Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCONSENT Hearing Notice re CAO - Appendix C to G redline Appendix C - 1 APPENDIX C Chapter 17.05 JCC 17.05.050 Additional requirements. The following ordinances and requirements may qualify or supplement the regulations presented in this division. Where the regulations of this division, those set forth below, or any other local, state, or federal regulations overlap, the most restrictive and/or protective standards shall apply. (1) Article VI-D et seq. of Chapter 18.15 JCC, environmentally sensitive areasChapter 18.22 JCC (Critical Areas) (2) JCC 18.30.070, Stormwater management standards; (3) Chapter 18.35 JCC, Land Divisions, as amended by this division; (4) Chapter 246-272 WAC, On-Site Sewage Systems; (5) Chapter 18.25 JCC, Shoreline Management Master Program; (6) Ordinance No. 01-0121-97, Forest Lands Ordinance, as amended by this division (see JCC 17.10.060) to limit agreements pursuant to section 7.20(1) of the Forest Lands Ordinance so that when a new structure is proposed on land adjacent to land designated as commercial forest land, in no case shall an agreement be made which allows the setback to be reduced to less than 150 feet and, further, a minimum average setback of 200 feet shall be maintained, exclusive of critical areas and their associated setbacks; (7) All local and state monitoring, operational, and management requirements for sewer, water, and stormwater utilities, updated as may be required by the local or state agency with jurisdiction; (8) Land use procedures of JCC Title 18, Unified Development Code. Appendix D - 1 APPENDIX D Chapter 18.10 18.10.020 B definitions. “Buffer” means an area that is intended to protect the functions and values of a critical areas or a shoreline. Protecting these functions and values may includes the preservation of existing native and nonnative vegetation where it exists, unless otherwise required to be replaced with native vegetation through mitigation or voluntarily enhanced or restored. “Buffer zone, strip, or area” means an area designed to separate incompatible uses or activities. 18.10.060 F definitions. “Fish habitat” has the same meaning as in WAC 222-16-010. 18.10.160 P definitions. “Practicable alternative” means an alternative that is available and capable of being carried out after taking into consideration cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of overall project purposes, and having less impact to critical areas. It may include an area not owned by the applicant which could reasonably have been or be obtained, utilized, expanded, or managed in order to fulfill the basic purpose of the proposed activity. 18.10.170 Q definitions. “Qualified professional or individual” means an agency or individual based on schooling, certifications, or experience has demonstrated to the administrator’s satisfaction that they are qualified to perform simple activities including but not limited to restoration or enhancement plans. 18.10.180 R definitions. “Reasonable alternative” means an activity that could feasibly attain or approximate a proposal’s objectives, but at a lower environmental cost or decreased level of environmental degradation. Reasonable alternatives may be those over which the regulatory authority has authority to control impacts. 18.10.190 S definitions. “Shoreline buffer” means any buffer required by chapter 18.25 JCC. “Standard buffer” means a buffer that has a standard width required by chapter 18.22 JCC or chapter 18.25 JCC. 18.10.210 U definitions. “Utilities, public” means facilities serving the public through a network of wires or pipes, and ancillary structures thereto, including systems for the delivery of natural gas, electricity, and telecommunications services. “Utilities, private” means utilities including but not limited to gas, electric, water, sewer, stormwater and telecommunication service lines that are not public utilities is owned and maintained by a property owner or a private company, These utilities often extend beyond service meters or public lines, including lines to specific buildings, facilities, or private infrastructure. “Utility distribution lines” means pipes, wires, and associated structural supports serving more than one parcel. 18.10.230 W definitions. “Wetland buffer” means the area immediately adjoining and contiguous with a wetland. “WASHD” means the Washington State Department of Ecology’s Washington State Hydrography Dataset Program (WASHD). Appendix E - 1 APPENDIX E Chapter 18.30 JCC 18.30.080 Roads. (1) General. The following shall apply to all public and private roads, including any road in a development subject to Chapter 18.35 JCC, Land Divisions: (a) Transportation facilities shall be designed and constructed in conformance with the following reference manuals and standards of the Jefferson County department of public works which are hereby adopted by reference in this code, including: (i) American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, and Roadside Design Guide; (ii) Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Local Agency Guidelines, Highway Design Manual, Bridge Manual, Construction Manual, Highway Runoff Manual, Hydraulics Manual, Plans Preparation Manual, Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction, and Standard Plans for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction; (iii) Washington Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual; (iv) Federal Highway