The city of Poulsbo adopts this chapter under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), RCW 43.21C.120 and the SEPA rules WAC 197-11-904. This chapter contains the city’s SEPA procedures and policies. The SEPA rules contained in WAC Chapter 197-11 must be used in conjunction with this chapter. All code sections adopted or referenced in this chapter shall be as such codes now exist or are hereinafter amended.
(Ord. 84-43 § 1, 1984; Ord. 2000-29 § 1, 2000)
The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 of the Washington Administrative Code by reference:
WAC 197-11-040
Definitions.
WAC 197-11-050
Lead agency.
WAC 197-11-060
Content of environmental review.
WAC 197-11-070
Limitations on actions during SEPA process.
WAC 197-11-080
Incomplete or unavailable information.
WAC 197-11-090
Supporting documents.
WAC 197-11-100
Information required of applicants.
WAC 197-11-158
GMA project review—Reliance on existing plans, laws, and regulations.
WAC 197-11-210
SEPA/GMA integration. (WAC 197-11-210 through 197-11-235 optional; does not apply for non-GMA jurisdictions.)
WAC 197-11-220
SEPA/GMA definitions.
WAC 197-11-228
Overall SEPA/GMA integration procedures.
WAC 197-11-230
Timing of an integrated GMA/SEPA process.
WAC 197-11-232
SEPA/GMA integration procedures for preliminary planning, environmental analysis, and expanded scoping.
WAC 197-11-235
Documents.
WAC 197-11-238
Monitoring. (optional)
WAC 197-11-250
SEPA/Model Toxics Control Act integration.
WAC 197-11-253
SEPA lead agency for MTCA actions.
WAC 197-11-256
Preliminary evaluation.
WAC 197-11-259
Determination of nonsignificance for MTCA remedial actions.
WAC 197-11-262
Determination of significance and EIS for MTCA remedial actions.
WAC 197-11-265
Early scoping for MTCA remedial actions.
WAC 197-11-268
MTCA interim actions.
(Ord. 84-43 § 2, 1984; Ord. 2000-29 § 2, 2000)
In addition to those definitions contained within WAC 197-11-700 through 197-11-799 and 197-11-220, when used in this chapter, the following terms shall have the following meanings, unless the context indicates otherwise:
A. 
“Department”
means any division, subdivision or organizational unit of the city established by ordinance, rule or order.
B. 
“Early notice”
means the city’s response to an applicant stating whether it considers issuance of the determination of significance (DS) likely for the applicant’s proposal.
C. 
“SEPA Rules”
means WAC Chapter 197-11 adopted by the Department of Ecology.
D. 
“Optional DNS”
shall mean a project proposal which is processed under the optional DNS process set forth in Section 16.04.115 of this chapter.
E. 
“Ordinance”
means the ordinance, resolution, or other procedure used by the city to adopt regulatory requirements.
(Ord. 84-43 § 3, 1984; Ord. 2000-29 § 3, 2000)
A. 
For those proposals for which the city is a lead agency, the responsible official shall be the planning director or such other person as the director may designate in writing.
B. 
For all proposals for which the city is a lead agency, the responsible official shall make the threshold determination, supervise scoping and preparation of any required EIS and perform any other functions assigned to the lead agency or responsible official by those sections of the SEPA rules that have been adopted by reference.
(Ord. 84-43 § 4, 1984)
A. 
The department within the city receiving an application for or initiating a proposal that involves a nonexempt action shall determine the lead agency for that proposal under WAC 197-11-050, 197-11-253, and 197-11-922 through 197-11-940; unless the lead agency has been previously determined or the department is aware that another department or agency is in the process of determining the lead agency.
B. 
When the city is not the lead agency for a proposal, all departments of the city shall use and consider as appropriate either the DNS or the final EIS of the lead agency in making decisions on the proposal. No city department shall prepare or require preparation of a DNS or EIS in addition to that prepared by the lead agency unless the city determines a supplemental environmental review is necessary under WAC 197-11-600.
C. 
If the city, or any of its departments, receives a lead agency determination made by another agency that appears inconsistent with the criteria of WAC 197-11-253 or WAC 197-11-922 through 197-11-940, it may object to the determination. Any objection must be made to the agency originating the determination and resolved within fourteen days of receipt of the determination or the city must petition the Department of Ecology for a lead agency determination under WAC 197-11-946 within the fourteen-day time period. Any such petition on behalf of the city may be initiated by the responsible official or any department.
D. 
