Source: https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Yakima/html/Yakima06/Yakima0688.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 18:37:39
Document Index: 692997790

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 2', 'art:\n197', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 2', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 2', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 2', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 2', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 2', 'art.\n1', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 2', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 2', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 2', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 2', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 2', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 2', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 2', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 2', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 2', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 2', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 3', '§ 2', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 2', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 2']

Chapter 6.88 ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY
Chapter 6.88
6.88.010 Authority.
6.88.020 Purpose of this part and adoption by reference.
6.88.030 Additional definitions.
6.88.040 Designation of responsible official.
6.88.050 Lead agency determination and responsibilities.
6.88.058 Additional timing considerations.
6.88.060 SEPA/GMA integration.
6.88.062 Planned actions.
6.88.065 Purpose of this part and adoption by reference.
6.88.070 Flexible thresholds for categorical exemptions.
6.88.080 Use of exemptions.
6.88.090 Environmental checklist.
6.88.100 Mitigated determination of nonsignificance (MDNS).
6.88.110 Purpose of this part and adoption by reference.
6.88.120 Preparation of environmental impact statement (EIS)—Additional considerations.
6.88.125 Additional elements.
6.88.128 Adoption by reference.
6.88.130 Public notice.
6.88.140 Responsible official to perform consulted agency responsibilities for the city.
6.88.150 Purpose of this part and adoption by reference.
6.88.155 Purpose of this part and adoption by reference.
6.88.160 Substantive authority.
6.88.170 Appeals.
6.88.173 Notice/statute of limitations.
6.88.175 Purpose of this part and adoption by reference.
6.88.180 Adoption by reference.
6.88.185 Purpose of this part and adoption by reference.
6.88.200 Fees.
6.88.205 Effective date.
6.88.220 Severability.
6.88.230 Adoption by reference.
The city of Yakima adopts the ordinance codified in this chapter under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), RCW 43.21C.120, and the SEPA rules, WAC 197-11-904. The ordinance codified in this chapter adopts many of the statewide SEPA rules by reference. This chapter contains this city’s SEPA procedures and implements the purposes and policies of SEPA pursuant to RCW 43.21C.010 and 43.21C.020, which are adopted by reference. The SEPA rules, WAC Chapter 197-11, should be referred to in conjunction with this chapter. (Ord. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 2805 § 2 (part), 1984).
This part contains the basic requirements that apply to the SEPA process. The city adopts the following sections of the SEPA rules by reference, as supplemented by this part:
197-11-158 GMA project review—Reliance on existing plans, laws, and regulations.
197-11-168 Ordinances or resolutions designating planned actions—Procedures for adoption.
(Ord. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 2805 § 2 (part), 1984).
B. “SEPA rules” means WAC Chapter 197-11 as adopted, revised, or amended by the Department of Ecology of the State of Washington.
C. “Early notice” means the city’s response to an applicant stating whether it considers issuance of a determination of significance likely for the applicant’s proposal.
D. “City” means the city of Yakima.
E. “Day” means calendar day. (Ord. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 2805 § 2 (part), 1984).
A. For those proposals for which the city is the lead agency, the responsible official shall be the Yakima city manager, or the city manager’s designee.
B. For proposals initiated by the city, agency people carrying out SEPA procedures should be different, whenever possible, from agency people initiating the proposal.
C. For all proposals for which the city is the lead agency, the responsible official shall make the threshold determination, supervise scoping and preparation of any required environmental impact statement (EIS), and perform any other functions assigned to the “lead agency” or “responsible official” by those sections of the SEPA rules that are adopted by reference in this chapter.
D. The city shall retain all documents required by the SEPA rules and make them available in accordance with RCW Chapter 42.56. (Ord. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 2805 § 2 (part), 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 the applicable SEPA rules and supplemental provisions adopted in this chapter, 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 required under WAC 197-11-600. In some cases, the city may conduct supplemental environmental review 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 the SEPA rules and supplemental provisions adopted in this chapter, it may object to the determination and seek Department of Ecology resolution of lead agency disputes according to the SEPA rules and supplemental provisions of this chapter.
D. The responsible official is authorized to make agreement as to lead agency status or shared lead agency duties in accordance with the SEPA rules and supplemental provisions of this chapter.
E. The responsible official shall require sufficient information from the applicant to identify which other agencies have jurisdiction over the proposal (that is: which agencies require nonexempt licenses?). (Ord. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 2805 § 2 (part), 1984).
A. For nonexempt proposals where action by an advisory or decision-making body such as the city of Yakima planning commission, hearings examiner, or city council is required, the DNS or final EIS for the proposal shall be combined with the city’s staff recommendation to the advisory or decision-making body.
