CHAPTER 21.04
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT Revised 3/24
Sections:
21.04.010 Adoption of State Environmental Policy Act.
21.04.020 Adoption of designated sections of SEPA Guidelines.
21.04.040 Proposals – Responsibilities – Availability of documents.
21.04.050 Lead agency determination and responsibilities.
21.04.070 Environmental checklist.
21.04.080 Environment impact statements.
21.04.090 Requirements for DNS, DS or SEIS – Public notice.
21.04.100 Conditions attached for approval – Findings for denial.
21.04.110 Policies for exercise of authority.
21.04.120 Fees required for activities.
21.04.130 Adoption of Grant County critical areas ordinance. Revised 3/24
21.04.010 Adoption of State Environmental Policy Act.
The City hereby adopts by reference the policies of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) as expressed in RCW 43.21C.120 and 43.21C.130. (Ord 666, 1984)
21.04.020 Adoption of designated sections of SEPA Guidelines.
The City hereby adopts by reference the following sections of WAC 197-11 (SEPA rules) adopted by the state of Washington:
WAC
197-11-040 Definitions.
197-11-050 Lead Agency.
197-11-055 Timing of the SEPA process.
197-11-060 Content of environmental review.
197-11-070 Limitations on actions during SEPA process.
197-11-080 Incomplete or unavailable information.
197-11-090 Supporting documents.
197-11-100 Information required.
197-11-300 Purpose of this part.
197-11-305 Categorical exemptions.
197-11-310 Threshold determination required.
197-11-315 Environmental checklist.
197-11-330 Threshold determination process.
197-11-335 Additional information.
197-11-340 Determination of nonsignificance (DNS).
197-11-350 Mitigated DNS.
197-11-360 Determination of Significance (DS)/initiation of scoping.
197-11-390 Effect of threshold determination.
197-11-400 Purpose of EIS.
197-11-402 General requirements.
197-11-405 EIS types.
197-11-406 EIS timing.
197-11-408 Scoping.
197-11-410 Expanded scoping (optional).
197-11-420 EIS preparation.
197-11-425 Style and size.
197-11-430 Format.
197-11-435 Cover letter or memo.
197-11-440 EIS Contents.
197-11-442 Contents of EIS on nonproject proposals.
197-11-443 EIS contents when prior nonproject EIS.
197-11-444 Elements of the environment.
197-11-448 Relationship of EIS to other considerations.
197-11-450 Cost-benefit analysis.
197-11-455 Issuance of DEIS.
197-11-460 Issuance of FEIS.
197-11-500 Purpose of this part.
197-11-502 Inviting comment.
197-11-504 Availability and cost of environmental documents.
197-11-508 SEPA register.
197-11-535 Public hearings and meetings.
197-11-545 Effect of no comment.
197-11-550 specificity of comments.
197-11-560 FEIS response to comments.
197-11-570 Consulted agency costs to assist lead agency.
197-11-600 When to use existing environmental documents.
197-11-610 Use of NEPA documents.
197-11-620 Supplemental environmental impact statement – procedures.
197-11-625 Addenda – procedures.
197-11-630 Adoption – procedures.
197-11-635 Incorporation by reference – procedures.
197-11-640 Combining documents.
197-11-650 Purpose of this part.
197-11-655 Implementation.
197-11-660 Substantive authority and mitigation.
197-11-680 Appeals.
197-11-700 Definitions.
197-11-702 Act.
197-11-704 Action.
197-11-706 Addendum.
197-11-708 Adoption.
197-11-710 Affected tribes.
197-11-714 Agency.
197-11-716 Applicant.
197-11-718 Built environment.
197-11-720 Categorical exemption.
197-11-722 Consolidated appeal.
197-11-724 Consulted agency.
197-11-726 Cost – benefit analysis.
197-11-728 County/City.
197-11-730 Decision maker.
197-11-732 Department.
197-11-734 Determination of nonsignificance (DNS).
197-11-736 Determination of significance (DS).
197-11-738 EIS.
197-11-740 Environmentally sensitive area.
197-11-742 Environmental checklist.
197-11-744 Environmental document.
197-11-746 Environmental review.
197-11-748 Environmentally sensitive area.
197-11-750 Expanded scoping.
197-11-752 Impacts.
197-11-754 Incorporation by reference.
197-11-758 Lead agency.
197-11-760 License;
197-11-762 Local agency.
197-11-764 Major action.
197-11-766 Mitigated DNS.
197-11-768 Mitigation.
197-11-770 Natural environment.
197-11-772 NEPA.
197-11-774 Nonproject.
197-11-776 Phased review.
197-11-778 Preparation.
197-11-780 Private project.
197-11-782 Probable.
197-11-784 Proposal.
197-11-786 Reasonable alternative.
197-11-788 Responsible official.
197-11-790 SEPA.
197-11-792 Scope.
197-11-793 Scoping.
197-11-794 Significant.
197-11-796 State agency.
197-11-797 Threshold determination.
197-11-799 Underlying governmental action.
197-11-800 Categorical exemptions.
197-11-880 Emergencies.
197-11-890 Petitioning DOE to change exemptions.
197-11-900 Purpose of this part.
197-11-902 Agency SEPA policies.
197-11-916 Application to ongoing actions.
197-11-920 Agencies with environmental expertise.
197-11-922 Lead agency rules.
197-11-924 Determining the lead agency.
197-11-926 Lead agency for governmental proposals.
197-11-928 Lead agency for public and private purposals.
197-11-930 Lead agency for private projects with one agency with jurisdiction.
197-11-932 Lead agency for private projects requiring licenses from more than one agency, when on of the agencies is a town.
197-11-934 Lead agency for private projects requiring licenses from a local agency, not a town and one or more state agencies.
197-11-936 Lead agency for private projects requiring licenses from more than one state agency.
197-11-938 Lead agencies for specific proposals.
197-11-940 Transfer of lead agency status to a state agency.
197-11-942 Agreements on lead agency status.
197-11-944 Agreements on division of lead agency duties.
197-11-946 DOE resolution of lead agency disputes.
197-11-948 Assumption of lead agency status.
197-11-960 Environmental checklist.
197-11-965 Adoption notice.
197-11-970 Determination of nonsignificance (DNS).
197-11-980 Determination of significance and scoping notice (DS).
197-11-985 Notice of assumption of lead agency status.
197-11-990 Notice of action.
(Ord 666 §7, 1984)
21.04.030 Definitions.
In addition to those definitions contained within WAC 197-11-700 through 197-11-799, when used with this chapter, the following terms shall have the following meanings, unless the context indicates otherwise:
"Department" means any division, subdivision or organizational unit of the City established by ordinance, rule or order.
"SEPA rules" means Chapter 197-11 WAC adopted by the department of ecology.
"Ordinance" means the ordinance, resolution or other procedure used by the town to adopt regulatory requirements.
