ORDINANCE __________________

AN ORDINANCE relating to land use and zoning, amending various sections of Chapter 23.69 and Sections 23.04.040, 23.12.120, 23.41.004, 23.41.012, 23.45.004, 23.47.004, 23.54.016, 23.54.020 of the Seattle Municipal Code to establish revised procedures and regulations for the city's major institutions (hospitals, colleges and universities) and for the major institution master planning process ("the 1996 Major Institution Ordinance"), and amending Plat 40W of the City's Official Land Use Map to eliminate the Major Institution Overlay District for Cabrini Hospital.

WHEREAS, Resolution #28969, adopted by the City Council on August 1, 1994, described the Comprehensive Plan Work Program and laid out a general scope of work for reviewing major institution policies and regulations; and

WHEREAS the scope of work included a review of procedures to reduce costs and time requirements for major institution master plans, to address any changes required as a result of the role of neighborhood planning in addressing local development, and to assess any changes warranted by health care or regulatory reform; and

WHEREAS the City Council has determined that Cabrini Hospital no longer meets the definition of a "major institution", and that the Major Institution Overlay (MIO) District for Cabrini shall be removed; and

WHEREAS the Department of Construction and Land Use (DCLU) published a scope of work for the major institution policy and regulation changes on June 19, 1995, a Draft Report and Recommendation on November 7, 1995, a Revised Report and Recommendation on May 31, 1996, and the Mayor's Recommendations on July 31, 1996; and

WHEREAS DCLU has determined that this proposed text amendment is not likely to have significant adverse environmental impacts, and issued a Declaration of Non-Significance (no environmental impact statement required) on November 9, 1995. The appeal period ended on November 21, 1995 and there were no appeals;

NOW THEREFORE,

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF SEATTLE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Subsections A, B, C and D of Section 23.04.040 of the SMC, which Section was last amended by Ordinance 116744, are amended as follows:

23.04.040 Major Institution transition rule.

The following transition rules shall apply only to Major Institution master plans and Major Institution projects:

A. The development program component, as described in subsections C and D and E of Section 23.69.030, of a master plan which was adopted before the effective date of theis 1996 major institutions ordinance, or for which an application was filed before the effective date of theis 1996 major institutions ordinance and which was subsequently adopted, shall remain effective through its adopted expiration date. If no expiration date was adopted for a development program that was adopted before the effective date of the 1996 major institutions ordinance, it shall expire ten (10) years from the effective date of this ordinance on May 2, 2000. Amendments to a development program component shall be subject to the provisions of Section 23.69.035. The institution may choose to update the entire development program component, as described in subsections D and E of Section 23.69.030, by applying for an amendment pursuant to Section 23.69.035. The Director may require new or changed development standards as part of this process, and any prior expiration date would be eliminated.

B. The development standards component, as described in subsections B and C of Section 23.69.030 B, of a master plan which was adopted before the effective date of theis 1996 major institutions ordinance, or for which an application was filed before the effective date of theis 1996 major institutions ordinance and which was subsequently adopted, shall remain in effect unless amended. Amendments to a development standard component shall be subject to the provisions of Section 23.69.035.

C. A transportation management program, as described in subsection F of Section 23.69.030, which was approved before the effective date of theis 1996 major institutions ordinance shall remain in effect unless amended. Amendment of such a transportation management program shall be subject to the provisions of Section 23.69.035.

D. Master Plan Proceeding Under Code in Effect at Time of Filing. When an application and applicable fees have been filed for a master plan prior to November 1, 1989, the effective date of the 1996 major institutions ordinance, the master plan shall be subject either to the procedure and provisions in effect at the time of filing (i.e., recently repealed SMC Sections 23.81.040 and 23.81.050 or to the newly adopted procedures and provisions (i.e., SMC Section 23.69.030 and 23.69.032), at the discretion of the applicant, provided that:

1. The applicant may elect only one (1) set of procedures and provisions which shall apply throughout the process; and

2. The election of applicable procedures and provisions shall be made within sixty (60) days following the effective date of the is 1996 Major Institution ordinance; and

3. The election shall be irrevocable and shall be made in writing on a form provided by the Director; and

4. If no election is made, the master plan shall be subject to the procedures and provisions in effect at the time of filing. ;

5. If an applicant elects to be subject to the procedures and provisions in effect at the time of filing, technical assistance to the advisory committee shall be provided by the Department of Construction and Land Use, the Engineering Department, and the Department of Neighborhoods.

Section 2. Subsections E, F and G of Section 23.04.040 of the SMC, which Section was last amended by Ordinance 116744, are repealed.

Section 3. Section 23.12.120 of the SMC, which was last amended by Ordinance 117929, is amended as follows:

23.12.120 Major institution policies.

Framework Policies:

The City of Seattle places a high value on its hospitals and higher educational facilities. Institutions containing these facilities provide needed health and educational services to the citizens of Seattle and the region. They also contribute to employment opportunities and to the overall diversification of the Cc ity's economy. However, when located in or adjacent to residential and neighborhood commercial areas, the activities and facilities of major institutions can have negative impacts such as traffic generation, loss of housing, displacement of neighborhood-serving businesses and incompatible physical development.

The intent of these policies is to balance the public benefits of the growth and change of major institutions with the need to maintain the livability and vitality of adjacent neighborhoods.

Special land use provisions that modify the underlying zoning shall be established in order to allow such uses to thrive while ensuring that the impacts of major institution development on the surrounding neighborhood are satisfactorily mitigated. The expansion of established major institution boundaries shall be discouraged. Institutions are encouraged to participate in the life of their surrounding communities.

To determine the appropriate level of development and the appropriate mitigating measures that will maintain the livability of adjacent areas, a master plan shall be prepared when any major development is proposed that does not conform with the height, density, bulk, setbacks, site coverage or landscaping of the underlying zoning. The master plan shall be a concept plan for development prepared through a cooperative process including representatives of the major institution, the community and the City. The master plan review and adoption shall take place within a pre-determined schedule to assure an expeditious and predictable process.

The master plan review shall include consideration of any proposed expansion of existing boundaries or height limits; proposed demolition of existing residential or commercial uses; the scale and type of proposed development; the need for open space; and impacts on adjacent land uses, open space and transportation.

In general, the institution's growth shall be directed toward concentration within the existing boundaries in a given location rather than encroachment on the neighborhood. Dispersal of growth shall be given consideration when continued concentration would create significant impacts on the surrounding area. In such cases, every effort shall be made to decentralize facilities which do not need to be located on the main campus. Decentralization shall also be encouraged as a means to avoid future expansion of boundaries.

New institutions shall be located in areas where such activities are compatible with the surrounding land uses and where the impacts associated with existing and future development can be appropriately mitigated.

Policy 1: Definition

A Major Institution shall be defined as an institution providing medical or educational services to the community which, by nature of its function and size, has the potential to change the character of the surrounding area.

In order to qualify as a major medical or educational institution an institution shall be located on a site of at least 60,000 square feet; contiguous properties must constitute no less than 50,000 square feet of the total site area and the institution must have a minimum gross floor area of 300,000 square feet.

Major institution site size shall be calculated to include all contiguous properties of the institution abutting, across an alley or a street and within 2,500 feet of the contiguous properties of the institution. Where only portions of a structure may be occupied by a major institution use, a prorated amount of the site shall be included in determining site size.

Gross floor area is intended to include all space occupied by a major institution use in any structure within the total institution site area even if the structure is owned by an entity other than the major institution.

Policy 2: Overlay District

A Major Institution Overlay (MIO) shall be established as the basis for allowing major institutions. The intent of an overlay is to permit appropriate institutional development within boundaries while minimizing the adverse impacts associated with development and geographic expansion. A further purpose is to balance the public benefits of growth and change for major institutions with the need to maintain livability and vitality of adjacent neighborhoods. Where appropriate, the establishment of MIO boundaries may contribute to the transition of physical development to ensure compatibility between major institution areas and less intensive zones.

Within each overlay MIO district, all functionally integrated major institution uses shall be allowed ,provided the development standards of the underlying zone are met. Development standards specifically tailored for the major institution and its surrounding area may be permitted within the overlay MIO district through a master plan process.

The designation of a new major institution overlay MIO district or change in the boundaries or height limits of an established overlay MIO district shall require a rezone in accordance with Policy 5: Rezones.

As medical and educational institutions expand, they have the potential to reach the size of a major institution.

Overlay Provisions

To accommodate the changing needs of major institutions, provide flexibility for development and encourage a high quality environment, permitted uses and parking requirements of the underlying zoning may be modified by the overlay. The development standards and other requirements of the underlying zoning may be modified by an adopted master plan.

Uses: All uses that are functionally integrated with, or substantively related to, the central mission of the major institution or that primarily and directly serve the users of the institution shall be defined as major institution uses and shall be permitted in the

Major Institution Overlay MIO district, subject to the provisions of this policy, and in accordance with the development standards of the underlying zoning classifications or adopted master plan.

Development Standards:

1) Standards Without a Master Plan. The development standards of the underlying zoning classification for height, density, bulk, setbacks, coverage and landscaping for institutions shall apply to all major institution development.

2) Standards With a Master Plan. The development standards specified in the adopted master plan shall regulate all major institution development.

Parking Standards: Minimum parking requirements shall be established in MIO districts to meet the needs of the major institution and minimize parking demand in the adjacent areas. Maximum parking limits shall also be included to avoid unnecessary increases of traffic in the surrounding areas and to avoid encouraging the use of single occupancy vehicles (SOV).

Short-term parking space provisions may be modified as part of a Transportation Management Program (TMP). Long-term parking space provisions may be modified as part of a TMP when it is part of a master plan process. Increases to the number of permitted spaces shall be allowed only when it 1) is necessary to reduce parking demand on streets in surrounding areas and 2) is compatible with goals to minimize traffic congestion in the area.

Transportation Management Program: Major objectives of a TMP shall be to reduce the number of vehicle trips to the major institution, minimize the adverse impacts of traffic on the streets surrounding the institution, minimize demand for parking on nearby streets, especially residential streets, and minimize the adverse impacts of institutionrelated parking on nearby streets.

A primary means for achieving the objectives shall be the reduction of the number of single occupancy vehicles (SOV) used by employees and students at peak time and destined for the campus. The goal shall be that no more than 50 percent of peak time employees and students are in SOV. The goal may be raised or lowered when the TMP is prepared as part of a master plan process.

Uses Outside MIO District Boundaries

Major institution uses developed or owned by, or leased to, the a major institution which conform to the use and development standard zoning regulations for the site shall be permitted within 2,500 feet outside the boundaries but shall be limited at the street level in commercial zones. in size both per site and on a cumulative basis.

Policy 3: Housing Preservation

The preservation of housing shall be encouraged and enhanced within major institution overlay MIO districts and the surrounding areas. Conversion or demolition of housing within a major institution campus shall be discouraged but may be allowed under certain conditions.

Residential Structures Within an MIO District

Demolition for Major Institution Use: Structures with noninstitution residential uses located within an MIO district may be demolished or changed in use by the major institution when necessary for expansion of the major institution. Demolition or change of use shall not be permitted if specifically prohibited when the housing was included within the boundaries as part of a boundary expansion rezone. The demolition or change of use action may require preparation of a master plan in conformance with Land Use Code procedures and requirements. When a master plan is required, it shall include measures to mitigate the loss of housing.

Demolition for Parking: Structures with non-institutional residential uses shall not be demolished for the development of any parking lot or parking structure which could provide non-required parking or be used to reduce a deficit of required parking spaces.

Residential Structures Outside an MIO District

Development by a major institution shall not be permitted within 2,500 feet of the MIO district boundaries when it would result in the demolition of structures with residential uses or change of these structures to non-residential uses.

Policy 4: Master Plan

A master plan shall be required for each Mmajor I institution proposing development which could affect the livability of adjacent neighborhoods or has the potential for significant adverse impacts on the surrounding areas.

The master plan shall be a concept plan for development to facilitate a comprehensive review of benefits and impacts of the Mm ajor Iinstitution development. The adopted plan shall 1) give clear guidelines and development standards on which the major institutions can rely for long-term planning and development; 2) provide the neighborhood advance notice of the development plans of the major institution; 3) allow the cCity to anticipate and plan for public capital or programmatic actions that will be needed to accommodate development; and 4) provide the basis for determining appropriate mitigating actions to avoid or reduce adverse impacts from major institution growth.

Generally the master plan will specify the amount of development, the ways it may take place, and a schedule to achieve planned development it. The master plan may also appropriately limit some kinds of development or activities while allowing others to expand.

The master plan shall have three components. The first shall establish or modify boundaries and provide physical development standards for the overlay MIO district. The second component shall define the development program for the specified time period. The third component shall consist of a transportation management program.

The master plan shall be reviewed and adopted by the City Council following a cooperative planning process to develop the master plan by the Mmajor Iinstitution, the surrounding community and the cCity. The procedure for preparation of master plans, review, and adoption, including the schedule shall be defined to assure an efficient and predictable process.

Components of Master Plan

The master plan shall define boundaries and height limits; establish the types of uses, development standards, and phasing of planned development implementation; and outline mitigation measures for a period of five to fifteen years. The plan shall include three parts: a Development Standards component, a Development Program component, and a Transportation Management Program component.

Upon adoption of the master plan, the Development Standards and Development Program components shall remain in effect until amended or revoked or until a new master plan is required. The Development Program shall remain in effect for a period no less than five years and no more than fifteen years. The term shall begin on the date of adoption of the master plan by City Council.

