Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fife staff propose expanded development-agreement code with clearer criteria, limits and public process
Summary
Planning staff proposed amendments to Fife's development-agreement code to provide a purpose statement, decision criteria, notification rules and limits (no binding arbitration; capped vesting), and scheduled a public hearing for the council.
Chris Larson, the city's planning director (presented as Director Larson), told the council that the proposed amendments aim to "give a lot more substance to our code" on development agreements, including a clearer purpose statement, approval criteria, and definitions of permissible flexibility.
Larson said state law (RCW) governs development agreements: they must be consistent with zoning and development regulations, require a public hearing and recording with Pierce County, and can be interpreted as contracts rather than permits. "A development agreement is still approved by the city council after a public hearing," Larson said, adding that the city is cautious about vesting and appeals: "If a development agreement becomes a de facto amendment to your zoning code, you may be subject to the growth management hearings board for appeal."
Larson reviewed past local uses of development agreements (Praxair, Portside Business Center, Murray's) and noted benefits for large, mixed-use projects where a contract can secure long-term commitments (for example, affordable housing or public infrastructure). He recommended several best practices including explicit public-benefit criteria, administrative cost recovery, and restrictions on what may be modified (for example, not vesting state-level requirements such as building code or critical-area protections). "Never ever have a binding arbitration clause," Larson advised, citing problems elsewhere.
Council members sought examples of how much flexibility the council could authorize. Larson pointed to the consolidated development-standards table for medium-density residential zones: the base maximum is 10 dwelling units per acre through a planned-residential development (PRD) and a development agreement or hearing examiner could authorize up to 15 dwelling units per acre in that zone, but not exceed the numeric limits established in the code.
Larson said the planning commission has held a public hearing and recommended the amendments; staff plan to return to the council with a public hearing on the code amendments (scheduled for the June 9 meeting) followed by first and second readings and likely wrap-up by July. No ordinance was adopted at this meeting; the item was presented for council review and direction.