The responsible official is authorized to make agreements as to lead agency status or shared lead agency’s duties for a proposal under WAC 197-11-942 and 197-11-944.
E. 
The responsible official (or any department making a lead agency determination for a private project) shall require sufficient information from the applicant to identify other agencies with jurisdiction.
F. 
When the city is lead agency for a MTCA remedial action, the Department of Ecology shall be provided an opportunity under WAC 197-11-253(5) to review the environmental documents prior to public notice being provided. If the SEPA and MTCA documents are issued together with one public comment period under WAC 197-11-253(6), the city shall decide jointly with Ecology who receives the comment letters and how copies of the comment letters will be distributed to the other agency.
(Ord. 84-43 § 5, 1984; Ord. 2000-29 § 4, 2000)
The city adopts the following sections of WAC Chapter 197-11, as now existing or hereinafter amended, by reference as supplemented in this chapter:
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. 84-43 § 7, 1984; Ord. 2000-29 § 6, 2000)
A. 
Mandatory Time Limits. The responsible official shall make a threshold determination on a completed application within ninety days after the application and supporting documentation are complete. The applicant may request an additional thirty days for the threshold determination.
B. 
Time Estimates. Although state law allows the threshold determination to be made at any time within ninety days after the application and supporting documentation are complete, the city shall endeavor to make such determinations within the time estimated below. The time estimates contained in this subsection apply when the city processes licenses for all private projects and those governmental proposals submitted to the city by other agencies. The actual time may vary with the complexity of the project, availability of staff, cooperation of agencies with jurisdiction or expertise, etc. The time estimates contained in this section shall not be construed as mandatory. The following time estimates are supplied:
1. 
Categorical Exemptions. The city will normally identify whether an action is categorically exempt in seven days of receiving an application.
2. 
Threshold Determinations.
a. 
The city will normally complete threshold determinations that can be based solely upon review of the environmental checklist for the proposal within fifteen days of the date an applicant’s adequate application and completed checklist are submitted.
b. 
When the responsible official requires further information from the applicant or consults with other agencies with jurisdiction:
i. 
The city will normally request such further information within fifteen days of receiving an adequate application and completed environmental check list.
ii. 
The city will normally wait no longer than thirty days for a consulted agency to respond.
iii. 
The responsible official will normally complete the threshold determination within fifteen days of receiving the requested information from the applicant or the consulting agency.
c. 
When the city must initiate further studies, including field investigations, to obtain the information to make the threshold determination, the city will normally complete the studies within thirty days of receiving an adequate application and a completed checklist.
d. 
The city will normally complete threshold determinations on actions where the applicant recommends in writing that an environmental impact study (EIS) be prepared, because of the probable significant adverse environmental impacts described in the application and completed checklist.
e. 
The responsible official will normally respond to a request for early notice within ten days. The threshold determination will normally be made within fifteen days of receipt of the changed or clarified proposal, environmental checklist and/or permit application.
C. 
Definitions. As used in this section:
1. 
“Days”
means calendar days; and
2. 
A completed application for a threshold determination consists of the following information:
a. 
For proposals requiring a permit or license for which an application is otherwise required by city ordinance, a complete application for such permit or license meeting all requirements for such application specified by the said ordinance or administrative procedures, and
b. 
A completed environmental checklist, and
c. 
Such additional information as may be required by the responsible official pursuant to all WAC 197-11-335.
(Ord. 84-43 § 8, 1984; Ord. 92-23 § 1, 1992)
A. 
When the city receives an application for a license or, in the case of governmental proposals a department initiates a proposal, the responsible official shall determine whether the license and/or the proposal is exempt. The 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 responsible official shall make certain the proposal is properly defined and shall identify the governmental license required. If a proposal includes exempt and nonexempt actions, the responsible official shall determine the lead agency even if the license application that triggers the 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,
c. 
Any action that would limit the choice of reasonable 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 the nonexempt actions 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 the nonexempt actions were not approved.
(Ord. 84-43 § 10, 1984)
A. 
If the city’s only action on a proposal is a decision on a building permit or other licenses that requires detailed project plans and specifications, the applicant may request in writing that the city conduct environmental review prior to submission of the detailed plans and specifications.
B. 
In addition to the environmental documents an applicant shall submit the following information for early environmental review:
1. 
Site plan;
2. 
Circulation plans showing access and egress;
3. 
Utility locations;
4. 
Topography;
5. 
Building heights;
6. 
Lighting;
7. 
Buffering;
8. 
Other information as the responsible official may determine.
(Ord. 84-43 § 11, 1984)
A. 
