the Hearing Examiner, and all those who have made a written request for a copy and provided an address for notice. (Ord. 126684 , § 8, 2022; Ord. 124378 , § 80, 2013; Ord. 123913, § 17, 2012; Ord. 123046, § 57, 2009; Ord. 121477, § 50, 2004; Ord. 120157, § 8, 2000; Ord. 119239, § 35, 1998; Ord. 118409, § 214, 1996; Ord. 118181, § 5, 1996; Ord. 118012, § 36, 1996; Ord. 117789, § 11, 1995; Ord. 116909 , § 10, 1993; Ord. 114041, § 1, 1988; Ord. 112522, § 2, 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.026 Vesting

A. Master Use Permit components other than subdivisions and short subdivisions. Except as otherwise provided in this Section 23.76.026 or otherwise required by law, applications for all Master Use Permit components other than subdivisions and short subdivisions shall be considered vested under the Land Use Code and other land use control ordinances in effect on the date: 1. That notice of the Director's decision on the application is published, if the decision is appealable to the Hearing Examiner; 2. Of the Director's decision, if the decision is not appealable to the Hearing Examiner; 3. A valid and fully complete building permit application is filed, as determined under Section 106 of the Seattle Building Code or Section R105 of the Seattle Residential Code, if it is filed prior to the date established in subsections 23.76.026.A.1 or 23.76.026.A.2; or 4. Of the filing of a letter of eligibility for exemption from design review pursuant to subsection 23.41.004.E.3, provided that a valid and complete Type I or Type II Master Use Permit application pursuant to Section 23.76.010 is filed within 90 days. If a complete Type I or Type II Master Use Permit application pursuant to Section 23.76.010 has not been filed within 90 days for a proposal associated with a filed letter of eligibility for exemption from design review, the filed letter of eligibility for exemption from design review and its relevance to establishing vesting under Title 23 shall be void. A filed letter of eligibility may be withdrawn by the applicant. A new letter of eligibility may be filed, that defines a new 90-day timeframe for providing a valid and complete Type I or Type II Master Use Permit application. B. Subdivision and short subdivision components of Master Use Permits. An application for approval of a subdivision or short subdivision of land shall be considered under the Land Use Code and other land use control ordinances in effect when a fully complete application for such approval that satisfies the requirements of Section 23.22.020 (subdivision) or Sections 23.24.020 and 23.24.030 (short subdivision) is submitted to the Director. C. Design review component of Master Use Permits 1. If a complete application for a Master Use Permit is filed prior to the date design review becomes required for that type of project, design review is not required. 2. Except as otherwise provided by law, a complete application for a Master Use Permit that includes a design review component other than an application described in subsection 23.76.026.C.3 shall be considered under the Land Use Code and other land use control ordinances in effect on: a. The date a complete application for the early design guidance process or streamlined design review guidance process is submitted to the Director, provided that such Master Use Permit application is filed within 90 days of the date of the early design guidance public meeting if an early design guidance public meeting is required, or within 90 days of the date the Director provided guidance if no early design guidance public meeting is required. If more than one early design guidance public meeting is held, then a complete application for a Master Use Permit that includes a design review component shall be considered under the Land Use Code and other land use control ordinances in effect on the date a complete application for the early design guidance process is submitted to the Director, provided that such Master Use Permit application is filed within 150 days of the first meeting. If a complete application for a Master Use Permit that includes a design review component is filed more than 150 days after the first early design guidance public meeting, then such Master Use Permit application shall be considered under the Land Use Code and other land use control ordinances in effect at the time of the early design guidance public meeting that occurred most recently before the date on which a complete Master Use Permit application was filed, provided that such Master Use Permit application is filed within 90 days of the most recent meeting; or b. A date elected by the applicant that is later than the date established in subsection 23.76.026.C.2.a and not later than the dates established in subsections 23.76.026.A.1 through 23.76.026.A.3. 3. A complete application for a Master Use Permit that includes a Master Planned Community design review component, but that pursuant to subsection 23.41.020.C does not include an early design guidance process, shall be considered under the Land Use Code and other land use control ordinances in effect on the date the complete application is submitted. D. Master Use Permit components for light rail transit facilities. Applications for all Master Use Permit components for light rail transit facilities shall be considered vested under the Land Use Code and other land use control ordinances in effect on the date a valid and fully complete Master Use Permit application is filed, as determined by Section 23.76.010 . E. If an applicant elects a date for consideration of an application for Master Use Permit components pursuant to subsection 23.76.026.C.2.b after notice of the application required by Section 23.76.012 has been given, notice of the application and an opportunity to comment shall be repeated according to Section 23.76.012 . F. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Section 23.76.026 or this Chapter 23.76 , an applicant may elect, at such time and in such manner as the Director may permit, that specific Land Use Code provisions that became effective after the applicant's application vested may nonetheless be applied to the application, pursuant to authorization for such election set forth elsewhere in this Title 23 . (Ord. 127228 , § 28, 2025; Ord. 127100 , § 7, 2024; Ord. 126685 , § 57, 2022; Ord. 125429 , § 28, 2017; Ord. 124843 , § 58, 2015; Ord. 123963, § 31, 2012; Ord. 123913, § 18, 2012; Ord. 123649, § 54, 2011; Ord. 123495, § 79, 2011; Ord. 122611 , § 12, 2007; Ord. 122311 , § 96, 2006; Ord. 122235, § 14, 2006; Ord. 121477, § 51, 2004; Ord. 121112, § 1, 2003; Ord. 119728, § 12, 1999; Ord. 118980, § 8, 1998; Ord. 118539, § 7, 1997; Ord. 118466, § 3, 1997; Ord. 118012, § 37, 1996; Ord. 117598, § 5, 1995; Ord. 115751 , § 2, 1991; Ord. 113977, § 1, 1988; Ord. 112522, § 2, 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.028 Type I and II Master Use Permit issuance

A. The Director shall notify the applicant when a Type I or II Master Use Permit is approved for issuance. B. Type I Master Use Permits. A Type I Master Use Permit is approved for issuance at the time of the Director's decision that the application conforms to all applicable laws, except that for a project that requires both a Master Use Permit and a Council land use decision, the Master Use Permit is approved for issuance only after the Council land use decision is made. A Type I Master Use Permit for a light rail transit facility shall not be approved for issuance until the alignment, transit station locations, and maintenance base location of the light rail transit system have been approved by the Council by ordinance or resolution. C. Type II Master Use Permits 1. Except as provided in subsections 23.76.028.C.2 and 23.76.028.C.3, a Type II Master Use Permit is approved for issuance on the day following expiration of the applicable City of Seattle administrative appeal period or, if appealed, on the fourth day following a final City of Seattle administrative appeal decision or the day after an appeal is dismissed. 2. A Type II Master Use Permit containing a shoreline component as defined in subsection 23.76.006.C.2.g is approved for issuance pursuant to Section 23.60A.072 , except that a shoreline decision on limited utility extensions and bulkheads subject to Section 23.60A.064 is approved for issuance within 21 days of the last day of the comment period as specified in Section 23.60A.064 . 3. For a Type II Master Use Permit that requires a Council land use decision, the Master Use Permit is approved for issuance only after the Council land use decision is made. D. Master Use Permits shall not be issued to the applicant until all outstanding fees are paid. (Ord. 127228 , § 29, 2025; Ord. 125603 , § 73, 2018; Ord. 123913, § 19, 2012; Ord. 121112, § 2, 2003; Ord. 119239, § 36, 1998; Ord. 118012, § 38, 1996; Ord. 117570, § 22, 1995; Ord. 115751 , § 3, 1991; Ord. 112522, § 2, 1985.)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.029 Type I and II Master Use Permit duration and expiration date