"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 (mitigated DNS procedures). (Ord 666 §3, 1984)
21.04.040 Proposals – Responsibilities – Availability of documents.
For public proposals, the head of the department making the proposal shall be the responsible official. For private proposals, the head of the department with primary responsibility for approving the permits and licenses for the proposal shall be the responsible official. When multiple officials have permitting authority, the assignment of responsibility shall be reached by agreement.
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, and perform any other functions assigned to the "lead agency" or "responsible official" by those sections of the SEPA rules that were adopted by reference in WAC 173-806-020.
The City shall retain all documents required by the SEPA rules and make them available in accordance with RCW Chapter 42.17. (Ord 666 §4, 1984)
21.04.050 Lead agency determination and responsibilities.
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, 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.
When the City is the lead agency for a proposal, the department receiving the application shall determine the responsible official who shall supervise compliance with the threshold determination requirements, and if an EIS is necessary, shall supervise preparation of the EIS.
When the City is not the lead agency for the proposal, all departments of the City shall use and consider, as appropriate either the 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.
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 197-11-922 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 fifteen days of receipt of the determination, or the City must petition the department of ecology for a lead agency determination under WAC 197-11946 within the fifteen-day time period. Any such petition on behalf of the City may be initiated by the department head.
Any department head making a lead agency determination for a private project shall require sufficient information from the applicant to identify which other agencies have jurisdiction over the proposal (i.e., which agencies require nonexempt licenses?). (Ord 666 §5, 1984)
21.04.060 Exemptions.
Each department within the City 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. Completion of an environmental checklist shall not be a requirement for an exempt proposal.
In determining whether or not a proposal is exempt, the department shall make certain the proposal is properly defined and identifies 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.
If a proposal includes both exempt and nonexempt actions, the City may authorize exempt actions prior to compliance with the procedure requirements of this chapter, except that:
1. The City shall not give authorization for any nonexempt action, any action that would have an adverse environmental impact, or 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 actions) were not approved. (Ord 666 §6, 1984)
21.04.070 Environmental checklist.
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 chapter; except, a checklist is not needed if the City and applicant agree an EIS is required, SEPA compliance has been completed, or SEPA compliance has been initiated by another agency. The checklist shall be in the form of WAC 197-11-960 with the following additions: For private proposals, the City 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.
As provided in WAC 173-806-100 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.
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.
B. The responsible official should respond to the request for early notice within fifteen days. The response shall be written; state whether the City 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 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.
As much as possible, the City should assist the applicant with identification of impacts to the extent necessary to formulate mitigation measures.
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 fifteen 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 under WAC 197-11-340(2).
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. For example, proposals to "control noise" or "prevent stormwater runoff" are inadequate, whereas proposals to "muffle machinery to X decibel" or "construct 200-foot stormwater retention pond at Y location" are adequate.
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.
A mitigated DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2), requiring a fifteen-day comment period and public notice. 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 a permit, or enforced in any manner specifically prescribed by the City.
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) (withdrawal of DNS). The City’s written response under 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 666 §7, 1984)
21.04.080 Environment impact statements.
Preparation of draft and final EISs (DEIS and FEIS) and draft and final supplemental EISs is the responsibility of the department 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 SETS shall be prepared by City staff, the applicant, or by a consultant selected by the City or the applicant. 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 DEIS and FEIS prior to distribution.
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. This does not apply to information the City may request under another ordinance, other than the ordinance codified in this chapter, or statute. (Ord 666 §8, 1984)
21.04.090 Requirements for DNS, DS or SEIS – Public notice.
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 no public notice is required for the permit or approval, the City shall give notice of the DNS or DS by posting the property, for site-specific proposals or publishing notice in the City’s official newspaper.
3. 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.
Whenever the City issues a DS 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 indicating the availability of the DEIS in any public notice required for a nonexempt license, and publishing notice in the City’s official newspaper.
Whenever possible, the City shall integrate the public notice required under this section with existing notice procedures for the City’s nonexempt permits or approvals required for the proposal.
The City may require an applicant to complete the public notice requirements for the applicant’s proposal at his or her expense.
The planning commission 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. The department shall be responsible for the town’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 666 §9, 1984)
21.04.100 Conditions attached for approval – Findings for denial.
A. The policies and goals set forth in this chapter are supplementary to those in the existing authorization of the City. The City may attach conditions to a permit or approval for a proposal so long as:
1. Such conditions are necessary to mitigate specific probable adverse environmental impacts identified in environmental documents prepared pursuant to this chapter; and
2. Such conditions are in writing; and
3. The mitigation measures included in such conditions are reasonable and capable of being accomplished; and
4. The City has considered whether other local, state, or federal mitigation measures applied to the proposal are sufficient to mitigate the identified impacts; and
5. Such conditions are based on one or more policies in Section 21.04.100(A)(4) and cited in the 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 a final SEIS prepared pursuant to this chapter; and
2. A finding is made that there are no reasonable mitigation measures capable of being accomplished that are sufficient to mitigate the identified impact; and
3. The denial is based on one or more policies identified in Section 21.04.100(A)(4) and identified in writing in the decision document. (Ord 666 §10, 1984)
21.04.110 Policies for exercise of authority.
The City designates and adopts by reference the following policies as the basis for the City’s exercise of authority pursuant to this section:
1. The City 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; fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment for succeeding generations; assure for all people of Washington safe, healthful, productive, and aesthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings; attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risk to health or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences; preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage; maintain, wherever possible, an environment which supports diversity and variety of individual choice; achieve a balance between population and resource use which will permit high standards of living and a wide sharing of life’s amenities; and 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.
When any proposal or action not requiring a decision of the planning commission is conditioned or denied on the basis of SEPA by a nonelected official, the decision shall be appealable to the planning commission. Such appeal may be perfected by the proponent or any aggrieved party by giving notice to the responsible official within ten days of the decision being appealed. Review by the planning commission shall be on a de novo basis. (Ord 666 §10, 1984)
21.04.120 Fees required for activities.
The City shall require the following fees for its activities in accordance with the provisions of this chapter:
1. Threshold Determination. For every environmental checklist the City will review when it is lead agency the town shall collect a fee of fifty dollars from the proponent of the proposal 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 the fee.
2. Environmental Impact Statement. 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 preparing the EIS. The responsible official shall advise the applicant of the projected costs for the EIS prior to actual preparation;.the applicant shall post bond or otherwise ensure payment of such costs. 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 town and applicant after a call for proposals. If a proposal is modified so that an EIS is no longer required, the responsible official shall refund any fees collected under this subsection which remain after incurred costs are paid.
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 applicant’s proposal.
The City shall not collect a fee for performing its duties as a consulted agency.