If the responsible official has a reasonable basis for determining that significant adverse environmental impacts are unlikely, the responsible official may elect to use the single integrated comment period set forth in this section. If this process is used, a second comment period will typically not be required when the DNS is issued.
B. 
If the optional process set forth in this section is used, the responsible official shall:
1. 
State on the first page of the notice of application that it expects to issue a DNS for the proposal, and that
a. 
The optional DNS process is being used,
b. 
This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal,
c. 
The proposal may include mitigation measures under applicable codes, and the project review process may incorporate or require mitigation measures regardless of whether an EIS is prepared, and
d. 
A copy of the subsequent threshold determination for the specific proposal may be obtained upon request (in addition, the city may choose to maintain a general mailing list for threshold determination distribution);
2. 
List in the notice of application the conditions being considered to mitigate environmental impacts, if a mitigated DNS is expected;
3. 
Comply with the requirements for a notice of application and public notice in RCW 36.70B.110; and
4. 
Send the notice of application and environmental checklist to:
a. 
Agencies with jurisdiction, the Department of Ecology, affected tribes, and each local agency or political subdivision whose public services would be changed as a result of implementation of the proposal, and
b. 
Anyone requesting a copy of the environmental checklist for the specific proposal (in addition, the city may choose to maintain a general mailing list for checklist distribution).
C. 
If the responsible official indicates on the notice of application that a DNS is likely, an agency with jurisdiction may assume lead agency status during the comment period on the notice of application in accordance with Section 16.04.050 of this chapter and WAC 197-11-948.
D. 
The responsible official shall consider timely comments on the notice of application and either:
1. 
Issue a DNS or mitigated DNS with no comment period using the procedures in subsection E of this section;
2. 
Issue a DNS or mitigated DNS with a comment period using the procedures in subsection E of this section, if the responsible official determines a comment period is necessary;
3. 
Issue a DS; or
4. 
Require additional information or studies prior to making a threshold determination.
E. 
If a DNS or mitigated DNS is issued under subsection D(1) of this section, the responsible official shall send a copy of the DNS or mitigated DNS to the Department of Ecology, agencies with jurisdiction, those who commented, and anyone requesting a copy. A copy of the environmental checklist need not be recirculated.
(Ord. 2000-29 § 7, 2000)
A. 
A completed environmental checklist shall be filed at the same time as an application for a permit, license, certificate or other approval not exempted by this chapter. The checklist shall be in the form of WAC 197-11-960 with such additions that may be required by the responsible official in accordance with WAC 197-11-906(4).
B. 
A checklist is not needed if the city and the applicant agree an EIS is required, SEPA compliance has been completed, or SEPA compliance has been initiated by another agency.
C. 
The city shall use the environmental checklist to determine the lead agency and, if the city is the lead agency for determining the responsible official and for making the threshold determination.
D. 
For private proposals, the applicant is required to complete the environmental checklist. The city may provide assistance as necessary. For city proposals the department initiating the proposal shall complete the environmental checklist for that proposal.
E. 
The city may decide to complete all or part of the environmental checklist for a private proposal, if any of the following occurs:
1. 
The city has technical information on a question or questions that is unavailable to the private applicant;
2. 
The applicant has provided inaccurate information on previous proposals or on proposals currently under consideration;
3. 
Upon request of the applicant, at the applicant’s cost.
(Ord. 84-43 § 12, 1984)
A. 
The responsible official may issue a determination of nonsignificance (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. 
An applicant may request in writing early notice of whether a DS is likely. The request must:
1. 
Follow submission of a permit application and environmental checklist for a nonexempt proposal for which the department is lead agency;
2. 
Precede the city’s actual threshold determination for the proposal.
C. 
The responsible official’s response to the request for early notice shall:
1. 
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;
2. 
State that the applicant may change or clarify the proposal to mitigate the indicated impacts, and may revise the environmental checklist and/or permit application as necessary to reflect the changes or clarifications.
D. 
When an applicant submits a changed or clarified proposal, along with a revised environmental checklist, the city shall base its threshold determination on 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 determination of nonsignificance if the city determines that no additional information or mitigation measures are required.
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.
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. 
1. 
A mitigated DNS is issued under either WAC 197-11-340(2), requiring a fourteen-day comment period and public notice, or WAC 197-11-355, which may require no additional comment period beyond the comment period on the notice of application.
2. 
The city shall not act upon a proposal for which a mitigated DNS has been issued for fourteen days after the date of issuance.
F. 