1. Development Standards : The Development Standards component shall include standards and guidelines for physical development of the major institution campus and for structures on the campus.

2. Development Program: The Development Program component shall include a clear description of proposed planned major institution development or change within and outside the major institution campus, the total amount of gross floor area that may be developed within the major institution campus, and the maximum number of parking spaces that may be located within the major institution campus.

3. Transportation Management Program: The Transportation Management Program shall conform with the specific requirements outlined in the Land Use Code.

Process for a Master Plan

A cooperative planning approach shall be followed to develop the master plan. The approach shall include the institution, the community and the City working toward dual objectives: 1) to allow institutions to develop facilities for the provision of health care of or educational services to fulfill unmet local and regional public needs; and 2) to minimize the negative impacts, especially in relation to the surrounding area, which may result from expanded major institution development.

Process: The following steps shall be completed prior to submission of the master plan for consideration and approval by City Council:

1) A concept plan shall be prepared by the major institution.

2) An Advisory Committee shall be established to review and comment on the preliminary concept plan and the master plan throughout the process of development to time of the final consideration by City Council. The Advisory Committee shall participate throughout the process of revision, amendment and refinement of the master plan proposal.

3) An application, with all applicable fees, to prepare a master plan shall be filed by the institution.

4) A schedule for completion and adoption of the master plan including the steps for Advisory Committee participation shall be prepared by the institution and the City. Review and comment on the schedule by the Advisory Committee shall be made before it is finalized.

5) An environmental review shall be conducted.

6) The Department of Construction and Land Use (DCLU) shall prepare an evaluation of the proposed master plan, including draft and final recommendations. The final recommendations shall include a response to the Advisory Committee recommendations.

7) The Advisory Committee shall prepare reports and recommendations on the proposed master plan and on the DCLU evaluation and draft and final recommendations.

8) The Hearing Examiner shall hold a public hearing on the proposed master plan and DCLU evaluation and recommendations and make recommendations to the City Council. DCLU and the Hearing Examiner shall give careful consideration to the Advisory Committee recommendations.

9) The Advisory Committee shall review and comment on the Hearing Examiner's recommendations prior to City Council adoption of the master plan.

Documents: The documents submitted to City Council shall include the following:

1) Proposed master plan

2) Environmental assessment

3) Advisory Committee meeting minutes and committee reports

4) DCLU report and recommendations

5) Hearing Examiner report and recommendations.

Amendments to Adopted Master Plans:

1) Minor amendments may be allowed by the Director of the Department of Construction and Land UseDCLU. The Advisory Committee shall receive notification of any proposed minor amendments, submit comments to DCLU, and be notified by DCLU of the decision. The decision may be appealed to the Hearing Examiner.

2) Major amendments to the amount, use, location or scale of development, development standards, open space or mitigating measures established by an approved master plan shall follow a similar but shorter process than the master plan process outlined in part A of this guideline Policy 4: Master Plan.

3) All changes to master plan boundaries or height limits shall be rezones in accordance with Policy 5: Rezones.

Renewal of Master Plan Development Program Component:

1) Renewal process. The process for renewal of the Development Program component shall, in general, follow the requirements set forth in "A" and "B" above.

2) Expiration. The Development Program component shall expire at the end of the time specified in the master plan. Renewal of the Development Program component shall be required for any development subsequent to the expiration date which exceeds the limits of development permitted without a master plan.

3) Approval of MUP applications. When the Development Program component of the master plan has expired, MUP applications for new projects which do not meet the development standards of the underlying zoning, and for replacement projects except those that would not require a master plan under Policy 4, Implementation Guideline 1.B, shall not be approved until a new Development Program component has been adopted by City Council.

4) Extension. When the development schedule for the expired program period was not achieved, a request for Development Program Extension may be made. The request shall include, as appropriate, a) the term, not to exceed five years; b) a revised development schedule; and c) a site plan and any other illustrative documents needed to describe the revised development schedule.

The request shall be filed with the Director of Construction and Land Use. Within sixty days the Director shall transmit a report and recommendation, which includes comments of the Advisory Committee, to the City Council for consideration and approval.

Advisory Committee

A standing Citizens Advisory Committee, independent of the City and the major institution, of at least six, but no more than twelve, members shall be established through a memorandum of agreement, prepared by the Department of Neighborhoods between the major institution and the City and approved by City Council. The committee shall be established immediately following the time a Letter of Intent to prepare a master plan is submitted by the institution and the committee shall meet as necessary following the completion of the master plan, but no less than one time annually, to review the status of the plan.

In cases where there is more than one major institution in the same general area, a single aAdvisory cCommittee serving more than one major institution shall be permitted, or after master plan adoption, individual advisory committees may be consolidated into one committee.

When a master plan has been adopted prior to these policies and there is no standing Advisory Committee, a committee shall be established at the time an application for an amendment or master plan Development Program component renewal requiring City Council approval is made.

Advisory Committee Responsibilities: The committee shall be advisory to the major institution and the City during development of the master plan and shall prepare reports on 1) the completed master plan proposal; 2) the draft and final DCLU recommendations; and 3) the Hearing Examiner recommendations. These reports shall be forwarded with the plan to the City Council. If the committee is unable to reach consensus on any aspect of the master plan, more than one recommendation on the plan may be submitted.

Following adoption of the master plan, the committee shall continue to be advisory to the institution and the City regarding implementation of the plan and subsequent amendments and renewals.

Advisory Committee Membership: The objective of member selection is to provide a balanced representative group in order to realize the goals of the major institution, the community and the Cc ity at large. The composition of the committee will vary, depending on such things as the number of affected community councils and the type of service the institution provides. The majority of members should be from the adjacent neighborhood and membership shall include a non-management major institution representative. One member shall be selected from persons in the area participating in neighborhood planning, if applicable. One member shall be selected from the community at large.

Master Plan Evaluation

The master plan is intended 1) to document anticipated development and changes in major institutions for the purpose of preparing an approved development program and evaluating and minimizing impacts; and 2) to provide a zoning framework of development standards which is tailored to the specific major institution and responsive to the neighborhood context of the major institution.

The following shall guide review and evaluation of master plan proposals.

Public Benefit: A determination shall be made that the proposed development and changes represent a reasonable balance of the public benefits of development and change with the need to maintain livability and vitality of adjacent neighborhoods. Consideration shall be given to:

1) The reasons for institutional growth and change, the public benefits resulting from the proposed new facilities and services, and the way in which the proposed development will serve the public purpose mission of the major institution; and

2) The extent to which the growth and change will significantly harm the livability and vitality of the surrounding neighborhood.

An assessment shall also be made of the extent to which the major institution, with its proposed development and changes, will address the goals and applicable policies under Education and Employability and Health in the Human Development Element of the Comprehensive Plan the City's health policies and human service goals, including the provision of medical and educational services to low-income people .

Boundaries and Height Limits: Proposals for establishment or changes to boundaries and height limits shall be in conformance with Policy 5: Rezones.

Development Program:

1) Development Within the MIO District. The amount of new development shall be limited by the following:

a) Density. The density of total development allowed shall be specified by total gross floor area and by a floor area ratio on the basis of the entire campus, and by subarea in some cases. Densities may exceed those permitted by the underlying zoning and the zoning for adjacent areas but shall be considered in relation to impacts on vehicular and pedestrian circulation and the capacities of public facilities, public infrastructure and open space, and private neighborhood-serving services in surrounding areas.

b) Parking spaces. The amount of development allowed shall be specified also by a maximum number of parking spaces for the entire campus.

2) Schedule. Proposed projects shall be phased in a manner to minimize short-and long-term impacts on the surrounding areas. When public improvements are anticipated on the campus or in the surrounding area, major institution proposals shall be coordinated with the improvements to expedite completion and minimize adverse impacts.

2) Decentralization. Options for decentralization shall be evaluated to determine the trade-offs between enhancement of the institutional mission and the reduction of impacts from development on the main campus.

a) Decentralization of an existing or proposed facility may be required if:

(i) A. The facility or use does not require geographic proximity to the main campus; or

B. Development potential on the campus is needed for facilities more critical to the central mission of the major institution and increasing development potential would produce unacceptable impacts on the surrounding areas; and

(ii) Decentralization would reduce or avoid undesirable adverse impacts on the surrounding neighborhood including a boundary expansion.

b) Satellite or branch facilities which are not located on the main campus shall be located beyond a 2,500 foot radius outside the boundaries and regulated according to the revisions for institutions in the zone in which they are located.

3) Development Outside Major Institution Overlay MIO District Boundaries. Except for development within the area bounded by Elliott Bay, Denny Way, Interstate Highway 5, and Royal Brougham Way, major institution development within 2,500 feet outside the MIO boundaries shall generally be discouraged at the street level . Development in this area may exceed 40,000 square feet total or 10,000 square feet on a single site only if approved in an adopted master plan. Any development exceeding 40,000 square feet proposed A major institution shall be permitted to lease space, or otherwise locate a use at street level in a commercial zone if the use is determined to be similar to a personal and household retail sales and services uses, eating and drinking establishments, customer service offices, entertainment uses or child care centers. Other uses may be permitted at street level in a commercial zone through a master plan. shall:

a) Conform with the zoning classification where it would be located;

b) Be compatible with other uses in the zone; and

c) Be essential to meeting the public purpose mission of the major institution.

The master plan shall establish conditions and specify the amount of uses by major institutions allowed beyond but within 2,500 feet of the boundaries.

Development Standards: Development standards shall be provided as necessary to guide the design and location of structures and provide predictability regarding the physical characteristics of new development. Specific standards may be provided or the standards of an existing zoning classification may be adopted. No less than the following shall be evaluated, and standards and guidelines established as necessary to meet the criteria.

1) Edges/Transition. Appropriate transition shall be provided from the major institution campus to the surrounding areas when there are differences in allowed height and/or bulk. Transition at edges shall be given special consideration when there are not strong, distinctive edge conditions such as topographic breaks, freeways or large open spaces. Transition can be achieved, depending on circumstances, through such things as setbacks, bulk limits on structures, articulation of facades, landscaping, spacing of buildings or height limits.

The provisions for transition shall be balanced against impacts on the demonstrated need for development potential of the institution within existing and/or proposed boundaries.

2) Pedestrian-designated zones. Where a pedestrian-designation in a Commercial zone occurs along a boundary or within a campus, the use, parking and blank facade standards of the underlying zoning shall apply.

3) Height. Maximum height limits shall be those established by the MIO district. Within each established height limit area, the amount of structure allowed to the height limit shall be specified in relation to permitted coverage, open space and setback requirements, impacts on view corridors, creation of shadows and transition considerations.

4) Setbacks. Setbacks shall be established for all structures abutting MIO district boundaries and public rights-of-way. The need for appropriate transition shall be a primary consideration in determining setbacks. In no case shall a setback from the boundary be less than required by the greater of the underlying zoning, or the zoning for property adjacent to or across a public right-of-way from the institution.

In order to achieve transition at boundaries or other scale, building modulation or view corridor objectives, setback standards for the upper portions of buildings may be appropriate.

5) Coverage. The percentage of site coverage by structures shall be specified on the basis of the entire campus or by designated sub-area. Coverage may exceed the site coverage permitted by the underlying zoning and the zoning for adjacent areas but should take into account overall density constraints and the needs for setbacks, landscaping and open space and/or view corridors to limit impacts on the campus and adjacent areas.

6) Density. The density of development shall be specified, by square feet or by a floor area ratio, on the basis of the entire campus or by designated sub-area. Densities may exceed that permitted by the underlying zoning and the zoning for adjacent areas but shall be considered in relation to impacts on vehicular and pedestrian circulation and the capacities of public facilities, public infrastructure and open space, and private neighborhood-serving services in surrounding areas.

7) Landscaping. Landscaping standards for required setbacks, open areas, public rights-of-way and surface parking areas shall meet or exceed the requirements for the underlying zoning classification. Trees shall be required along the sidewalks of all public streets.

8) 7) Circulation and Parking. Primary access to grounds, facilities and parking shall be focused on arterial streets and shall be minimized on streets in residential areas. Primary service and loading access shall not be permitted on residential streets unless there is no other reasonable alternative.

Pedestrian circulation routes shall be provided to conveniently connect with public pedestrian rights-of-way within the campus and in with the surrounding areas. Where appropriate, pedestrian paths shall be provided through the campus to provide convenient access between neighborhoods.

Street vacations shall be evaluated according to the adopted Street Vacation Policies.

9) 8) Open Space. Open space is desirable and shall be provided for the use of patients, students, visitors and employees. The amount and kinds of open space provided shall reflect the character of the district neighborhood of the City where the major institution is located and consider the impacts on existing open spaces.

Open space shall not be required to be publicly accessible; however, open space and landscaping which is visually accessible from public areas shall be encouraged. To the extent open space is not provided to meet demands of the major institution, equitable contribution to nearby public open space may be required.

10) 9) View Corridors. View corridors may be established and preserved for their importance as a public amenity and as a public safety feature.

Preservation of scenic views or views of landmarks shall have the highest priority for preservation. Views which are territorial or provide visual linkage with the surrounding areas, from or through the campus, are also important.

View corridors along existing public rights-of-way, or those proposed for vacation, may be preserved. Site planning should consider establishment of new view corridors where the potential exists. In some cases it may be appropriate to maintain view corridors through wide grade level openings in structures rather than a total separation of structures, open to the sky.