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 666 §11, 1984)
21.04.130 Adoption of Grant County critical areas ordinance. Revised 3/24
A. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.060, the City hereby adopts by reference Chapter 24.08 of the Grant County Unified Development Code entitled "Critical Areas and Cultural Resources," including any amendments thereto.
B. Except as provided for in Section 21.04.140, whenever Chapter 24.08 of the Grant County Unified Development Code specifically adopted in this section refers to another state statute or regulation, or to another Grant County Code provision not specifically adopted in this section, the statute, regulation or code provision referred to shall be given the force and effect necessary to enforce Chapter 24.08 of the Grant County Unified Development Code. (Ord 24-610 §2)
21.04.140 Amendments to Grant County critical areas ordinance to reflect the City of Quincy Municipal Code provisions. Revised 3/24
A. Section 24.08.020 of the Grant County Unified Development Code shall be amended as follows:
24.08.020 Categorization of Critical Areas.
(a) Critical areas in the City of Quincy are categorized as follows:
(1) Wetlands;
(2) Frequently Flooded Areas;
(3) Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas;
(4) Geologically Hazardous Areas; and
(5) Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas;
(6) Cultural Resource Areas.
B. Section 24.08.030 of the Grant County Unified Development Code shall be amended as follows to reflect the City of Quincy Municipal Code provisions:
24.08.030 Applicability and Authorization Required.
(a) The provisions of this chapter shall apply to those land use or development activities that:
(1) Are within the geographical limits of critical areas as set forth in this chapter; and
(2) Require a development permit or review under any of the following City of Quincy codes:
(A) Title 19 – Subdivision Code;
(B) Chapter 20.06 – Use Districts;
(C) Chapter 21.04 – Environmental Policy Act;
(D) Title 15 – Buildings and Construction; and
(3) Is not an exempt land use or development activity delineated in GCC § 24.08.060.
(b) No land use development or use application pursuant to the City of Quincy Codes identified in GCC § 24.08.030(b)(2) shall be accepted as counter complete pursuant to QMC 17.05.030 until the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Administrative Official compliance with the provisions of this Chapter. For a building permit, submission of a complete critical areas checklist shall be considered counter complete.
(c) No land use development permit or land use, division or development approval pursuant to the City of Quincy Codes identified in GCC § 24.08.030(a)(2) shall be granted for any activity regulated under this Chapter until the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Administrative Official compliance with the provisions of this Chapter.
(d) Critical area review, pursuant to this Chapter, shall be conducted as part of the underlying permit or approval. For any activity altering or disturbing any critical areas and not subject to or requiring an underlying development permit or approval, such activity shall not proceed in the absence of approval of a critical areas alteration permit issued pursuant to this Chapter.
C. Section 24.08.040 of the Grant County Unified Development Code shall be amended as follows to reflect the City of Quincy Municipal Code provisions:
24.08.040 Relationship to Other Regulations.
(a) Areas characterized by a particular critical area may also be subject to other federal, state and local regulations. Compliance with this Code does not affect a person’s obligation to comply in all respects with other regulatory requirements. In the event of any conflict between the requirements of this Code and any other Code or ordinance of Grant County or the City of Quincy, the regulation that provides the greater protection for the particular critical area shall apply.
(b) Federal regulations include, but are not limited to:
(1) Clean Water Act, Section 404, 401
(2) Endangered Species Act
(3) Federal Water Pollution Control Act
(4) National Environmental Policy Act
(5) National Floodplain Insurance Program
(c) State regulations include, but are not limited to:
(1) RCW 43.21C State Environmental Policy Act
(2) RCW 75.20 Hydraulic Project Approval
(3) RCW 77.12 Bald Eagle Protection Rules
(4) RCW 78.44 Surface Mining Act
(5) RCW 90.03 State Water Code
(6) RCW 90.48 State Water Pollution Control Act
(7) RCW 90.58 Shoreline Management Act
(d) County and City regulations include, but are not limited to:
(1) QMC Chapter 15.50 Floodplain Management
(2) QMC Chapter 21.04 Environmental Policy
(3) QMC Chapter 20.14 Development Standards
(4) GCC § 24.12 Grant County Shoreline Master Program
(5) Grant County Solid Waste Permits
(6) Grant County On-Site Sewage Disposal Permits
D. Section 24.08.050 of the Grant County Unified Development Code shall be amended as follows to reflect the City of Quincy Municipal Code provisions:
24.08.050 Jurisdictional Substitution and Coordination.
(a) Jurisdictional Substitution: In cases where other agencies possess jurisdictional control over critical areas and it is determined by the Administrative Official that the permit conditions satisfy the requirements of this Chapter, those requirements may substitute for the requirements of this Chapter. Such requirements shall be a condition of critical area approval and be enforceable by the County. The County shall notify the applicant in writing when any such substitution is made. The County shall also notify the public through a Notice of Decision as provided in QMC 17.07.020 and shall provide opportunity for written comment by the Washington State Department of Ecology and/or the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife as to whether the substitution provides required protection of critical areas.
(b) Jurisdictional Coordination: In addition to the provisions established in this Chapter, the County shall coordinate its own programs with those of other public and private organizations to enhance management of Critical Areas in Grant County. A partial list of public and private programs providing additional protection to critical areas includes:
(1) Local plans or programs include, but are not limited to:
(A) Watershed Management Plans (WRIA 41 – Lower Crab, WRIA 42 – Grand Coulee, WRIA 43 – Upper Crab-Wilson)
(B) QMC Chapter 15.50 Floodplain Management
(C) QMC Chapter 21.04 Environmental Policy
(D) QMC Chapter 20.14 Development Standards
(E) GCC § 24.12 Grant County Shoreline Management Master Program
(F) Grant County Solid Waste Permits
(G) Grant County On-Site Sewage Disposal Permits
(H) Grant County Open Space Taxation Program
(2) State and federal programs include, but are not limited to:
(A) Washington State Hydraulic Project Permits (HPA)
(B) Washington State Pesticide Applicator License Requirements
(C) Washington State Waste Discharge Permits
(D) Washington State Water Quality Certification Requirements (401)
(E) Federal Corps 404 Permits and Section 10 Permits
(F) Tribal Environmental Policy Act (TEPA) requirements.
E. Section 24.08.060 of the Grant County Unified Development Code shall be amended as follows to reflect the City of Quincy Municipal Code provisions:
24.08.060 General Exemptions.
(a) The following developments, land-use activities and associated uses shall be exempt from the provisions of this Chapter provided that they are otherwise consistent with the applicable provisions of other Grant County or City ordinances:
(1) Emergency Actions. An emergency action is an action required to mitigate an unanticipated and imminent threat to the public health or safety or to the environment within a period of time too short to allow full compliance with this Chapter. The following criteria shall exist to qualify any action under an emergency provision:
(A) There must be an immediate threat to life, public or private property, or an immediate threat of serious environmental degradation arising from a natural condition, or non-natural accident or incident;
(B) The emergency response shall be confined to the action necessary to protect life or property from damage;
(C) The scope of the emergency response must be limited to the work necessary to relieve the immediate threat; and
(D) The emergency response applies only to the period of time in which the actual emergency exists.