Administration Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices; (v) Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual; and (vi) Transportation Research Board (TRB) Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report No. 209. (b) Bridges shall be designed and constructed in conformance with the standards of the department of public works identified by reference in this code. Bridge design and construction shall be certified by a licensed engineer. (c) Road signs and traffic signs shall be installed in conformance with the standards of the department of public works identified by reference in this title. (d) Drainage, erosion control, and stormwater management facilities shall comply with the requirements of the storm drainage standards contained in JCC 18.30.070 and the Washington Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual, and any other applicable Jefferson County standards. (e) The applicant shall submit plans for construction of roads, bridges, stormwater management facilities, and/or land disturbing activities regulated by this code to the department of public works for review and approval prior to commencing construction. (f) Clearing, grading, and construction of roads, bridges, utilities, and stormwater management facilities shall be inspected by the department of public works. In order to enable the department to conduct inspections in a timely manner, the applicant shall notify the department in a timely manner regarding the project construction schedule. The following road inspections are typically required: (i) Installation of temporary erosion and sediment control measures; (ii) Clearing and road subgrade preparation; (iii) Placing roadway gravel base; Appendix E - 2 (iv) Placing roadway crushed surfacing top course; (v) Placing improved roadway surface (chip seal or asphalt concrete); (vi) Construction of stormwater management facilities; and (vii) Final plat review. Additional inspections may be necessary based on site-specific conditions or the nature of the project. (g) The department of public works may require development applicants to submit a traffic analysis prepared by a licensed engineer in order to determine the potential off-site impacts to public and private transportation facilities from proposed subdivisions. (h) Subdivision road systems shall provide access to the public road system at two locations, when feasible. One access location may be allowed based on a finding by the department of public works that a single access location is adequate to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. (i) Access to subdivisions from arterial and collector roads shall be restricted. Lots shall be accessed from an internal access road system, unless the lots are accessed from a local access road. (j) Developments shall make appropriate provision to ensure safe walking conditions for pedestrians and for students who walk to and from school. Construction of road improvements, sidewalks, trails, or bicycle facilities may be required in order to meet this standard. (k) Subdivisions shall make appropriate provision for transit and school bus stops. (l) When a proposed subdivision is adjacent to a county road, a right-of-way 30 feet in width from the roadway centerline shall be conveyed to Jefferson County by either statutory warranty deed or dedication in fee simple on the plat, if such right-of-way has not been previously conveyed. (m) Easements for private roads providing access to and/or internal circulation within subdivisions shall be 60 feet in width. Easement width may be reduced on the recommendation of the department of public works based on a finding that the public health, safety, and welfare will be protected and that the easement width is adequate for the construction and maintenance of roads and utilities. Where reduced access easement widths are proposed, parallel utilities easements may be required. (n) Access easements from the county road system to the subdivision shall be provided consistent with the requirements of this code. Access from the public road system shall be depicted on the final plat. (o) Subdivision road names shall be approved by the board of county commissioners based on a recommendation by the department of public works and in compliance with Cchapter 12.20 JCC, 911 Emergency Locator System. (p) Subdivisions shall establish an agreement for the continuing maintenance of private roads either by recording a separate instrument and referencing said instrument on the plat or by declaring a maintenance agreement on the plat. The applicant shall submit the maintenance agreement to the department of public works for review and approval prior to final plat approval. (q) All required construction of roads, bridges, utilities, and stormwater management facilities shall be inspected and approved by the department of public works prior to final development approval. (r) Developments proposing access to county collector roads and state highways shall make appropriate access improvements to ensure that mobility on these roadways is not degraded. The design of access improvements shall be reviewed and approved by the Jefferson County engineer for county roads and by the Washington Department of Transportation for state routes. (s) Subdivision applicants may post a surety guaranteeing completion of subdivision improvements within one year Appendix E - 3 of final plat approval. The surety shall be reviewed and approved by the department of public