11) 10) Historic Structures. The preservation, restoration and reuse of federal-, stateor City-designated historic buildings shall be encouraged and enhanced.

Any building designated by the City Landmarks Board shall comply with the requirements of the City of Seattle Landmark Preservation Ordinance. An environmental assessment shall be completed, and review by the major institution's Advisory Committee shall be made prior to consideration of a certificate of approval for demolition of historic structures.

Permitted uses, density and other development standards for historic structures shall be subject to the provisions of the underlying zoning for landmark structures and the Landmark Preservation Ordinance.

12) 11) Mitigating Measures. Actions to mitigate adverse impacts required by these policies or through environmental review shall be specified.

Development Under a Master Plan

The adopted master plan Development Standards component shall establish the zoning provisions applicable to all major institution uses within the MIO district. The provisions of both the Development Standards and Development Program components of the master plan shall take precedence over the underlying zoning for major institution uses.

MUP applications for projects implementing the adopted master plan shall be subject to the environmental review requirements of SEPA.

The adopted master plan shall be referenced in the Land Use Code and copies shall be available from the Department of Construction and Land Use.

Policy 5: Rezones

A rezone shall be required to establish an Major Institution Overlay MIO district or change an existing major institution boundary or height limit, except that a boundary adjustment caused by the acquisition, merger, or consolidation of two same-type major institutions with contiguous boundaries shall not constitute a rezone and shall not be subject to this policy.

To minimize the need for expansion into adjacent areas, Mm ajor Iinstitution uses shall be concentrated within defined boundaries to: 1) minimize adverse impacts and 2) provide predictability for the major institution, the neighborhoods and the city.

The rezone procedure shall allow for establishment and changes to boundaries and height limits in an orderly, equitable and predictable fashion. Zoning changes shall be based upon the major institution policies and the corresponding land use policies of the underlying zoning.

Existing Overlay Designation Limitations

Rezones for expansion of Major Institution Overlay MIO districts shall not be considered permitted within the boundaries of Industrial land use classifications.

Rezones for expansion of Major Institution Overlay MIO districts shall not be permitted when they would result in substantial adverse impacts on useful housing stock.

New Overlay Designation Limitations

Rezones for establishment of a new Major Institution Overlay MIO district shall not be considered permitted in Single Family or Industrial zoning classifications.

Boundaries and height limits shall be established for each new overlay MIO district in accordance with provisions of this policy for rezone valuation. Height limits higher than those of the underlying zoning shall be available only through a master plan.

A master plan shall be required for each institution for which an overlay is established. The master plan shall be in conformance with Policy 4: Master Plan.

Rezone Evaluation

In considering rezones, the objective shall be to achieve a better relationship between residential or commercial uses and the major institution uses, and to reduce or eliminate major land use conflicts in the area. The rezone shall also be consistent with the rezone criteria in the Land Use Code.

Revocation of Major Institution Overlay District Designation

The Major Institution Overlay MIO district designation, including height limits and master plan provisions when one has been adopted, shall be revoked for institutions which no longer conform with Policy 1: Definition. The applicable zoning provisions shall be the provisions of the existing underlying zoning classification. When an MIO district designation of an institution is to be revoked, the City may consider rezoning the institution campus.

Upon determination that an institution no longer meets the definition of major institution, the Director of DCLU shall forward to the City Council proposed legislation to repeal revoke the major institution overlay MIO district, including the master plan when one has been adopted, and amend the Official Land Use Map.

Policy 6: Transition Provisions

Major Institution Master Plans and other Mmajor I institution development agreements adopted prior to these policies shall remain in effect under the conditions of adoption or until such time as they are amended or superseded under the provisions of these policies.

For master plans subject to the regulations in effect before the effective date of the regulations adopted as part of the 1996 major institutions ordinance, Ddevelopment program components of adopted master plans shall expire and, if the institution plans additional development, shall be renewed in accordance with Policy 4: Master Plan.

Where a specific expiration date is not established in a master plan, the expiration date shall be ten years from March 26May 2, 1990, the effective date of the Land Use Code regulations implementing these policies.

Non-contiguous areas of major institutions with adopted master plans shall be included in theMajor Institution Overlay ( MIO) designation until any major amendment or new renewal of the master plan. A provision shall be included in the master plan major amendment or new master plan renewal to delete the noncontiguous areas from the overlay designation, unless the noncontiguous areas were once separate major institutions. This deletion of non-contiguous areas shall not be subject to Policy 5: Rezones. It shall be processed as a City-initiated amendment to the Official Land Use Map to implement new land use policies adopted by resolution, which is a Type V Council land use decision.

Applications may be made and permits issued for any individual development project which would not require an adopted master plan under these policies.

University of Washington

The Joint Statement of Goals and Policies of the City of Seattle and the University of Washington, as adopted by the Seattle City Council on May 23, 1977, and the University of Washington Board of Regents on May 13, 1977, and subsequently amended, shall continue to serve as an applicable policy and implementation guideline for the University of Washington until amended.

The Joint Statement was amended by the Agreement Between the City of Seattle and the University of Washington, May 2, 1983, which includes the requirement for a master plan. The master plan provisions and procedures for the University of Washington shall be in accordance with Section II, Master Plan and Cumulative Impacts, of the CityUniversity Agreement.

Section 4. Subsection A of Section 23.41.004 of the SMC, which Section was last amended by Ordinance 118302, is amended as follows:

23.41.004 Applicability and phasing.

A. Design Review Required.

1. Design review shall be required for all new multifamily and commercial structures which exceed the thresholds for environmental review established in the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) as adopted by The City of Seattle and codified in Chapter 25.05, SMC, in all Neighborhood Commercial 1, 2, 3 (NC1, 2, 3) zones and in the Seattle Cascade Mixed (SCM) zone.

2. Design review shall also be required for all new multifamily and commercial structures which exceed the SEPA thresholds in Lowrise 3 (L3), Lowrise 4 (L4), Midrise (MR) and Highrise (HR) zones.

3. Design review shall also be required for all new multifamily and commercial structures which exceed SEPA thresholds in Commercial 1 and 2 (C1, C2) zones, when that development abuts or is directly across a street or alley from any lot zoned single family.

4. Design review shall also be required for all new structures containing more than fifty thousand (50,000) square feet of usable new office space in all downtown zones.

5. Design review is optional for all new multifamily and commercial structures not otherwise subject to this chapter, in all multifamily, commercial, and downtown zones.

6. Design review shall also be required for all new major institution structures which exceed the SEPA thresholds in NC1, NC2, NC3, L3, L4, MR, and HR zones, and in C1 and C2 zones when the new structure(s) abuts or is directly across a street or alley from any lot zoned single family; provided that design review shall not be required for any structure in a Major Institution Overlay (MIO) District. Design review is optional for new major institution structures not otherwise subject to this chapter in all multifamily, commercial, and downtown zones.

Section 5. Subsection A of Section 23.41.012 of the SMC, which Section was last amended by Ordinance 118302, is amended as follows:

23.41.012 Development standard departures.

A. Departure from Land Use Code requirements may be permitted for new multifamily, and commercial, and major institution development as part of the design review process. Departures may be allowed if an applicant demonstrates that departures from Land Use Code standards would result in a development which better meets the intent of the adopted design guidelines.

Section 6. Subsection A of Section 23.45.004 of the SMC, which Section was last amended by Ordinance 117263, is amended as follows:

23.45.004 Principal uses permitted outright.

A. The following principal uses shall be permitted outright in all multifamily zones:

1. Single-family dwelling units;

2. Multifamily structures;

3. Congregate residences;

4. Adult family homes;

5. Nursing homes;

6. Institutions meeting all development standards;

7. Major institutions and Mmajor institution uses within Major Institution Overlay Districts subject to Chapter 23.69;

8. Public facilities meeting all development standards;

9. Existing cemeteries; and

10 Public or private parks or playgrounds including customary buildings and activities.

Section 7. The subsection of Section 23.47.004, "Uses: Chart A," of the SMC, which Section was last amended by Ordinance 117514, is amended as follows:

NC1 NC2 NC3 C1 C2

I. COMMERCIAL USE

A. Retail Sales and Services.

1. Personal and Household

Retail Sales and Services

Multi-purpose P P P P P

convenience stores

General retail sales and P P P P P

service

Major durables sales, P P P P P

service and rental

Specialty food stores P P P P P

2. Medical Services P P/CU1 P/CU1 P/CU1 P/CU1

3. Animal Services2

Animal health services P P P P P

Kennels X X X X P

Animal shelters X X X X X

4. Automotive Retail Sales and

Services

Gas stations P P P P P

Sales and rental of X P P P P

motorized vehicles

Vehicle repair, minor P P P P P

Vehicle repair, major X P P P P

Car wash X P P P P

Towing services X X X P P

Automotive parts or P P P P P

accessory sales

5. Marine Retail Sales and

Services

Sales and rental of large X P P P P

boats

Vessel repair, minor P P P P P

Vessel repair, major X X X S S

Marine service station P P P P P

Dry storage of boats X P P P P

Recreational marinas S S S S S

Commercial moorage S S S S S

Sale of boat parts or P P P P P

accessories

6. Eating and Drinking

Establishments

Restaurants without P P P P P

cocktail lounges

Restaurants with X P P P P

cocktail lounges

Fast-food restaurant P P P P P

(750 square feet and under)

Fast-food restaurant CU CU CU CU CU

(over 750 square feet)

Tavern CU CU P P P

Brewpub CU CU P P P

ZONES

NC1 NC2 NC3 C1 C2

7. Lodging

Hotel X X P P P

Motel X X P P P

Bed and breakfast P3 P3 P P P

8. Mortuary Services X P P P P

9. Existing Cemeteries P P P P P

B. Principal Use Parking X P P P P

C. Non-Household Sales and Service

1. Business support services P P P P P

2. Business incubator P P P P P

3. Sales, service and rental X P P P

of office equipment

4. Sales, service and rental

of commercial equipment X X P P P

and construction

materials

5. Sale of heating fuel X X P P P

6. Heavy commercial services X X X P P

Construction services X X X P P

Commercial laundries X X X P P

D. Offices

1. Customer service office P P P P P

2. Administrative office P P P P P

E. Entertainment

1. Places of Public

Assembly

Performing arts X P P P P

theater

Spectator sports X P P P P

facility

Lecture and meeting X P P P P

halls

Motion picture X P P P P

theater

Adult motion picture X X X X X

theater

Adult panoramas X X X X X

2. Participant Sports and

Recreation

-Indoor P P P P P

-Outdoor X X X4 P P

ZONES

NC1 NC2 NC3 C1 C2

F. Wholesale Showroom X X P P P

G. Mini-warehouse X X P P P

H. Warehouse X X P P P

I. Outdoor Storage X X X5 P P

J. Transportation Facilities

1. Personal transportation X X P P P

services

2. Passenger terminals X X P P P

3. Cargo terminals X X X S P

4. Transit vehicle base X X X CCU6 CCU6

5. Helistops X X CCU7 CCU7 CCU7

6. Heliports X X X X X

7. Airport, land-based X X X X X

8. Airport, water-based X X X X S

9. Railroad switchyard X X X X X

10. Railroad switchyard with X X X X X

mechanized hump

K. Food Processing and Craft

Work

1. Food processing for P P P P P

human consumption

2. Custom and craft work P P P P P

L. Research and Development P P P P P

Laboratories

II. SALVAGE AND RECYCLING

A. Recycling Collection Station P P P P P

B. Recycling Center X X X P P

C. Salvage Yard X X X X X

III. UTILITIES

A. Utility Service Uses P P P P P

B. Major Communication Utility8 X X X CCU CCU

C. Minor Communication Utility8 P P P P P

D. Solid Waste Transfer Station X X X X X

E. Power Plants X X X X X

F. Sewage Treatment Plants X X X X X

G. Solid Waste Incineration X X X X X

Facility

H. Solid Waste Landfill X X X X X

ZONES

NC1 NC2 NC3 C1 C2

IV. MANUFACTURING

A. Light Manufacturing X P P P P

B. General Manufacturing X X X P P

C. Heavy Manufacturing X X X X X

V. HIGH-IMPACT USES X X X X X

VI. INSTITUTIONS

A. Institute for Advanced Study P P P P P

B. Private Club P P P P P

C. Child Care Center P P P P P

D. Museum P P P P P

E. School, Elementary or Secondary P P P P P

F. College P P P P P

G. Community Center P P P P P

H. Community Club P P P P P

I. Vocational or Fine Arts School P P P P P

J. Hospital P P P P P

K. Religious Facility P P P P P

L. University P P P P P

M. Major Institutions within a

Major Institution Overlay P P P P P

District subject to ((the

provisions of)) Chapter 23.69

VII. PUBLIC FACILITIES

A. Jails X X X X X

B. Work-Release Centers9 CCU CCU CCU CCU CCU

VIII. PARK AND POOL/RIDE LOT

A. Park and Pool Lots P10 P P P P

B. Park and Ride Lots X X CU CU CU

ZONES

NC1 NC2 NC3 C1 C2

IX. RESIDENTIAL11

A. Single-Family Dwelling Units P/CU12 P/CU12 P/CU12 P/CU12 CU12

B. Multi-Family Structures P/CU P/CU P/CU P/CU CU

C. Congregate Residences P/CU P/CU P/CU P/CU CU

D. Floating Homes S S S S S

E. Mobile Home Park X X X P CU

F. Artist Studio/Dwelling P/CU P/CU P/CU P/CU CU

G. Caretaker's Quarters P/CU P/CU P/CU P/CU P

H. Adult Family Homes P/CU P/CU P/CU P/CU P

I. Home Occupations P13 P13 P13 P13 P13

J. Nursing Homes P P P P P

X. OPEN SPACE

A. Parks P P P P P

B. Playgrounds P P P P P

XI. AGRICULTURAL USES

A. Animal Husbandry X13 X13 X13) X13 P

B. Horticultural Uses P P P P P

C. Aquaculture P P P P P

Section 8. Subsection C of Section 23.54.016 of the SMC, which Section was last amended by Ordinance 115165, is amended as follows:23.54.016 Major Institutions--Parking and transportation. C. Requirement for a Transportation Management Program. 1. When a major institution proposes parking in excess of one hundred thirtyfive percent (135%) of the minimum requirement for short-term parking spaces, or when a major institution prepares a master plan or applies for a master use permit for development that would require twenty (20) or more parking spaces or increase the major institution's number of parking spaces by twenty (20) or more above the level existing on the effective date of this provision May 2, 1990, a transportation management program shall be required or an existing transportation management program shall be reviewed and updated. The Director shall assess the traffic and parking impacts of the proposed development against the general goal of reducing the percentage of the major institution's employees, staff and/or students who commute in single-occupancy vehicles ("SOV") during the peak period to fifty percent (50%) or less, excluding those employees or staff whose work regularly requires the use of a private automobile vehicle during working hours.