(2) Once the emergency is abated or dissipated as deemed by jurisdictional authorities, compliance with the requirements of this chapter is required.
(3) Emergency actions shall use reasonable methods that minimize the impact to critical areas and their buffers. Persons who take emergency action shall notify the Administrative Official within one (1) working day following commencement of the emergency activity. Following such notification, the Administrative Official shall determine if the action taken was within the scope and definition of emergency actions as defined above. If the Administrative Official determines that the action taken or any part of the action taken was beyond the scope and definition of allowed emergency actions, then the enforcement provisions of QMC Chapter 20.02 shall apply;
(4) Agricultural Operations. Existing and ongoing agricultural operations as defined in GCC § 25.02 including related development and activities that are conducted on lands designated as Agricultural by the Grant County Comprehensive Plan which do not result in expansion into a critical area or its buffer or do not result in an increase in impact to a critical area. Existing and ongoing agricultural activities, however, shall comply with agricultural best management practices contained within any conservation plan between the property owner and the Department of Ecology pursuant to Chapter 89.08 RCW. Existing and ongoing agricultural activities that result in significant adverse impacts to a critical area or its buffer shall not be exempt from the provisions of this Chapter. New development and/or expansion of existing operations shall comply with the provisions of this Chapter;
(5) Operation, Maintenance, and Repair of Columbia Basin Project-related Facilities. Activities conducted by or on behalf of the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation related to operation, maintenance, and repair of facilities;
(6) Activity Adjacent to Artificial Watercourses. Activity adjacent to artificial watercourses which are constructed and actively maintained for irrigation and drainage; provided, that any activity shall comply with RCW 75.20.100 and RCW 75.20.103 by securing written approval from the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife; and provided further, that the activity must also comply with all applicable drainage, erosion and sedimentation control requirements for water quality. The operator shall notify the Administrative Official in writing regarding the location and nature of anticipated activities a minimum of 21 days prior to commencing any such activity. Such notification shall be a condition for allowance of this activity as an exemption from the provisions of this Chapter;
(7) Maintenance, Repair and Operation. Normal and routine maintenance, repair and operation of existing structures, utilities, sewage disposal systems, water systems, drainage facilities, ponds, flood control facilities, electric and communications facilities, and public and private roads and driveways associated with pre-existing residential or commercial use. However, any person engaging in or providing any maintenance or repair activities shall use reasonable methods with the least amount of potential impact to critical areas. Any impacted critical area or its buffer shall be restored after the completion of maintenance/repair activities to the maximum extent practicable;
(8) Modifications of Buildings. Modification of: (1) an existing single-family residence that does not change the use from residential, does not expand the building footprint, or increase septic effluent and (2) an existing building having other than single-family use which does not expand the building footprint, alter the use, or increase septic effluent. A person granted an exemption under this subsection for a particular building cannot receive another exemption under this subsection for the same building unless ten (10) years have elapsed from the date of granting of the previous exemption;
(9) Replacement of Manufactured Homes. Replacement of a manufactured home, as defined in QMC Chapter 20.44, that does not increase the number of bedrooms or exacerbate nonconformity with critical area setbacks or buffers required under this Chapter. A person granted an exemption under this subsection for a particular building cannot receive another exemption under this subsection for the same building unless ten (10) years have elapsed from the date of granting of the previous exemption;
(10) Site Investigations. Site investigation work necessary for land use applications such as surveys, soil and mineral resource explorations, percolation tests, archaeological explorations authorized and approved by all jurisdictional agencies, and other related activities. However, critical area impacts shall be minimized and disturbed areas shall be immediately restored to the maximum extent practicable;
(11) Landscape Maintenance. Maintenance activities such as mowing, normal pruning, and gardening accessory to single family residential use, provided that such maintenance activities are limited to existing landscaping improvements and do not expand into critical areas or associated buffers, do not expose soils, do not alter topography, do not destroy or clear native vegetation, and do not diminish water quality or quantity. This allowance shall not be construed as applying to agricultural activities undertaken outside lands designated as Agricultural;
(12) Enhancement Activities. Fish, wildlife, wetland and/or riparian enhancement activities not required as mitigation provided that the project is approved by the U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Washington State Department of Ecology;
(13) Navigation Aids and Boundary Markers. Construction or modification of navigational aids and channels markers;
(14) Noxious Weed Control; and
(15) Passive Activities. Passive recreational activities and uses, sport fishing, hunting, scientific and educational activities, or similar minimal impact, activities.
(b) Although exempt from the provisions of this Code, those activities delineated in GCC § 24.08.060, above, may not be exempt from other federal, state and local regulations regarding critical areas. Additionally, exempted activities shall use reasonable methods to avoid impacts to critical areas or their buffers. An exemption does not give permission to degrade a critical area or ignore risk from natural hazards. Any temporary damage to, or alteration of a critical area or buffer, shall be restored, rehabilitated, or replaced to prior condition or better at the responsible party’s expense. Revegetation shall occur during the wet season, but no later than 180 days after the damage or alteration of the critical area or buffer occurred. All other restoration or rehabilitation shall be completed within 60 days of the damage or alteration, unless otherwise approved by the Administrative Official.
F. Section 24.08.070 of the Grant County Unified Development Code shall be amended as follows to reflect the City of Quincy Municipal Code provisions:
24.08.070 General Review Procedures.
(a) Critical areas review shall be classified and processed in the manner delineated in QMC Title 17 for the underlying development permit or approval being sought. Critical areas alteration permits issued pursuant to this Chapter and not subject to an underlying permit or approval shall be classified as an administrative permit, and shall be processed in the manner delineated in QMC 17.09.020.
(b) A critical areas determination, using best available science, by the Administrative Official under this chapter shall be in addition to, and not a substitute for, any other development permit or authorization required by the GCC or QMC. A critical areas determination shall not be interpreted as an approval of any other permit or authorization required of a development, construction or use.
(c) Pre-Application Review. Applications for certain project permits shall not be accepted by the Administrative Official unless the applicant has scheduled and attended a pre-application conference, as specified in QMC 17.05.010. Pre-application review is not intended to provide an exhaustive review of all the potential issues that a given application could raise. Pre-application review does not prevent the County from applying all relevant laws to the applicant. In addition to the purposes listed in QMC 17.05.010(B), the review is intended to establish:
(1) The critical areas involved or potentially impacted;
(2) The degree to which a proposed development may impact a designated critical area; and
(3) If there is a need for a preliminary site assessment or technical assistance conference to better define the critical area issues.
