This subchapter may be cited as the City of Shoreline Environmental Procedures Ordinance. The City of Shoreline adopts this subchapter under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), RCW 43.21C.120, and the SEPA Rules, WAC 197-11-904. This subchapter contains this City’s SEPA procedures and policies. The SEPA Rules, Chapter 197-11 WAC, must be used in conjunction with this subchapter.
(Ord. 238 Ch. III § 9(a), 2000)
The City adopts by reference the definitions contains in WAC 197-11-700 through 197-11-799, as now existing or hereinafter amended. The following abbreviations are used in this subchapter:
DEIS – Draft Environmental Impact Statement
DNS – Determination of Nonsignificance
DOE – Department of Ecology
DS – Determination of Significance
EIS – Environmental Impact Statement
FEIS – Final Environmental Impact Statement
MTCA – Model Toxics Control Act
SEPA – State Environmental Policy Act
(Ord. 238 Ch. III § 9(b), 2000)
The City of Shoreline adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now existing or hereinafter amended, by reference, as supplemented in this subchapter:
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 197-11-220
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.
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. 238 Ch. III § 9(c), 2000)
A. 
For those proposals for which the City is a lead agency, the responsible official shall be the 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 (Chapter 197-11 WAC) that have been adopted by reference.
C. 
The responsible official shall be responsible for preparation of written comments for the City in response to a consultation request prior to a threshold determination, participation in scoping, and reviewing a DEIS.
D. 
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.
E. 
The responsible official shall retain all documents required by the SEPA Rules and make them available in accordance with Chapter 42.17 RCW.
(Ord. 238 Ch. III § 9(d), 2000)
A. 
When the City receives an application for or initiates a proposal that involves a nonexempt action, the responsible official 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 responsible official is aware that another 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 responsible official 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 197-11-922 through 197-11-940, it may object to the determination. Any objection must be made to the agency originally making the determination and resolved within 15 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 15-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 duties for a proposal under WAC 197-11-942 and 197-11-944.
E. 
The responsible official shall require sufficient information from the applicant to identify which other agencies have jurisdiction over the proposal.
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 responsible official shall decide jointly with the Department of Ecology who receives the comment letters and how copies of the comment letters will be distributed to the other agency.
(Ord. 238 Ch. III § 9(e), 2000)
A. 
Categorical Exemptions. The City will normally identify whether an action is categorically exempt within 28 days of receiving an application.
B. 
Threshold Determinations. When the City is lead agency for a proposal, the following thresh-old determination timing requirements apply:
1. 
If a determination of significance (DS) is made concurrent with the notice of application for a proposal, the DS and scoping notice shall be combined with the notice of application. Nothing in this subsection prevents the DS/scoping notice from being issued before the notice of application. If sufficient information is not available to make a threshold determination when the notice of application is issued, the DS may be issued later in the review process.
2. 
SEPA determinations for City capital projects may be appealed to the Hearing Examiner as provided in Chapter 20.30 SMC, Subchapter 4.
3. 
If an open record predecision hearing is required on the proposal, the threshold determination shall be issued at least 15 calendar days before the open record predecision hearing.
4. 
The optional DNS process provided in WAC 197-11-355 may be used to indicate on the notice of application that the lead agency is likely to issue a determination of nonsignificance (DNS). If this optional process is used, a separate comment period on the DNS may not be required.
C. 
For nonexempt proposals, the DNS or draft environmental impact statement (EIS) for the proposal shall accompany the City’s staff recommendation to the appropriate review authority. If the final EIS is or becomes available prior to review, it shall be substituted for the draft.
D. 
The optional provision of WAC 197-11-060(3)(c) analyzing similar actions in a single environmental document is adopted.
(Ord. 238 Ch. III § 9(f), 2000; Ord. 959 § 1 (Exh. A), 2022)
The City adopts the following sections of the SEPA Rules by reference, as now existing or hereinafter amended, as supplemented in this subchapter:
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.
WAC 197-11-800
Categorical exemptions.
WAC 197-11-880
Emergencies.
WAC 197-11-890
Petitioning DOE to change exemptions.
(Ord. 238 Ch. III § 9(g), 2000; Ord. 299 § 1, 2002; Ord. 591 § 1 (Exh. A), 2010)
The following types of construction shall be exempt, except when: 1) undertaken wholly or partly on lands covered by water; 2) a rezone is requested; or 3) any license governing emissions to the air or discharges to water is required.
A. 
The construction or location of:
1. 
Any residential structures up to 30 dwelling units.
2. 
A multifamily structure with up to 60 dwelling units.
B. 
The construction of an office, school, commercial, recreational, service or storage building with 30,000 square feet of gross floor area, and with associated parking facilities designed for 90 automobiles.
C. 
The construction of a parking lot designed for 90 automobiles. This exemption includes standalone parking lots.