works. The surety shall be for 200 percent of the cost of constructing the improvements based on an estimate prepared by a licensed engineer. In the event that the applicant does not complete construction of improvements within one year, the department of public works shall be authorized to complete the construction and pay for the work from the surety account. Surety shall not be accepted for water supply development other than distribution facilities. (t) A maintenance bond guaranteeing any improvements required by this code for two years may be required by Jefferson County as a condition of final plat approval. Maintenance bonds shall be approved by the department of public works. (u) Applications requiring review by the department of public works to meet the requirements of this section shall be assessed hourly review fees in accordance with the Jefferson County fee schedule. By making application, the applicant agrees to reimburse the department for its expenses even if the proposal is denied by subsequent action of the county or the proposal is otherwise not completed. (v) Modifications to design and construction standards for a specific road project may be approved by the county engineer. (2) Public Roads. (a) General. (i) The Jefferson County engineer is responsible for the design and construction of all county roads. (ii) The standard right-of-way width is 60 feet for all public roads. (iii) Roadway monumentation shall be approved by the department of public works. (iv) Road access permits are required for access to county roads. Applications will be reviewed by the administrator for the requirements of the environmentally sensitive areas overlay district (see Article VI-D of Chapter 18.15 JCC)chapter 18.22 JCC (Critical Areas) and of the State Environmental Policy Act (Article X of Chapter 18.40 JCC) prior to being approved by the county engineer. Such permits shall be limited as follows: (A) The number of access points along roads shall be limited to one per parcel, except: • For agricultural access; • When the parcel topography makes a single access point impractical for the entire parcel; • When access is being provided for commercial uses with 20 or more parking spaces; or • When additional access points are required or approved by the county engineer. (B) New access points to arterial roads shall not be allowed if reasonable access from any other road is available. (C) Road access points shall have a clear and unobstructed sight distance in both directions adequate to ensure public safety. Appropriate site distances shall be determined by the county engineer, based on speed limit, roadway surface, and other pertinent factors. (D) Storm drainage and culvert sizing shall be based upon engineering analysis and the standards of JCC 18.30.060(2) and 18.30.070. Maximum length of surface drainage for roadside ditches before discharging onto adjacent property or into natural drainageway shall be 1,000 feet. (E) The permits shall be conditioned to address impacts to environmentally sensitive areas or as indicated by SEPA analysis, if applicable. (F) The county engineer shall have the authority to approve or deny all road access permits, which decision is final Appendix E - 4 and not subject to administrative appeal. (b) Road and Right-of-Way Dedication. (i) Where any public road right-of-way abutting a property proposed for a development is subject to a conditional use permit or to Chapter 18.35 JCC, Land Divisions, and has insufficient width to conform to the county’s adopted road standards for the class of road involved, the county engineer may: (A) Require the dedication of sufficient additional right-of-way to bring the abutting half of the right-of-way (measured from the existing county road centerline) into conformance with the adopted standards; and (B) Obtain additional easements to cut and fill on the subject property adjacent to the county road, and to provide for drainage of surface and stormwater runoff by directing the runoff along or into natural drainageways on lots adjacent to the county road. Such drainage should be designed and mitigated to avoid or minimize impacts to the environment and to the affected properties. (ii) The county may accept the dedication of new county roads and rights-of-way subject to the following standards: (A) Only if all of the following criteria are met: • The road right-of-way is at least 60 feet in width and is dedicated to Jefferson County in fee simple; • The road meets all other county standards; and • An evaluation by the county engineer deems the road to be of general public benefit. (B) When roads are proposed to be dedicated to Jefferson County, the county engineer shall make a report to the board of county commissioners regarding the practicality and necessity of accepting the dedication, the effect of the dedication on traffic circulation, and any other matters deemed to be material by the county engineer. (C) All road rights-of-way dedications shall be processed in accordance with final plat procedures contained in Chapter 18.35 JCC, Land Divisions. (c) Road Vacations. All applications to the board of county commissioners seeking vacation of a county road right- of-way or any portion of one shall be subject to the requirements of Chapter 12.10 JCC, Road Vacations. 