(d) Technical Assistance Conference. If requested by the applicant or required by the Administrative Official, the Administrative Official will arrange and conduct a meeting of representatives of Grant County Departments and Resource Agency Personnel having technical expertise, interest, or jurisdiction in the proposed development. The technical assistance conference may also involve a preliminary site assessment, if it is determined that identification of or resolution of issues related to the proposed development may be achieved through an on-site review. The purpose of the technical assistance conference will be to:
(1) Confirm and define the requirements of any other applicable local, state or federal regulations;
(2) Clarify any identified procedural or regulatory conflicts and define alternative courses of action available to the applicant in addressing project requirements;
(3) Provide the applicant with guidance, available data and information that will assist in complying with the provisions of this title, other chapters of the GCC and other applicable regulations;
(4) Provide the applicant with guidance concerning project modifications or site enhancements that would minimize impacts to the critical area;
(5) Provide the applicant with alternatives for securing data, information, or assistance necessary to the project; and
(6) Determine whether a special assessment or study is necessary.
(e) The procedure for critical areas review shall be as follows:
(1) Determination of Applicability: Based on the documents submitted by the applicant, the Administrative Official shall first determine if the proposed activity conforms to any of the exemptions to this Chapter as delineated in GCC § 24.08.060. If the Administrative Official determines that the proposed activity meets any of the listed exemptions, no further critical areas review is required pursuant to this Chapter, except as necessary for the Administrative Official to ensure that the proposed activity is undertaken as described in the application and as shown on the site plan. The Administrative Official shall note this determination in the application file.
(2) Critical Areas Checklist: If the Administrative Official determines that the proposed activity does not meet any of the listed exemptions, or any best management practices and/or restoration requirements associated therewith, the applicant shall complete a critical areas checklist on forms provided by the Department.
(3) Preliminary Assessment: The Department will review the critical areas checklist together with resource information and maps identified in the relevant sections of this Chapter, and may conduct a site reconnaissance to determine whether critical areas or their required buffers are affected by the proposed activity. The applicant shall be responsible for providing the Department with sufficient and accurate information regarding the proposed activity and site conditions and shall allow and facilitate on-site observation by the Department in connection with this review. Restriction of access shall be grounds for denial of critical areas alteration permit and/or underlying permit or approval.
(4) Preliminary Determination: Based on the preliminary assessment, the Administrative Official shall make one of the following determinations:
(A) Determination that Critical Areas are Not Associated: If the Administrative Official determines that critical area indicators are not present within 300 feet of the proposed development activity that is the subject of a proposed development application, no further critical areas review is required pursuant to this Chapter, except as necessary for the Administrative Official to ensure that the proposed activity is undertaken as described in the application and as shown on the site plan. The Administrative Official shall note this determination in the application file. This determination shall not constitute approval of any use or activity, nor its compliance with the requirements of this Chapter, outside the scope of that stated in the application. Any proposed change in use or scope of activity from that contained in the application shall be subject to further review under this Chapter. The applicant shall acknowledge in writing that this determination by the Administrative Official regarding the apparent absence of critical area indicators and the likelihood that critical areas will not be affected is not intended as an expert certification regarding the presence or absence of critical areas and that the critical areas review process is subject to possible reopening if new information is received as described in GCC § 24.08.080(5), below. If the applicant wants greater assurance of the accuracy of any such critical area indicators determination, the applicant may hire a qualified critical areas expert to provide such assurances; or
(B) Determination that Critical Areas Are Associated: If the Administrative Official determines that critical area indicators are present within 300 feet of the proposed development activity that is the subject of a proposed development application, then the Administrative Official shall note this determination in the application file. The Administrative Official shall notify the applicant of such determination, and the applicant shall complete a critical areas assessment pursuant to the requirements of this Chapter.
(5) Reopening of Review Process: If at any time following the Administrative Official’s determination that critical areas are not associated with the proposed activity and prior to completion of project review under QMC Chapter 17.09, including any appeals, the Administrative Official receives new evidence that critical areas may be associated with the proposed activity, the Administrative Official shall reopen the critical areas review process and shall require completion of a critical areas assessment and mitigation pursuant to this Chapter. Once project review is complete pursuant to QMC Chapter 17.09, including any appeals, then the Administrative Official’s determination that critical areas are not associated with the proposed activity shall be final, unless appealed pursuant to QMC 17.09.100. However, the Administrative Official shall not be prevented from reopening the critical areas review process if the Department relied on misinformation, provided by the applicant in the permit application or critical areas checklist.
(6) Critical Areas Assessment: The requirements of a critical areas assessment are dependent upon the particular critical area of interest. The applicant shall conduct, or cause to have conducted, a technical assessment and prepare a Critical Areas Assessment Report pursuant to GCC § 24.08.090 and as delineated in the relevant sections of this Chapter. The Critical Area Assessment report shall have three components: (a) a site analysis, (b) an impact analysis, and (c) proposed mitigation measures.
(7) Waiver of Wetland Site Assessment Requirements: In circumstances where the Administrative Official has identified the presence of wetland indicators within 300 feet of the proposed development activity that is the subject of a proposed development application, the Administrative Official may consider waiving the site assessment requirements of GCC § 24.08.230 upon receiving a written request from the applicant. Such a waiver shall only be granted under the following conditions:
(A) The wetland in question has been preliminarily identified by County technical staff as a Class IV wetland;
(B) The proposed development application is for a single-family residence, subdivision or short subdivision on an existing lot of record if field investigation by County staff indicates the following:
(i) Sufficient information exists for staff to estimate the boundaries of a wetland without a delineation; and
(ii) The Administrative Official determines that the single-family residence and all accessory structures and uses, or building envelopes and building setback lines in the case of subdivisions and short subdivisions, as proposed will not impact the critical area and will not impact a buffer twice the standard width required pursuant to this GCC § 24.08.250 from the estimated wetland boundary;
(C) The Administrative Official determines that the project or activity as proposed will not impact the wetland and will not impact a buffer twice the standard width required pursuant to this Chapter;
(D) The Administrative Official determines that such a waiver will not reduce the long-term protection of the identified critical area;
(E) Prior to any such waiver, the Administrative Official shall either convene a site visit by a Technical Interdisciplinary Team or provide opportunity for review and comment by members of a Technical Interdisciplinary Team; and
(F) The Administrative Official may consider all comments received from the Technical Interdisciplinary Team prior to waiving the site assessment requirements of this Chapter and shall include these comments in the record along with the basis and rationale for any such decision.
(G) For any project or activity for which the site assessment requirement has been waived, no further critical area review shall be required, except as necessary for the Administrative Official to ensure that the proposed activity is undertaken as described in the application and as shown on the site plan. The Administrative Official shall note this waiver in the application file.