D. 
Any landfill or excavation of 1,000 cubic yards throughout the total lifetime of the fill or excavation not associated with an exempt project in subsection A, B or C of this section and any fill or excavation classified as a Class I, II, or III forest practice under RCW 76.09.050 or regulations thereunder.
(Ord. 238 Ch. III § 9(h), 2000; Ord. 299 § 1, 2002; Ord. 324 § 1, 2003; Ord. 591 § 1 (Exh. A), 2010; Ord. 660 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2013)
Projects proposed within a planned action area, as defined by the City, may be eligible for planned action status. The applicant shall submit a complete planned action determination of consistency review checklist and any other submittal requirements specified by the Director at the time of application submittal. If the City determines the project is within a planned action area and meets the thresholds established by the planned action, no additional SEPA analysis is required. If a project does not qualify as a planned action, SEPA review will be required. A planned action determination appeal is a Type A decision and may be appealed as provided in SMC § 20.30.200.
(Ord. 654 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2013; Ord. 959 § 1 (Exh. A), 2022)
A. 
The determination of whether a proposal is categorically exempt shall be made by the responsible official.
B. 
The determination that a proposal is exempt shall be a final decision.
C. 
If a proposal is exempt, none of the procedural requirements of this subchapter shall apply to the proposal.
D. 
Repealed by Ord. 959.
E. 
If a proposal includes both exempt and nonexempt actions, the responsible official may authorize exempt actions prior to compliance with the procedural requirements of this ordinance, except that:
1. 
The responsible official 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 responsible official 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 responsible official 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. 238 Ch. III § 9(i), 2000; Ord. 959 § 1 (Exh. A), 2022)
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 in this ordinance; except, a checklist is not needed if the City’s responsible official and applicant agree an EIS is required, SEPA compliance has been completed, or SEPA compliance has been initiated by another agency. Except as provided in subsection E of this section, 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. 
For private proposals, the responsible official will require the applicant to complete the environmental checklist, providing assistance as necessary. For City proposals, the department initiating the proposal shall complete the environmental checklist for that proposal.
C. 
The responsible official may require that it, and not the private applicant, will 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; or
2. 
The applicant has provided inaccurate information on previous proposals or on proposals currently under consideration.
D. 
The applicant shall pay to the City the actual costs of providing information under subsection (C)(2) of this section.
E. 
For projects seeking to qualify as planned actions, the applicant shall submit a planned action determination of consistency review checklist and any other submittal requirements specified by the Director.
F. 
The lead agency shall make a reasonable effort to verify the information in the environmental checklist and planned action checklist and shall have the authority to determine the final content of the checklists.
(Ord. 238 Ch. III § 9(j), 2000; Ord. 959 § 1 (Exh. A), 2022)
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. 
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 City’s actual threshold determination for the proposal.
C. 
The responsible official’s response to the request for early request shall:
1. 
Be written;
2. 
State whether the City currently considers issuance of a DS likely and, if so, indicate the general or specific area(s) of concern that is/are leading the City to consider a DS; and
3. 
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.
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 15 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 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. 
A mitigated DNS is issued under either WAC 197-11-340(2), requiring a 14-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.
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.
G. 
If at any time the proposed mitigation measures are withdrawn or substantially changed, the responsible official shall review the threshold determination and, if necessary, may withdraw the mitigated DNS and issue a DS.
H. 
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) relating to the withdrawal of a DNS.
I. 
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 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. 238 Ch. III § 9(k), 2000)
The City adopts the following sections of the SEPA Rules, as now existing or hereinafter amended, by reference, as supplemented by this subchapter:
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. 238 Ch. III § 9(l), 2000)
A. 
Pursuant to WAC 197-11-420, 197-11-620, and 197-11-625, the Department shall be responsible for preparation and content of an EIS and other environmental documents by or under the direction of the SEPA responsible official. An EIS may be prepared by the lead agency’s staff; by an applicant or its agent; or by an outside consultant retained by either an applicant or the lead agency. The lead agency shall assure that the EIS is prepared in a professional manner and with appropriate interdisciplinary methodology. The responsible official shall direct the areas of research and examination to be undertaken as a result of the scoping process, as well as the organization of the resulting document.
B. 
Consultants or subconsultants selected to prepare environmental documents for a private development proposal shall not:
1. 
Act as agents for the applicant in preparation or acquisition of associated underlying permits;
2. 
Have a financial interest in the proposal for which the environmental document is being prepared; and
3. 
Perform any work or provide any services for the applicant in connection with or related to the proposal.
C. 
All costs of preparing any required environment document shall be borne by the applicant.
D. 
If the responsible official requires an EIS for a proposal and determines that the City will prepare the EIS, the responsible official shall notify the applicant as soon as reasonably possible after completion of the threshold determination. The responsible official shall also notify the applicant of the City’s procedure for EIS preparation, including approval of the DEIS and FEIS prior to distribution.