An issued Type I or II Master Use Permit expires three years from the date a permit is approved for issuance as described in Section 23.76.028 , except as follows: A. A Master Use Permit with a shoreline component expires pursuant to WAC 173-27-090. B. A variance component of a Master Use Permit expires as follows: 1. Variances for access, yards, setback, open space, or lot area minimums granted as part of a short plat or lot boundary adjustment run with the land in perpetuity as recorded with the King County Recorder. 2. Variances granted as separate Master Use Permits pursuant to subsection 23.76.004.G expire three years from the date the permit is approved for issuance as described in Section 23.76.028 or on the effective date of any text amendment making more stringent the development standard from which the variance was granted, whichever is sooner. If a Master Use Permit to establish the use is issued prior to the earlier of the dates specified in the preceding sentence, the variance expires on the expiration date of the Master Use Permit. C. The time during which pending litigation related to the Master Use Permit or the property subject to the permit made it reasonable not to submit an application for a building permit, or to establish a use if a building permit is not required, is not included in determining the expiration date of the Master Use Permit. D. Master Use Permits with a Major Phased Development or Planned Community Development component under Sections 23.45.600 , 23.47A.007 , 23.48.007 , 23.49.036 , 23.50.015 , or 23.50A.300 expire as follows: 1. For the first phase, the expiration date shall be three years from the date the permit is approved for issuance; 2. For subsequent phases, the expiration date shall be determined at the time of permit issuance for each phase, and the date shall be stated in the permit. E. Permits for uses allowed under Section 23.42.038 , temporary or intermittent use permits issued pursuant to Section 23.42.040 , and transitional encampment interim use permits issued under Section 23.42.056 expire on the date stated in the permit. F. Except as otherwise provided in this subsection 23.76.029.F, Master Use Permits for development pursuant to Section 23.49.180 expire on the date set by the Director in the Master Use Permit decision, which date may be a maximum of 15 years from the date the Master Use Permit is approved for issuance. The Director shall consider the complexity of the project, economic conditions of the area in which the project is located, and the construction schedule proposed by the applicant in setting the expiration date. If no expiration date is set in the Master Use Permit decision, the expiration date is three years from the date a permit is approved for issuance. 1. In order for the Director to set the Master Use Permit expiration date, the applicant shall: a. Submit with the application a site plan showing a level of detail sufficient to assess anticipated impacts of the completed project; and b. Submit a proposed schedule for complying with the conditions necessary to gain the amount of extra floor area and the extra height sought for the project. 2. The expiration date of the Master Use Permit may be extended past the expiration date set in the Master Use Permit decision or the date established in this subsection 23.76.029.F if: a. On the expiration date stated in the Master Use Permit decision, a building permit for the entire development has been issued, in which case the Master Use Permit is extended for the life of the building permit if the Master Use Permit would otherwise expire earlier; or b. A complete application for a building permit that either is for the entire development proposed pursuant to Section 23.49.180 , or is for construction to complete the entire development proposed pursuant to Section 23.49.180 , is: 1) Submitted before the expiration date of the Master Use Permit; and 2) Made sufficiently complete to constitute a fully complete building permit application as defined in the Seattle Building Code, or for a highrise structure regulated under Section 403 of the Seattle Building Code, made to include the complete structural frame of the building and schematic plans for the exterior shell of the building, in either case before the expiration date of the Master Use Permit, in which case the Master Use Permit is extended for the life of the building permit issued pursuant to the application if the Master Use Permit would otherwise expire earlier. G. The permit expires earlier pursuant to Section 22.800.100 . H. The time during which the property subject to the Master Use Permit is used for a transitional encampment interim use is not included in determining the expiration date of the Master Use Permit. I. A Master Use Permit subject to this subsection 23.76.029.I approved for issuance after September 1, 2019, and before December 31, 2026, and that is not subject to subsections 23.76.029.A or 23.76.029.E, shall expire as follows: 1. A Master Use Permit that has not been granted a renewal under subsection 23.76.032.A by January 29, 2024 expires six years from the date the permit was approved for issuance as described in Section 23.76.028 . A Master Use Permit with a six-year expiration period is not eligible for a two-year extension described in Section 23.76.032 . A variance component of a Master Use Permit subject to this subsection 23.76.029.I shall expire in accordance with subsection 23.76.029.B. A Master Use Permit with a Major Phased Development or Planned Community Development component under Section 23.45.600 , 23.47A.007 , 23.48.007 , 23.49.036 , 23.50.015 , or 23.50A.300 that is subject to this subsection 23.76.029.I shall expire as follows: a. For the first phase, six years from the date the permit is approved for issuance; b. For subsequent phases, expiration shall be stated in the permit. 2. A Master Use Permit that has been granted a renewal under subsection 23.76.032.A by January 29, 2024 expires three years from the date of the renewal. A Master Use Permit extended through this subsection 23.76.029.I.2 shall not be renewed beyond a period of six years from the original date the permit was approved for issuance. J. An issued Master Use Permit for a light rail transit facility expires six years from the date the permit was approved for issuance as described in Section 23.76.028 . (Ord. 127228 , § 30, 2025; Ord. 126979 , § 1, 2023; Ord. 126855 , § 67, 2023 [renumbered from 23.76.032.A.1]; Ord. 126685 , § 58, 2022; Ord. 125558 , § 60, 2018; Ord. 124873 , § 4, 2015; Ord. 124843 , § 59, 2015; Ord. 124747 , § 6, 2015; Ord. 123913, § 20, 2012; Ord. 123566, § 7, 2011; Ord. 123565, § 4, 2011; Ord. 123176, § 2, 2009; Ord. 123034, § 12, 2009; Ord. 122816, § 8, 2008; Ord. 122311 , § 97, 2006; Ord. 122054, § 83, 2006; Ord. 121112, § 4, 2003.)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.030 Type I and II Master Use Permit expiration and exceptions to expiration

On the expiration date determined as provided in Section 23.76.029 , a Master Use Permit expires unless one of the conditions in this Section 23.76.030 exists: A. A building permit is issued before the expiration date, in which case the Master Use Permit shall be extended for the life of the building permit. B. A valid and fully complete application for a building permit is submitted prior to the Master Use Permit expiration date and a building permit is subsequently issued. In such cases, the Master Use Permit shall be extended for the life of the building permit. C. For projects that do not require a building permit, the use has been established prior to the expiration date and is not terminated prior to that date by abandonment, change of use, or otherwise. In such cases the Master Use Permit expires when the use permitted by the Master Use Permit is terminated by abandonment, change of use, or otherwise. D. The Master Use Permit is renewed pursuant to Section 23.76.032 . E. A Major Phased Development or Planned Community Development component is part of the Master Use Permit, in which case subsection subsection 23.76.029.D applies. F. The Master Use Permit is for development subject to Section 23.49.180 , in which case the provisions in subsection 23.76.029.F apply. (Ord. 126855 , § 67, 2023 [renumbered from 23.76.032.A.2]; Ord. 124378 , § 82, 2013 [cross-reference correction and style update]; Ord. 123913 , § 20, 2012; Ord. 123176 , § 2, 2009; Ord. 123034, § 12, 2009; Ord. 122816, § 8, 2008; Ord. 122311 , § 97, 2006; Ord. 121112 , § 4, 2003.)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.031 Type I and Type II Master Use Permits' relationship to building permits