(8) Critical Areas Determination: Based on the findings of the Critical Area Assessment Report and other available relevant information, the Administrative Official shall make a determination regarding critical areas on the proposed activity. A determination to approve a proposed activity may include stipulation of binding conditions and required mitigation, monitoring, maintenance or other conditions of approval pursuant to this Chapter. If the Administrative Official determines that there are no conditions under which the proposed activity could be approved, then the Administrative Official shall deny the proposal.
(9) Request for Variance: If, as a result of the critical areas determination, the applicant believes that he or she is eligible for a variance from one or more of the requirements of this Chapter, or one or more of the stipulations or conditions of the critical areas determination, then the applicant may request a variance as described in GCC § 24.08.100.
(10) Application for Reasonable Use Exception: If, as a result of the critical areas determination, the applicant believes that the requirements of this Chapter, including any request for a variance from the requirements of this Chapter, still leave the applicant with no reasonable economically viable use of his or her property, then the applicant may apply for a reasonable use exception pursuant to GCC § 24.08.100.
(f) Any decision of the Administrative Official or other Decision Maker in the administration of this Chapter may be appealed according to the provisions of QMC 17.09.100.
(g) For proposed development subject to environmental review pursuant to QMC Chapters 17.09 and Chapter 197-11 WAC (SEPA Rules), information demonstrating compliance with the standards of this Chapter shall be submitted in connection with environmental documents. Any environmental determination shall include a review of this material to determine whether the requirements of this Chapter have been met.
(h) For proposed development exempt from or not subject to environmental review pursuant to QMC Chapter 17.09 and Chapter 197-11 WAC (SEPA Rules), information demonstrating compliance with the standards of this Chapter shall be submitted in connection with permit or approval application documents.
(i) Activities in and around critical areas often require review and permitting by state and federal agencies. The requirements of this Chapter are additional to any and all state and federal review, approval, and/or permit responsibilities.
G. Section 24.08.080 of the Grant County Unified Development Code shall be amended as follows to reflect the City of Quincy Municipal Code provisions:
24.08.080 Resource Information and Maps.
(a) Critical areas are designated on a series of data maps maintained by the Department. These maps contain graphic representation of critical areas based on the best available science data obtained by the Department from a variety of sources considered reliable. Specific sources of data are identified in the relevant sections of this Chapter. The maps may be supplemented with inventories, raw data, and interpretations made by professionals having expertise in the delineation, classification, function and value of one or more critical area.
(b) The maps are for information and illustrative purposes, and are intended to alert a person to the potential presence of critical areas that may affect the ability to obtain regulatory approval to develop and/or use the subject parcel. The maps are intended as a general guide to the location and extent of critical areas. They do not definitively indicate that critical areas do or do not exist on or near a subject parcel; rather, they denote the presence of indicators that suggest a critical area may be present on or near the subject parcel. They are intended to advise Grant County, applicants and other participants in the development permit process that a critical area may exist and that further study, review and consideration may be necessary. In all cases, actual presence or absence of the critical area shall be determined using best available science and shall prevail.
(c) The maps and supplemental resource information shall be used by the Department in conducting a Preliminary Assessment pursuant to GCC § 24.08.070(b)(3). The maps will be used in conjunction with the Grant County Assessor’s land based parcel mapping by the Administrative Official in making a Preliminary Determination pursuant to GCC § 24.08.070(b)(4) of whether a critical area designation is present on or near the subject parcel. The determination by the Administrative Official that (1) a parcel of land or part of a parcel of land that is the subject of a proposed development application is within the boundaries of one or more critical areas as delineated on the critical area maps, or (2) that one or more critical areas as delineated on the critical area maps is within any buffer or setback distance specified in this Chapter from a parcel of land or part of a parcel of land that is the subject of a proposed development application, shall be sufficient evidence to require the Administrative Official to direct an applicant to conduct a Critical Areas Assessment pursuant to GCC § 24.08.070(b)(6). Such determination by the Administrative Official may be appealed according to the provisions of QMC Chapter 17.09.
(d) In addition to those maps and references identified in the relevant sections of this Chapter, the following maps and documents may be used:
(1) Critical area maps included in Comprehensive Plans of cities and towns of Grant County;
(2) U.S.G.S. Topographic Quadrangle Maps;
(3) Aerial photos; and
(4) Soil Survey of Grant County, Washington by the United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service.
(e) Recognizing the necessity for accurate geographic information, the Department shall annually update the maps based on inventories conducted by Qualified Critical Areas Professionals, regulatory agencies and other reliable sources of data.
H. Section 24.08.090 of the Grant County Unified Development Code shall be amended as follows to reflect the City of Quincy Municipal Code provisions:
24.08.090 Critical Areas Assessments – General Requirements.
(a) The determination by the Administrative Official that one or more critical areas as delineated on the critical area maps are present within 300 feet of the proposed development activity that is the subject of a proposed development application shall be sufficient evidence to require the Administrative Official to direct an applicant to conduct a Critical Areas Assessment pursuant to GCC § 24.08.070(b)(6).
(b) The Administrative Official shall notify the applicant of such determination, and the applicant shall complete a Critical Areas Assessment pursuant to the requirements of this Chapter. The notice shall identify the type of critical area identified and shall cite the requirements for Critical Areas Assessment(s) pursuant to this Chapter. The Critical Areas Assessment shall be limited to those types of critical areas determined by the Administrative Official to be present as indicated on the critical areas maps. For example, if a Preliminary Determination indicates only the presence of wetlands on or near the proposed development, then the Critical Areas Assessment need only address wetlands. However, nothing in this subsection shall waive an applicant’s responsibility to protect any and all critical areas that may be present in accordance with this Chapter. In the event of multiple designations, each critical area shall be addressed independently and collectively for the purpose of determining development and use limitations and/or appropriate mitigating measures.
(c) While the data maps shall be used as a guide to the location and extent of critical areas, the exact location, extent, functions and values shall be determined by the applicant based on field investigations and evaluations performed by a Qualified Critical Areas Professional as defined in GCC § 25.02 pursuant to the requirements of this Chapter.
(d) Submission of a complete Critical Area Assessment Report(s) required under this Chapter shall be a prerequisite to determination that a development application is counter complete pursuant to QMC 17.05.030.
I. Section 24.08.100 of the Grant County Unified Development Code shall be amended as follows to reflect the City of Quincy Municipal Code provisions:
24.08.100 Variances.
(a) Variance requests shall be classified and processed under the procedures as delineated in QMC Chapter 20.56 and QMC Title 17. The burden of proof shall be on the person requesting the variance to bring forth evidence in support of the variance.
(b) The Decision Maker, as defined in QMC 17.01.030, may grant a critical areas variance as provided in QMC 20.56.010.
(c) In reviewing the variance application, the Decision Maker shall consider testimony provided at any public hearing and recommendations provided by interested and affected agencies and jurisdictions, including the Washington Departments of Ecology, Fish and Wildlife, and Natural Resources, and affected Indian tribes, and any Technical Interdisciplinary Team participating in critical areas review for the proposed development.
