This part contains the rules for deciding whether a proposal has a "probable significant, adverse environmental impact" requiring an environmental impact statement (EIS) to be prepared. This part also contains rules for integrating SEPA environmental analysis with project review and for evaluating the impacts of proposals not requiring an EIS. The city adopts the following sections by reference, as supplemented in this part:
WAC 197-11-300
Purpose of this part.
WAC 197-11-305
Categorical exemptions.
WAC 197-11-310
Threshold determination required.
WAC 197-11-315
Environmental checklist.
WAC 197-11-330
Threshold determination process.
WAC 197-11-335
Additional information.
WAC 197-11-340
Determination of nonsignificance (DNS).
WAC 197-11-350
Mitigated DNS.
WAC 197-11-355
Optional DNS process.
WAC 197-11-360
Determination of significance (DS)/initiation of scoping.
WAC 197-11-390
Effect of threshold determination.
(Ord. 2304 § 1 (part), 2013)
A. 
Categorical exemptions are adopted by reference under CMC § 16.04.180. The city establishes the following exempt levels for minor new construction under WAC 197-11-800(1)(d) based on local conditions:
1. 
For residential dwelling units in WAC 197-11-800(1)(d): twenty units.
2. 
For agricultural structures in WAC 197-11-800(1)(d): forty thousand square feet.
3. 
For office, school, commercial, recreational, service or storage buildings in WAC 197-11-800(1)(d): twelve thousand square feet and forty parking spaces.
4. 
For parking lots in WAC 197-11-800(1)(d): forty parking spaces.
5. 
For landfills and excavations in WAC 197-11-800(1)(d): one thousand cubic yards.
B. 
The city shall send the new exempt levels established under this section to the Department of Ecology, Headquarters Office, Olympia, Washington, 98504 under WAC 197-11-800(1)(c).
(Ord. 2304 § 1 (part), 2013)
A. 
Upon receiving an application for a license or, in the case of governmental proposals, initiating the proposal, the city shall determine whether the license and/or the proposal is exempt. The city's determination that a proposal is exempt shall be final and not subject to administrative review. If a proposal is exempt, none of the procedural requirements of this chapter shall apply to the proposal.
B. 
In determining whether or not a proposal is exempt, the city shall make certain the proposal is properly defined and shall identify the governmental licenses required (WAC 197-11-060). If a proposal includes exempt and nonexempt actions, the city shall determine the lead agency, even if the license application that triggers the city's consideration is exempt.
C. 
If a proposal includes both exempt and nonexempt actions, the city may authorize exempt actions prior to compliance with the procedural requirements of this chapter, except that:
1. 
The city shall not give authorization for:
a. 
Any nonexempt action;
b. 
Any action that would have an adverse environmental impact; or
c. 
Any action that would limit the choice of alternatives.
2. 
The city may withhold approval of an exempt action that would lead to modification of the physical environment, when such modification would serve no purpose if nonexempt action(s) were not approved; and
3. 
The city may withhold approval of exempt actions that would lead to substantial financial expenditures by a private applicant when the expenditures would serve no purpose if nonexempt action(s) were not approved.
D. 
1. 
Short subdivision of lands previously subdivided under an exemption from the SEPA rules shall not be exempt from environmental review.
2. 
Proposed short subdivision of land that is adjacent to previous short subdivisions or adjacent to land on which a subdivision is pending shall not be exempt if adjacent subdivisions share any improvements or access easements. In such cases, the proposed short plat will be considered physically or functionally related regardless of ownership.
(Ord. 2304 § 1 (part), 2013)
A. 
A completed environmental checklist (or a copy), in the form provided in WAC 197-11-960, shall be filed at the same time as an application for a permit, license, certificate, or other approval not specifically exempted in this chapter; provided, that a checklist is not needed if the city and applicant agree an EIS is required, SEPA compliance has been completed, or SEPA compliance has been initiated by another agency. The city shall use the environmental checklist to determine the lead agency.
B. 
For private proposals, the city will require the applicant to complete the environmental checklist, providing assistance as necessary. For city proposals, the applicant shall complete the environmental checklist for that proposal.