If a Master Use Permit is issued for a project, a building permit is issued for the project, and the project is constructed pursuant to the building permit: A. Conditions of or incorporated in the Master Use Permit shall remain in effect, notwithstanding expiration of the Master Use Permit pursuant to Sections 23.76.029 and 23.76.030 , until the project is demolished or until an earlier date on which: 1. The condition by its terms expires or is fully satisfied; 2. The condition is removed through a permitting decision; or 3. If the condition was imposed as to a specific use within the project, that use is terminated; and B. Terms of a building permit relating to requirements of Section 23.58C.050 shall remain in effect for the time period specified according to subsection 23.58C.050.B, notwithstanding: 1. Expiration of the Master Use Permit according to Sections 23.76.029 and 23.76.030 ; or 2. Any contrary provision of Title 22 . (Ord. 126855 , § 67, 2023 [renumbered from 23.76.032.B]; Ord. 125108 , § 7, 2016; Ord. 124873 , § 4, 2015 [style update]; Ord. 123913 , § 20, 2012.)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.032 Type I and II Master Use Permit renewal

A. Except for Major Phased Development permits, the Director shall renew issued Master Use Permits for projects that are in conformance with applicable regulations, including but not limited to land use and environmentally critical areas regulations and SEPA policies in effect at the time renewal is sought. Except as provided in subsections 23.76.032.B and 23.76.032.C, Master Use Permit renewal is for a period of two years. A Master Use Permit shall not be renewed beyond a period of five years from the original date the permit is approved for issuance. The Director shall not renew issued Master Use Permits for projects that are not in conformance with applicable regulations in effect at the time renewal is sought. B. If an application for a building permit is submitted before the end of the two year term of renewal, and is subsequently issued, the Master Use Permit shall be extended for the life of the building permit. C. The Director may renew a Master Use Permit for the temporary relocation of police and fire stations issued pursuant to Section 23.42.040 for a period not to exceed 12 months. D. The Director may renew a Master Use Permit for a transitional encampment interim use issued according to subsection 23.42.056.E for additional one-year terms. (Ord. 126855 , § 67, 2023; Ord. 126042 , § 6, 2020; Ord. 124873 , § 4, 2015 [style update]; Ord. 124747 , § 6, 2015; Ord. 123913 , § 20, 2012; Ord. 123176 , § 2, 2009; Ord. 123034, § 12, 2009; Ord. 122816, § 8, 2008; Ord. 121112 , § 4, 2003.)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.034 Suspension and revocation of Master Use Permits

A. A Master 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; 2. The permittee has not complied with the conditions of the permit; 3. The permittee has secured the permit with false or misleading information; 4. The permit was issued in error; or 5. The permittee has failed to pay past-due fees. B. If 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; provided that any shoreline component of a Master Use Permit shall not be revoked until a public hearing has been held pursuant to the procedures set forth in Section 23.60A.078 . 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. The Director shall provide written notice of the stop work order to all persons who have expressed a complaint leading to the stop work order and provided an address for notice. C. The procedures for appealing a stop work order for all Master Use Permit components other than shoreline components are as follows: 1. Persons who receive a stop work order issued under subsection 23.76.034.B may appeal the order to the Hearing Examiner. Appeals shall be filed with the Hearing Examiner by 5 p.m. of the 15 th calendar day following service of the stop work order. If 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 p.m. on the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or federal or City holiday. 2. The Hearing Examiner shall hold a hearing on the appeal of the Director's decision in order to review the facts and determine whether grounds for revocation or suspension exist. 3. The Hearing Examiner shall provide notice of the hearing at least 20 days prior to the hearing to the permittee and to any persons who have expressed a complaint leading to the stop work order. 4. The Hearing Examiner's decision shall be issued within 15 days following the hearing. 5. The Hearing Examiner shall provide written notice of the decision to the permittee, the Director, and persons who have made a written request for notice and provided an address for notice. (Ord. 125603 , § 74, 2018; Ord. 123913, § 21, 2012; Ord. 117263 57, 1994; Ord. 112522, § 2(part), 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.036 Council decisions required

A. Quasi-judicial Type IV Council land use decisions. The Council shall make the following quasi-judicial Type IV Council land use decisions, as well as any associated Type II decisions listed in subsections 23.76.006.C.2.c, d, f, and g and SEPA decisions integrated with such Type II decisions as set forth in Section 23.76.006.C.2.l : 1. Amendments to the Official Land Use Map, including changes in overlay districts and shoreline environment redesignations, except those map amendments listed in subsection C.1 of this Section 23.76.036 ; 2. Public projects that require Council approval; 3. Major Institution master plans, including major amendments as defined in Section 23.69.035 , renewal of a master plan's development plan component pursuant to Section 23.69.036 , and master plans prepared pursuant to subsection 23.69.023.C after an acquisition, merger, or consolidation of major institutions; 4. Council conditional uses; 5. Major amendments to property use and development agreements pursuant to Section 23.76.058 ; and 6. Decisions to approve, condition, or deny based on SEPA Policies that are integrated with a Type IV decision listed in subsections 23.76.036.A.1 through A.5. B. Other quasi-judicial Council land use decisions. The Council shall also make the following quasi-judicial decisions, which are not subject to the same procedures as Type IV Council land use decisions: 1. Minor amendments to property use and development agreements pursuant to Section 23.76.058 ; and 2. Extensions of Type IV Council land use decisions pursuant to Section 23.76.060 . C. Legislative Type V Council land use decisions. Council action is required for the following Type V Council land use decisions, as well as any associated Type II decisions listed in subsections 23.76.006.C.2.c, d, f, and g and SEPA decisions integrated with such Type II decisions as set forth in Section 23.76.006.C.2. l: 1. The following amendments to the Official Land Use Map: a. Area-wide amendments; and b. Corrections of errors on the Official Land Use Map due to cartographic and clerical mistakes; 2. Amendments to the text of this Title 23 ; 3. Concept approval for the location or expansion of City facilities requiring Council land use approval; 4. Waiver or modification of development standards for City facilities; 5. Major Institution designations and revocations of Major Institution designations; and 6. Planned action ordinances. (Ord. 123913, § 22, 2012; Ord. 122497 , § 6, 2007; Ord. 122054 § 84, 2006; Ord. 121477 § 52, 2004; Ord. 120691 , § 29, 2001; Ord. 120609 , § 16, 2001: Ord. 119096 § 9, 1998; Ord. 18672 § 26, 1997; Ord. 118012 § 41, 1996; Ord. 117570 § 23, 1995: Ord. 115165 § 11, 1990; Ord. 115002 , § 15, 1990; Ord. 112522 § 2(part), 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.038 Preapplication conferences for Council land use decisions

