12.95.050 Grounds for appeal – Concurrency, MPS, IS.
(1) For appeals of denial or conditional approval of a certificate of concurrency, the appellant must show that:
(a) The Department committed a technical error;
(b) Alternative data or a traffic mitigation plan, which may include transportation strategies such as demand management or vanpools, submitted to the Department was inadequately considered;
(c) The action of the Department would substantially deprive the owner of all reasonable use of the property;
(d) Conditions required by the Department for concurrency are not related to the concurrency requirement; or
(e) The action of the Department was arbitrary and capricious.
(2) For appeals of the MPS fee, the appellant must show that the Department:
(a) Committed an error in:
(i) Calculating the development’s proportionate share, as determined by an individual fee calculation, or if relevant, as set forth in the fee schedule; or
(ii) Granting credit for benefit factors; or
(b) Based the final decision upon incorrect data; or
(c) Gave inadequate consideration to alternative data or mitigations submitted to the Department.
(3) For appeals of IS improvements, the appellant must show that:
(a) The Department committed a technical error;
(b) Alternative data or a traffic mitigation plan submitted to the Department was inadequately considered; or
(c) Conditions required by the Department are not related to improvements needed to serve the proposed development. (Ord. 38-02 § 2 (12.65.040))