C. 
The city may require that it or a consultant of the city's choosing, and not the private applicant, shall complete all or part of the environmental checklist for a private proposal, if either of the following occurs:
1. 
The city has technical information on a question or questions that is unavailable to the private applicant; or
2. 
The applicant has provided inaccurate information on previous proposals or on proposals currently under consideration. Prior to the hiring of such consultant, the applicant, the city and the consultant shall enter into a three-party agreement under which the applicant pays the consultant directly for services rendered.
(Ord. 2304 § 1 (part), 2013)
A. 
As provided in this section and in WAC 197-11-350, the responsible official may issue a DNS based on conditions attached to the proposal by the responsible official or on changes to, or clarifications of, the proposal made by the applicant.
B. 
Early Notice.
1. 
An applicant may request in writing early notice of whether a DS is likely under WAC 197-11-350. The request must:
a. 
Follow submission of a permit application and environmental checklist for a nonexempt proposal for which the city is lead agency; and
b. 
Precede the city's actual threshold determination for the proposal.
2. 
The responsible official should respond to the request for early notice within fifteen working days. The response shall:
a. 
Be written;
b. 
State whether the city currently considers issuance of a DS likely and, if so, indicate the general or specific areas of concern that are leading the city to consider a DS; and
c. 
State that the applicant may change or clarify the proposal to mitigate the indicated impacts, revising the environmental checklist and/or permit application as necessary to reflect the changes or clarifications.
C. 
As much as possible, the city should assist the applicant with identification of impacts to the extent necessary to formulate mitigation measures.
D. 
When an applicant submits a changed or clarified proposal along with a revised or amended environmental checklist, the city shall base its threshold determination on the changed or clarified proposal and should make the determination within fifteen days of receiving the changed or clarified proposal:
1. 
If the city indicated specific mitigation measures in its response to the request for early notice, and the applicant changed or clarified the proposal to include those specific mitigation measures, the city shall issue and circulate a DNS under WAC 197-11-340(2).
2. 
If the city indicated areas of concern, but did not indicate specific mitigation measures that would allow it to issue a DNS, the city shall make the threshold determination, issuing a DNS or DS as appropriate.
3. 
The applicant's proposed mitigation measures (clarifications, changes or conditions) must be in writing and must be specific. For example, proposals to "control noise" or "prevent storm water runoff" are inadequate, whereas proposals to "muffle machinery to X decibel" or "construct two-hundred-foot storm water retention pond at Y location" are adequate.
4. 
Mitigation measures which justify issuance of a mitigated DNS may be incorporated in the DNS by reference to agency staff reports, studies or other documents.
E. 
A mitigated DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2), requiring a fourteen-day comment period and public notice or issued under the optional DNS process, WAC 197-11-355.
F. 
Mitigation measures incorporated in the mitigated DNS shall be deemed conditions of approval of the permit decision and may be enforced in the same manner as any term or condition of the permit, or enforced in any manner specifically prescribed by the city. Failure to comply with the designated mitigation measures shall be grounds for suspension and/or revocation of any issued license or permit.
G. 
If the city's tentative decision on a permit or approval does not include mitigation measures that were incorporated in a mitigated DNS for the proposal, the city should evaluate the threshold determination to assure consistency with WAC 197-11-340(3)(a) (withdrawal of DNS).
H. 
Optional DNS Process.
1. 
When the responsible official has a reasonable basis for determining significant adverse environmental impacts are unlikely for a proposal, the city may use a single integrated comment period to obtain comments on the notice of application and the likely threshold determination for the proposal. If the process is used, an second comment period will typically not be required when the DNS is issued.
2. 
If the city uses the optional process, the responsible official shall comply with the requirements of WAC 179-11-355, combining the SEPA notice with the notice of application and providing on fourteen-day comment period for the application and SEPA determination.
I. 
The city's written response under subsection (B) of this section, Early Notice, shall not be construed as a determination of significance. In addition, preliminary discussion of clarifications or changes to a proposal, as opposed to a written request for early notice, shall not bind the city to consider the clarifications or changes in its threshold determination.
(Ord. 2304 § 1 (part), 2013)