A. Except as provided in subsection 23.76.038.B, a preapplication conference is required between Department representative(s) and an applicant for the following Council land use decisions prior to official filing with the Director of an application: 1. All Type IV decisions; 2. Type V concept approval for the location or expansion of City facilities requiring Council land use approval; and 3. Type V decisions for waivers or modifications of development standards for City facilities. B. The Director may waive the requirement for a preapplication conference if an applicant demonstrates, to the Director's satisfaction, experience with Council land use decision procedures that would render a preapplication conference unnecessary. C. The preapplication conference shall be held in a timely manner to determine the appropriate procedures and review criteria for the proposed project. Pre-application conferences may be subject to fees as established in Subtitle IX of Title 22 . (Ord. 123913, § 23, 2012; Ord. 118012 § 42, 1996: Ord. 112522 § 2(part), 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.040 Applications and requests for Council land use decisions

A. Applications for Type IV Council land use decisions. 1. Applications for all Type IV Council land use decisions except rezones shall be made by the holder of record of fee title, a City agency, or an authorized agent thereof. 2. Applications for rezones shall be made by the holder(s) of record of fee title for all of the property or properties in the area proposed to be rezoned, or the authorized agent for such holder(s) of record of fee title. B. Applications for other quasi-judicial Council land use decisions. Applications for quasi-judicial Council land use decisions that are not Type IV decisions shall be made by all holder(s) of record of fee title of the affected property or properties, or the authorized agent for such holder(s) of record of fee title. C. Applications for Type V Council land use decisions. 1. Applications for concept approval for the location or expansion of City facilities requiring Council approval and for waiver or modification of development standards for City facilities shall be made by a City agency or authorized agent thereof. 2. Applications for Major Institution designations and revocations of Major Institution designations shall be made by a City agency, the holder of record of fee title of the affected major institution, or authorized agent thereof. D. Requests for Type V Council land use decisions. 1. Requests for planned action ordinances shall be made by a City agency or the holder(s) of record of fee title for the property(ies) proposed to be addressed by the planned action ordinance, or authorized agent thereof. 2. Requests for an area-wide amendment to the Official Land Use Map, correction of errors in the Official Land Use Map due to cartographic or clerical mistakes, or an amendment to the text of this Title 23 may be made by any City department or interested person. E. A claim made by a person that they possess title to any portion of the property for which an application for a Council land use decision has been submitted, whether the claim is made by a judicially-filed pleading or not, is not grounds to suspend processing the application unless a court injunction has been issued and is delivered to the Department. F. All applications and requests for Council land use decisions shall be made to the Director on a form provided by the Department. G. Notice to the City Clerk 1. For Type IV Council land use decisions that do not include a design review component and are not notices of intent to prepare Major Institution master plans, and for applications for quasi-judicial Council land use decisions that are not Type IV decisions, the Director shall provide notice of the application to the City Clerk promptly after the application is submitted. 2. For Type IV Council land use decisions that include a design review component, the Director shall provide notice of the application to the City Clerk promptly after the applicant submits a complete application to begin the early design guidance process. 3. For notices of intent to prepare Major Institution master plans, the Director shall provide the notice of intent to prepare a master plan to the City Clerk promptly after the notice of intent is received. 4. For Type V Council land use decisions, the Director shall provide notice of the application or request to the City Clerk promptly after the application or request is submitted. H. Applications and requests for Council land use decisions shall be accompanied by payment of the applicable filing fees, if any, as established in Subtitle IX of Title 22 . I. Applications for Council land use decisions 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 , SEPA Policies and Procedures; Chapter 25.09 , Regulations for Environmentally Critical Areas; Chapter 25.12 , Landmark 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 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 submittal requirements for a complete application. In the case of unusual or unique applications the Director shall determine submittal requirements. J. Notice of Complete Application. 1. The Director shall determine whether an application for a Council land use decision 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 23.76.040.J. A determination that the application is complete is not a determination that the application is vested. 2. An application for a Council land use decision is complete for purposes of this Section 23.76.040 if it meets the submittal requirements established by the Director in subsection I of this Section 23.76.040 and is sufficient for continued processing even though additional information may be required or project modifications are undertaken subsequently. The 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 additional information is required to complete review of the application or if substantial changes in the permit application are proposed. A determination under this Section 23.76.040 that an application is complete for purposes of continued processing is not a determination that the application is vested. K. Failure to supply all required information or data within 60 days of a written request may result in a notice of intent to cancel. The Director may cancel the application if the requested information is not provided within the time required by the notice of intent to cancel. (Ord. 125429 , § 29, 2017; Ord. 123913, § 24, 2012; Ord. 123495, § 80, 2011; Ord. 122497 , § 7, 2007; Ord. 122054, § 85, 2006; Ord. 121476, § 21, 2004; Ord. 118012, § 43, 1996; Ord. 117570, § 24, 1995; Ord. 117430 , § 82, 1994; Ord. 112522, § 2(part), 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.042 Notice of Type IV applications

Notice Required. For all Type IV Council land use decisions, notice of application shall be provided pursuant to Section 23.76.012 , provided that, for amendments to property use and development agreements, additional notice shall be given pursuant to subsection 23.76.058.C. (Ord. 123913, § 25, 2012; Ord. 122311 , § 98, 2006; Ord. 121477 § 53, 2004; Ord. 116145 , § 4, 1992; Ord. 115002 , § 16, 1990; Ord. 112522 § 2(part), 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.044 Notice of scoping and draft EIS.

Notice of Scoping and of Draft EISs for Type IV decisions shall be as provided for Master Use Permits in Section 23.76.014 . (Ord. 112522 § 2(part), 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.046 Public meetings and hearings for draft EISs

A. Preliminary Council Meeting on City Facilities Requiring Council Approval. When a City agency proposing a new City facility or expansion of an existing City facility determines that an EIS is required for the project, the Council shall hold an early public meeting to determine the need for and functions of the proposed facility, identify the source of funding, and establish site selection criteria. The meeting shall be held as part of the scoping process as required by Chapter 25.05 , SEPA Policies and Procedures. B. Draft EISs on Type IV and V decisions. The Director shall hold a public hearing on all draft EISs for Type IV and Type V Council land use decisions for which the Department is the lead agency, pursuant to Section 25.05.535 . If convened in-person, the Director may hold the hearing near the site of the proposed project. For Major Institution master plans, the draft EIS hearing shall be combined with a hearing on the draft master plan as required by Section 23.69.032 . C. The Director may combine the public hearing on the draft EIS with any other public hearings that may be held on the project by another local, state, regional, federal, or other agency, and shall do so if requested by the applicant, provided that: 1. The joint hearing if convened in-person shall be held within the city of Seattle; and 2. The joint hearing can be held within the time periods specified in Section 23.76.005 , or the applicant agrees in writing to additional time, if needed, to combine the hearings. (Ord. 126684 , § 9, 2022; Ord. 124378 , § 83, 2013; Ord. 123913, § 26, 2012; Ord. 118012 § 44, 1996; Ord. 115002 , § 17, 1990; Ord. 112522 § 2(part), 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.048 Notice of final EISs.