2. Transportation management programs shall be prepared and implemented in accordance with the Director's Rule governing Transportation Management Programs. The Transportation Management Program shall be in effect upon Council adoption of the major institution master plan.

3. If an institution has previously prepared a transportation management program, the Director, in consultation with the Director of Engineering, shall review the major institution's progress toward meeting stated goals. The Director shall then determine:

a. That the existing program should be revised to correct deficiencies and/or address new or cumulative impacts; or

b. That the application will not be approved until the major institution makes substantial progress toward meeting the goals of its existing program; or

c. That a new program should be developed to address impacts associated with the application; or

d. That the existing program does not need to be a revised or new program is not needed.

4. Through the process of reviewing a new or updated transportation management program in conjunction with reviewing a master plan, the Council may approve in excess of one hundred thirtyfive percent (135%) of the minimum requirements for long-term parking spaces, or may increase or decrease the stated required fifty percent (50%) SOV goal, based upon the major institution's impact on traffic and opportunities for alternative means of transportation. Factors to be considered shall include, but not be limited to:

a. Proximity to a street with fifteen (15) minute transit service headway in each direction;

b. Air quality conditions in the vicinity of the major institution;

c. The absence of other nearby traffic generators and the level of existing and future traffic volumes in and through the surrounding area;

d. The patterns and peaks of traffic generated by major institution uses and the availability or lack of on-street parking opportunities in the surrounding area;

e. The impact of additional parking on the major institution site;

f. The extent to which the scheduling of classes or work shifts reduces the transportation alternatives available to employees and/or students and faculty or the presence of limited carpool opportunities due to the small number of employees; and

g. The extent to which the major institution has demonstrated a commitment to SOV alternatives.

5. The provision of short-term parking spaces in excess of one hundred thirty-five percent (135%) of the minimum requirements established in subsection B2 may be permitted by the Director through preparation or update of Transportation Management Program. In evaluating whether to allow more than one hundred thirty-five percent (135%) of the minimum, the Director, in consultation with the Seattle Engineering Department and the Municipality of Metropolitan King County Seattle ( Metro), shall consider evidence of parking demand and opportunities for alternative means of transportation. Factors to be considered shall include but are not necessarily limited to the criteria contained in subsection d D of this sSection and the following:

a. The nature of services provided by Mmajor I institution uses which generate short-term parking demand; and

b. The extent to which the major institution manages short-term parking to ensure its availability to meet short-term parking needs.

Based on this review, the Director shall determine the amount of additional short-term parking to be permitted, if any.

6. When an institution applies for a permit for development included in its master plan, it shall present evidence that it has made substantial progress toward the goals of its transportation management program as approved with a master plan, including the SOV goal. If substantial progress is not being made, as determined by the Director in consultation with the Engineering Department and METRO, the Director may:

a. Require the institution to take additional steps to comply with the transportation management program; and/or

b. Require measures in addition to those in the transportation management program which encourage alternative means of transportation for the travel generated by the proposed new development; and/or

c. Deny the permit if previous efforts have not resulted in sufficient progress toward meeting the SOV goals of the institution.

7. If one (1) major institution has acquired, merged with, or consolidated with another major institution, pursuant to Section 23.69.023, the new/surviving major institution shall prepare a new or revised transportation management program for the combined Major Institution Overlay District, according to provisions of this section. The new/surviving major institution shall submit a draft transportation management program with any master use permit application for changes on any portion of the combined Major Institution Overlay District not already covered by an adopted master plan, or within one (1) year of the acquisition, merger or consolidation, whichever occurs first. The new or revised transportation management program shall be completed and approved by the Director as soon as is practicable, and at least before any master use permit, for which an application is filed more than one (1) year after the acquisition, merger or consolidation, is issued, for changes on any portion of the combined Major Institution Overlay District not already covered by an adopted master plan; provided that this shall not affect the Director's authority to consider and mitigate traffic and transportation impacts under the SEPA policies and procedures in SMC Chapter 25.05.

Section 9. Subsection A of Section 23.54.020 of the SMC, which Section was last amended by Ordinance 118302, is amended as follows:

23.54.020 Parking quantity exceptions.

The parking quantity exceptions set forth in this sS ection shall apply in all zones except downtown zones, which are regulated by Section 23.49.016, and major institution zones, which are regulated by Section 23.48.018 23.54.016.

A. Adding Units to Existing Structures in Multifamily and Neighborhood Commercial Zones.

1. For the purposes of this sSection, "existing structures" shall be those structures which were established under permit, or for which a permit has been granted and has not expired, or are substantially underway in accordance with subsection D of Section 23.04.010, as of the effective date of the applicable chapter of this Land Use Code, as follows:

a. In multifamily zones, August 10, 1982;

b. In commercial zones, June 9, 1986.

2. If an existing residential structure in a multifamily or neighborhood commercial zone has parking which meets the development standards, and the lot area is not increased, one (1) unit may be added without additional parking. If two (2) units are added, one (1) space will be required; three (3) units will require two (2) spaces, etc. Additional parking must meet all development standards for the particular zone.

3. In a Lowrise Duplex/Triplex zone:

a. When an existing residential structure provides less than one (1) parking space per unit, one (1) parking space shall be required for each additional dwelling unit when dwelling units are added to the structure or the structure is altered to create additional dwelling units;

b. When an existing nonresidential structure is partially or completely converted to residential use, then no parking space shall be required for the first new dwelling unit, provided that the lot area is not increased and existing parking is screened and landscaped to the greatest extent practical. Additional parking provided shall meet all development standards for the Lowrise Duplex/Triplex zone.

4. If an existing structure does not conform to the development standards for parking, or is occupied by a nonconforming use, when:

- Dwelling units are added to the structure; or

- The structure is altered to create additional dwelling units; or

- The structure is completely converted to residential use, then no parking space need be provided for the first new or added dwelling unit, provided that the lot area is not increased and existing parking is screened and landscaped to the greatest extent practical. Additional parking provided shall meet all development standards for the particular zone. This exception shall not apply in Lowrise Duplex/Triplex zones.

Section 10. Section 23.69.008 of the SMC, which was adopted by Ordinance 115002, is amended as follows:

23.69.008 Permitted uses.

A. All uses that are functionally integrated with, or substantively related to, the central mission of a the M major Iinstitution or that primarily and directly serve the users of a the institution shall be defined as Mmajor Iinstitution uses and shall be permitted in the Major Institution Overlay (MIO) District. Major Iinstitution uses shall be permitted either outright or as conditional uses according to the provisions of Section 23.69.012. Permitted Mmajor Iinstitution uses shall not be limited to those uses which are owned or operated by the Mmajor Iinstitution.

B. The following characteristics shall be among those used by the Director to determine whether a use is functionally integrated with , or substantively related to, the central mission of the M major Iinstitution. No one (1) of these characteristics shall be determinative:

1. Functional contractual association;

2. Programmatic integration;

3. Direct physical circulation/access connections;

4. Shared facilities or staff;

5. Degree of interdependence.;

6. Similar or common functions, services, or products.

C. Major Institution uses shall be subject to the following:

1. Major Institution uses which are determined to be heavy traffic generators or major noise generators shall be located away from abutting residential zones;

2. Uses at which there would be present which require the presence of a hazardous chemical, extremely hazardous substance or toxic chemical that is required to be reported under Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 or its associated regulations, shall be reviewed by the Director. The Director shall consult with the Seattle-King County Department of Public Health and The City of Seattle Fire Department.

Based on this consultation and review, the Director may prohibit the uses, or impose conditions regulating the amount and type of such materials allowed on-site, or the procedures to be used in handling hazardous or toxic materials;

3. Where the underlying zone is Ccommercial, uses at street level shall complement uses in the surrounding commercial area and be located in a manner which provides continuity to the commercial street front. Where the underlying zoning is a pedestrian-designated zone, the regulations of Section 23.47.042 governing required street level uses shall apply. ;

4. Professional offices shall be limited to use by individuals or groups whose activities have a primary and direct relationship to the central mission of the major institution.

D. When a use is determined to be a Major Institution use, it shall be located in the same Major Institution Overlay MIO District as the Mmajor Iinstitution with which it is functionally integrated, or to which it is related, or the users of which it primarily and directly serves. To locate outside but within two thousand five hundred feet (2,500') of that Major Institution Overlay MIO District, a Mmajor I institution use shall be subject to the provisions of Section 23.69.022.

E. Major Iinstitution uses, outside of, but within two thousand five hundred feet (2,500') of the boundary of the Major Institution Overlay MIO District, which were legally established as of January 1, 1989 and are located on sites which are not contiguous with the Major Institution Overlay MIO District shall be permitted uses in the zone in which they are located when:

1. The use is located on a lot which was contained within the boundary of a Major Institution Overlay MIO District as it existeds on May 2, 1990 the effective date of this provision; or

2. The site was deleted from the Major Institution Overlay MIO District by master plan amendment or renewal according to the provisions of Sections 23.69.035 and 23.69.036.

F. Uses other than those permitted under subsections A and B which are not Major Institution uses shall be subject to the use provisions and development standards of the underlying zone.

Section 11. Subsection B of Section 23.69.012 of the SMC, which Section was last amended by Ordinance 115043, is amended as follows:

Section 23.69.012 Conditional uses.

B. Administrative Conditional Uses.

1. The following uses may be permitted as administrative conditional uses:

a. Development requiring preparation of a master plan may be permitted by the Director as an administrative conditional use according to the standards of subsections F or G of Section 23.04.040.

b. Development otherwise requiring preparation of a master plan may be permitted by the Director as an administrative conditional use according to the standards of Section 23.69.033.

2. In considering an application for a conditional use, the Director's decision shall be based on the following criteria:

a. Parking areas and facilities, trash and refuse storage areas, ventilating mechanisms and other noise-generating or odorgenerating equipment, fixtures or facilities shall be located so as to minimize noise and odor impacts on the surrounding area. The Director may require measures such as landscaping, sound barriers, fences, mounding or berming, adjustments to parking location or setback development standards, design modifications, limits on hours of operation or other similar measures to mitigate impacts; and

b. Required landscaping shall be compatible with neighboring properties. Landscaping in addition to that required by the Code may be required to reduce the potential for erosion or excessive stormwater runoff, to minimize coverage of the site by impervious surfaces, to screen parking, or to reduce noise or the appearance of bulk and scale; and

c. Traffic and parking impacts shall be minimized; and

d. To reduce the impact of light and glare, exterior lighting shall be shielded or directed away from residentially zoned properties. The Director may require that the area, intensity, location or angle of illumination be limited.

Section 12. Chapter 23.69 of the SMC is amended to delete the Subchapter heading immediately before Section 23.69.021, as adopted by Ordinance 115165, as follows:

Subchapter V Development Outside a Major Institution Overlay District

Section 13. Subsection D of Section 23.69.021 of the SMC, which Section was adopted by Ordinance 115165, is amended as follows:

23.69.021 Signs in Major Institution Overlay Districts.

D. Signs across from nonresidential zones shall have no area, type of or number limitations.

Section 14. Chapter 23.69 of the SMC is hereby amended to add a new Subchapter heading immediately before Section 23.69.022 to read as follows.

Subchapter V Uses Outside A Major Institution Overlay District

Section 15. Section 23.69.022 of the SMC, which was last amended by Ordinance 115165, is hereby amended as follows:

23.69.022 Uses Development permitted within 2,500 feet of a Major Institution Overlay District.

A. A Mmajor institution uses proposed to be developed by, or leased to, or located in a structure(s) or on land owned by, the major institution or an entity that is controlled in whole or in part by the major institution or by a parent or affiliate entity of the major institution, shall be permitted to lease space, or otherwise locate a use outside a Major Institution Overlay (MIO) District, and within two thousand five hundred feet (2,500') of the Overlay MIO District boundary, subject to the following limitations:

1. The provisions of this Section shall not apply to contractual arrangements with other entities, except for leases or other agreements for occupying space.