18.30.180 On-site sewage disposal best management practices in critical aquifer recharge areas. All land uses identified in Article III of Cchapter 18.22 JCC and special aquifer recharge protection areas that are also classified as susceptible aquifer recharge areas (as defined Cchapter 18.22 JCC) shall adhere to be designated areas of special concern pursuant to WAC Title 246. Consistent with WAC Title 246, the Jefferson County board of health determines the best management practices (BMPs) established in chapter 8.15 JCC to meet minimum on-site sewage system design standards for sites that are within both a susceptible aquifer recharge area and a special aquifer recharge protection area (as identified in Article III of Cchapter 18.22 JCC). The current BMPs, subject to modification from the Jefferson County board of health, are: (1) The contaminants of concern, bacteria and nitrogen, are not fully treated (removed) from wastewater in Type 1 and 2 soils (excessively coarse and coarse) with conventional gravity fed on-site sewage systems. To more adequately protect the groundwater in these areas from contamination by these elements the standards in this section have been developed utilizing a combination of treatment systems and land use density parameters. (2) Where land use densities are such that adequate aquifer protection is not ensured, best management practices for on-site sewage shall apply to new development, or expansion (as defined in WAC 246-272A-0010) of existing development when an on-site sewage disposal system is installed. (a) Tables 1 and 2 shall be used to determine the type of on-site sewage disposal system required and the minimum lot size in different soil types where public water is available. Lot size requirements are taken from the Washington State On-Site Sewage Code, Chapter 246-272A WAC, Table X. Soil textural classifications Appendix E - 5 and minimum standards for methods of effluent distribution for soil types and depths are taken from Chapter 246-272A WAC, Tables V and VI, respectively. (b) In critical aquifer recharge areas, no on-site sewage permit will be issued where public water systems are not available on lots less than one acre, except as permitted in subsection (2)(c) of this section. (c) When lots sizes do not meet the area requirements specified in Tables 1 and 2, and lot consolidation is impracticable, an approved composting toilet and greywater treatment system may be permitted. Permits for composting toilets shall include a condition requiring further treatment of toilet waste at the Port Townsend composting facility or other approved site. On-site use or disposal of the toilet-generated compost shall not be allowed. (d) BMPs shall be updated as new technologies are reviewed and approved by Jefferson County public health and/or Washington State Department of Health. Criteria for review of new or existing systems will include, but not be limited to, adequate laboratory evidence provided by the system proprietor of a minimum of 50 percent total nitrogen reduction prior to final disposal. Currently, acceptable BMPs include: (i) Intermittent sand filter followed by a shallow pressure distribution system (also meets Treatment Level B); (ii) Recirculating gravel filter; (iii) Composting and incinerating toilets – if these are used, greywater from the facility shall be treated by the method normally required by the site and soil conditions required under Chapter 246-272A WAC. For example: Type 1 soils require Treatment Level B under Chapter 246-272A WAC. Only composting or incinerating toilets on the List of Registered On-Site Treatment and Distribution Products by the Washington Department of Health may be permitted; (iv) Treatment units listed in Washington State Department of Health Registered Products meeting Treatment Level N. (e) Systems that meet Treatment Levels A and B and N are listed and approved by the Washington State Department of Health and are available in the List of Registered On-Site Treatment and Distribution Products. Only those systems that meet Treatment Levels specified in Chapter 246-272A WAC and meet Treatment Level N or are listed as nitrogen reduction BMPs (in subsection (2)(d) of this section) meet the standard for critical aquifer recharge area requirements in Type 1 soils. (f) Where a question/disagreement regarding the soil texture exists the following procedure shall be used: (i) Sample will be taken in the presence of Jefferson County public health staff. (ii) Chain of custody protocol shall be followed. (iii) Lab reports shall be sent to Jefferson County environmental health division and the applicant, or applicant’s representative, for review. Table 1 On-Site Sewage System Requirements for Sites Using Public Water Sources and Having Three Feet Vertical Separation in Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas 1 Note: “NO3 BMP” refers to the nitrogen reduction best management practices listed in subsection (2)(d) of this section or Treatment Level N in Chapter 246-272A WAC. Appendix E - 6 Soil Type (as defined in Chapter 246-272A WAC) Minimum Lot Size2 1 2 3 4 5 6 >1.0 ac Treatment Level A or B Pressure Distribution Conventional Gravity Conventional Gravity Conventional Gravity Conventional Gravity 22,000 sq. ft. Treatment Level A or B that is also listed as NO3 BMP NO3 BMP Shallow Pressure Distribution Shallow Pressure Distribution Shallow Pressure Distribution Shallow Pressure Distribution 0.5 ac (21,780 sq. ft.) Treatment Level A or B that is also listed as NO3 BMP NO3 BMP Shallow Pressure Distribution Shallow Pressure Distribution Shallow Pressure Distribution 20,000 sq. ft. NO3 BMP Shallow Pressure