Notice of the availability of a final EIS for a Type IV or V decision shall be as provided for Master Use Permits in Section 23.76.018 . (Ord. 112522 § 2(part), 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.050 Reports for Type IV and V Council land use decisions

A. Except for Type V Council land use decisions that are proposed by the Director of the Office of Planning and Community Development, the Director shall prepare a written report on Type IV and V decisions and any associated Type II decisions listed in subsections 23.76.006.C.2.c, 23.76.006.C.2.d, 23.76.006.C.2.f, and 23.76.006.C.2.g and SEPA decisions integrated with such Type II decisions as set forth in subsection 23.76.006.C.2.l. For Type V Council land use decisions proposed by the Director of the Office of Planning and Community Development, the Director of the Office of Planning and Community Development shall prepare the report required under Section 23.76.050 . For purposes of this Section 23.76.050 the word "Director" refers to the Director of the Seattle Department of Construction and Inspections or the Director of the Office of Planning and Community Development that is responsible for preparation of the report required by this section. B. The Director's report for Type IV and V Council land use decisions other than those listed in subsection 23.76.050.C shall include: 1. The written recommendations or comments of any affected City departments and other governmental agencies having an interest in the application or request; 2. Responses to written comments from the public; 3. An evaluation of the proposal based on the standards and criteria for the approval sought and consistency with applicable City policies; 4. All environmental documentation, including any checklist, EIS or DNS; and 5. The Director's recommendation to approve, approve with conditions, or deny a proposal. C. For Land Use Code amendments, area-wide amendments to the Official Land Use Map, and Planned Action Ordinances, the Director's report shall include: 1. An evaluation of the proposal based on the standards and criteria for the approval sought and consistency with applicable City policies; 2. a summary of the public notice and outreach efforts undertaken to evaluate the proposal; and 3. The Director's recommendation to approve or reject a proposal. D. A DNS or the Director's determination that an EIS is adequate shall be subject to appeal pursuant to the procedures in subsection C of Section 23.76.022 . E. For Type IV Decisions, the Director's report shall be submitted to the Hearing Examiner and filed with the City Clerk on the same date the notice of availability of the Director's report is given pursuant to Section 23.76.052 . The Director's report shall be made available for public inspection at least 21 days prior to the Hearing Examiner's open record predecision public hearing described in Section 23.76.052 . F. For Type V Council land use decisions, the Director's report shall be submitted to the Council and shall be made available to the public at least 15 days before the Council hearing described in Section 23.76.062 . (Ord. 124919 , § 163, 2015; Ord. 124378 , § 84, 2013; Ord. 123913, § 28, 2012; Ord. 122497 , § 8, 2007; Ord. 121476 § 22, 2004; Ord. 120691 , § 30, 2001; Ord. 118012 § 46, 1996; Ord. 117929 § 9, 1995; Ord. 112522 § 2(part), 1985.) Part 2 Quasi-judicial Decisions (Type IV)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.052 Hearing Examiner open record predecision hearing and recommendation for Type IV Council land use decisions

A. General—Consolidation With Environmental Appeal. The Hearing Examiner shall conduct a public hearing, which shall constitute a hearing by the Council, on all applications for Type IV Council land use decisions and any associated variances, special exceptions, and administrative conditional uses. At the same hearing, the Hearing Examiner shall also hear any appeals of the Director's Type II decisions and any interpretations. B. The Hearing Examiner may combine a public hearing on a Type IV application with any other public hearings that may be held on the project by another local, state, regional, federal, or other agency, and shall do so if requested by the applicant, provided that: 1. The joint hearing if convened in-person shall be held within the city of Seattle; and 2. The joint hearing can be held within the time periods specified in Section 23.76.005 , or the applicant agrees in writing to additional time, if needed, to combine the hearings. C. Notice. 1. The Director shall give notice of the Hearing Examiner's hearing, the Director's environmental determination, and the availability of the Director's report at least 21 days prior to the hearing by: a. Inclusion in the Land Use Information Bulletin; b. Publication in the City official newspaper; c. One land use sign visible to the public posted at each street frontage abutting the site except that if there is no street frontage or the site abuts an unimproved street, the Director shall either post more than one sign and/or select an alternative posting location so that notice is clearly visible to the public. For hearings on Major Institution master plans, one land use sign posted at each street frontage abutting the site but not to exceed ten land use signs; d. Mailed notice; and e. Provision of notice to the applicant and to those who have submitted written comments on the proposal, and to persons who have made a written request for specific notice and have provided an address for notice. 2. DNSs shall be filed with the SEPA Public Information Center. If the Director's decision includes a mitigated DNS or other DNS requiring a 14 day comment period pursuant to Section 25.05.340 , the notice of DNS shall include notice of the comment period. The Director shall distribute copies of such DNSs as required by Section 25.05.340 . 3. The notice shall state the project description, type of land use decision under consideration, a description sufficient to locate the subject property, where the complete application file may be reviewed, and the Director's recommendation and environmental determination. The notice shall also state that the environmental determination is subject to appeal and shall describe the appeal procedure. D. Appeal of Environmental Determination. Any person significantly interested in or affected by the Type IV Council land use decision under consideration may appeal the Director's procedural environmental determination subject to the following provisions: 1. Filing of Appeals. Appeals shall be submitted to the Hearing Examiner by 5 p.m. of the fourteenth calendar day following publication of notice of the determination, provided that if a 14 day DNS comment period is required pursuant to Section 25.05.340 , appeals may be filed until 5 p.m. of the twenty-first calendar day following publication of the notice of the determination. If the last day of the appeal period so computed is a Saturday, Sunday, or federal or City holiday, the period shall run until 5 p.m. on the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or federal or City holiday. The appeal shall be in writing and shall state specific objections to the environmental determination and the relief sought. The appeal shall be accompanied by payment of the filing fee as set forth in Section 3.02.125 . In form and content, the appeal shall conform with the rules of the Hearing Examiner. 2. Pre-hearing Conference. 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. 3. Notice of Appeal. Notice of filing of the appeal and of the date of the consolidated hearing on the appeal and the Type IV Council land use decision recommendation shall be promptly provided by the Hearing Examiner to parties of record and those who have requested notice and provided an address for notice. 4. Scope of Review. Appeals shall be considered de novo. The Hearing Examiner shall entertain only those issues cited in the written appeal that relate to compliance with the procedures for Type IV Council land use decisions as required in this Chapter 23.76 and the adequacy of the environmental documentation upon which the environmental determination was made. 5. Standard of Review. The Director's environmental determination shall be given substantial weight. E. Conduct of Hearing. The Hearing Examiner at the public hearing shall accept evidence and comments regarding: 1. The Director's report, including an evaluation of the project based on applicable City ordinances and policies and the Director's recommendation to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application; and 2. Specific issues related to any appeals of the Director's Type II decisions. F. The Record. The record shall be established at the hearing before the Hearing Examiner. The Hearing Examiner shall either close the record after the hearing or leave it open to a specified date for additional testimony, written argument, or exhibits. G. Written Comments. Written comments on the application for a Type IV Council land use decision and the Director's report and recommendation may be sent to the Hearing Examiner. Only those received prior to the conclusion of the hearing shall be considered by the Hearing Examiner. H. Recommendation. From the information gained at the hearing, from timely written comments submitted to the Hearing Examiner, and from the report and recommendation of the Director, the Hearing Examiner shall submit a recommendation to the Council by filing it together with the record and the original application with the City Clerk within 15 days after the close of the hearing record, provided that the Hearing Examiner's recommendation on a Major Institution master plan shall be submitted within 30 days. The recommendation to approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application shall be based on written findings and conclusions. I. Environmental Appeal Decision. If the Director's environmental determination is appealed, the Hearing Examiner shall affirm, reverse, remand, or modify the Director's determination that an EIS is not required (DNS) or that an EIS is adequate, based on written findings and conclusions. The Director shall be bound by the terms and conditions of the Hearing Examiner's decision. If the environmental determination is remanded, the Hearing Examiner shall also remand the Director's recommendation for reconsideration. The Hearing Examiner's decision on a DNS or EIS adequacy appeal shall not be subject to Council appeal. The time period for requesting judicial review of the environmental determination shall not commence until the Council has completed action on the Type IV Council land use decision for which the DNS or EIS was issued. J. Distribution of Decision and Recommendation. On the same date that the Hearing Examiner files a recommendation with the City Clerk, the Hearing Examiner shall provide copies of the recommendation and environmental appeal decision, if any, to the applicant, the Director, all persons testifying or submitting information at the hearing, all persons who submitted substantive comments on the application to either the Director or the Hearing Examiner, and all those who request a copy in writing and provide an address for notice. Notice of the Hearing Examiner's recommendation to the Council shall include instructions for appealing the recommendation on the Type IV Council land use decision. (Ord. 126684 , § 10, 2022; Ord. 123913, § 29, 2012; Ord. 122497 , § 11, 2007; Ord. 121477, § 54, 2004; Ord. 120157, § 9, 2000; Ord. 119096, § 10, 1998; Ord. 118672, § 27, 1997; Ord. 118012, § 47, 1996; Ord. 112522, § 2, 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.054 Council consideration of Hearing Examiner recommendation on Type IV Council land use decisions