2. No such use shall be allowed at the street-level in a commercial zone, unless the use is determined to be similar to a personal and household retail sales and service use, eating and drinking establishment, customer service office, entertainment use or child care center and is allowed in the zone. If the use is allowed in the zone but is determined not to be similar to a personal and household retail sales and service use, eating and drinking establishment, customer service office, entertainment use or child care center, the Director may not allow the use at street level in a commercial zone unless provided otherwise in an adopted master plan or in a Council-approved neighborhood plan; No such use or combination of uses shall exceed ten thousand (10,000) square feet on any lot; and

23. Except as permitted in an adopted master plan, the use shall not result in the demolition of a structure(s) that contains a residential use nor shall it change a residential use to a nonresidential use; andSuch uses shall be separated from each other and from the Major Institution Overlay District boundary by a minimum distance of three hundred feet (300') between property lines; and

3 The cumulative total of such uses shall be limited to forty thousand

(40,000) square feet; and

4. The measurement of such uses shall include the site area used for parking or other outdoor uses or activity areas, such as ball courts and playfields, primarily used by the major institution; and

54. The use(s) shall conform to the use and development standards of the applicable zone; and

5. The use shall be included in the major institution's approved Transportation Management Program if it contains students or employees of the major institution; and

66. The cumulative total of permitted Major Institution uses subject to this subsection outside a Major Institution Overlay District within two thousand five hundred feet (2,500') of the Overlay District boundary may exceed forty thousand (40,000) square feet only where permitted in an approved master plan. If a Master Use Permit is required for the use, the Director shall notify the Advisory Committee of the pending permit application and the committee shall be given the opportunity to comment on the impacts of the proposed use.

B. A medical service use not subject to subsection A of this section that is over ten thousand (10,000) square feet shall be permitted to locate within two thousand five hundred feet (2,500') of a medical Major Institution Overlay MIO District only as an administrative conditional use subject to the conditional use requirements of the applicable zone Section 23.47.006 B8 or Section 23.50.014 B13.

C. A Mmajor Iinstitution that leases space or otherwise locates a uses located in a Downtown zone shall not be subject to the limitations established in subsections A or B, except that subsection A3 and A45 shall apply.

D. Uses to be developed by, or leased to, or located in a structure(s) or on land owned by, the major institution or an entity that is controlled in whole or in part by the major institution or by a parent or affiliate entity of the major institution, shall not be permitted outside a Major Institution Overlay District and within two thousand five hundred feet (2,500') of an Overlay District boundary when it would result in the demolition of a structure(s) which contains residential uses or would change residential uses to nonresidential uses.

E. Acquisition, merger or consolidation involving two (2) major institutions shall be governed by the provisions of Section 23.69.023.

Section 16. Section 23.69.023 of the SMC, which was last amended by Ordinance 116744, is amended as follows:

23.69.023 Major Institution acquisition, merger or consolidation.

A. Notwithstanding any other provisions of Title 23, one (1) major institution may acquire, merge with, or otherwise consolidate with, another major institution of the same type (medical or educational), if boundaries of the two (2) Major Institution Overlay Districts are contiguous.

B. Within ten (10) days of the acquisition, merger or consolidation, the new/surviving major institution shall notify the Director of the acquisition, merger or consolidation and the name of the new/surviving major institution. Upon receiving this notice, the Director shall adjust the Official Land Use Map to reflect a single, combined Major Institution Overlay (MIO) District, with the single name of the new/surviving major institution, but only if the two institutions are contiguous. The entire Major Institution Overlay MIO District of each major institution shall be included in the single, combined Major Institution Overlay MIO District.

C. When the determination to prepare a master plan is made pursuant to 23.69.026 and after acquisition, merger or consolidation, the new/surviving institution shall prepare the master plan according to the following:

1. If the two former institutions were not contiguous, the new/surviving institution has the option of preparing a joint master plan for both contiguous portions of the major institution or a separate master plan for the contiguous portion of the major institution for which the master plan requirement is triggered.

2. If the two former institutions were contiguous, the new/surviving institution must prepare a master plan for the single, combined major institution.

The new/surviving major institution created through acquisition, merger or consolidation shall prepare a new or revised transportation management program for the combined Major Institution Overlay District, according to the provisions of Section 23.54.016. The new/surviving major institution shall submit a draft transportation management program with any master use permit application for changes on any portion of the combined Major Institution Overlay District not already covered by an adopted master plan, or within one (1) year of the acquisition, merger or consolidation, whichever occurs first. The new or revised transportation management program shall be completed and approved by the Director as soon as is practicable, and at least before any master use permit, for which an application is filed more than one (1) year after the acquisition, merger or consolidation, is issued, for changes on any portion of the combined Major Institution Overlay District not already covered by an adopted master plan; provided that this shall not affect the Director's authority to consider and mitigate traffic and transportation impacts under the SEPA policies and procedures in SMC Chapter 25.05.

D. Within ninety (90) days of the acquisition, merger or consolidation, or within ninety (90) days of the promulgation of regulations governing reporting, by major institutions, as to how they address the City's health policies and human services goals, whichever is later, the new/surviving institution shall submit to the Director a statement of the extent to which the two (2) major institutions have addressed in the past, and the extent to which the new/surviving major institution will address in the future, of the City's health policies and human services goals, including the provision of medical and/or educational services to low-income people regardless of their ability to pay.

E. The Director, in consultation with other government agencies, shall review the statement. The Director or other City department or office may schedule one (1) or more public hearings to receive public comment on the new/surviving major institution's proposal to address the city's health policies and human services goals in the future. The Director may direct the institution to meet with representatives of City departments, including the Health Department, the Department of Housing and Human Services and the Department of Neighborhoods, to develop steps to improve the new/surviving major institution's proposal to address the City's health policies and human services goals.

Section 17. Section 23.69.026 of the SMC, which was last amended by Ordinance 115165, is amended as follows:

23.69.026 Determination to prepare a master plan.

A. Any major institution may elect to prepare a master plan.

B. A major institution without an adopted master plan or with a master plan that includes an expiration date and that was adopted under code provisions prior to the 1996 major institutions ordinance shall be required to prepare a master plan or a master plan amendment in the following circumstances:

1. The establishment of a new Major Institution Overlay (MIO) District is required according to Section 23.69.024; or

2. Expansion of a Major Institution Overlay MIO District boundary or change in a Major Institution Overlay MIO District height designation is proposed; or

3. An application is filed for a structure containing major institution use(s) that is located within the Major Institution Overlay MIO District and would exceed the development standards of the underlying zone and is not permitted under an existing master plan, provided other means of modifying development standards that apply to similar uses located in the zone may also be sought; or

4. An application is filed to establish more than a cumulative total of forty thousand (40,000) square feet of Major Institution uses outside a Major Institution Overlay District boundary and within two thousand five hundred feet (2,500') of the institution's Overlay district boundaries; or

5. A major institution proposes to demolish or change the use of a residential structure inside the boundaries of a Major Institution Overlay MIO District, provided that a master plan need not be prepared when:

a. The use is changed to housing for the institution; or

b. Not more than two (2) structures containing not more than a total of four (4) dwelling units are demolished or changed to a nonresidential use within a two (2) year period and are replaced in the general vicinity by the same number of dwelling units.; or

6. An application is filed for development that would require a major amendment to an adopted master plan as set forth in Section 23.69.035, Master plan amendment, or renewal of a master plan development program component according to Section 23.69.036, Master plan renewal; or

7. One (1) major institution has acquired, merged with, or consolidated with another major institution, pursuant to Section 23.69.023, and an application is filed for a project containing major institution use(s) that is located on any portion of the combined Major Institution Overlay District not already covered by an adopted master plan and would either:

a. Exceed the envelope of structures existing on the date of the acquisition, merger or consolidation, except for the addition of heating, ventilating, air conditioning, mechanical or similar equipment; or

b. Demolish all or most of any existing structure; or

c. Result in an increase of more than one hundred thousand (100,000) square feet of gross floor area of medical offices, over the amount existing on the date of the acquisition, merger or consolidation, in the portion of the combined Major Institution Overlay District not already covered by an adopted master plan, excluding any structure for which medical service use is the established use, and excluding medical offices that directly serve hospital clinic, laboratory, nursing facility, and blood bank uses.

C. A major institution with an adopted master plan that is not subject to subsection B shall be required to prepare a new master plan in the following circumstances:

1. The major institution proposes to increase the total amount of gross floor area allowed or the total number of parking spaces allowed within the MIO District; or,

2. A master plan has been in effect for at least ten (10) years and the institution proposes to expand the MIO District boundaries; or,

3. A master plan has been in effect for at least ten (10) years and the institution proposes an amendment to the master plan that is determined to be major according to the provisions of Section 23.69.035, and the Director determines that conditions have changed significantly in the neighborhood surrounding the major institution since the master plan was adopted.

D. A master plan shall not be required for replacement of existing structures where the replacement structure:

1. Wwould be located on the same lot; and

2. Wwould not contain uses which would require a change of use and which the Director determines would not result in an increase in adverse impacts on the surrounding area; and

3. Wwould not exceed the height of the existing structure; and

4. Wwould not represent a significant increase in bulk over the existing structure; and

5. Wwould not represent a significant increase in gross floor area over the existing structure; and

6. Wwould not significantly reduce existing open area or landscaping.

E. If an institution proposes a major amendment of unusual complexity or size, the Advisory Committee may recommend, and the Director may require, that the institution develop a new master plan.

D. F. The Director shall determine whether a master plan is required. The Director's determination shall be final and shall not be subject to an interpretation or appeal.

Section 18. Section 23.69.028 of the SMC, which was last amended by Ordinance 115165, is hereby amended as follows:

23.69.028 Major institution master plan--General provisions.

A. A master plan may modify the following:

1. Any development standard of the underlying zone, including structure height up to the limit established by the Major Institution Overlay (MIO) District;

2. Limits on housing demolition or conversion within the boundaries of the Major Institution Overlay MIO District;

3. Limits on the maximum amount of Mmajor Ii nstitution uses at street level permitted outside, but within two thousand five hundred feet (2,500') of, a Major Institution Overlay MIO District Boundary;

4. Single-occupancy vehicle goals and maximum parking limitations.

B. Except as provided in Section 23.04.040 F, Section 23.04.040 G, and Section 23.69.033, an application for a permit for development which requires preparation of a master plan shall not be approved prior to adoption of the master plan by the Council.

C. Proposed development requiring a master plan that is not specified in an adopted master plan shall require that an amendment to the master plan be approved pursuant to Section 23.69.035, Master plan amendment.

D. Changes to the boundaries of the Major Institution Overlay MIO District or to a Major Institution Overlay MIO District height limit shall require a rezone in addition to the adoption of a master plan or major amendment, except that a boundary adjustment caused by the acquisition, merger or consolidation of two (2) contiguous major institutions shall be governed by the provisions of Section 23.69.023 and Section 23.69.026 B7.

Section 19. Section 23.69.030 of the SMC, which was adopted by Ordinance 115002, is amended as follows:

23.69.030 Contents of a master plan.

A. The master plan is a conceptual plan for a major institution consisting of three (3) components: the development standards component, the development program component and the transportation management program component.

B. The development standards component in an adopted master plan shall become the applicable regulations for physical development of major institution uses within the MIO District and shall supersede the development standards of the underlying zone. Where standards established in the underlying zone have not been modified by the master plan, the underlying zone standards shall continue to apply. Proposed development standards shall be reviewed according to the criteria contained in Section 23.69.032E, Draft Report and Recommendation of the Director. The development standards component may be changed only through a master plan amendment.

C. The development standards component of a master plan shall include the following:

1. Structure height limits established within the Major Institution Overlay District applicable to Major Institution development as provided for in Section 23.69.004; and

2. Existing underlying zoning applicable to of the area within the boundaries of the major institution MIO District. If a change to the underlying zoning is proposed, the master plan shall identify the proposed zone(s), and the master plan shall be subject to rezone approval according to the procedures of Chapter 23.76, Master Use Permits and Council Land Use Decisions; and

32. If modifications to the underlying zone development standards are proposed, the master plan shall list the specific modifications which would change the underlying zone development standards applicable to the major institution. Rthe proposed modifications and reasons for the proposed modifications or for special standards tailored to the specific institution shall be included.; and

3. Standards in the master plan shall be defined for the following:

a. Structure setbacks along public rights-of-way and at the boundary of the Major Institution Overlay MIO District. In no case shall any setback be less than is required in the underlying zone or by setback requirements applicable to structures on abutting lots or structures directly across a street or alley from a structure in the Major Institution Overlay MIO District, whichever is greater,;

b. Height limits as provided for in Section 23.69.004, ;

c. Lot coverage determined on the basis of the applicable for the entire Major Institution Overlay MIO District or on a subarea basis,;

d. Density as defined by maximum developable floor area or a floor area ratio (FAR),

e. Landscaping,;

fe. Percentage of MIO District to remain in Oopen space,; and

4. The major institution may choose or the Director may require the major institution Standards may also be required to address the following:

a. Transition in height and scale between development within the Major Institution Overlay MIO District and development in the surrounding area,;

b. Width and depth limits for structures or measures by which a reduction in the apparent bulk of a structure may be achieved, ;

c. Setbacks between structures which are not located on a public right-of-way or along the boundary of the Major Institution Overlay MIO District,;

d. Preservation of historic structures which are designated on federal, state or local registers,;

e. View corridors or other specific measures intended to mitigate the impact of major institution development on the surrounding area,;

f. Pedestrian circulation within and through the Major Institution Overlay MIO District,.