Mitigation measures incorporated in the mitigated DNS shall be deemed conditions of approval of the licensing decision and may be enforced in the same manner as any term or condition of the permit or enforced in any matter specifically prescribed by the city. Failure to comply with the designated mitigation measures shall be grounds for suspension and/or revocation of any license issued.
G. 
If the city’s tentative decision on a permit or approval does not include mitigation measures that were incorporated in a mitigation DNS for the proposal, the city should evaluate the threshold determination to assure consistency with WAC 197-11-340(3)(a) relating to the withdrawal of a DNS.
H. 
The city’s written response under subsection C of this section shall not be construed as a determination of significance. In addition, preliminary discussion of clarification 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. 84-43 § 13, 1984; Ord. 2000-29 § 9, 2000)
The city adopts the following sections of WAC Chapter 197-11, as now existing or hereinafter amended, by reference as supplemented by this chapter:
WAC 197-11-400
Purpose of EIS.
WAC 197-11-402
General requirements.
WAC 197-11-405
EIS types.
WAC 197-11-406
EIS timing.
WAC 197-11-408
Scoping.
WAC 197-11-410
Expanded scoping.
WAC 197-11-420
EIS preparation.
WAC 197-11-425
Style and size.
WAC 197-11-430
Format.
WAC 197-11-435
Cover letter or memo.
WAC 197-11-440
EIS contents.
WAC 197-11-442
Contents of EIS on nonproject proposals.
WAC 197-11-443
EIS contents when prior nonproject EIS.
WAC 197-11-444
Elements of the environment.
WAC 197-11-448
Relationship of EIS to other considerations.
WAC 197-11-450
Cost-benefit analysis.
WAC 197-11-455
Issuance of DEIS.
WAC 197-11-460
Issuance of FEIS.
(Ord. 84-43 § 14, 1984)
A. 
Preparation of draft and final EIS’s and supplemental EIS’s (SEIS) shall be under the direction of the responsible official. Before the city issues an EIS, the responsible official shall be satisfied that it complies with this chapter and WAC Chapter 197-11.
B. 
The draft and final EIS or SEIS shall be prepared at the city’s option by the city staff, the applicant or by a consultant approved by the city. If the responsible official requires an EIS for a proposal and determines that someone other than the city will prepare the EIS, the responsible official shall notify the applicant after completion of the threshold determination. The responsible official shall also notify the applicant of the city’s procedure of EIS preparation, including approval of the draft and final EIS prior to distribution.
C. 
The city may require an applicant to provide information the city does not possess, including specific investigations. However, the applicant is not required to supply information that is not required under this chapter or that is being requested from another agency; provided, however, this does not apply to information the city may request under another ordinance or statute.
(Ord. 84-43 § 15, 1984)
The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now existing or as hereinafter amended, by reference, as supplemented in this chapter:
WAC 197-11-500
Purpose of this part.
WAC 197-11-502
Inviting comment.
WAC 197-11-504
Availability and cost of environmental documents.
WAC 197-11-508
SEPA register.
WAC 197-11-510
Public notice.
WAC 197-11-535
Public hearings and meetings.
WAC 197-11-545
Effect of no comment.
WAC 197-11-550
Specificity of comments.
WAC 197-11-560
FEIS response to comments.
WAC 197-11-570
Consulted agency costs to assist lead agency.
(Ord. 84-43 § 17, 1984; Ord. 2000-29 § 10, 2000)
A. 
Whenever possible, the city shall integrate the public notice required under this section with existing notice procedures for the city’s nonexempt permit(s) or approval(s) required for the proposal.
B. 
Whenever the city issues a DNS under WAC 197-11-340(2) or a DS under WAC 197-11-360(3) the city shall give public notice as follows:
1. 
If public notice is required for a nonexempt license, the notice shall state whether a DS or DNS has been issued and when comments are due.
2. 
If an environmental document is issued concurrently with the notice of application, the public notice requirements for the notice of application in RCW 36.70B.110(4) will suffice to meet the SEPA public notice requirements in WAC 197-11-510(1).
3. 
If no public notice is otherwise required for the permit or approval, the city shall give notice of the DNS or DS by one or more of the following methods:
a. 
Posting the property, for site-specific proposals;
b. 
Publishing notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the county, city, or general area where the proposal is located;
c. 
Notifying public or private groups which have expressed interest in a certain proposal or in the type of proposal being considered;
d. 
Notifying the news media;
e. 
Placing notices in appropriate regional, neighborhood, ethnic, or trade journals; and/or
f. 
Any other reasonable method calculated to inform the public and other agencies or local governments.