Distribution Shallow Pressure Distribution Shallow Pressure Distribution 18,000 sq. ft. NO3 BMP Shallow Pressure Distribution Shallow Pressure Distribution 15,000 sq. ft. NO3 BMP Shallow Pressure Distribution 12,500 sq. ft. NO3 BMP 1As defined in Article III of Chapter 18.22 JCC. 2Per unit volume of sewage (450 gallons per day), WAC 246-272A-0010. Table 2 On-Site Sewage System Requirements for Sites Using Public Water Sources and Having Two Feet But Less Than Three Feet of Vertical Separation, for Development in Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas 3 Note: “NO3 BMP” refers to the nitrogen reduction best management practices listed in subsection (2)(d) of this section or Treatment Level N in Chapter 246-272A WAC. Soil Type (as defined in Chapter 246-272A WAC) Minimum Lot Size4 1 2 3 4 5 6 >1.0 ac Treatment Level A or B Pressure Distribution Pressure Distribution Pressure Distribution Pressure Distribution Pressure Distribution 22,000 sq. ft. Treatment Level A or B that is also listed as NO3 BMP NO3 BMP Shallow Pressure Distribution Shallow Pressure Distribution Shallow Pressure Distribution Shallow Pressure Distribution 0.5 ac Treatment NO3 BMP Shallow Shallow Shallow Appendix E - 7 Soil Type (as defined in Chapter 246-272A WAC) Minimum Lot Size4 1 2 3 4 5 6 (21,780 sq. ft.) Level A or B that is also listed as NO3 BMP Pressure Distribution Pressure Distribution Pressure Distribution 20,000 sq. ft. NO3 BMP Shallow Pressure Distribution Shallow Pressure Distribution 18,000 sq. ft. NO3 BMP Shallow Pressure Distribution Shallow Pressure Distribution 15,000 sq. ft. NO3 BMP Shallow Pressure Distribution 12,500 sq. ft. NO3 BMP 3As defined in Article III of Chapter 18.22 JCC. 4Per unit volume of sewage (450 gallons per day), WAC 246-272A-0010. The Jefferson County board of health has the authority to modify these BMPs, provided there is compliance with WAC Title 246. The above BMPs are in effect until modified by the Jefferson County board of health, consistent with WAC Title 246. [Ord. 5-20 § 3 (Appx. A); Ord. 14-18 § 4 (Exh. B); Ord. 8-06 § 1] Appendix F - 1 APPENDIX F Chapter 18.40 JCC 18.40.010 Purpose. Articles I through VI of this chapter are a mechanism for implementing the provisions of Cchapter 36.70B RCW (the Local Project Review Act) regarding compliance, conformity, and consistency of proposed projects with the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan and development regulations. (1) Given the extensive investment that public agencies and a broad spectrum of the public have made and shall continue to make in Jefferson County’s Comprehensive Plan and development regulations, it is essential that project review start from the fundamental land use planning choices made in the Comprehensive Plan and regulations. If the Comprehensive Plan or regulations identify the type of land use, specify density and identify and provide for the provision of public facilities needed to review the proposed development and site, these decisions, at a minimum, provide the foundation for further project review unless there is a question of code interpretation. The project review process, including the environmental review process under Cchapter 43.21C RCW and the consideration of consistency, should start from this point and should not reanalyze these land use planning decisions in making a permit decision, unless the county finds that the Comprehensive Plan and regulations do not fully foresee site- specific issues and impacts identified through land use project application review. (2) Comprehensive plans and development regulations adopted by the county under Cchapter 36.70A RCW (the Growth Management Act), sub-area plans, and environmental policies, laws and rules adopted by the county, the state, and the federal government address a wide range of environmental subjects and impacts. These provisions typically require environmental studies and contain specific standards to address various impacts associated with a proposed development (e.g., building size and location, drainage, transportation requirements, and protection of environmentally sensitive areascritical areas). When the county applies these existing requirements to a proposed project, some or all of a project’s potential environmental impacts may be avoided or otherwise mitigated. Through the integrated project review process described in Articles I through V of this chapter, the administrator shall determine whether existing requirements, including the applicable regulations or plans, adequately analyze and address a project’s environmental impacts. Project review generally should not require additional studies and mitigation under Cchapter 43.21C RCW where existing regulations adequately address a proposed project’s probable significant adverse environmental impacts. Development regulations enable project review through the application of established scientific standards, required studies and standard mitigation measures. 18.40.620 Scope. This article shall apply to all applications for variances from the provisions of this code, except for reasonable economic use variances and environmentally sensitive area buffer width reductions, which shall be governed by the provisions of Article VI-D of Chapter 18.15 JCCchapter 18.22 JCC (Critical Areas). 