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 evaluating the impacts of proposals not requiring an EIS. The county adopts the following sections by reference, as supplemented in this part:
RCW 43.21C.229
Infill Development – Categorical exemptions from 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. 99-A (1991) § 3(A), 1991; Ord. 368 (2006) § 13 (part), 2006; Ord. 416 (2008) § 9, 2008)
The exemptions in this subsection apply to all licenses required to undertake the construction in question, except when a rezone or any license governing emissions to the air or discharges to water is required.
A. 
The county establishes the following exempt levels for minor new construction under WAC 197-11-800(1)(c):
1. 
For the construction or location of residential dwelling units in WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(i):
a. 
Up to nine residential dwelling units within the boundaries of an urban growth area; or
b. 
Up to four residential dwelling units outside the boundaries of an urban growth area;
2. 
For agricultural structures in WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(ii): up to fifteen thousand square feet of ground coverage. This exemption shall not apply to feed lots;
3. 
For the construction or location of office, school, commercial, recreational, service or storage buildings in WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(iii): up to eight thousand square feet with associated parking up to forty parking spaces;
4. 
For the construction or location of parking lots in WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(iv): up to forty parking spaces;
5. 
For any landfills or excavations in WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(v):
a. 
Up to five hundred cubic yards; or
b. 
Up to one hundred fifty cubic yards if the proposal is located on property subject to the provisions in Title 22, Shoreline Management Master Program.
B. 
Whenever the county establishes new exempt levels under this section, it shall send them to the Department of Ecology, Headquarters Office, Olympia, Washington 98504 under WAC 197-11-800(1)(c).
(Ord. 368 (2006) § 13 (part), 2006; Ord. 416 (2008) § 10, 2008)
A. 
In order to accommodate infill development in the Silverdale Infill Area, except for in the Urban Low Residential (UL) and Urban Restricted (UR) zones, the county establishes the following exempt levels for construction of residential developments, mixed use, and commercial nonretail developments under RCW 43.21C.229.
1. 
For residential developments in the Urban Medium Residential (UM) and Urban High Residential (UH) zones, up to the maximum total number of available trips in the Silverdale Mixed Use Infill Trip Bank, as established by the department of public works; or
2. 
For (a) mixed use developments or (b) commercial (nonretail) developments in the Neighborhood Commercial (NC), Highway/Tourist Commercial (HTC), Regional Commercial (RC), and Mixed Use (MU) zones, up to the maximum total number of available trips in the Silverdale Mixed Use Infill Trip Bank, as established in subsection (A)(3) of this section. The exemption does not apply to stand-alone nonretail commercial development that exceeds sixty-five thousand square feet in size.
3. 
The Silverdale Mixed Use Infill Trip Bank is as follows:
a. 
The residential and mixed use trip bank equals seven hundred seventy-five new trips between 2010 and 2025.
b. 
The commercial (nonretail) trip bank equals six thousand two hundred eighty new trips between 2010 and 2025.
B. 
In determining whether or not a proposal is exempt, the department shall consider a traffic analysis based on the quantity of development units and the related applicable trip generation. The traffic analysis shall be filed by the applicant at the same time as an application for a permit, license, certificate or other approval. Traffic analysis will follow Traffic Impact Analysis guidelines as set forth in Chapter 20.04. Developments that qualify for this SEPA exemption would still be subject to the Transportation Facilities Concurrency Ordinance (Chapter 20.04). Development will be allowed under this exemption up to the point that all the trips in the trip bank have been taken, unless denied by concurrency.
C. 
Upon approval of the proposal according to the provisions of Title 21, the department shall document the change in total available trips in accordance with adopted administrative guidelines. These exempt levels are not applicable once the total available trips have been utilized.
D. 
The department of public works will monitor the total number of trips taken from the Silverdale Mixed Use Infill Trip Bank as part of the development approval process.
(Ord. 368 (2006) § 14, 2006; Ord. 416 (2008) § 11, 2008; Ord. 493 (2012) § 4, 2012; Ord. 496 (2012) § 4, 2012)
A. 