4. 
Whenever the city issues a DS under WAC 197-11-360(3), the city shall state the scoping procedure for the proposal in the DS as required in WAC 197-11-408 and in the public notice.
C. 
If a DNS is issued using the optional DNS process, the public notice requirements for a notice of application in RCW 36.70B.110(4) as supplemented by the requirements in WAC 197-11-355 will suffice to meet the SEPA public notice requirements in WAC 197-11-510(1)(b).
D. 
Whenever the city issues a DEIS under WAC 197-11-455(5) or a SEIS under WAC 197-11-620, notice of the availability of those documents shall be given by:
1. 
Indicating the availability of the DEIS in any public notice required for a nonexempt license; and
2. 
At least one of the following:
a. 
Posting the property, for site-specific proposals,
b. 
Publishing notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the county, city, or general area where the proposal is located,
c. 
Notifying public or private groups which have expressed interest in a certain proposal or in the type of proposal being considered,
d. 
Notifying the news media,
e. 
Placing notices in appropriate regional, neighborhood, ethnic, or trade journals, and/or
f. 
Any other reasonable method calculated to inform the public and other agencies or local governments.
E. 
Public notice for projects that qualify as planned actions shall be tied to the underlying permit as specified in WAC 197-11-172(3).
F. 
The city may require an applicant to complete the public notice requirements for the applicant’s proposal at his or her expense.
(Ord. 84-43 § 18, 1984; Ord. 2000-29 § 11, 2000)
A. 
The responsible official shall be responsible for the preparation of written comments for the city in response to a consultation request prior to a threshold determination, participation in scoping and reviewing of a draft EIS.
B. 
The responsible official shall be responsible for the city’s compliance with WAC 197-11-550 whenever the city is a consulted agency and is authorized to develop operating procedures that will ensure that responses to consultation requests are prepared in a timely fashion and include data from all appropriate departments of the city.
(Ord. 84-43 § 19, 1984)
The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now existing or hereinafter amended, by reference:
WAC 197-11-164
Planned actions—Definition and criteria.
WAC 197-11-168
Ordinances or resolutions designating planned actions—Procedures for adoption.
WAC 197-11-172
Planned actions—Project review.
WAC 197-11-600
When to use existing environmental documents.
WAC 197-11-610
Use of NEPA documents.
WAC 197-11-620
Supplemental environmental impact statement—Procedures.
WAC 197-11-625
Addenda—Procedures.
WAC 197-11-630
Adoption—Procedures.
WAC 197-11-635
Incorporation by reference—Procedures.
WAC 197-11-640
Combining documents.
(Ord. 84-43 § 20, 1984; Ord. 2000-29 § 12, 2000)
For nonexempt proposals, the DNS or draft EIS for the proposal shall accompany the city staff’s recommendation to any appropriate advisory body such as the planning commission, if such a body is required to consider the proposal pursuant to the city’s procedural ordinance.
(Ord. 84-43 § 22, 1984; Ord. 2000-29 § 5, 2000)
A. 
The city may attach conditions to a license or approval for a proposal so long as:
1. 
Such conditions are necessary to mitigate specific adverse environmental impacts clearly identified in an environmental document prepared pursuant to this chapter;
2. 
Such conditions are in writing;
3. 
Such conditions are reasonable and capable of being accomplished;
4. 
The city has considered whether other local, state or federal mitigation measures applied to the proposal are sufficient to mitigate the identified impacts;
5. 
Such conditions are based on one or more policies in Section 16.04.240 of this chapter and cited in the permit, approval, license, or other decision document.
B. 
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 final EIS or final supplemental EIS;
2. 
A finding is made that reasonable mitigation measures are insufficient to mitigate the identified impact;
3. 
A denial is based on one or more policies identified in Section 16.04.240 of this chapter and identified in writing in the decision document.
(Ord. 84-43 § 23, 1984; Ord. 2000-29 § 13, 2000)
A. 
The policies and goals set forth in this chapter are supplementary to those in the existing authorization of the city.
B. 
The city adopts by reference the policies in the following city codes, ordinances, resolutions and plans, as now existing or hereinafter amended:
1. 
Comprehensive plan;
2. 
Zoning ordinance;
3. 
Shoreline master program;
4. 
Subdivision ordinance;
5. 
Comprehensive park and open space plan;
6. 
SEPA implementing ordinance;
7. 
Water system plan;
8. 
Sewer system plan;
9. 
Storm sewer plan;
10. 
Standards ordinance;
11. 