A. Any person who submitted a written comment to the Director, or who provided a written or oral comment to the Hearing Examiner, may submit in writing an appeal of the Hearing Examiner's recommendation regarding a Type IV land use decision to the Council and, if desired, a request to supplement the record. No appeals of a DNS or the determination that an EIS is adequate will be accepted. B. Appeals of the Hearing Examiner's recommendation shall be filed with the City Clerk by 5 p.m. of the 14th calendar day following the date of issuance of the Hearing Examiner's recommendation. When the last day of the appeal period so computed is a Saturday, Sunday, or federal or City holiday, the appeal period runs until 5 p.m. on the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or federal or City holiday. C. The appeal shall clearly identify specific objections to the Hearing Examiner's recommendation and specify the relief sought. D. After the City Clerk's receipt of an appeal, Council staff shall provide a copy of the appeal and instructions for responding to those persons who were provided written notice of the Hearing Examiner's recommendation at least 21 days prior to the date of the Council's public meeting to consider the appeal. E. Council action shall be based on the record established by the Hearing Examiner. The Council may supplement the record with new evidence or information if the Council determines that the new evidence or information was not available or could not reasonably have been produced at the time of the open record hearing before the Hearing Examiner. The Council may remand an application for a Type IV land use decision only when: 1. The Council has voted to supplement the record and has determined that the Director or the Hearing Examiner should reconsider the application in light of the new evidence; or 2. For major institution master plans, the Council has determined that there is a need for additional information or new proposal(s) pursuant to 23.69.032 . F. The Council may allow oral or written arguments based on the record. (Ord. 123913, § 30, 2012; Ord. 122497 , § 10, 2007; Ord. 118012 § 48, 1996; Ord. 112522 § 2(part), 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.056 Council decision on Hearing Examiner recommendation for Type IV Council land use decisions

A. The Council's decision to approve, approve with conditions, remand, or deny the application for a Type IV Council land use decision shall be based on applicable law and supported by substantial evidence in the record established pursuant to Section 23.76.054 . An appellant bears the burden of proving that the Hearing Examiner's recommendation should be rejected or modified. B. The Council shall adopt written findings and conclusions in support of its decision regarding Type IV Council land use decisions. C. To the extent such information is available to the Council, the decision should contain the name and address of the owner of the property at issue, of the applicant, and of each person who filed an appeal of the Hearing Examiner's recommendation with the Council, unless such person abandoned the appeal or such person's claims were dismissed before the hearing. D. Any Type IV Council land use decision shall be final and conclusive unless Council retains jurisdiction or the decision is reversed or remanded on judicial appeal or appeal to the Shorelines Hearings Board. Any judicial review of a decision shall be commenced as provided by state law, and an appeal of a decision concerning personal wireless service must be commenced within 30 days of issuance of the decision. E. The City Clerk shall promptly transmit a copy of the findings, conclusions and decision, and ordinance if applicable, to the Director, the Hearing Examiner, and all parties of record. The Director shall be bound by and incorporate the terms and conditions of the Council's decision in permits issued to the applicant or on approved plans. F. Re-application Rules. If an application for a Type IV Council land use decision is denied with prejudice by the Council, no application for the same or substantially the same decision shall be considered until 12 consecutive months have passed since the filing of the denial of the application. After 12 months, the Council shall consider an application for the same decision only if the applicant establishes that there has been a substantial change of circumstances pertaining to a material issue. G. Type IV Council land use decisions are quasi-judicial decisions of the City Council and are not subject to mayoral approval or disapproval. (Ord. 124378 , § 85, 2013; Ord. 123913, § 31, 2012; Ord. 122497 , § 11, 2007; Ord. 120928 § 43, 2002; Ord. 118181 § 7, 1996; Ord. 118012 § 49, 1996; Ord. 117789 § 12, 1995; Ord. 112522 § 2(part), 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.058 Rules for specific Council land use decisions