5. Proposed development standards shall be reviewed according to the criteria contained in Section 23.69.032F, Reported recommendation of the Director;

6. When contained within an adopted master plan, development standards shall become the applicable regulations for physical development of major institution uses within the Major Institution Overlay District and shall supersede the development standards of the underlying zone. Where standards established in the underlying zone have not been modified by the master plan, the underlying zone standards shall continue to apply;

7. The development standards component of a master plan shall be permanent and may be changed only through a master plan amendment;

8. If a change to the underlying zoning is proposed, the master plan shall identify the proposed zone(s), which shall be subject to approval of a rezone according to the procedures of Chapter 23.76, Master Use Permits and Council Land Use Decisions.

CD. The development program component shall include the information set forth in subsection E. With regard to future development, the development program component shall describe proposed planned physical development, defined as development which the major institution has definite plans to construct. The development program may describe potential physical development or uses for which the major institution's plans are less definite. for a ten (10) to fifteen (15) year period, provided that the period may be five (5) to ten (10) years if the institution so chooses, and shall have an explicit date of expiration no more than fifteen (15) years from the date of master plan adoption by the Council. The development program may be amended according to the provisions of Section 23.69.035 without requiring amendment of the development standards component.

DE. The development program component shall include the following:

1. A description of alternative proposals for physical development including an explanation of the reasons for considering each alternative, but only if an Environmental Impact Statement is not prepared for the master plan; and

2. Density as defined by total maximum developable gross floor area for the MIO District and an overall floor area ratio (FAR) for the MIO District. Limits on total gross floor area and floor area ratios may also be required for sub-areas within the MIO District but only when an MIO District is over 400 acres in size or when an MIO District has distinct geographical areas; and

3. The maximum number of parking spaces allowed for the MIO District; and

4. A description of existing and planned future physical development on a site plan which shall contain:

a. The height, description, gross floor area and location of existing and planned physical development, and

b. The location of existing open spaceand approximate location of proposed open space, landscaping and screening, and areas of the MIO District to be "designated open space". Designated open space shall be open space within the MIO District that is significant and serves as a focal point for users of the major institution. Changes to the size or location of designated open space will require an amendment pursuant to Section 23.69.035, and

c. The general physical characteristics including approximate height and location of any anticipated development and proposed alternatives, and

d. Existing Ppublic and private street layout, and

ed. Existing and proposed planned parking areas and structures; and

5. A description and total square footage in gross floor area of uses permitted under Section 23.69.008 E and F; and

6. A site plan showing: property lines and ownership of all properties within the applicable MIO District, or areas proposed to be included in an expanded MIO District, and all structures and properties a major institution is leasing or using or owns within two thousand five hundred feet (2,500') of the MIO District; and

37. Three (3) dimensional drawings to illustrate the height, bulk and form of existing and planned proposed physical development. Information on architectural detailing such as window placement and color and finish materials shall not be required; and

48. A site plan showing any planned or proposed infrastructure improvements and the timing of those improvements; and

59. A description of proposed planned development phases and plans, including development priorities, the probable sequence for such planned proposed development , and estimated dates of construction and occupancy and anticipated interim use of property awaiting development; and

610. A description of any planned or anticipated street or alley vacations or the abandonment of existing rights-ofway; and

11. At the option of the major institution, a description of potential uses, development, parking areas and structures, infrastructure improvements or street or alley vacations. Information about potential projects is for the purpose of starting a dialogue with the City and the community about potential development, and changes to this information will not require an amendment to the master plan; and

12. An analysis of the proposed master plan's consistency with the City's Major Institution policies in Section 23.12.120 and in the Land Use Element of the City of Seattle's Comprehensive Plan; and

13. A discussion of the major institution's facility decentralization plans and/or options, including leasing space or otherwise locating uses off-campus; and

714. A description of the following shall be provided for informational purposes only. The Advisory Committee, pursuant to Section 23.69.032D1, may comment on the following but may not subject these elements to negotiation nor shall such review delay consideration of the master plan or the final recommendation to Council:

a. A description of the ways in which the institution will address the City's health policies and human services goals. goals and applicable policies under Education and Employability and Health in the Human Development Element of the Comprehensive Plan; and

b. A statement explaining the purpose of the development proposed in the master plan, including the public benefits resulting from the proposed new development and the way in which the proposed development will serve the public purpose mission of the major institution.

EF. The tTransportation mM anagement pProgram component shall satisfy the requirements of Section 23.54.015K23.54.016. The t Transportation mManagement pProgram shall include, at a minimum, the following:

1. A description of existing and proposed planned parking, loading and service facilities, and bicycle, pedestrian and traffic circulation systems within the institutional boundaries and the relationship of these facilities and systems to the external street system. This shall include a description of the major institution's impact on traffic and parking in the surrounding area; and

2. Specific institutional programs to reduce traffic impacts and to encourage the use of public transit, carpools and other alternatives to single-occupant vehicles. Any specific agreements with the City for the provision of alternative modes of transportation shall also be included.

FG. Environmental information and the master plan shall may be integrated into one (1) document.

GH. Where two (2) or more institutions are located in close proximity to one another, the Director may require their combined land use, traffic and parking impacts on the surrounding area to be evaluated in the master plan for each institution.

Section 20. Section 23.69.032 of the SMC, which was last amended by Ordinance 116744, is amended as follows:

23.69.032 Master plan process.

A. Not less than sixty (60) days prior to applying for a master plan, the institution shall file a notice of intent to prepare a master plan with the Director.

B. Formation of a Citizens Advisory Committee.

1. Immediately following submittal of a notice of intent to prepare a master plan, the institution shall initiate the establishment of a cCitizens aAdvisory c Committee of at least six (6), but no more than twelve (12) members. In addition, all institutions with adopted master plans shall have a standing Advisory Committee.

2. Where there is more than one (1) major institution in the same general area, as determined by the Director, a single aA dvisory cCommittee serving more than one (1) institution shall may be permitted.

3. The institution, in consultation with the Director of the Department of Neighborhoods, shall develop a list of potential members to serve on the aAdvisory cCommittee. Groups from which members may be selected for appointment to the aA dvisory cCommittee shall include area community groups, residents, property owners, and business persons; consumer groups using the services of the institution; and any other persons or organizations directly affected by the actions of the institution. One member of the Advisory Committee shall be selected from persons in the area participating in neighborhood planning, if applicable. One member of the Advisory Committee shall be a general community or citywide organization representative. To the extent possible, members of the aAdvisory cCommittee should possess expertise or experience in such areas as neighborhood organization and issues, land use and zoning, architecture or landscape architecture, economic development, building development and educational or medical services. A non-management representative of the institution shall be included.

4. Members of the aAdvisory cC ommittee shall have no direct economic relationship with the institution except as provided in subsection B3.

5. The Director of the Department of Neighborhoods shall review the list of potential members and recommend to the Council those individuals appropriate to achieve a balanced, independent and representative committee. After the recommendation has been submitted, the Department of Neighborhoods may convene the aA dvisory cCommittee. The Council may confirm the a Advisory cCommittee composition, make changes in the size and/or composition of the aAdvisory cC ommittee, or remand the matter to the Director of the Department of Neighborhoods for further action. The Council shall establish the final composition of the committee through a memorandum of agreement with the institution, prepared by the Department of Neighborhoods, and adopted by resolution.

6. For each member, an alternate(s) shall also be selected for service on the advisory committee. Alternates shall fill-in for members only when the latter are unable to serve. Individual members may be replaced by the represented group subject to the approval of the Director of the Department of Neighborhoods, without Council confirmation.

76. Four (4) nonvoting, ex-officio members of the aAdvisory cCommittee shall represent the major institution, the Department of Construction and Land Use, the Department of Neighborhoods and the Transportation Division of the Seattle Engineering Department.

87. The Committee shall be staffed by the Department of Neighborhoods with the cooperation and assistance of the major institution. Technical assistance to the committee shall be provided by the Department of Construction and Land Use, the Transportation Division of the Engineering Department and the Department of Neighborhoods.

98. During the master plan review and adoption process, the Council may, in the interest of ensuring representative community participation on the aAdvisory cC ommittee, amend the size and/or composition of the aA dvisory cCommittee.

109. The City-University Community Advisory c Committee (CUCAC) shall serve as the aAdvisory c Committee for the University of Washington.

11.10. The Director of the Department of Neighborhoods shall promulgate rules applicable to advisory committees, including terms of office, selection of chairpersons, and methods of conflict resolution.

C. Application for a Master Plan.

1. Within one hundred twenty (120) days of filing a notice of intent to prepare a master plan, the institution shall submit an application and applicable fees for a master plan. This application shall include an environmental checklist and a concept plan. comprised of the following: The requirement for the environmental checklist may be waived if the Director and the major institution agree that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be prepared. The concept plan shall consist of the following:

a. Proposed institution boundaries; and

b. A proposed site plan including proposed structure dimensions and planned development and an estimate of total gross floor area proposed by the major institution; and

c. Proposed Planned uses; and

d. Any proposed planned street vacations and planned parking location and access; and

e. Proposed phasing of development and aA description of alternative proposals for physical development and decentralization options, including a detailed explanation of the reasons for considering each alternative.; and

2. In order to evaluate a proposed master plan the following information shall be included in the concept plan for all master plan applications, whether for a new master plan or for an amendment to an existing master plan:

a. A statement explaining the purpose of the development proposed in the master plan, including a discussion of the public benefits resulting from the proposed new development, the way in which the proposed development will serve the public-purpose mission of the major institution, and the extent to which the growth and change may adversely affect the livability of the surrounding neighborhood; and

b. A statement of the extent to which the major institution has addressed in the past, and will address in the future with its proposed development, the city's health policies and human services goals; and

cf. A description of the uses and character of the neighborhood surrounding the major institution and how the major institution relates to the surrounding area. This shall include pedestrian connections, physical and visual access to surrounding amenities and services, and the relationship of the major institution to other major institution development within two thousand five hundred feet (2,500') of its Overlay MIO District boundaries; and.

d. An analysis of the proposed master plan's consistency with the intent of the City's Major Institution and other Land use Policies; and

e. A discussion of the major institution's facility decentralization plans and/or options; and

f. A site plan showing property lines and ownership of all properties within the applicable major Institution Overlay District of areas proposed to be included in an expanded Major Institution Overlay District, or areas proposed to be included in an expanded major Institution Overlay District, and of all major institution uses within two thousand five hundred feet (2,500') of Overlay District boundaries; and

g. The boundary of the Major Institution Overlay District applicable to the major institution preparing the master plan and any proposed changes.

32. The Advisory Committee shall review and may submit comments on the concept plan and if there is one, the environmental checklist.

43. After an application for a master plan has been filed, the Director, in consultation with the institution and the Advisory Committee, shall prepare a schedule for the completion of the master plan. The Advisory Committee shall review and submit comments on the schedule. The timelines described in this Section shall be goals, and shall form the basis for the master plan schedule. The schedule shall require that goal of the City Council receive a recommended shall be to make a decision on the master plan for approval within twenty-four (24) months from the date of application., provided that the Director may approve a schedule of up to thirty (30) months from the date of application for master plans of unusual complexity or difficulty. Changes to the schedule may be made by mutual agreement between the institution and the Director.

54. Notice of application for a master plan shall be provided as required by Chapter 23.76, Procedures for Master Use Permits and Council Land Use Decisions.

D. Development of Master Plan.

1. The aAdvisory cCommittee shall participate directly in the formulation of the master plan from the time of its preliminary concept so that the concerns of the community and the institution are considered. The primary role of the aAdvisory cCommittee is to work with the major institution and the City to produce a master plan that meets the intent of Section 23.69.025. Advisory Committee comments shall be focused on identifying and mitigating the potential impacts of institutional development on the surrounding community comments shall consider the physical development and environmental impacts of the institution based upon the objectives listed in the Major Institutions Policies and Chapter 25.05, SEPA. The Advisory Committee may review and comment on the mission of the institution, the need for the expansion, public benefits resulting from the proposed new development and the way in which the proposed development will serve the public purpose mission of the major institution, but these elements are not subject to negotiation nor shall such review delay consideration of the master plan or the final recommendation to Council.

2. The aAdvisory cCommittee shall hold open meetings with the institution and City staff to discuss the master plan and resolve differences. The institution shall provide adequate and timely information to the aAdvisory c Committee for its consideration of the content and level of detail of each of the specific elements of the master plan.

3. The threshold determination of need for preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) shall be made as required by Chapter 25.05, SEPA Policies and Procedures.

4. If an EIS is required and an institution is the lead agency, it shall initiate a predraft EIS consultation with the Director. The aAdvisory cCommittee shall meet to discuss the scope of the document. The aAdvisory cC ommittee shall submit its comments on the scope of the draft EIS to the lead agency and the Director before the end of the scoping comment period. The lead agency shall prepare a final scope within one week after the end of the scoping period.

5. The institution shall prepare a preliminary draft master plan within 70 days of completion of the final scope for the EIS.

6. If an EIS is required, Tthe institution or DCLU, whichever is lead agency, shall be responsible for the preparation of a preliminary draft EIS within 70 days of the completion of the final scope, or approval of an EIS consultant contract, whichever is later.

7. The aAdvisory cCommittee, the Engineering Department, the Director, and the institution shall submit comments on the preliminary draft master plan and the preliminary draft EIS to the lead agency within three (3) weeks of receipt, or on the environmental checklist and supplemental studies if an EIS is not required. If DCLU is the lead agency, a compiled list of the comments shall be submitted to the institution within ten (10) days of receipt of the comments.