18.40.750 Categorically exempt actions – Use of existing documents and analyses. (1) Categorically Exempt Levels. (a) Except with the adoption of flexible threshold limits as set forth in subsections (1)(b) through (e) of this section, Jefferson County adopts and incorporates by reference the categorical exemption levels set forth in WAC 197-11- 800. (b) Pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(1)(c)(v), the maximum exempt level for any landfill or excavation activity in Jefferson County shall be 500 cubic yards. (c) Pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(1)(c)(ii), the maximum exempt level for the construction of a barn, loafing shed, farm equipment storage building, produce storage or packing structure, or similar agricultural structure, covering 30,000 square feet, and to be used only by the property owner or his or her agent in the conduct of farming the property. This exemption shall not apply to feed lots. Appendix F - 2 (d) Pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(1)(c)(iii), the maximum exempt level for the construction of an office, school, commercial, recreational, service or storage building with 12,000 square feet of gross floor area, and with associated parking facilities designed for up to 40 automobiles. (e) Pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(1)(c)(iv), the construction of a parking lot designed for 40 automobiles shall be exempt. (2) Categorically Exempt Actions. Actions categorically exempt under subsection (1) of this section do not require review under this article or the preparation of an environmental impact statement, and may not be conditioned or denied under SEPA, except as provided in WAC 197-11-305 and subsection (3) of this section. (3) Use of Exemptions. (a) The responsible official shall determine the applicability of a categorical exemption. The determination by the responsible official that a proposal is exempt from SEPA is final. None of the procedural requirements of this article (except as provided in WAC 197-11-305 and this subsection) apply to an exempt proposal. (b) If a proposal includes exempt and non-exempt actions, the responsible official shall determine the lead agency pursuant to WAC 197-11-050. (c) If a proposal includes exempt and non-exempt actions, the county may authorize exempt actions prior to compliance with procedural requirements of this article, except as provided in subsections (3)(d) through (3)(g) of this section. (d) Consistent with WAC 197-11-070, 197-11-305 and 197-11-800, the county may not authorize the use of exemptions for: (i) Actions that are not exempt; (ii) Any action that would have a probable significant adverse environmental impact; (iii) A series of exempt actions that are physically or functionally related which together would result in a probable significant adverse environmental impact for the overall project; or (iv) Any action that would limit choice of alternatives. (e) The county 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 (see WAC 197-11-305(1)(b)(i)). (f) The county may withhold approval of exempt actions that would lead to substantial financial expenditures by a private applicant when the expenditures would serve no purpose if the non-exempt action(s) were not approved. (g) Actions identified as categorically exempt from SEPA under WAC 197-11-800 shall remain exempt under SEPA even when located in one or more of the environmentally sensitive areas (ESAs) classified, designated and mapped under Article VI-D of Chapter 18.15 JCCcritical areas listed in chapter 18.22 JCC (Critical Areas). However, the categorical exemptions listed in WAC 197-11-800 shall not apply when undertaken wholly or partly on lands covered by water, regardless of whether or not such lands are mapped as ESAs. Proposals in areas subject to this subsection (3)(g) shall require environmental review and a threshold determination, and may be conditioned or denied under this article (see WAC 197-11-756, 197-11-800, and 197-11-908). (4) Use of Existing Documents and Analyses. Procedures for the use, adoption, or incorporation of existing documents and analyses are provided in WAC 197-11-600, 197-11-610, 197-11-630, and 197-11-635. (5) Planned Actions. Appendix F - 3 (a) The county may, as part of its planning processes, elect to perform or have performed for it in advance of any development proposal, the environmental review and analysis for certain actions and their probable impacts. These “planned actions” must be so designated by ordinance or resolution adopted by the county after the analysis of the actions and their impacts has been completed. (b) Planned actions must be located in an urban growth area, a master planned resort (MPR), or a fully contained community, and meet the additional requirements contained in RCW 43.21C.031(2). (c) The analysis must be sufficient to identify and analyze all probable significant impacts and most nonsignificant impacts of the actions, and to identify (and, optionally, provide) to a great extent the mitigation necessary (i.e., the significant impacts must be “adequately addressed” in an environmental impact statement). (d) As a result of the analysis in subsections (5)(a) and (5)(c) of this section, a development proposal being prepared under a planned action does not require a threshold determination or the preparation of an environmental impact statement, but is subject to a full environmental review of its impacts and full requirements for mitigation as identified and specified by the review for the planned action in subsection (5)(c) of this section. (e) If the environmental review identifies additional impacts not addressed by the planned action, a checklist and threshold determination shall be required. 