A. Shoreline Decisions. For shoreline environment reclassifications, a copy of the Council's findings, conclusions and decision shall also be filed with the Department of Ecology. Shoreline environment reclassifications shall not become effective until approved by the Department of Ecology. B. Contract Rezones. 1. Within 30 days after adoption of the ordinance approving a contract rezone, the City Clerk shall record the executed property use and development agreement (PUDA) with the King County Recorder. 2. The zoning designation established by the contract rezone shall not take effect until the later of: a. the effective date of the ordinance approving the contract rezone and accepting the PUDA, as specified in the ordinance or pursuant to Section 1.04.020 , or b. the recording by the City Clerk with the King County Recorder of the PUDA executed by the legal and beneficial owners. C. Amendment of PUDAs for Title 23 zones. Property use and development agreements recorded as a condition of a contract rezone may be amended by agreement between the owner and the City, if the amendment is approved by the Council. 1. Applications to amend a PUDA shall meet the requirements of Section 23.76.040 . 2. Applications to amend a PUDA are subject to a 14 day comment period. 3. In addition to the notice required pursuant to Section 23.76.012 , the Director shall provide notice of an application to amend a PUDA and the 14-day comment period on the application to the parties of record in the original rezone decision and to those persons who were provided written notice of the Hearing Examiner's recommendation in the original rezone decision, to the extent reasonably practicable. 4. The Director shall determine whether the amendment is major or minor. This determination is a Type I decision. a. Minor amendments. A minor amendment to a PUDA is one that is within the spirit and general purpose of the prior decision of the Council, is generally consistent with the uses and development standards approved in the prior decision of the Council, would not result in significant adverse impacts that were not anticipated in the prior decision of the Council, and does not request any additional waivers or changes in the waivers of bulk or off-street parking and loading requirements other than those approved in the prior decision of the Council. If the Director determines that a proposed amendment is minor, the Director shall transmit to Council the application to amend, the Director's determination that the proposed amendment is minor, any comments received by the Director on the proposed amendment, and the Director's recommendation on the proposed amendment. An application to amend that is minor and that complies with the rezone criteria of Chapter 23.34 may be approved by the Council by ordinance after receiving any additional advice that it deems necessary. b. Major Amendments. Applications to amend a PUDA that are not minor are major. Major amendments to a PUDA shall follow the procedures for Type IV Council land use decisions in Sections 23.76.052 , 23.76.054 , and 23.76.056 . D. Public Projects Not Meeting Development Standards. The City Council may waive or modify applicable developments standards, accessory use requirements, special use requirements, and conditional use criteria for public projects. (Ord. 123913, § 32, 2012; Ord. 123046, § 58, 2009; Ord. 122497 , § 12, 2007; Ord. 122054 § 86, 2006; Ord. 118672 § 28, 1997; Ord. 118012 § 50, 1996; Ord. 117242 , § 27, 1994; Ord. 112522 § 2(part), 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.060 Expiration and extension of Council land use decisions

A. Decisions granted under Title 24 . The expiration of Council land use decisions granted under Title 24 is governed by the applicable provisions of Section 23.04.010 , Transition to the Land Use Code. B. Council conditional uses and public projects 1. Approvals of Council conditional uses and public projects expire three years from the effective date of approval unless: a. Within the three year period, an application is filed for a Master Use Permit, that is subsequently issued; or b. Another time for expiration is specified in the Council's decision. 2. If a Master Use Permit is issued for a project permitted by Council approval of a Council conditional use or a public project, the Council's approval of the Council conditional use or public project remains in effect until the date that the Master Use Permit expires pursuant to the provisions of Sections 23.76.029 , 23.76.030 , and 23.76.031 , or until the date specified by the Council, whichever is later. If a Master Use Permit is issued for a project permitted by Council approval of a Council conditional use or Council approval of a public project, a building permit is issued for the project, and the project is constructed pursuant to the building permit, conditions required by the Council's approval of the Council conditional use or the Council's approval of the public project shall remain in effect, notwithstanding expiration of the Council's approval of the Council conditional use or the Council's approval of the public project, until the project is demolished or until an earlier date on which: a. The condition by its terms expires; b. The condition is removed through a permitting decision; or c. If the condition was imposed as to a specific use within the project, that use is terminated. C. Contract rezones 1. The provisions of this subsection 23.76.060.C.1 apply except as otherwise provided in the Council decision on a contract rezone. A zoning designation established by a contract rezone shall expire three years after the date of the Council action approving the rezone, except as follows: a. If, prior to the end of the three-year period, a complete application is filed for a Master Use Permit to establish a use on the rezoned property, the zoning designation shall not expire pursuant to this Section 23.76.060 as to the lot or lots for which the application is made so long as that application remains pending. The zoning designation shall expire immediately upon any cancellation of the application that occurs after the end of the three-year period, unless another such application filed before the end of that period is pending at the time of such cancellation; b. If a Master Use Permit is issued based on an application that is sufficient to extend the three-year period under subsection 23.76.060.C.1.a, then the zoning designation shall not expire pursuant to this Section 23.76.060 as to the lot or lots for which the permit is issued unless and until the Master Use Permit expires without a certificate of occupancy having been issued for any structure constructed or altered for a use authorized by any such Master Use Permit, and then shall immediately expire. If such a certificate of occupancy is issued, then the zoning designation shall not expire pursuant to this Section 23.76.060 for that lot or lots; c. If only a portion of the rezoned property is the subject of a particular application or Master Use Permit, then the zoning designation shall expire as to the other portions of the rezoned property at the same time as if that application had not been made or that permit not issued, as the case may be. 2. When a contract rezone expires, the Official Land Use Map is automatically amended so the zoning designation in effect immediately prior to the contract rezone applies to the subject property, except to the extent otherwise expressly provided by ordinance. The Director shall file a notice of expiration with the City Clerk and with the King County Recorder and shall cause the reversion to the former designation to be shown on published land use maps, but the expiration shall be effective notwithstanding any failure to make such filing or to reflect such expiration in any published information. Unless expressly stated otherwise in any property use and development agreement (PUDA) recorded in connection with a rezone, if the zoning designation expires as to all property subject to the PUDA, then all restrictions and requirements in the PUDA shall terminate. 3. Regardless of whether the time period for expiration has elapsed or a certificate of occupancy has been issued as described in subsection 23.76.060.C.1.b, the zoning designation established by a contract rezone shall no longer be in effect upon the effective date of a subsequent rezoning by the Council of the subject property, either through a site-specific rezone or as part of an area-wide rezone. a. Effective on or after the effective date of such subsequent rezoning of all property subject to a PUDA recorded in connection with the prior rezone, some or all of that property may be released from some or all of the conditions of the PUDA if the release is authorized by ordinance. Such release may be authorized without following the PUDA amendment procedures in Section 23.76.058 , except that notice and a comment period shall be provided pursuant to subsection 23.76.058.C.3. In making the decision whether to release all or part of the PUDA, the Council shall consider factors such as: 1) Whether any of the property subject to the PUDA has been or may still be developed in a manner that was permitted under the designation established by the contract rezone and would not be permitted under the subsequent rezoning; and 2) The extent to which any terms of the PUDA as applied to the subsequently rezoned property are relevant to the impacts of any development of that property occurring subsequent to the PUDA. b. Effective on or after the effective date of such subsequent rezoning of all property subject to a PUDA recorded in connection with the prior rezone, if the subsequent rezone is to a zone with a mandatory housing affordability suffix, the property shall be released, without authorization by ordinance, from all of the conditions of a PUDA that was accepted prior to January 1, 2016, if the Director finds as a Type I decision as part of a Master Use Permit or building permit for a development proposal that the conditions of the PUDA are limited to one or more of the provisions listed in subsections 23.76.060.C.3.b.1 through 23.76.060.C.3.b.4. 1) Provisions requiring development of the property to comply with the permit for an associated development proposal, once issued. 2) Provisions establishing limitations on maximum floor area or height. 3) Provisions regarding the termination, amendment, or repeal of the conditions in the PUDA. 4) Standard PUDA provisions, such as those dealing with recording, remedies, or legal effect, that do not establish substantive limitations or conditions on development. D. Variances. Variances granted as part of a Council land use decision shall remain in effect for the same period as the land use decision granted, except those variances granted as part of a rezone, which shall expire on the date the rezone expires or the effective date of any text amendment making more stringent the development standard from which the variance was granted, whichever is sooner. E. Extensions. The Council may extend the time limits on Type IV land use decisions for two years or such other time as the Council may determine appropriate, upon an applicant's filing an application to the Department at least 120 days before the approval's expiration. The Council may request a recommendation on the extension application from the Director, but the Hearing Examiner hearing and recommendation requirements of Section 23.76.052 do not apply. Notice of applications for extensions of Type IV land use decisions and an opportunity to comment shall be provided pursuant to subsections 23.76.012.B.1 or B.2, and subsection 23.76.012.B.3, and notice and an opportunity to comment shall also be provided to the parties of record in the Council's original Type IV land use proceeding and to those persons who were provided written notice of the Hearing Examiner's recommendation on the original Type IV application to the extent reasonably practicable. 1. The Council may not extend the time limit for a Type IV land use decision for a project that is not in conformance with applicable regulations, including land use and environmentally critical areas regulations, in effect at the time application for an extension is made. 2. In deciding whether to grant an extension, the Council shall consider: a. The reason or basis for the application for the extension and whether it is reasonable under the circumstances; b. Whether changed circumstances in the area support an extension; c. Whether additional time is reasonably necessary to comply with a condition of approval adopted by the Council that is required to be fulfilled prior to expiration of the Council land use decision. (Ord. 126855 , § 68, 2023 [cross-reference and style update]; Ord. 125791 , § 107, 2019; Ord. 125272 , § 63, 2017; Ord. 123913, § 33, 2012; Ord. 123046, § 59, 2009; Ord. 122497 , § 13, 2007; Ord. 122054, § 87, 2006; Ord. 118012, § 51, 1996; Ord. 114473, § 4, 1989; Ord. 112522, § 2(part), 1985.) Part 3 Legislative Decisions (Type V)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.062 Type V Council land use decisions