8. Within three (3) weeks of receipt of the compiled comments, Tthe institution shall review the comments and revise the preliminary draft master plan, if necessary, discussing and evaluating in writing the comments of all parties. The lead agency shall review the comments and be responsible for the revision of the preliminary draft EIS if necessary. If no EIS is required, the lead agency shall review the comments and be responsible for the annotation of the environmental checklist and revisions to any supplemental studies if necessary. Within three (3) weeks after receipt of the revised drafts, Tthe Director shall review the revised drafts and may require further documentation or analysis on the part of the institution. Three (3) additional weeks may be spent revising the drafts for publication.

9. The Director shall publish the draft master plan,. If an EIS is required, and shall publish the lead agency shall publish the draft EIS as required by Section 25.05.510 of the Seattle Municipal Code.

10. The Director and the lead agency shall hold a public hearing on the draft master plan and if an EIS is required, on the draft EIS.

11. The aAdvisory cCommittee, the Engineering Department and the Director shall prepare a report submit comments on the draft master plan and if an EIS is required,and shall submit comments on the draft EIS within six (6) weeks after the issuance of the draft master plan and EIS.

12. Within thirteen (13) weeks after receipt of the comments, the institution shall review the comments on the draft master plan and shall prepare the final master plan.

13. The institution shall prepare a preliminary final master plan and If an EIS is required, the lead agency shall be responsible for the preparation of a preliminary final EIS, following the public hearing and within six (6) weeks after receipt of the comments on the draft EIS. 13. The advisory committee, tThe Engineering Department, the Director, and the institution shall submit comments on the preliminary final master plan and preliminary final EIS. 14. The institution shall review the comments and revise the preliminary final master plan, if necessary.

14. The lead agency shall review the comments on the preliminary final EIS and shall be responsible for the revision of the preliminary final EIS, if necessary. The Director shall review the revised final documents and may require further documentation or analysis on the part of the institution.

15. Within seven (7) weeks after preparation of the preliminary final EIS, Tthe Director shall publish the final EIS and the final master plan and, if an EIS is required, the lead agency shall publish the final EIS.

E. Draft Report and Recommendation of the Director.

1. Within five (5) weeks of the publication of the final master plan and EIS, The Director shall prepare a draft written rReport on an the application for a master plan as provided in Section 23.76.050, Report of the Director. The Director shall first prepare a draft Director's Report, and shall submit it to the advisory committee and the institution. The advisory committee and the institution shall review and submit comments on the draft Director's Report. The Director shall review the comments, and prepare a final Director's Report on the final master plan.

2. In the Director's Report, a determination shall be made whether the proposed planned development and changes of the major institution are consistent with the framework policy of the City's Major Institution Ppolicies in Section 23.12.120 and in the Land Use Element of the City of Seattle's Comprehensive Plan, and whether the proposed planned development and changes represent a reasonable balance of the public benefits of development and change with the need to maintain livability and vitality of adjacent neighborhoods. Consideration shall be given to:

a. The reasons for institutional growth and change, the public benefits resulting from the proposed planned new facilities and services, and the way in which the proposed development will serve the public purpose mission of the major institution; and

b. The extent to which the growth and change will significantly harm the livability and vitality of the surrounding neighborhood.

3. In the Director's Report, an assessment shall be made of the extent to which the major institution, with its proposed development and changes, will address the goals and applicable policies under Education and Employability and Health in the Human Development Element of the Comprehensive Plan the City's health policies and human services goals, including the provision of medical and educational services to low income people.

4. The Director's analysis and recommendation on the proposed master plan's development program component shall consider the following:

a. The extent to which the institution's plans for development conform to the City's Major Institution Policy on concentration of Major Institution development on existing campuses or decentralization of Major Institution development. The Director may require existing or proposed facilities to be located beyond two thousand five hundred feet (2,500') of a Major Institution Overlay District boundary if the following conditions are present:

(1) The facility or use does not require geographic proximity to the main institution, or

Development potential within the boundaries of the applicable Major Institution Overlay District is needed for facilities more critical to the central mission of the major institution and increasing development potential would produce unacceptable adverse impacts on the surrounding area, and

(2) Decentralization would reduce or eliminate undesirable adverse impacts on the surrounding neighborhood, including the need for expanding the boundary of the Major Institution Overlay District,

a.b. The extent to which the major institution proposes to lease space or otherwise locate a use at street level in a commercial zone development is proposed to be located outside of, but the Major Institution Overlay district within two thousand five hundred feet (2,500') of, the MIOverlay District boundary that is not similar to a personal and household retail sales and service use, eating and drinking establishment, customer service office, entertainment use or child care center but is allowed in the zone. To approve such a proposal, the Director shall consider the criteria in Section 23.69.035D4. To approve major institution development within two thousand five hundred feet (2,500') of the boundary of the Overlay District, except for development in a Downtown zone, which would result in floor area of major institution uses in excess of forty thousand (40,000) square feet or ten thousand (10,000) square feet on any one (1) site, the development shall:

(1) Conform to the standards of the zone in which it is proposed to be located, and

(2) Be compatible with other uses in the zone, and

(3) Be essential to meeting the central mission of the major institution,

b.c. The extent to which proposed development is phased in a manner which minimizes adverse impacts on the surrounding area. When public improvements are anticipated in the vicinity of proposed major institution development or expansion, coordination between the major institution development schedule and timing of public improvements shall be required,

c.d. The extent to which historic structures which are designated on any federal, state or local historic or landmark register are proposed to be restored or reused. Any changes to designated Seattle Landmarks shall comply with the requirements of the Landmarks Preservation Ordinance. The major institution's aA dvisory cCommittee shall review any application to demolish a designated Seattle Landmark and shall submit comments to the Landmarks Preservation Board before any certificate of approval is issued,

d. The extent to which the proposed density of major institution development will affect vehicular and pedestrian circulation, adequacy of public facilities, capacity of public infrastructure, and amount of open space provided,

e. The extent to which the limit on the number of total parking spaces allowed will minimize the impacts of vehicular circulation, traffic volumes and parking in the area surrounding the MIO District.

5. The Director's analysis and recommendation on the proposed master plan's development standards component shall be based on the following:

a. The extent to which buffers such as topographic features, freeways or large open spaces are present or transitional height limits are proposed to mitigate the difference between the height and scale of existing or proposed major institution development and that of adjoining areas. Transition may also be achieved through the provision of increased setbacks, articulation of structure facades, limits on structure height or bulk or increased spacing between structures;

b. The extent to which any structure is permitted to achieve the height limit of the Major Institution Overlay MIO District. The Director shall evaluate the specified limits on structure height in relationship to the amount of Overlay MIO District area permitted to be covered by structures, the impact of shadows on surrounding properties, the need for transition between the major institution and the surrounding area, and the need to protect views;

c. The extent to which setbacks of major institution development at ground level or upper levels of a structure from the boundary of the Major Institution Overlay MIO District or along public rights-of-way are provided for and the extent to which these setbacks provide a transition between major institution development and development in adjoining areas;

d. The extent to which allowable lot coverage is consistent with permitted density and allows for adequate setbacks along public rights-of-way or boundaries of the Major Institution Overlay MIO District. Coverage limits should insure that view corridors through major institution development are enhanced and that area for landscaping and open space is adequate to minimize the impact of major institution development within the Overlay MIO District and on the surrounding area. Allowable lot coverage shall be specified on the basis of the entire Major Institution Overlay District or on a subarea basis within the Overlay District;

e. The extent to which allowable density of development is specified either by the provision of floor area ratios (FAR) or by allowable gross floor area of development. Density limits shall be specified on the basis of the entire Major Institution Overlay District or on a subarea basis within the Overlay District. Allowable density shall consider the impacts of density of major institution development on vehicular and pedestrian circulation, adequacy of public facilities, capacity of public infrastructure, and amount of open space provided. Density permitted shall not significantly impact the provision of neighborhood services to the surrounding area;

f. The extent to which landscaping standards have been incorporated for required setbacks, for open space, along public rights-of-way, and for surface parking areas. Landscaping shall meet or exceed the amount of landscaping required by the underlying zoning. Trees shall be required along all public rights-of-way where feasible;

gf. The extent to which access to planned parking, loading and service areas is provided from an arterial street;

hg. The extent to which the provisions for pedestrian circulation maximize connections between public pedestrian rights-of-way within and adjoining the Major Institution Overlay MIO District in a convenient manner. Pedestrian connections between neighborhoods separated by major institution development shall be emphasized and enhanced;

ih. The extent to which designated open space maintains the patterns and character of the area in which the major institution is located and is desirable in location and access for use by patients, students, visitors and staff of the major institution. If proposed open-space areas are deemed to be inadequate to serve the needs of the major institution, the Director may require that the major institution contribute to the provision of public open space nearby;

ji. The extent to which designated open space, though not required to be physically accessible to the public, is visually accessible to the public;

kj. The extent to which the proposed development standards provide for the protection of scenic views and/or views of landmark structures. Scenic views and/or views of landmark structures along existing public rights-of-way or those proposed for vacation may be preserved. New view corridors shall be considered where potential enhancement of views through the major institution or of scenic amenities may be enhanced. To maintain or provide for view corridors the Director may require, but not be limited to, the alternate spacing or placement of planned structures or grade-level openings in planned structures. The institution shall not be required to reduce the combined gross floor area of proposed buildings for the MIO District in order to protect views other than those protected under City laws of general applicability.

6. The Director's report shall specify all measures or actions necessary to be taken by the major institution to mitigate adverse impacts of major institution development that are specified in the proposed master plan.

7. The Director shall make a recommendation on each of the issues highlighted in the advisory committee's comments on the draft Director's Report as being unresolved or inadequately addressed. In addition, on those issues where the Director's recommendation differs from the advisory committee's comments, the Director shall include written justification for the Director's recommendation.

F. Draft Advisory Committee Report.

1. At the same time the Director is preparing a written report on the master plan application, Tthe aA dvisory cCommittee shall prepare a written report of its findings and recommendations on the final master plan and on the final Director's Report. The aAdvisory cC ommittee report shall include, in addition to its recommendations, the public comments it received. The document may incorporate minority reports.

2. The aAdvisory cCommittee report shall set forth any issues which the committee believes were inadequately addressed in the final master plan and final EIS and clearly state the committee's position on these issues.

3. The aAdvisory cCommittee report shall include a record of committee meetings, including the meetings' minutes.

G. Preparation of Final Director's Report and Final Advisory Committee Report.

1. The Director shall submit the draft Director's Report to the Advisory Committee and the institution for their review.

2. Within three (3) weeks after receipt of the draft Director's Report, the Advisory Committee and the institution shall review and submit comments to the Director on the draft Director's Report.

3. Within two (2) weeks after receipt of the Advisory Committee's and institution's comments, the Director shall review the comments, and prepare a final Director's Report using the criteria in subsection E. The Director shall address each of the issues in the Advisory Committee's comments on the draft Director's Report. In addition, on those issues where the Director's recommendation differs from the Advisory Committee's recommendations, the Director shall include explanation of the difference.

4. The Director shall submit the final Director's Report to the Advisory Committee.

5. Within two (2) weeks after receipt of the final Director's Report, the Advisory Committee shall finalize its report according to subsection F. The Advisory Committee report shall also include comments on the final Director's Report.

H. Hearing Examiner Consideration of the Master Plan.

1. The Hearing Examiner shall review the Director's report and recommendation, including and the aAdvisory cCommittee's report on the Director's report, as provided in Section 23.76.052, Hearing eExaminer open record predecision hearing and recommendation.

2. If the Hearing Examiner considers the proposed master plan and all recommendations for changes, alternatives, mitigating measures and conditions, and determines that a significant master plan element or environmental issue was not adequately addressed by the proposed master plan, the Hearing Examiner may request the institution to prepare new proposals on the issues identified, may request the Director to conduct further analysis or provide clarification, and may request the aAdvisory cCommittee to reconvene for the limited purpose of commenting on the new proposals. The new proposals shall also be submitted to the Director, aA dvisory cCommittee and parties of record for comment. After the new proposals and comments have been received, the Hearing Examiner may:

a. Remand the new proposals and aAdvisory c Committee comments and recommendation to the Director for further consideration and report; or

b. Hold the hearing Open the record open for evidence for a hearing on the new proposals, the aA dvisory cCommittee comments and recommendation, and/or any comments pertaining to the limited issues which were presented by other parties of record.

3. The Hearing Examiner shall submit a recommendation to the Council on the proposed master plan within thirty (30) days following the hearing. In addition to the Hearing Examiner's recommendation, the Hearing Examiner shall transmit to the Council the proposed master plan, environmental documentation, the aAdvisory c Committee's reports, and the report and recommendation of the Director.

HI. Council Consideration of the Hearing Examiner's Recommendation.

1. The Council shall review and consider the Hearing Examiner's recommendation as provided in Section 23.76.054, Council consideration of hHearing eExaminer recommendation. The goal of the Council shall be to take final action on the Hearing Examiner's recommendation no later than six (6 three (3) months after the date it receives the recommendation.