18.40.760 Analysis of nonexempt project and nonproject actions. The procedures and requirements in this article apply equally to project and nonproject actions. (1) Submittal of Environmental Checklist. (a) A completed environmental checklist shall be submitted with any application for a permit or approval not specifically exempted as per JCC 18.40.750(1). However, a checklist is not required if the county and applicant agree that an EIS is required, if SEPA compliance has been completed, or if SEPA compliance has been initiated by another agency. The county shall use the checklist to determine lead agency and to make the threshold determination if the county is lead agency. (b) Applicants for private proposals shall complete the checklist, and the county shall provide assistance as appropriate. For county proposals, the department initiating the proposal shall complete the checklist. (2) Review of Project Impacts. The responsible official shall review the checklist, other information about a project, and the applicable regulations to review the environmental impacts of the project and make a threshold determination. In making this review the responsible official may determine: (a) All of the project’s probable significant adverse environmental impacts have been adequately identified and analyzed. If not, additional studies and analyses may be required; (b) Some or all of the probable significant adverse environmental impacts have been adequately addressed and mitigated in this UDC and other development regulations adopted by Jefferson County, the Comprehensive Plan, or in other applicable local, state, or federal laws and rules by: (i) Avoiding or otherwise mitigating the impacts; or (ii) The county has designated as acceptable certain levels of service, land use designations, development standards, or other land use planning required or allowed by the Growth Management Act (Chapter 36.70A RCW). Where probable significant adverse environmental impacts have not been adequately mitigated, the responsible official may condition the project with additional mitigation measures or deny the permit; (c) To determine if the probable significant adverse environmental impacts have been addressed by an existing rule or law of another agency with jurisdiction, the county shall consult orally or in writing with that agency and may Appendix F - 4 expressly defer to that agency. In making this deferral, the county shall base or condition its project approval on compliance with that agency’s rules or laws; (d) If the county bases or conditions its SEPA approval of the project wholly or in part on compliance with the requirements or mitigation measures identified in subsections (2)(b)(i) and (2)(b)(ii), during project review the county shall not impose additional mitigation under SEPA for those impacts so conditioned; (e) Nothing in this subsection limits the authority of the county in its review or mitigation of a project to adopt or otherwise rely on environmental analyses and requirements under other laws, as provided by SEPA. (3) Threshold Determination. The “threshold determination” is the decision regarding whether there is a reasonable likelihood that the project shall have a probable significant adverse environmental impact on an element of the environment. A threshold determination is required for any proposal that meets the definition of an “action” under WAC 197-11-704 and is not categorically exempt, a planned action, or subject to WAC 197-11-600(3). The responsible official shall make and publish the threshold determination for public comment as provided in JCC 18.40.780: (a) Determination of Significance (DS). If a project may have a probable significant adverse environmental impact, a DS shall be issued, and an EIS shall be required. In determining an impact’s significance, the responsible official shall take into account the guidance in WAC 197-11-330 and 197-11-794, including: (i) Locational, quantitative, and cumulative effects, severity and likelihood of the effects, and effects on environmentally sensitivecritical or special areas; and (ii) Mitigation measures that will be implemented. The responsible official shall not balance whether beneficial aspects of a proposal outweigh its adverse environmental impacts in determining significance. (b) Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS). If a project will not have a significant adverse environmental impact, a DNS shall be issued. (c) Request for Early Indication of DS. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-350(2) and (6), submission of an environmental checklist and prior to the responsible official’s threshold determination on a proposal, an applicant may ask the responsible official to indicate whether it is considering a DS. If the responsible official indicates a DS is likely, the applicant may clarify or change features of the proposal to mitigate the impacts that led the responsible official to consider a DS likely. The applicant shall revise the environmental checklist as may be necessary to describe the clarifications or changes. The responsible official shall make its threshold determination based upon the changed or clarified proposal. If a proposal continues to have one or more probable significant adverse environmental impacts, even with mitigation measures, an EIS shall be prepared. The county’s indication under this section that a DS appears