International Building Code;
12. 
International Fire Code;
13. 
Uniform Plumbing Code;
14. 
International Mechanical Code;
15. 
International Property Maintenance Code;
16. 
Thermal efficiency standards;
17. 
Floodplain management;
18. 
Any other policy of the city which has been incorporated into any ordinance, resolution, regulation, plan or code and which provides a reasonable basis for attaching conditions to the approval, denial or conditioning of a proposal in order to mitigate adverse environmental impacts.
C. 
The city designates and adopts by reference the following additional policies as further basis for the city’s exercise of authority pursuant to Section 16.04.230 of this chapter:
1. 
The city shall use all practicable means, consistent with other essential considerations of state policy, to improve and coordinate plans, functions, programs, and resources to the end that the state and its citizens may:
a. 
Fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment for succeeding generations;
b. 
Assure for all people of Poulsbo safe, healthful, productive, and aesthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings;
c. 
Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risk to health or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences;
d. 
Preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage;
e. 
Maintain, wherever possible, an environment which supports diversity and variety of individual choice;
f. 
Achieve a balance between population and resource use which will permit high standards of living and a wide sharing of life’s amenities; and
g. 
Enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the maximum attainable recycling of depletable resources.
2. 
The city recognizes that each person has a fundamental and inalienable right to a healthful environment and that each person has a responsibility to contribute to the preservation and enhancement of the environment.
(Ord. 84-43 § 24, 1984; Ord. 87-27 § 1, 1987; Ord. 88-43 § 1, 1988; Ord. 2000-29 § 14, 2000; Ord. 2011-15 § 2, 2011; Ord. 2016-10 § 7, 2016)
A. 
Any interested person may appeal a threshold determination or the adequacy of a final EIS by following the procedures set forth in this section. No other SEPA appeal shall be allowed.
B. 
All appeals filed pursuant to this section must be filed in writing with the planning director within ten working days of the date of the determination appealed from. All appeals shall contain the information required by Title 19, including, but not limited to, information on the specific aspect(s) of the SEPA decision or SEPA issue being appealed, the reasons why each aspect is in error as a matter of fact or law, and the evidence relied on to prove the error.
C. 
Upon receipt of a timely and complete notice of appeal, the planning director shall advise the hearing examiner of the filing of the appeal and request that a date for considering the appeal be established.
D. 
The hearing on the appeal before the hearing examiner shall be limited to those specific aspect(s) of the SEPA decision and/or SEPA issue being appealed, and the reasons why the appellant claims each aspect is in error, as the same are set forth in the notice of appeal. No other aspects, issues or reasons shall be considered in the appeal hearing. All relevant evidence on the aspects, issues, and reasons for error shall be received in the hearing of the appeal and the hearing examiner’s decision on those specific aspects of the SEPA decision and/or SEPA issue being appealed shall be made de novo. Procedural determinations by the city’s responsible official shall be entitled to substantial weight in any appeal proceeding. The appellant bears the burden of proof in any appeal proceeding under this section.
E. 
For any appeal under this section, the hearing examiner shall provide for a record that shall consist of the following:
1. 
A written decision, supported by the hearing examiner’s written findings and conclusions; and
2. 
Testimony under oath; and
3. 
A taped or written transcript.
F. 
An electronically recorded transcript will suffice for purposes of review. The hearing examiner may require the applicant to provide an electronic transcript.
G. 
The city shall give official notice whenever it issues a permit or approval for which a statute or ordinance establishes a time limit for commencing judicial appeal.
(Ord. 84-43 § 25, 1984; Ord. 97-29 §§ 1—3, 1997; Ord. 2005-26 § 2 (part), 2005)
A. 
Under state law, the procedure for review of project permits shall be combined with the environmental review process, both procedural and substantive. The environmental review process under SEPA and this chapter shall integrate the following procedures, insofar as possible, with any applicable process for decision-making on permit and land use applications:
1. 
Staff review of the application under city codes and regulations and the environmental review and determination thereon;
2. 
The staff report on the application, and the report or documentation concerning environmental review;
3. 
Hearings and other public processes, including required public notices, required by city code or regulation, and hearings or other public processes, including public notices, required or conducted under SEPA. Except as provided in this subsection and in subsection B of this section, the appeal of a SEPA threshold determination or the appeal of the adequacy of a final environmental impact statement shall be consolidated with a hearing or appeal on the underlying governmental action or permit in a single simultaneous hearing before the hearing examiner. The hearing or appeal shall be one at which the hearing examiner will consider either the final decision of the applicable official or the official’s recommendation on the proposed action, if both proceedings are allowed by city ordinance. An appeal of a determination of significance need not be consolidated with a hearing or appeal on the underlying project permit or proposal; and
4. 