2. If the Council examines the proposed master plan and all recommendations for changes, alternatives, mitigating measures and conditions, and determines that a significant master plan element or environmental issue was not adequately addressed by the proposed master plan, the Council may request the institution to prepare new proposals on the issue identified, may request the Director to conduct further analysis or provide clarification, and may request the a Advisory cCommittee to convene for the limited purpose of commenting on the new proposals. The new proposals shall also be submitted to the Director, Advisory Committee and parties of record for comment. After the new proposals and comments have been received, the Council may:

a. Remand the new proposals and aAdvisory c Committee comments and recommendations to the Director for further consideration and report; or

b. Direct the Hearing Examiner to conduct another hearing and to reconsider the recommendation based on the new proposals, the a Advisory cCommittee comments and recommendation, and/or any comments pertaining to the limited issues which were presented by other parties of record; or

c. Open the record for a hearing on the new proposals, the a Advisory cCommittee comments and recommendation, and any comments pertaining to the limited issues which were presented by other parties of record.

3. Consideration of a master plan for the University of Washington will be made in concert with the Board of Regents in accordance with the Agreement between The City of Seattle and the University of Washington, May 2, 1983.

IJ. Council Decision.

1. The Council's decision to adopt, adopt with conditions, or deny an application for a Major Institution Master Plan shall comply with the requirements of Section 23.76.056, Council decision on h Hearing eExaminer recommendation.

2. Adoption of a master plan shall be by ordinance. A master plan shall not become final until the ordinance approving it becomes law pursuant to the City Charter.

JK. Requirement for Compiled Plan. Within thirty (30) days of adoption of a master plan by the Council, the institution shall submit a draft copy of the compiled adopted plan for the Director's review and approval. This compiled plan shall incorporate all changes and conditions imposed during the plan approval process. The Director shall review the compiled plan within thirty (30) days of receipt of the plan, and may request corrections or clarifications if necessary. Upon the Director's approval, the institution shall submit seven (7) written twenty-five (25) copies plus a camera-ready original of the compiled adopted plan to the Director. The Director shall keep one copy and distribute the other six (6) copies to the City Clerk's Office, the Office of Management and Planning, the Department of Neighborhoods and the Seattle Public Library (one (1) copy for the main downtown library and two (2) copies to go to the two (2) branch libraries nearest the institution). The institution shall also submit one (1) copy of the compiled adopted plan in electronic format for the City to post on the Public Access Network (PAN) This compiled plan shall incorporate all changes and conditions imposed during the plan approval process. No mMaster uUse p Permit for development first permitted in the adopted plan shall be issued until the compiled plan has been reviewed and approved by the Director except as provided in Section 23.69.033.

Section 21. Subsection C of Section 23.69.033 of the SMC, which Section was adopted by Ordinance 115002, is hereby repealed.

Section 22. Subsections H and I of Section 23.69.034 of the SMC, which Section was last amended by Ordinance 116744, are amended as follows:

23.69.034 Effect of master plan adoption.

H. The Advisory Committee and the neighborhood planning group from the surrounding area, if applicable, will be notified of master use permit (MUP) applications for major institution uses within the Major Institution Overlay (MIO) District and for major institution structures outside of but within two thousand five hundred feet (2,500') of the MIO District boundaries, and shall have an opportunity to review and comment on the institution structures outside of but within two thousand five hundred feet (2,500') of the MIO District boundaries, and shall have an opportunity to review and comment on the applications if there is a discretionary decision and formal comment period as part of the MUP.

I.H. The institution shall provide an annual status report on institution development to the Director and the Advisory Committee which shall detail the progress the institution has made in achieving the goals and objectives of the master plan. The annual report shall contain the following information:

1. A report on tThe status of projects which were initiated or under construction during the previous year; and

2. A report on progress anticipated in the following year towards the initiation or completion of development projects; and

3. A statement of tThe institution's land and structure acquisition, ownership and leasing activity outside of but within two-thousand five hundred feet (2,500') of the Major Institution Overlay MIO District boundary undertaken during the year; and;

34. A report on p Progress made in achieving the goals and objectives contained in the transportation management program towards the reduction of single-occupant vehicle use by institution employees, staff and/or students; and

5. A report on the progress made in achieving the goals and objectives established in the master plan for addressing the City's health policies and human services goals; and

6. A report on the p4. Progress made in meeting conditions of master plan approval. This report shall include any required annual reports relating to institution activities.

I. 1. The Director shall review the annual status report and, in consultation with other government agencies, shall evaluate the institution's progress toward achieving the goals and objectives established in the master plan for addressing the City's health policies and human services goals. The Director shall notify the Council that DCLU is conducting the review, and the Council may schedule one (1) or more public hearing(s) to

2. If substantial progress is not being made in addressing the City's health policies and human services goals, the Council and/or the Director may direct the institution to meet with representatives of City departments, including the Health Department, the Department of Housing and Human Services and the Department of Neighborhoods, to develop additional steps to improve the institution's performance in addressing the City's policies and goals.

Section 23. Section 23.69.035 of the SMC, which was last amended by Ordinance 115165, is amended as follows:

23.69.035 Changes to a master plan Master plan amendment.

A. A Pproposed change amendments to an adopted master plan shall be reviewed by the Director and determined to be an exempt change, a minor amendment, or a major amendment.

B. Exempt Changes. An exempt change shall be a change to the design and/or location of a planned structure or other improvement from that shown in the master plan, which the Director shall approve without publishing an interpretation. Any new gross floor area or parking space(s) must be accompanied by a decrease in gross floor area or parking space(s) elsewhere if the total gross floor area or parking spaces permitted for the entire MIO District or, if applicable, the subarea would be exceeded. Each exempt change must meet the development standards for the MIO District. Exempt changes shall be:

1. Any new structure or addition to an existing structure not approved in the master plan that is twelve thousand (12,000) square feet of gross floor area or less; or

2. Twenty (20) or fewer parking spaces not approved in the master plan; or

3. An addition to a structure not yet constructed but approved in the master plan that is no greater than twenty percent (20%) of the approved gross floor area of that structure or twentythousand (20,000) square feet, whichever is less; or

4. Any change in the phasing of construction, if not tied to a master plan condition imposed under approval by the Council; or

5. Any increase in gross floor area below-grade.

C. Amendments. The aAdvisory cC ommittee shall be given the opportunity to review a proposed minor or major amendment and submit comments on whether it should be considered a) minor or a major amendment, and what conditions (if any) should be imposed if it is minor. The Director shall determine whether the amendment is a minor amendment which complies with the original intent of the adopted master plan, or is a major amendment which does not comply with the original intent of the master plan according to subsections D and E. The Director's decision that a proposed amendment is minor or major shall be made in the form of an interpretation subject to the procedures of Chapter 23.88, Rules; Interpretation. If the Director and the major institution agree that a major amendment is required based on subsection E, the interpretation process may be waived, and the amendment and environmental review process shall be subject to the provisions of subsection G. After the Director makes a decision on whether an amendment is minor or major, the Advisory Committee shall be notified.

D. Minor Amendments. A proposed change to an adopted master plan shall be considered and approved as a minor amendment when it is not an exempt change according to subsection B, when it is consistent with the original intent of the adopted master plan, and when it meets at least one of the following criteria:

1. The amendment will not result in significantly greater impacts than those contemplated in the adopted master plan; or

2. The amendment is a waiver from a development standard or master plan condition, or a change in the location or decrease in size of designated open space, and the proposal does not go beyond the minimum necessary to afford relief and will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity in which the major institution is located; or

3. The amendment is a proposal by the major institution to lease space or otherwise locate a use at street level in a commercial zone outside a MIO District, and within two thousand five hundred feet (2,500') of the MIO District boundary, and the use is allowed in the zone but not permitted pursuant to Section 23.69.022. In making the determination whether the amendment is minor, the Director shall consider the following factors:

a. Whether an adequate supply of commercially zoned land for businesses serving neighborhood residents will continue to exist; and

b. Whether the use will maintain or enhance the viability or long term potential of the neighborhood-serving character of the area; and

c. Whether the use will displace existing neighborhoodserving commercial uses at street level or disrupt a continuous commercial street front, particularly of personal and household retail sales and service uses; and

d. Whether the use supports neighborhood planning goals and objectives as provided in a Council-approved neighborhood plan.

E.B. Major Amendments. A proposed change amendment to an adopted master plan shall be considered a major amendment subject to the provisions of Section 23.69.032 when it is not an exempt change according to subsection B or a minor amendment according to subsection D. In addition, any of the following shall be considered a major amendment:

1. An increase in a height designation or the expansion of the boundary of the Major Institution Overlay MIO District is proposed; or

2. Any change to a development standard that is less restrictive; or

2. The proposal seeks to permit structures of significantly greater height or bulk than those contemplated in the master plan; or

3. A reduction in housing stock or development outside the boundary but within two thousand five hundred feet (2,500') of the Major Institution Overlay MIO District, other than within a Downtown zone, is proposed that exceeds the level approved in the an adopted master plan; or

4. The proposed amendment substantially alters the types or mix of institutional uses; or

5. The proposed amendment has significantly greater impacts than were contemplated in the master plan; when assessing whether impacts are significantly greater, the Director shall consider both the magnitude of the impacts and who is impacted; or

4.6. A Cchanges are proposed to the single-occupancy vehicle goals of an approved transportation management program that increases the percentage of people traveling by single-occupancy vehicle; or

5. A use that requires Council Conditional Use approval, including but not limited to a helistop or a major communication utility, that was not described in an adopted master plan; or

6. The update of an entire development program component of a master plan that was adopted under code provisions prior to the 1996 major institutions ordinance where the institution proposes an increase to the total amount of gross floor area allowed or the total number of parking spaces allowed under the institution's existing development program component within the MIO District.

7. One (1) major institution has acquired, merged with, or consolidated with another major institution, pursuant to Section 23.69.023, and an application is filed for a project containing major institution use(s) that is located on any portion of the combined Major Institution Overlay District not already covered by an adopted master plan and would either:

a. Exceed the envelope of structures existing on the date of the acquisition, merger or consolidation, except for the addition or heating, ventilating, air conditioning, mechanical, or similar equipment, or

b. Demolish all or most of any existing structure, or

c. Result in an increase of more than one hundred thousand (100,000) square feet of gross floor area of medical offices, over the amount existing on the date of the acquisition, merger or consolidation, in the portion of the combined Major Institution Overlay District not already covered by an adopted master plan, excluding any structure for which medical service use is the established use, and excluding medical offices that directly serve hospital clinic, laboratory, nursing facility, and blood bank uses;

F. If the Director, after reviewing any Advisory Committee recommendation, determines that a proposed major amendment is of unusual complexity or size, the Director may require that the institution prepare a new master plan subject to Section 23.69.032.

G. If an amendment is determined to be major, the amendment and environmental review process shall be subject to the provisions of Section 23.69.032, Master plan process. However, a concept plan and preliminary draft plan shall not be required. Instead, the major institution shall submit a major amendment draft report as part of the application stating which parts of the master plan are proposed to be amended. If an EIS is required for the major amendment, the draft EIS shall be prepared after submittal of the major amendment draft report. After comments are received on the major amendment draft report, the institution shall prepare the major amendment final report and if required, the final EIS. If an EIS is not required for the major amendment, the Director is not required to hold a public hearing on the major amendment draft report.

C. A proposed amendment shall be considered minor if structures, uses or features described in the Master Plan are relocated and the Director finds the relocation would not have a significantly greater impact than the siting proposed in the master plan.

D. The Director shall notify the advisory committee of any proposed minor amendment to an adopted master plan, and the advisory committee shall comment on the proposed amendment. After the Director makes a decision, the advisory committee shall be notified.

H.E. Noncontiguous areas that which are included in a Major Institution Overlay MIO District as a result of a previously adopted master plan shall be deleted from the Major Institution Overlay MIO District at the time a major amendment is approved, unless the noncontiguous area was a former and separate MIO District. The change to the Overlay MIO District boundaries shall be in accordance with the procedures for City-initiated amendments to the Official Land Use Map as provided in Chapter 23.76, Master Use Permits and Council Land Use Decisions, and shall not be subject to the rezone criteria in the City's Major Institution Policies.

Section 24. Subsections B and C of Section 23.69.036 of the SMC, which Section was adopted by Ordinance 115002, are repealed.

Section 25. Subsection D of Section 23.69.036 of the SMC, which Section was adopted by Ordinance 115002, is amended as follows:

23.69.036 Master plan renewal.

DB. Noncontiguous areas which are included in a Major Institution Overlay MIO District as a result of a previously adopted master plan shall be deleted from the Major Institution Overlay MIO District at the time a new master plan development program component is adopted, unless the noncontiguous area was a former and separate MIO District. The change to the Overlay MIO District boundaries shall be in accordance with the procedures for City-initiated amendments to the Official Land Use Map as provided in Chapter 23.76, Master Use Permits and Council Land Use Decisions, and shall not be subject to the rezone criteria in the City's Major Institution Policies.

Section 26. Plat 40W, Page 110 of the Official Land Use Map of the City of Seattle, as last amended by Ordinance 118050, is hereby amended to eliminate the Major Institution Overlay District for Cabrini Hospital as shown on "Attachment A" to this Ordinance.

Section 27. The provisions of this ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. The invalidity of any particular provision shall not affect the validity of any other provision.

Section 28. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after its approval by the Mayor, but if not approved and returned by the Mayor within ten (10) days after presentation, it shall take effect as provided by Municipal Code Section 1.04.020.

Passed by the City Council the _____ day of ____________, 1996, and signed by me in open session in authentication of its passage this _____ day of _________________, 1996.

___________________________________

President ........................ of the City Council

Approved by me this _____ day of _________________, 1996.

___________________________________

Norman B. Rice, Mayor

Filed by me this _____ day of ____________________, 1996.

__________________________________

City Clerk

(SEAL)

ngt/msl November 4,1996 V7