(d) Variances to the dimensional setbacks, including buffers, of this Chapter may be granted by the Decision Maker following the preparation of a Critical Areas Assessment Report by a Qualified Critical Areas Professional where a conclusion of the report supports a modification of the dimensional requirements. Such a conclusion must also include all necessary mitigation. In granting a dimensional variance, the Decision Maker must find that granting of a zoning variance by itself will not provide sufficient relief to avoid the need for a variance to the dimensional setbacks under this Chapter, and that a Critical Areas Assessment Report and mitigation plan demonstrate that the proposed development provides for the least impact on critical areas while providing reasonable use of the property, and full mitigation of project impacts.
(e) In granting any variance, the Decision Maker shall find that the variance is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of land, building or structure and allows the minimum impact to critical areas necessary to allow such reasonable use.
(f) In granting any variance, the Decision Maker shall prescribe such conditions and safeguards as are necessary to secure protection of critical areas from adverse impacts and to ensure that impacts to critical areas and their buffers are mitigated.
J. Section 24.08.110 of the Grant County Unified Development Code shall be amended as follows to reflect the City of Quincy Municipal Code provisions:
24.08.110 Reasonable Use Exception.
(a) If the application of this Chapter would result in denial of reasonable and economically viable use of a property, and if such reasonable and economically viable use of the property cannot be obtained by consideration of a variance pursuant to GCC § 24.08.100 to one or more individual requirements of this Chapter, then a landowner may seek a reasonable use exception from the standards of this Chapter. Reasonable use exceptions shall only apply to legal lots of record established prior to the effective date of this Chapter. Reasonable use exceptions are intended as a "last resort" when no plan for mitigation and/or variance can meet the requirements of this Chapter and allow the applicant a reasonable economically viable use of his or her property. Requests for reasonable use exception shall be classified and processed as delineated in QMC 17.09.020, and shall only be granted under the following conditions:
(1) The application of this Chapter would deny all reasonable and economically viable or beneficial uses of the property so that there is no reasonable and economically viable or beneficial use with a lesser impact on the critical area than that proposed; and
(2) The proposed development does not pose a reasonable threat to the public health, and safety, and welfare on or off the site for which the reasonable use exception is sought; and
(3) Any proposed modification to a critical area will be the minimum necessary to allow reasonable and economically viable and beneficial use of the property; and
(4) The inability of the applicant to derive reasonable use of the property is not the result of actions by the applicant after the effective date of this chapter;
(5) The applicant has requested and been denied a variance under the provisions of GCC § 24.08.100; and
(6) The Decision Maker may issue, as part of the findings in any decision made under this Subsection, conditions of approval, including modifications to the size and placement of structures and facilities to minimize impacts to critical areas and associated buffers. As part of the findings, the Decision Maker may also specify mitigation requirements that ensure that all impacts are mitigated to the maximum extent feasible.
(b) In reviewing a request for reasonable use exception, the Decision Maker shall consider testimony provided at any public hearing and recommendations provided by interested and affected agencies and jurisdictions, including the Washington Departments of Ecology, Fish and Wildlife, and Natural Resources, and affected Indian tribes, and any Technical Interdisciplinary Team participating in critical areas review for the proposed development.
(c) Decisions issued on requests for reasonable use exceptions may be appealed according to the provisions of QMC 17.09.100.
K. Section 24.08.130 of the Grant County Unified Development Code shall be amended as follows to reflect the City of Quincy Municipal Code provisions:
24.08.130 Penalties and Enforcement.
(a) A person who violates the provisions of this Chapter or who fails to comply with any of its requirements shall be subject to the procedures and sanctions set forth in QMC Chapter 20.02.
L. Section 24.08.260 of the Grant County Unified Development Code shall be amended as follows to reflect the City of Quincy Municipal Code provisions:
24.08.260 Mitigation.
(a) Mitigation Plan. Where mitigation is required pursuant to GCC § 24.08.240, the applicant shall prepare a Mitigation Plan. The Mitigation Plan shall follow the general requirements described herein below and Wetland Mitigation in Washington State – Part 2: Developing Mitigation Plans (Version 1), Washington Department of Ecology Publication No. 06-06-011b), March. The following items at a minimum are required as part of a mitigation plan:
(1) Description of project or activity, including a detailed narrative describing the project or activity, its relationship to the wetland and its potential impact to the wetland; and
(2) Any proposed mitigation, including a discussion of how the project has been designed to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to wetlands, as well as the necessary monitoring and contingency actions for the continued maintenance of the wetland and its associated buffer.
(3) A report which includes, but is not limited to:
(A) Location maps;
(B) A site map prepared at a scale no smaller than one inch = 200 feet indicating the boundaries of the identified wetlands; the width and length of all existing and proposed structures, utilities, roads, easements; wastewater and stormwater management facilities; adjacent land uses, zoning districts, and comprehensive plan designations;
(C) A description of the vegetation in the wetland, on the overall project site, and adjacent to the site;
(D) A discussion of any federal, state, or local management recommendations which have been developed for the area;
(E) A discussion of the following mitigation alternatives as they relate to the proposal:
(i) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action;
(ii) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation, by using appropriate technology, or by taking affirmative steps to avoid or reduce impacts;
(iii) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment;
(iv) Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments;
(F) A detailed discussion of ongoing management and monitoring practices which will protect the wetland after the project site has been fully developed, including proposed monitoring, contingency maintenance and surety programs. Monitoring is required for at least five years from the date of plant installation or potentially longer, as determined by a qualified professional (e.g., wetland biologist or other professional), where woody vegetation (forested or shrub wetlands) is the intended result. Monitoring does not have to occur each year but the expected timing, e.g., years 1, 3 and 5) should be described; and
(G) Proposed mitigation ratios, including a discussion of functions and values of and the variety of habitats provided by the proposed replacement wetland. Proposed mitigation ratios less than the standard ratios shall include full justification thereof.
(b) General Provisions. As a condition of any permit or other approval allowing alteration which results in the loss or degradation of a regulated wetland, or as an enforcement action pursuant to QMC Chapter 20.02, mitigation shall be required to offset impacts resulting from the actions of the applicant or any violator of the GCC or QMC. The following shall apply to all mitigation:
(1) Mitigation shall follow an approved Mitigation Plan pursuant to GCC § 24.08.260(a) and reflect the ratios specified in GCC § 24.08.260(c) below;
(2) Mitigation shall be "on-site" and "in-kind," except that "off-site" mitigation may be provided pursuant to GCC § 24.08.260(d) and "out-of-kind" mitigation may be provided pursuant to GCC § 24.08.260(f);
(3) Compensation shall be completed prior to, or concurrently with, wetland alteration, or, in the case of an enforcement action, prior to further development of the site;
(4) Mitigation must be conducted on property that will be protected and managed to avoid further development or degradation. The applicant shall provide for long-term preservation of the mitigation area; and
(5) The applicant shall demonstrate sufficient scientific expertise, supervisory capability, and financial resources, including bonding in accordance with GCC § 24.08.180, to carry out the project. The applicant shall demonstrate sufficient capability for monitoring the site and making corrections if the project fails to meet projected goals.