likely shall not be construed as a determination of significance. Likewise, the preliminary discussion of clarifications or changes to a proposal shall not bind the county to a mitigated DNS. (4) Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS). The responsible official may issue a MDNS as provided in this subsection and in WAC 197-11-350, based on conditions attached to the proposal by the responsible official or on changes to or clarifications of the proposal made by the applicant. (a) Mitigation measures that justify issuance of a MDNS shall be incorporated in the DNS shall be deemed conditions of approval of the permit decision, and may be enforced in the same manner as any term or condition of the permit. The county may incorporate implementation or enforcement provisions in the MDNS and require performance guarantees. (b) If the tentative county decision on a permit or approval does not include mitigation measures that were incorporated in a MDNS, the county shall evaluate the threshold determination to assure consistency with WAC 197-11-340(3)(a) (i.e., withdrawal of a DNS). (5) The responsible official shall provide for prompt and coordinated review by government agencies and the public on compliance with applicable environmental laws and plans, including mitigation for specific probable significant adverse impacts arising from the project that have not been considered and addressed at the plan or development Appendix F - 5 regulation level. The county may clarify or change features in their own proposal, and may specify mitigation measures in their DNSs, as a result of comments by other agencies or the public or as a result of additional agency planning (see WAC 197-11-350). (6) Durations of comment periods are as provided in JCC 18.40.780. At the end of the comment period the threshold determination becomes final unless retained, modified, or withdrawn, and the appeal period begins. (7) Preparation of EIS. (a) Preparation of the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) and final environmental impact statement (FEIS) and supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) are the responsibility of the county under the direction of the responsible official. Before the county issues an EIS the responsible official must be satisfied that it complies with this article and with Chapter 197-11 WAC. When a DS is issued, an opportunity shall be provided to comment on the scope of the EIS that shall be developed. (b) The DEIS, FEIS or SEIS shall be prepared by the county or by a consultant in accordance with county procedures established for consultant selection. If the county requires an EIS for a proposal and the responsible official determines that a consultant shall prepare the EIS, the applicant shall be so notified immediately after completion of the threshold determination. (c) The county may require an applicant to conduct specific investigations and to provide information the county does not possess. The applicant is not required to supply information for the purpose of EIS preparation if such information is not required under this article. (d) If a consultant is preparing an EIS, the responsible official shall assure that the EIS is prepared in a responsible manner. The county shall: (i) Initiate and coordinate scoping and ensure that the consultant receives all substantive information submitted through the scoping process; (ii) Assist the consultant in obtaining information from applicants; and (iii) Direct the content and organization of the EIS. (e) The responsible official shall maintain procedures for preparation of EISs in accordance with the above. (8) The DNS and checklist, or FEIS, for non-exempt proposals shall accompany county staff recommendations to any appropriate decision-making body (e.g., the hearing examiner). (9) The county shall not take any action on the project permit application until the SEPA appeal period has lapsed. (10) Any appeal of the final SEPA determination shall be heard as provided in JCC 18.40.810. Appendix G - 1 APPENDIX G Chapter 18.42 JCC 18.42.050 Compliance with other regulations. (1) Compliance with Other Regulations. All construction of personal wireless service facilities shall also be subject to the requirements of the county building code, Cchapter 15.05 JCC, and all codes adopted by reference in JCC 15.05.030 including, but not limited to, the Uniform Building Code (UBC), the National Electrical Code (NEC), the requirements of the National Electronics Industries Association/Telecommunications Industries Association (EIA/TIA) 222 Revision F Standard entitled “Structural Standards for Steel Antenna Towers and Antenna Supporting Structures” and any additional applicable standards published by the Electronics Industries Association, the Uniform Fire Code; Article VI-D et seq. of Chapter 18.15 JCC, environmentally sensitive areas chapter 18.22 JCC (Critical Areas); and the Jefferson County Shoreline Management Master Program, Cchapter 18.25 JCC. (2) Emergency Response System. All personal wireless facilities service providers shall be integrated into the local emergency response system. (3) Right-of-Way Facilities. All facilities located in any developed or undeveloped public road or right-of-way shall be governed by the applicable sections of this code and related policies governing the placement of utilities and other facilities in public rights-of-way including, but not limited to, Division III of JCC Title 13. [Ord. 6-99 § 1]