Chapter 16B.06
CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS AND SEPA INTEGRATION
Sections:
16B.06.010 Determination of Consistency.
16B.06.020 Consistency Analysis.
16B.06.030 SEPA Integration – Purpose.
16B.06.040 Use of Existing Environmental Documents.
16B.06.050 Planned Actions.
16B.06.060 Issuance of SEPA Threshold Determinations.
16B.06.070 Appeals of SEPA Determinations.
16B.06.010 Determination of Consistency.
Fundamental land use planning choices made in adopted comprehensive plans and development regulations will serve as the foundation for project review. As part of project review, the reviewing official will determine if a proposed project is consistent with Yakima County’s applicable development regulations, or in the absence of applicable regulations the adopted comprehensive plan. This consistency review will consist of a review of the type of land use(s) permitted at the site, the level of development allowed, infrastructure analysis, and the character of the development.
(Ord. 14-1998 § 1 (part), 1998: Ord. 4-1996 § 1 (part), 1996).
16B.06.020 Consistency Analysis.
(1) Consistency should be determined in the project review process by considering four factors found in applicable plans and regulations:
(a) The type of land use permitted at the site, including uses that may be allowed under certain circumstances, if the criteria for their approval have been satisfied;
(b) The level of development, such as units per acre, density of residential development, or other measures of density;
(c) The availability and adequacy of infrastructure and public facilities identified in the comprehensive plan, if the plan or development regulations provide for funding of these facilities as required by Chapter 36.70A RCW; and
(d) The character of the development, such as development standards.
(2) In determining consistency, the determinations made pursuant to this title shall be controlling.
(3) During project review, Yakima County or any subsequent reviewing body shall not reexamine alternatives to or hear appeals on the items identified in subsection (1) of this section, except for issues of code interpretation.
(Ord. 14-1998 § 1 (part), 1998: Ord. 4-1996 § 1 (part), 1996).
16B.06.030 SEPA Integration – Purpose.
Environmental review for projects determined not to be categorically exempt under SEPA (RCW 43.21C and Yakima County Code Chapter 16.04) shall be integrated and run concurrently with the permit procedures of this title.
(Ord. 14-1998 § 1 (part), 1998: Ord. 4-1996 § 1 (part), 1996).
16B.06.040 Use of Existing Environmental Documents.
As provided by Section 16.04.085, the administrative official may determine that existing comprehensive plans, subarea plan elements of a comprehensive plan, development regulations, or other local, state or federal rules or laws provide adequate analysis and mitigation of the specific probable adverse environmental impacts of a proposed action.
(Ord. 14-1998 § 1 (part), 1998: Ord. 4-1996 § 1 (part), 1996).
16B.06.050 Planned Actions.
Projects defined as “planned actions” under Section 16.04.087 do not require a threshold determination or the preparation of an environmental impact statement under RCW Chapter 43.21C but are subject to environmental review and mitigation as provided in the course of project review.
(Ord. 14-1998 § 1 (part), 1998: Ord. 4-1996 § 1 (part), 1996).
16B.06.060 Issuance of SEPA Threshold Determinations.
(1) Expiration of Notice of Application Comment Period. Except for a determination of significance (DS), Yakima County may not issue its SEPA threshold determination or issue a decision or a recommendation on a project permit until the expiration of the public comment period on the notice of application.
(2) Preliminary SEPA Determination and Notice of Application. To integrate project and environmental review under SEPA and to encourage early public comment on project applications, a preliminary SEPA determination may be provided by the administrative official with the notice of application if such preliminary SEPA determination has been made at the time the notice of application is issued pursuant to the optional process in RCW 36.70B.060 and WAC 197-11-355. This preliminary SEPA determination may not substitute for the actual SEPA threshold determination, although the comment period for SEPA and the notice of application may be consolidated into a single fourteen-day comment period, as provided in Section 16B.05.020 above.
(3) SEPA Determination of Significance (DS) and Notice of Application. If Yakima County has made a SEPA determination of significance (DS) concurrently with the notice of application, the notice of application shall be combined with the determination of significance and scoping notice. Nothing in this subsection prevents a determination of significance and scoping notice from being issued prior to a notice of application.
(4) Public Hearing on Project Permit. If an open record predecision hearing is required on the underlying project permit application, Yakima County shall issue its threshold determination at least fifteen days prior to the open record predecision hearing.
(Ord. 14-1998 § 1 (part), 1998: Ord. 4-1996 § 1 (part), 1996).
16B.06.070 Appeals of SEPA Determinations.
Administrative SEPA appeals to the hearing examiner are hereby established.
(1) Types of Appeals. Threshold determinations consisting of a determination of nonsignificance (DNS), mitigated determination of nonsignificance (MDNS), or determination of significance (DS) may be appealed.
(2) Hearing Examiner. All appeals shall be heard by the hearing examiner in an open record hearing. The hearing examiner’s decision on the SEPA appeal may be appealed to the board of county commissioners at a closed record appeal hearing. Such appeals are subject to the provisions of Chapters 16B.08 and 16B.09 of this title and the hearing examiner’s adopted rules and procedures.
(3) Consolidated Appeals.
(a) All SEPA related appeals, other than of a DS, shall be consolidated with the open record hearing, or appeal, if any, on the underlying project application.
(b) DS appeals shall be heard in a separate open record hearing prior to the open record hearing, if applicable, on the underlying project application. The purpose of this early and separate appeal hearing is to resolve the need for an environmental impact statement (EIS), and to permit administrative and judicial review, prior to preparation of an EIS.
(4) Notice of Appeal – Timing and Contents.
(a) All SEPA appeals shall be filed in writing with the Yakima County planning department, accompanied by the filing fee established by Section 16.04.280.
(b) The notice of appeal shall identify the appellant, establish standing, and set forth the principal points of the appeal.
(c) The notice of appeal shall be filed no later than fourteen calendar days after the threshold decision has been issued, unless the threshold determination was issued concurrently with the final decision on the underlying project permit and the threshold determination was issued subject to a fourteen-day comment period. In that case, a joint twenty-one calendar day appeal period shall be provided on both the project decision and the SEPA threshold determination.
(d) If the optional process is exercised, and the county determines that no additional comment period is warranted, the appeal process for SEPA and the underlying decision shall be fourteen calendar days.
(5) Administration – Standard of Review.
(a) Any open record hearing shall be recorded or transcribed.
(b) All testimony shall be sworn.
(c) The hearing examiner shall issue a written decision containing findings and conclusions.
(d) The determination of the responsible official shall carry substantial weight.
(e) The hearing examiner may affirm, modify or reverse the determination of the responsible official and may issue a revised DS, DNS or MDNS. The hearing examiner may also request additional information pursuant to WAC 197-11-335.
(Ord. 14-1998 § 1 (part), 1998: Ord. 4-1996 § 1 (part), 1996).