Such other review processes as the planning director/administrator shall determine.
B. 
The procedure for review of nonproject actions by the city shall be integrated with the environmental review process to the extent determined by the planning director/administrator. Appeals of SEPA procedural determinations on nonproject actions need not be consolidated with the hearing or hearings on the underlying nonproject action.
(Ord. 2000-29 § 15, 2000; Ord. 2005-26 § 2 (part), 2005)
A. 
The city, applicant for, or proponent of an action may publish a notice of action pursuant to RCW 43.21C.080 for any action.
B. 
The form of the notice shall be substantially in the form provided in WAC 197-11-990. The notice shall be published by the city clerk, applicant or proponent pursuant to RCW 43.21C.080.
(Ord. 84-43 § 26, 1984)
The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now existing or hereinafter amended, by reference, as supplemented in this chapter:
WAC 197-11-700
Definitions.
WAC 197-11-702
ACL.
WAC 197-11-704
Action.
WAC 197-11-706
Addendum.
WAC 197-11-708
Adoption.
WAC 197-11-710
Affected tribe.
WAC 197-11-712
Affecting.
WAC 197-11-714
Agency.
WAC 197-11-716
Applicant.
WAC 197-11-718
Built environment.
WAC 197-11-720
Categorical exemption.
WAC 197-11-721
Closed record appeal.
WAC 197-11-722
Consolidated appeal.
WAC 197-11-724
Consulted agency.
WAC 197-11-726
Cost-benefit analysis.
WAC 197-11-728
County/city.
WAC 197-11-730
Decision maker.
WAC 197-11-732
Department.
WAC 197-11-734
Determination of nonsignificance (DNS).
WAC 197-11-736
Determination of significance (DS).
WAC 197-11-738
EIS.
WAC 197-11-740
Environment.
WAC 197-11-742
Environmental checklist.
WAC 197-11-744
Environmental document.
WAC 197-11-746
Environmental review.
WAC 197-11-750
Expanded scoping.
WAC 197-11-752
Impacts.
WAC 197-11-754
Incorporation by reference.
WAC 197-11-756
Lands covered by water.
WAC 197-11-758
Lead agency.
WAC 197-11-760
License.
WAC 197-11-762
Local agency.
WAC 197-11-764
Major action.
WAC 197-11-766
Mitigated DNS.
WAC 197-11-768
Mitigation.
WAC 197-11-770
Natural environment.
WAC 197-11-772
NEPA.
WAC 197-11-774
Nonproject.
WAC 197-11-775
Open record hearing.
WAC 197-11-776
Phased review.
WAC 197-11-778
Preparation.
WAC 197-11-780
Private project.
WAC 197-11-782
Probable.
WAC 197-11-784
Proposal.
WAC 197-11-786
Reasonable alternative.
WAC 197-11-788
Responsible official.
WAC 197-11-790
SEPA.
WAC 197-11-792
Scope.
WAC 197-11-793
Scoping.
WAC 197-11-794
Significant.
WAC 197-11-796
State agency.
WAC 197-11-797
Threshold determination.
WAC 197-11-799
Underlying governmental action.
(Ord. 84-43 § 27, 1984; Ord. 2000-29 § 16, 2000)
The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now existing or hereinafter amended, by reference, as supplemented in this chapter:
WAC 197-11-900
Purpose of this part.
WAC 197-11-902
Agency SEPA policies.
WAC 197-11-916
Application to ongoing actions.
WAC 197-11-920
Agencies with environmental expertise.
WAC 197-11-922
Lead agency rules.
WAC 197-11-924
Determining the lead agency.
WAC 197-11-926
Lead agency for governmental proposals.
WAC 197-11-928
Lead agency for public and private proposals.
WAC 197-11-930
Lead agency for private projects with one agency with jurisdiction.
WAC 197-11-932
Lead agency for private projects requiring licenses from more than one agency, when one of the agencies is a county/city.
WAC 197-11-934
Lead agency for private projects requiring licenses from a local agency, not a county/city, and one or more state agencies.
WAC 197-11-936
Lead agency for private projects requiring licenses from more than one agency.
WAC 197-11-938
Lead agencies for specific proposals.
WAC 197-11-940
Transfer of lead agency status to a state agency.
WAC 197-11-942
Agreements on lead agency status.