B. If the city’s only action on a proposal is a decision on a building permit or other license 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 and the responsible official may agree to such request; provided, that adequate information must be furnished to the responsible official pursuant to the SEPA rules and supplemental provisions of this chapter to allow a threshold determination to be made.
C. The optional DNS process in WAC 197-11-355 may be used to indicate on a notice of application that the lead agency is likely to issue a DNS. If this optional process is used, a separate comment period on the DNS may not be required. (Ord. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 2805 § 2 (part), 1984).
A. The city endorses the procedures for SEPA and Growth Management Act integration as provided by the SEPA rules and any supplemental provisions adopted pursuant to this part.
B. The city endorses the procedures for environmental review of GMA project proposals as provided by WAC 197-11-158 and any supplemental provisions adopted pursuant to this part.
1. In reviewing the environmental impacts of a GMA project and making a threshold determination, the responsible official may determine that the requirements for environmental analysis, protection, and mitigation measures in the city’s development regulations and comprehensive plan, and in other applicable local, state, or federal laws or rules, provide adequate analysis of and mitigation for some or all of the specific adverse environmental impacts of the project.
2. In making the determination under subsection (B)(1) of this section, the responsible official shall follow the SEPA rules contained in WAC 197-11-158. (Ord. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005).
A. The city endorses the procedures in the SEPA rules adopted in this section for project review as a “planned action” and will apply the provisions of WAC 197-11-164 through 197-11-172 to projects that meet the criteria for planned action environmental review under RCW 43.21C.031.
B. Whenever a project proposal meets the requirement and criteria for a planned action set forth in WAC 197-11-164 to 197-11-172, and the planned action ordinances of the city, the responsible official shall not be required to issue a threshold determination or require an EIS under the provisions of this chapter.
C. Nothing in this section limits the city from using this chapter or other applicable law to place conditions on the project in order to mitigate impacts through the normal local project review and permitting process. (Ord. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005).
This part contains the rules for deciding whether a proposal has a “probable significant, adverse environmental impact” requiring an environmental impact statement (EIS). This part also contains rules for evaluating the impact of proposals not requiring an EIS. The city adopts the following sections of the SEPA rules by reference, as supplemented by this part:
A. Effective April 7, 1986, the city establishes the following exempt levels for minor new construction under WAC 197-11-800(1)(b) based on local conditions:
1. For residential dwelling units in WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(i):
a. Twenty dwelling units in the R-2, R-3, B-1, B-2, SCC, LCC, CBD, GC, and RD zoning districts;
b. Nine dwelling units in the SR and R-1 zoning districts;
2. For agricultural structures in WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(ii):
a. Thirty thousand square feet in the SR, M-1 and M-2 zoning districts;
b. Ten thousand square feet in all other zoning districts;
3. For office, school, commercial, recreational, service or storage buildings in WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(iii):
a. Neither more than twelve thousand square feet nor more than forty parking spaces in the B-1, B-2, SCC, LCC, AS, CBD, GC, RD, M-1 and M-2 zoning districts;
b. Neither more than four thousand square feet nor more than twenty parking spaces in all other zoning districts;
4. For parking lots in WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(iv):
a. Forty parking spaces in the R-3, B-1, B-2, SCC, LCC, AS, CBD, GC, RD, M-1 and M-2 zoning districts;
b. Twenty parking spaces in all other zoning districts;
5. For landfills and excavations in WAC 197-11- 800(1)(b)(v):
a. Five hundred cubic yards in all zoning districts. (Ord. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 2953 § 1, 1986: Ord. 2805 § 2 (part), 1984).
A. Upon receipt of an application for a proposal, and for city-initiated proposals, the responsible official shall determine whether the proposal is categorically exempt. This determination shall be made based on the definition of action (WAC 197-11-704), the process for determining categorical exemption (WAC 197-11-305), and any designation of environmentally sensitive or critical areas. The responsible official’s determination that a proposal is exempt shall be final and not subject to administrative review. If a proposal is exempt, the city shall not require completion of an environmental checklist.
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 licenses required.
C. 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 chapter, except that the responsible official shall not give authorization for:
1. Any nonexempt action;
2. Any action that would have an adverse environmental impact; or
3. Any action that would limit the choice of alternatives.
D. 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 actions were not approved.
E. The responsible official may withhold approval of an exempt action that would lead to substantial financial expenditures by a private applicant when the expenditures would serve no purpose if nonexempt actions were not approved. (Ord. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 2805 § 2 (part), 1984).