E. 
The City may require an applicant to provide information that must be obtained by specific investigations. This provision is not intended to expand or limit an applicant’s other obligations under WAC 197-11-100, or other provisions of regulations, statute, or ordinance. An applicant shall not be required to produce information under this provision which is not specifically required by this subchapter nor is the applicant relieved of the duty to supply any other information required by statute, regulation or ordinance.
F. 
In the event an applicant decides to suspend or abandon the project, the applicant must provide formal written notice to the Department. The applicant shall continue to be responsible for all monies expended by the Department to the point of the Department’s receipt of notification.
G. 
The Department shall only publish an EIS when it believes that the EIS adequately discloses the significant direct, indirect, and cumulative adverse impacts of the proposal and its alternatives; mitigation measures proposed and committed to by the applicant, and their effectiveness in significantly mitigating impacts; mitigation measures that could be implemented or required; and unavoidable significant adverse impacts.
(Ord. 238 Ch. III § 9(m), 2000; Ord. 959 § 1 (Exh. A), 2022)
The City adopts the following sections, as now existing or hereinafter amended, by reference as supplemented in this subchapter:
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. 238 Ch. III § 9(n), 2000)
A. 
For purposes of WAC 197-11-510, public notice for SEPA threshold determinations shall be required as provided in SMC § 20.30.120. At a minimum, notice shall be provided to property owners located within 500 feet, posted on the property (for site-specific proposals), and the Department shall publish a notice of the threshold determination in the newspaper of general circulation for the general area in which the proposal is located. This notice shall include the project location and description, the type of permit(s) required, comment period dates, and the location where the complete application and environmental documents may be reviewed.
B. 
Publication of notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the area where the proposal is located shall also be required for all nonproject actions and for all other proposals that are subject to the provisions of this subchapter but are not classified as Type A, B, C, or L actions.
C. 
The SEPA responsible official may require further notice if deemed necessary to provide adequate public notice of a pending action. Failure to require further or alternative notice shall not be a violation of any notice procedure.
D. 
Pursuant to WAC 197-11-408(2)(a), all comments on determinations of significance and scoping notices shall be in writing, except where a public meeting on EIS scoping occurs pursuant to WAC 197-11-410(1)(b).
(Ord. 238 Ch. III § 9(o), 2000; Ord. 352 § 1, 2004; Ord. 959 § 1 (Exh. A), 2022)
The City adopts the following sections of the SEPA Rules, 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 statements.
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. 238 Ch. III § 9(p), 2000)
A. 
The City may attach conditions to a permit or approval for a proposal so long as:
1. 
Such conditions are necessary to mitigate specific adverse environmental impacts identified in environmental documents prepared pursuant to this subchapter; 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 SMC § 20.30.670 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 FEIS or final supplemental EIS; 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 SMC § 20.30.670 and identified in writing in the decision document.
(Ord. 238 Ch. III § 9(r), 2000)
For the purposes of RCW 43.21C.060 and WAC 197-11-660(a), the following policies, plans, rules and regulations, and all amendments thereto, are designated as potential bases for the exercise of the City’s substantive authority to condition or deny proposals under SEPA, subject to the provisions of RCW 43.21C.240 and SMC § 20.30.660.
A. 
The policies of the State Environmental Policy Act, RCW 43.21C.020.
B. 
The Shoreline Comprehensive Plan, its appendices, subarea plans, surface water management plans, park master plans, and habitat and vegetation conservation plans.
C. 
The Shoreline Municipal Code.
D. 
The Shoreline Historic Inventory.
E. 
The Shoreline Environmental Sustainability Strategy.
F. 
The Shoreline Climate Action Plan.
G. 
The Shoreline Diversity and Inclusion Goals.
(Ord. 238 Ch. III § 9(s), 2000; Ord. 959 § 1 (Exh. A), 2022)
There are no administrative appeals of a SEPA threshold determination except threshold determinations associated with a Type B action. Any appeal of a SEPA determination, together with the City’s final decision on a proposal, may be appealed to the King County Superior Court, the Growth Management Hearings Board, or the Shoreline Hearings Board, based on the type of action being appealed, as provided in RCW 43.21.075.
(Ord. 238 Ch. III § 9(t), 2000; Ord. 352 § 1, 2004; Ord. 591 § 1 (Exh. A), 2010; Ord. 695 § 1 (Exh. A), 2014; Ord. 959 § 1 (Exh. A), 2022)
The City adopts the following sections of the SEPA Rules, as now existing or hereinafter amended, by reference, as supplemented in this subchapter:
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 state 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. 238 Ch. III § 9(u), 2000)
Should any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this subchapter be declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this subchapter.
(Ord. 238 Ch. III § 9(w), 2000)