WAC 197-11-944
Agreements on division of lead agency duties.
WAC 197-11-946
DOE resolution of lead agency disputes.
WAC 197-11-948
Assumption of lead agency status.
(Ord. 84-43 § 28, 1984)
A. 
The city has selected certain categorical exemptions that will not apply in one or more critical areas identified in the critical areas ordinances required under RCW 36.70A.060. For each critical area listed below, the exemptions within WAC 197-11-800 that are inapplicable for that area are:
1. 
Wetlands: WAC 197-11-800(1); 197-11-800(2)(a)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g); 197-11-800(3); 197-11-800(6) (a); 197-11-800(14)(c); 197-11-800 (24)(a)(b)(c)(d) (e)(f)(g); and 197-11-800(25)(d).
2. 
Areas with critical recharging effect on aquifers for portable water: WAC 197-11-800(1); 197-11-800(2)(a)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g); 197-11-800(3); 197-11-800(6)(a); 197-11-800(14)(c); 197-11-800(24)(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g); and 197-11-800(25)(d).
3. 
Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas: WAC 197-11-800(1); 197-11-800(2)(a)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g); 197-11-800(3); 197-11-800(6)(a); 197-11-800(14)(c); 197-11-800(24)(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g); and 197-11-800(25)(d).
4. 
Frequently flooded areas: WAC 197-11-800 (1); 197-11-800(2)(a)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g); 197-11-800(3); 197-11-800(6)(a); 197-11-800(14)(c); 197-11-800(24)(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g); and 197-11-800(25)(d).
5. 
Geologically hazardous areas: WAC 197-11-800(1); 197-11-800(2)(a)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g); 197-11-800 (3); 197-11-800(6)(a); 197-11-800(14)(c); 197-11-800(24)(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g); and 197-11-800(25)(d).
B. 
The scope of environmental review of actions within these areas shall be limited to:
1. 
Documenting whether the proposal is consistent with the requirements of the critical areas ordinance; and
2. 
Evaluating potentially significant impacts on the critical area resources not adequately addressed by GMA planning documents and development regulations, if any, including any additional mitigation measures needed to protect the critical areas in order to achieve consistency with SEPA and with other applicable environmental review laws.
C. 
All categorical exemptions not listed in subsection A of this section apply whether or not the proposal will be located in a critical area.
(Ord. 84-43 § 29, 1984; Ord. 2000-29 § 17, 2000)
The city shall require fees for the following activities in accordance with the provisions of this chapter as set forth in the fee schedule for land use applications adopted by Sections 3.12.010(A) and 3.12.030(C):
A. 
Threshold Determination. For every environmental checklist the city will review when it is lead agency, the city shall collect a fee from the proponent of the proposal as specified in the fee schedule for land use applications adopted in Section 3.12.010(A) prior to undertaking the threshold determination. The time periods provided by this chapter for making a threshold determination shall not begin to run until payment of fees. When the city assists the applicant or completes the environmental checklist at the applicant’s request or under Section 16.04.120, an hourly charge as specified in the referenced fee schedule shall be collected.
B. 
Environmental Impact Statement.
1. 
When the city is the lead agency for a proposal requiring an EIS and the responsible official determines that the EIS shall be prepared by employees of the city, the city may charge and collect a reasonable fee from any applicant to cover costs incurred, including overhead, by the city in preparing the EIS as set forth in the fee schedule for land use applications adopted by Section 3.12.010(A). The responsible official shall advise the applicant of the projected costs for the EIS prior to actual preparation.
2. 
The responsible official may determine that the city will contract directly with a consultant for preparation of an EIS or a portion of the EIS for activities initiated by some person or entity other than the city and may bill such costs and expenses directly to the applicant. Such consultants shall be selected by the city.
3. 
The applicant shall pay the projected amount to the city prior to commencing work. The city will refund the excess, if any, at the completion of the EIS. If the city’s costs exceed the projected costs, the applicant shall immediately pay the excess. If a proposal is modified so that an EIS is no longer required, the responsible official shall refund any fees collected under subsections (B)(1) and (2) of this section which remain after incurred costs, including overhead, are paid.
C. 
Public Notice. The city may collect a reasonable fee from an applicant to cover the cost of meeting the public notice requirements of this chapter relating to the proposal.
D. 
Copies. The city may charge any person for copies of any document prepared under this chapter, and for mailing the document, in a manner provided by Chapter 42.17 RCW and Section 3.12.040(C)(2).
(Ord. 84-43 § 30, 1984; Ord. 2003-16 § 42, 2003)