A. A completed environmental checklist, substantially 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.
B. An environmental checklist is not needed for the following proposals:
1. Proposals where the city and applicant agree that an EIS is required;
2. Proposals where SEPA compliance has been previously completed; or
3. Proposals where 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 making the threshold determination.
D. For private proposals, the city will require the applicant to complete the environmental checklist, providing assistance as the city determines necessary. For city proposals, the department initiating the proposal shall complete the environmental checklist for that proposal.
E. The city may require that it or a consultant of the city’s choosing, and not the private applicant, will complete all or part of the environmental checklist for a private proposal if the city has technical information on a question or questions that is unavailable to the private applicant, or if the applicant has provided inaccurate information on previous proposals or on proposals currently under consideration. (Ord. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 2805 § 2 (part), 1984).
B. An applicant may request in writing early notice of whether a determination of significance (DS) is likely under WAC 197-11-350. The request must:
C. The responsible official should respond to the request for early notice as soon as feasible after the time the city receives such a request. The response shall:
D. The city may assist the applicant with identification of impacts to the extent necessary to formulate mitigation measures.
E. 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 revised proposal:
1. If the responsible official indicated specific mitigation measures in its response to the request for early notice, and the applicant revised the proposal to include those specific mitigation measures, the responsible official shall issue and circulate a DNS under WAC 197-11-340(2).
2. If the responsible official indicated areas of concern, but did not indicate specific mitigation measures that would allow it to issue a DNS, the responsible official 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, feasible and enforceable. For example, proposals to “control noise” or “prevent stormwater runoff” are inadequate, whereas proposals to “muffle machinery to X decibel” or “construct two-hundred-foot stormwater retention ponds at Y location” are adequate.
F. A mitigated DNS issued under WAC 197-11-340(2) requires a fifteen-calendar-day comment period and public notice.
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).
I. The city’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 city to consider the clarifications or changes in its threshold determination. (Ord. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 2805 § 2 (part), 1984).
This part contains the rules for preparing environmental impact statements. The city adopts the following sections of the SEPA rules by reference, as supplemented by this part:
A. Preparation of draft and final EISs and SEISs 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 Chapter 197-11 WAC. The DEIS and FEIS or draft and final SEIS may be prepared by city staff, the applicant, or by a consultant selected by the city or applicant.
B. 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 immediately 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 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. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 2805 § 2 (part), 1984).
The lead agency may include, in a FEIS, DEIS or SEIS, an analysis of any impact determined to be relevant to the agency’s decision, whether or not required by the provisions of this chapter and the SEPA rules. The inclusion of such analysis may be based upon comments received during the scoping process. Such additional analysis shall not add to the criteria for threshold determinations or perform any other function or purpose under this chapter. (Ord. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005).
This part contains rules for consulting, commenting and responding on all environmental documents under SEPA, including rules for public notice and hearings. The city adopts the following sections of the SEPA rules by reference, as supplemented by this part:
B. Whenever the city issues a DNS under WAC 197-11-340(2), under the optional process in WAC 197-11-355, 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 permit or approval, the notice shall state whether a DS or DNS has been issued and when comments are due.
2. If no public notice is required for the permit or approval, the city shall give notice of the DNS or DS by:
b. Notifying adjacent property owners within three hundred feet of the subject property; and
c. Notifying the public or private groups that have expressed interest in a certain proposal or in the type of proposal being considered.
C. 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:
2. Posting the property, for site-specific proposals;
3. Publishing notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the county, city, or general area where the proposal is located; and
4. Notifying the public or private groups that have expressed interest in a certain proposal or in the type of proposal being considered.
D. The city may require an applicant to complete the public notice requirements for the applicant’s proposal at the applicant’s expense, compensate the city for costs of carrying out the public notice requirements on behalf of the applicant, or provide services or materials to assist the city in carrying out the public notice requirements. (Ord. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 2805 § 2 (part), 1984).
A. The responsible official or designee 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, or reviewing a DEIS.
B. The responsible official or designee 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 city departments. (Ord. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 2805 § 2 (part), 1984).
This part contains rules for using and supplementing existing environmental documents prepared under SEPA or the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for the city’s own environmental compliance. The city adopts the following sections of the SEPA rules by reference:
This part contains the rules and policies for the city to exercise SEPA’s substantive authority, such as decisions to mitigate or reject proposals as a result of SEPA. This part also contains procedures for appealing SEPA determinations to agencies or the courts. The city adopts the following sections by reference:
A. The policies and goals set forth in this chapter are supplementary to those in the existing authorizations of the city.