Each department within the county that receives an application for a license or, in the case of governmental proposals, the department initiating the proposal shall determine whether the license and/or the proposal is exempt. The department’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 apply to the proposal. The county shall not require completion of an environmental checklist for an exempt proposal.
B. 
In determining whether or not a proposal is exempt, the department 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 department shall determine the lead agency, even if the license application that triggers the department’s consideration is exempt.
C. 
If a proposal includes both exempt and nonexempt actions, the county may authorize exempt actions prior to compliance with the procedural requirements of this chapter, except that:
1. 
The county 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. 
A department 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. 
A department 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.
(Ord. 99-A (1991) § 3(B), 1991; Ord. 368 (2006) § 15, 2006; Ord. 416 (2008) § 12, 2008)
A. 
Except as provided in subsection (D) of this section, 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; except, a checklist is not needed if the county and applicant agree an EIS is required, SEPA compliance has been completed, or SEPA compliance has been initiated by another agency. The county shall use the environmental checklist to determine the lead agency, and if the county is the lead agency, for determining the responsible official and for making the threshold determination.
B. 
For private proposals, the county will require the applicant to complete the environmental checklist, providing assistance as necessary. For county proposals, the department initiating the proposal shall complete the environmental checklist for that proposal.
C. 
The county may require that it, and not the private applicant, will complete all or part of the environmental checklist for a private proposal, if either of the following occurs:
1. 
The county 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.
D. 
For projects submitted as planned actions under WAC 197-11-164, the county shall use its existing environmental checklist form or may modify the environmental checklist form as provided in WAC 197-11-315. The modified environmental checklist form may be prepared and adopted along with or as part of a planned action ordinance, or developed after the ordinance is adopted. In either case, a proposed modified environmental checklist form must be sent to the Department of Ecology to allow at least a thirty-day review prior to use.
(Ord. 99 (1984) § 3(C), 1991; Ord. 368 (2006) § 16, 2006; Ord. 416 (2008) § 13, 2008)
A. 
As provided in this section and 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. 
An applicant may request in writing early notice of whether a DS is likely under WAC 197-11-350. The request must:
1. 
Follow submission of a permit application and environmental checklist for a nonexempt proposal for which the department is lead agency; and
2. 
Precede the county’s actual threshold determination for the proposal.
3. 
The responsible official should respond to the request for early notice within thirty working days. The response shall:
a. 
Be written;
b. 
State whether the county currently considers issuance of a DS likely and, if so, indicate the general or specific area(s) of concern that is/are leading the county 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.
4. 
As much as possible, the county should assist the applicant with identification of impacts to the extent necessary to formulate mitigation measures.
5. 
When an applicant submits a changed or clarified proposal, along with a revised or amended environmental checklist, the county 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:
a. 
If the county 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 county shall issue and circulate a DNS under WAC 197-11-340(2).
b. 
If the county indicated areas of concern, but did not indicate specific mitigation measures that would allow it to issue a DNS, the county shall make the threshold determination, issuing a DNS or DS as appropriate.
c. 
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 decibels” or “construct two-hundred-foot storm water retention pond at Y location” are adequate.
d. 
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.
C. 
The county shall reconsider the mitigated DNS based on timely comments and may retain or modify the MDNS or, if the county determines that significant adverse impacts are likely, withdraw the mitigated DNS or supporting documents. When a mitigated DNS is modified, the lead agency shall send the modified mitigated DNS to agencies, local tribes and jurisdictions.
A mitigated DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2), requiring a fourteen-day comment period and public notice.
D. 
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 county.
E. 
If the county’s tentative decision on a permit or approval does not include mitigation measures that were incorporated in a mitigated DNS for the proposal, the county should evaluate the threshold determination to assure consistency with WAC 197-11-340(3)(a) (withdrawal of DNS).
F. 
The county’s written response under subsection (B) of this section 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 county to consider the clarifications or changes in its threshold determination.
(Ord. 99-A (1991) § 3(D), 1991; Ord. 368 (2006) § 17, 2006; Ord. 416 (2008) § 14, 2008)