(c) On-Site Mitigation: Any alteration of wetlands pursuant to GCC § 24.08.240 shall be mitigated by creating or restoring new wetlands at the standard mitigation ratios shown in Table 3. The ratios apply to creation or restoration which is in-kind (i.e., the same type of wetland), on-site, and is accomplished prior to or concurrently with loss. The first number specifies the acreage of new wetlands to be restored or created and the second specifies the acreage of wetlands altered.
(d) The standard mitigation ratios may be increased or decreased by the Administrative Official on a case-by-case, site-specific basis. The determination shall be based on best available science and on site-specific and project-related conditions as described in the approved Mitigation Plan. In making such determination, the Administrative Official shall consider the functions and values of and the variety of habitats provided by the proposed replacement wetland, and may solicit and may consider comments and recommendations provided by the Washington Departments of Ecology, and Fish and Wildlife, and any Technical Interdisciplinary Team participating in review for the proposed development.
(e) Off-Site Mitigation: Off-site mitigation allows replacement of wetlands away from the site on which the wetland has been impacted by a regulated activity. Off-site mitigation shall be conducted by creating or restoring new wetlands at the ratios shown in Table 3 for on-site mitigation pursuant to GCC § 24.08.260(c) and by selecting mitigation sites pursuant to GCC § 24.08.260(f). Off-site compensation shall occur within the same drainage basin of the same watershed where the wetland loss occurs. Off-site compensation will be allowed only when the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Administrative Official that one or more of the following circumstances applies:
(1) On-site mitigation is not feasible due to hydrology, soils, or other factors;
(2) On-site mitigation is not practical due to probable adverse impacts from surrounding land uses or would conflict with a federal, state or local public safety directive;
(3) Potential functions and values at the site of the proposed restoration are greater than the lost wetland functions and values; or
(4) When the wetland to be altered is of low function and value mitigation shall be of the wetland community types needed most in the location of mitigation and those most likely to succeed with the highest function and value possible. In making such determination, the Administrative Official may solicit and may consider comments and recommendations provided by the Washington Departments of Ecology, and Fish and Wildlife, and any Technical Interdisciplinary Team participating in review for the proposed development.
(f) Selecting Off-Site Mitigation Sites: Applicants shall pursue locations for off-site mitigation in the following order of preference:
(1) Filled, drained, or cleared sites that were formerly wetlands and where appropriate hydrology exists; and
(2) Upland sites, adjacent to wetlands, if the upland is significantly disturbed and does not contain a mature community of native species, and where the appropriate natural hydrology exists.
(g) Out-of-kind Mitigation: Out-of-kind Mitigation will be allowed only when the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Administrative Official that out-of-kind replacement will best meet the provisions of GCC § 24.08.260(f) and the mitigation sequence outlined in GCC § 24.08.160, and would be of equal or greater value to the environment. Where out-of-kind replacement is accepted by the Administrative Official, the Administrative Official may require greater mitigation ratios than those for on-site or off-site mitigation to compensate for lost functions and values.
(h) Timing: Construction of mitigation projects shall be timed to reduce impacts to existing wildlife and plants. Construction shall be timed to assure that grading and soil movement occurs during those periods determined by the Administrative Official to be most advantageous to the needs of the species present.
(i) Alternative Mitigation Projects: The Administrative Official may encourage, facilitate and approve innovative wetland mitigation projects, including a watershed approach consistent with Selecting Wetland Mitigation Sites Using a Watershed Approach (Eastern Washington) (Ecology Publication No. 10-06-07, November 2010). Advance compensation or mitigation banking are other suitable types of alternative mitigation projects allowed under the provisions of this Chapter wherein one or more applicant(s), or an organization with demonstrated capability, may undertake a mitigation project together if it is demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Administrative Official that all of the following circumstances exist:
(1) Creation of one or several larger wetlands may be preferable to many small wetlands;
(2) The group demonstrates the organizational and fiscal capability to act cooperatively;
(3) The group demonstrates that long term maintenance and management of the mitigation area will be provided;
(4) There is a clear potential for success of the proposed mitigation at the identified mitigation site;
(5) Conducting mitigation as part of a cooperative process does not reduce or eliminate the required replacement ratios outlined in GCC § 24.08.260(c);
(6) Permits and approvals are obtained from all other agencies having regulatory jurisdiction; and
(j) Wetland mitigation banking programs are consistent with the provisions of Chapter 90.84 RCW and any Department of Ecology guidelines implementing provisions of Chapter 90.84 RCW regarding wetland mitigation banking.
In making such determination, the Administrative Official may solicit and may consider comments and recommendations provided by the Washington Departments of Ecology, and Fish and Wildlife, and any Technical Interdisciplinary Team participating in review for the proposed development.
M. Section 24.08.510 of the Grant County Unified Development Code shall be amended as follows to reflect the City of Quincy Municipal Code provisions:
24.08.510 Applicability.
(a) The provisions of GCC § 24.08.500 shall apply only to land use and development permits or approvals. Permits and approvals required under QMC Title 15 shall be exempt from this section. However, the Building Official may require evaluation using the provisions set forth in Chapter 18 of the 1994 Uniform Building Code (or the corresponding Chapter in any later adopted edition of the UBC). The expansion of pre-existing structures shall also be exempt so long as the intrusion into an erosion or landslide hazard area does not increase.
N. Section 24.08.550 of the Grant County Unified Development Code shall be amended as follows to reflect the City of Quincy Municipal Code provisions:
24.08.550 Mitigation.
(a) When mitigation is required by this section, a mitigation plan shall be prepared by a Qualified Geotechnical Professional and shall:
(1) Include a discussion on how the project has been designed to avoid and minimize the impacts to geologically hazardous areas;
(2) Make a recommendation for the minimum building setback from any bluff edge and/or other geologic hazard and shall be based upon the geotechnical analysis under GCC § 24.08.530(d)(4);
(3) Include the location and methods of drainage, locations and methods of erosion control, a vegetation management and/or restoration plan and/or other means for maintaining long term stability of slopes;
(4) Address the potential impact of mitigation on the hazard area, the subject property and proposed improvements and affected adjacent properties;
(5) Include a temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan prepared in accordance with the requirements of QMC Chapter 20.14;
(6) Include a drainage plan for the collection, transport, treatment, and discharge of surface water in accordance with the requirements of QMC Chapter 20.14; and
(7) Demonstrate compliance with GCC § 24.08.540.
(Ord 24-610 §3 (Ex A))