5. Such conditions are based on one or more policies in subsection E of this section.
3. The denial is based on one or more policies identified in subsection E of this section and identified in writing in the decision document.
D. If during project review the city determines that the requirements for environmental analysis, protection, and mitigation in the city’s development regulations or comprehensive plan, or in other applicable local, state or federal laws or rules, provide adequate analysis of and mitigation for the specific adverse environmental impacts under RCW 43.21C.240, the city shall not impose additional mitigation under this chapter.
E. The city designates and adopts by reference the following policies as the basis for the city’s exercise of authority pursuant to this section including the conditioning or denying of proposals:
d. Preserve important historic, cultural and natural aspects of our national heritages;
3. The following city codes, ordinances, resolutions, and plans:
a. Yakima urban area comprehensive plan, with amendments and supplements thereto;
b. YMC Title 4, Health and Sanitation;
c. YMC Title 5, Licenses and Business Regulations;
d. YMC Title 6, Public Safety and Morals;
e. YMC Title 7, Public Services and Utilities;
f. YMC Title 8, Streets and Sidewalks;
g. YMC Title 9, Traffic;
h. YMC Title 10, Fire;
i. YMC Title 11, Buildings;
j. YMC Title 12, Development Standards;
k. YMC Title 13, Parks and Playgrounds;
l. YMC Title 14, Subdivisions;
m. YMC Title 15, Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance;
n. YMC Title 16, Administration of Development Permit Regulations;
o. WAC 173-19-4706 (Shoreline Management), including the Yakima shorelines master program;
p. Agreement for wastewater treatment and disposal service (dated February 23, 1976) as amended;
q. Urban Yakima area regional planning agreement (dated January 25, 1977), as amended;
r. Yakima urban area growth policy;
s. Annexation policy;
t. Outside utility service policy (Resolution No. D- 1250, as amended);
u. Greenway Park development plan. (Ord. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 2953 § 2, 1986; Ord. 2805 § 2 (part), 1984).
A. It is the purpose of this chapter to combine environmental considerations with public decisions, and for this reason any appeal brought under this chapter shall be linked to a specific governmental action. Appeals under this chapter are not intended to create a cause of action unrelated to a specific governmental action.
B. The appellate procedures provided for by RCW 43.21C.060, which provides for an appeal to a local legislative body of any decision by a nonelected official conditioning or denying a proposal under authority of SEPA, are formally eliminated. The administrative appeal procedures provided by this part shall be construed consistently with RCW 43.21C.075, Chapter 36.70B RCW, and WAC 197-11-680.
C. Appeals under the provisions of this part shall be limited solely to those actions and/or determinations listed below. No administrative appeals shall be allowed for other actions and/or determinations taken or made pursuant to this chapter (such as lead agency determination, a determination that a proposal is categorically exempt, scoping, draft EIS adequacy, etc.).
1. Appeals of the responsible official’s compliance with the provisions of SEPA, the SEPA rules, and this chapter with respect to the following:
a. Determination of nonsignificance;
b. Determination of significance.
D. Except as provided in subsection E of this section, an appeal under this section shall consolidate any available SEPA appeal with a hearing or appeal on the underlying governmental action in a single simultaneous hearing before one hearing officer or body. The hearing or appeal shall be one at which the hearing officer or body will consider either the agency’s decision or a recommendation on the proposed underlying governmental action. If no hearing or appeal on the underlying governmental action is otherwise provided, then no SEPA appeal is allowed under this section, except as allowed under subsection E of this section.
E. The appeal of a determination of significance need not be consolidated with a hearing or appeal on the underlying governmental action.
F. All SEPA appeals provided under this section shall be initiated by filing a written notice of SEPA administrative appeal with the responsible official, accompanied with the applicable appeal fee.
1. The notice of appeal required by this section shall include, at a minimum:
a. The name and address of the party or agency filing the appeal;
b. An identification of the specific proposal and specific SEPA actions, omissions, conditions or determinations for which appeal is sought;
c. A statement of the particular grounds or reasons for the appeal.
2. The responsible official shall arrange to conduct the SEPA appeal in conjunction with a hearing or appeal on the underlying permit or approval, where required to consolidate the SEPA appeal with a hearing on the underlying governmental action.
a. SEPA appeals shall be initiated and conducted in the manner set forth below:
i. An appeal to the issuance of a DNS or MDNS may be filed by any agency or aggrieved person as follows:
(a.) For proposals which may be approved by an administrative official without public hearing, an appeal shall be filed within fourteen days after notice that the determination has been made has been issued. Such SEPA appeal shall be heard in conjunction with the appeal of the underlying permit or approval, where such appeal is allowed; provided, that if no administrative appeal of the underlying permit or approval is otherwise provided for, and consolidation is not required by subsection D of this section, an appeal of the DNS shall be heard and decided in an open record hearing by the hearing examiner. The decision of the hearing examiner on the SEPA appeal shall be final and not subject to further administrative appeal.