A. Notice of application. For Major Institution designations and revocations of Major Institution designations, concept approvals for the location or expansion of City facilities requiring Council land use approval, and waivers or modifications of development standards for City facilities, notice of application shall be provided pursuant to Section 23.76.012 . B. Public Hearing. The Council shall conduct a public hearing for each Type V Council land use decision except that no public hearing is required for an emergency amendment to the text of the Land Use Code. The Council may also appoint a hearing officer to conduct an additional fact-finding hearing to assist the Council in gathering information. Any hearing officer so appointed shall transmit written Findings of Fact to the Council within ten days of the additional hearing. C. Notice of Hearings. 1. Notice of a required Council hearing on a Type V Council land use decision shall be provided by the Director at least 30 days prior to the hearing in the following manner: a. Inclusion in the Land Use Information Bulletin; and b. Publication in the City's official newspaper. 2. Additional notice shall be provided by the Director for public hearings on concept approvals for the location or expansion of City facilities, waiver or modification of development standards for City facilities, Major Institution designations, and revocation of Major Institution designations, as follows: a. Mailed notice; and b. One land use sign posted visible to the public at each street frontage abutting the site, except that if there is no street frontage or the site abuts an unimproved street, the Director shall either post more than one sign and/or select an alternative posting location so that notice is clearly visible to the public. For hearings on Major Institution designations and revocations of Major Institution designations, the Director shall post one land use sign at each street frontage abutting the site but not to exceed ten land use signs. D. Council Decision. In making a Type V Council land use decision, the Council shall consider the oral and written testimony presented at the public hearing, as well as any required report of the Director. The City Council shall not act on any Type V Council land use decision until the end of the appeal period for any applicable determination of nonsignificance (DNS) or final EIS or, if an appeal is filed, until the Hearing Examiner issues a decision affirming the Director's DNS or EIS decision. (Ord. 123913, § 34, 2012; Ord. 121477 § 55, 2004; Ord. 119895 § 1, 2000; Ord. 118672 § 29, 1997; Ord. 115002 , § 18, 1990; Ord. 112522 § 2(part), 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.064 Approval of City facilities

A. Concept approval for City facilities 1. In acting on the proposed siting or expansion of a City facility, the Council shall decide whether to approve in concept the facility. If concept approval is granted, the Council may impose terms and conditions, including but not limited to design criteria and conditions relating to the size and configuration of the proposed facility. 2. Following Council approval, final plans for a City facility shall be submitted to the Director. If the Director determines that the project is consistent with the Council's concept approval, the Director shall issue the necessary permits for the facility. 3. No further Council action is required for a City facility unless the Director determines that the final plans represent a major departure from the terms of the original Council concept approval, in which case the final plan shall be submitted to the Council for approval in the same manner as the original application. B. City facilities not meeting development standards. The Council may waive or modify applicable development standards, accessory use requirements, special use requirements, or conditional use criteria for City facilities. If a waiver or modification of a development regulation is sought because the development regulation would otherwise preclude the siting of an essential public facility, then the decision to waive or modify shall be made pursuant to Chapter 23.80 and not this Section 23.76.064 . (Ord. 127376 , § 70, 2025; Ord. 118672 § 30, 1997; Ord. 112522 § 2(part), 1985.)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.066 Shoreline Master Program amendments

Council decisions approving an amendment to the text of Chapter 23.60A , Shoreline District, shall be sent to the Director of the Department of Ecology. Such amendments shall become effective as provided by applicable state law. (Ord. 124105 , § 32, 2013; Ord. 123649, § 55, 2011; Ord. 118012 § 52, 1996: Ord. 112522 § 2(part), 1985)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.067 Amendments to Title 23 to implement RCW 43.21C.420 (SEPA)

A. Unless an ordinance enacting amendments to Title 23 expressly recites that the ordinance is intended to implement RCW 43.21C.420, the provisions of that statute do not apply to the ordinance. B. RCW 43.21C.420 bars certain SEPA appeals if the City has elected to adopt optional elements of the City's Comprehensive Plan or development regulations pursuant to RCW 43.21C.420. Unless an ordinance enacting or amending the Comprehensive Plan or development regulations expressly recites that it is being adopted pursuant to the authority of RCW 43.21C.420, RCW 43.21C.420 does not affect the availability of appeals. If RCW 43.21C.420 applies to a non-project EIS as described in RCW 43.21C.420, then unless the City Council by ordinance establishes a different time frame for submitting a complete application for purposes of RCW 43.21C.420 (5) with respect to that EIS, the time frame is 24 hours following the date of issuance of the final EIS. (Ord. 123913, § 35, 2012)

Seattle Mun. Code § 23.76.070 Hearing Examiner reports to Council.

The Hearing Examiner shall compile and file with the Council a semi-annual report on issues of Code or policy interpretation arising in the Hearing Examiner's review of contested land use cases. The Hearing Examiner should report on all issues of general applicability which resulted in disagreement between the Director and the Hearing Examiner as to interpretation of Council intent. The Council will review the report and consider the need for code amendments to clarify its intent. (Ord. 112522 § 2(part), 1985.)

Source: Seattle Municipal Code (Municode library)URL: https://library.municode.com/wa/seattle/codes/municipal_codeFetched: 7/25/2026