(Reference WAC 197-11-910.) The administrator of development regulations per EMC § 15.06.050 shall be responsible for administering this chapter, except that determination of whether a proposal must undergo environmental review (reference categorical exemptions, WAC 197-11-305) shall be the responsibility of that agent of the city which first receives or initiates the proposal.
(Ord. 2316 § 2 (Exh. A), 2006; Ord. 2367 § 4, 2007)
(Reference WAC 197-11-504(2).) The applicant shall pay all costs associated with preparation and circulation of EISs, under the direction of the administrator. The city may offset these costs by charging nongovernmental entities for copies of any documents prepared under this section. The EIS may be prepared by the city, the applicant, or a consultant, at the discretion of the administrator, but in most cases will be prepared by a consultant.
(Ord. 2316 § 2 (Exh. A), 2006; Ord. 2367 § 4, 2007)
The following additional elements are part of the environment for the purpose of EIS content, but do not add to the criteria for threshold determinations or perform any other function or purpose under this chapter:
A. 
Economy;
B. 
Social policy analysis;
C. 
Cost-benefit analysis.
(Ord. 2316 § 2 (Exh. A), 2006; Ord. 2367 § 4, 2007)
A. 
The policies and goals set forth in this chapter are supplementary to those in the existing authorization of the city of Enumclaw.
B. 
The city may attach conditions to a permit or approval for a proposal so long as:
1. 
Such conditions are necessary to mitigate specific probable adverse environmental impacts identified in environmental documents prepared pursuant to this chapter; and
2. 
Such conditions are in writing; and
3. 
The mitigation measures included in such conditions are reasonable and capable of being accomplished; and
4. 
The city has considered whether other local, state, or federal mitigation measures applied to the proposal are sufficient to mitigate the identified impacts; and
5. 
Such conditions are based on one or more policies in subsection D of this section and cited in the license or other decision document.
C. 
The city may deny a permit or approval for a proposal on the basis of SEPA so long as:
1. 
A finding is made that approving the proposal would result in probable significant adverse environmental impacts that are identified in a FEIS or final SEIS prepared pursuant to this chapter; and
2. 
A finding is made that there are no reasonable mitigation measures capable of being accomplished that are sufficient to mitigate the identified impact; and
3. 
The denial is based on one or more policies identified in subsection D of this section and identified in writing in the decision document.
D. 
The city designates and adopts by reference the following policies as the basis for the city's exercise of authority pursuant to this section:
1. 
The city adopts by reference the policies in the following city documents:
a. 
The Enumclaw Municipal Code.
b. 
The Enumclaw comprehensive plan.
c. 
The shoreline management master program.
d. 
City of Enumclaw policies, design standards and studies.
e. 
City of Enumclaw general sewer system plan.
f. 
The King County countywide policies.
g. 
The King County shoreline management master program.
h. 
City of Enumclaw parks and open space plan.
i. 
King County Fire District 28 capital improvement plan.
j. 
Enumclaw school district capital facilities plan.
k. 
Stormwater comprehensive plan.
l. 
Resolution No. 1399 – Green House Gas Emission Reduction Policy.
m. 
Natural gas system plan and long-range investment plan.
n. 
Enumclaw strategic plan for economic development.
o. 
City of Enumclaw water systems plan.
p. 
Attachment C to King County Ordinance 17487.
q. 
Technical Appendix B to 2021 Comprehensive Plan.
r. 
PSRC Regional Plan.
s. 
City of Enumclaw transportation improvement plan.
t. 
City of Enumclaw franchises and easement agreements.
(Ord. 2316 § 2 (Exh. A), 2006; Ord. 2367 § 4, 2007; Ord. 2750 § 1 (Exh. A), 2023)