(b.) For proposals which may only be approved by open record hearing or open record predecision hearing recommendation, an appeal shall be filed within fourteen days following the last day of any comment period required to be provided by this chapter, or where no comment period is required, then within fourteen days following the date of issuance or adoption of the DNS, and shall be heard and decided in the open record hearing in conjunction with the decision or recommendation on the underlying proposal. The decision of the hearing examiner on the SEPA appeal shall be final and not subject to further administrative appeal.
(c.) An appeal to a DS may be filed by the proposal applicant or sponsor within fourteen days of the issuance of the DS/scoping notice. The appeal shall be heard in an open record hearing and decided by the hearing examiner, whose decision shall be final and not subject to further administrative appeal.
(d.) The SEPA determination of the responsible official shall be entitled to substantial weight, and the appellant shall bear the burden to establish a violation of SEPA, the SEPA rules, or the provisions of this chapter.
(e.) A SEPA determination shall be deemed to be conclusively in compliance with SEPA, the SEPA rules, and the provisions of this chapter, unless a SEPA appeal is filed in accordance with this part.
(f.) Where it is determined that there exists a violation of SEPA, the SEPA rules, or the provisions of this chapter, the hearing examiner may remand the SEPA determination to the responsible official and, in such event, shall continue the open record hearing or open record predecision hearing until such time as a new or modified SEPA determination is issued under the provisions of this chapter. The decision of the hearing examiner to remand the SEPA determination shall be a final administrative decision not subject to further administrative appeal. Where applicable, such remand shall toll any period for project permit approval required by Chapter 36.70B RCW or other statutes, or otherwise required by other provisions of this code.
b. For any appeal under this subsection, the city shall provide for a record that shall consist of the following:
i. Findings and conclusions;
ii. Testimony under oath; and
iii. A taped or written transcript.
G. Judicial Appeal.
1. Any available administrative appeal provided under this section must be utilized by an agency or aggrieved person prior to initiating judicial review of any SEPA action, omission or determination made or taken under this chapter.
2. A judicial appeal of any SEPA action, omission or determination made or taken under this chapter must be filed within the time limitations established by any statute or ordinance for appeal of the underlying governmental action.
3. The city shall give official notice of the date and place for commencing a judicial appeal, in accordance with WAC 197-11-680(5), where there is a statute or ordinance establishing a time limit for commencing judicial appeal. (Ord. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 2002-49 § 1, 2002; Ord. 98-40 § 1, 1998: Ord. 2805 § 2 (part), 1984).
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. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 2805 § 2 (part), 1984).
This part contains uniform usage and definitions of terms under SEPA. The city adopts the following sections of the SEPA rules by reference, as supplemented by YMC 6.88.030:
The city adopts by reference the following sections of the SEPA rules, as supplemented in this chapter, including YMC 6.88.070 (Flexible thresholds for categorical exemptions) and 6.88.080 (Use of exemptions):
(Ord. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord 2805 § 2 (part), 1984).
This part contains rules for agency compliance with SEPA, including rules for charging fees under the SEPA process, designating environmentally sensitive areas, listing agencies with environmental expertise, selecting the lead agency, and applying these rules to current agency activities. The city adopts the following sections by reference, as supplemented in this chapter:
A. Threshold Determination. For every environmental checklist the city will review when it is lead agency, the city shall collect a fee established in YMC 15.26.010 from the proponent of the proposal prior to undertaking the threshold determination.
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 by the city in processing the EIS.
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 persons or entity other than the city and may bill such costs and expenses directly to the applicant. The city may require the applicant to post bond or otherwise ensure payment of such costs. Such consultants shall be selected by mutual agreement of the city and applicant.
3. If a proposal is modified so that an EIS is no longer required, the responsible official shall refund any fees collected under subsection (B)(1) or (B)(2) of this section which remain after incurred costs are paid.
D. 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. (Ord. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 3245 § 3, 1990; Ord. 2805 § 2 (part), 1984).
The effective date of this chapter is October 1, 1984. (Ord. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 2805 § 2 (part), 1984).
If any provision of this chapter or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of this chapter, or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected. (Ord. 2011-07 § 1 (part), 2011: Ord. 2005-50 § 1 (part), 2005: Ord. 2805 § 2 (part), 1984).
The city adopts the following forms and sections of the SEPA rules by reference: