Chapter 17.02
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT

Sections:

Article I. Authority

17.02.010    Adoption – Authority (WAC 173-806-010).

Article II. General Requirements

17.02.020    Purpose of this article – Adoption by reference (WAC 173-806-020).

17.02.025    Adoption by reference.

17.02.027    Planned action EIS – Additional provisions.

17.02.029    Planned action permit process.

17.02.030    Additional definitions (WAC 173-806-030).

17.02.040    Designation of responsible official (WAC 173-806-040).

17.02.050    Lead agency determination and responsibilities (WAC 173-806-050).

17.02.060    Transfer of lead agency status to state agency (WAC 173-806-053).

17.02.070    Additional timing considerations (WAC 173-806-058).

Article III. Categorical Exemptions and Threshold Determinations

17.02.080    Purpose of this article – Adoption by reference.

17.02.090    Use of exemptions (WAC 173-806-080).

17.02.100    Environmental checklist (WAC 173-806-090).

17.02.110    Mitigated DNS (WAC 173-806-100).

Article IV. Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS)

17.02.120    Purpose of this article – Adoption by reference (WAC 173-806-110).

17.02.130    Preparation – Additional considerations (WAC 173-806-120).

17.02.140    Additional elements to be covered (WAC 173-806-125).

Article V. Commenting

17.02.150    Adoption by reference (WAC 173-806-128).

17.02.160    Public notice (WAC 173-806-130).

17.02.170    Designation of consulted agency official – Responsibilities (WAC 173-806-140).

Article VI. Existing Environmental Documents

17.02.180    Purpose of this article – Adoption by reference (WAC 173-806-150).

Article VII. SEPA and Agency decisions

17.02.190    Purpose of this article – Adoption by reference (WAC 173-806-155).

17.02.195    Appeals (WAC 173-806-170).

17.02.200    Substantive authority (WAC 173-806-160).

17.02.210    Notice – Statute of limitations (WAC 173-806-173).

Article VIII. Definitions

17.02.220    Purpose of this article – Adoption by reference (WAC 173-806-175).

Article IX. Categorical Exemptions

17.02.230    Adoption by reference (WAC 173-806-180).

Article X. Agency Compliance

17.02.240    Purpose of this article – Adoption by reference (WAC 173-806-185).

17.02.250    Repealed.

17.02.260    Fees (WAC 173-806-200).

Article XI. Forms

17.02.270    Adoption by reference (WAC 173-806-230).

Article XII. Severability

17.02.280    Severability (WAC 173-806-220).

Article XIII. City Center Planned Action

17.02.300    City center planned action.

Article XIV. Lynnwood Place Planned Action

17.02.400    Lynnwood Place planned action.

Article I. Authority

17.02.010 Adoption – Authority (WAC 173-806-010).

The city adopts the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), RCW 43.21C.120, and the SEPA rules, WAC 197-11-904. This chapter contains this city’s SEPA procedures and policies. The SEPA rules, Chapter 197-11 WAC, must be used in conjunction with this chapter. The SEPA rules may be waived pursuant to RCW 34.05.313(2) whenever the city enters a written agreement with the Washington State Department of Ecology to participate in a pilot project to test proposed or newly adopted rules, when such agreement provides for waiver of particular SEPA rules as authorized by RCW 34.05.313. (Ord. 2314 § 1, 2000; Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

Article II. General Requirements

17.02.020 Purpose of this article – Adoption by reference (WAC 173-806-020).

This article contains the basic requirements that apply to the SEPA process. The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC by reference:

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 of applicants.

(Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

17.02.025 Adoption by reference.

The city adopts by reference the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC relating to planned actions, as now exist or as hereafter amended:

WAC

197-11-164    Planned actions – Definitions and criteria.

197-11-168    Ordinances or resolutions designating planning actions – Procedures for adoption.

197-11-172    Planned actions – Project review.

The adopted sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC as they exist on the date of adoption of the ordinance codified in this chapter are set forth in full in the attached appendix to the ordinance codified in this chapter. (Ord. 2426 § 1, 2002)

17.02.027 Planned action EIS – Additional provisions.

A. Periodic Update.

1. No later than five years following approval of a planned action EIS, and every five years thereafter, the city’s responsible official shall review the content of the EIS and determine whether the EIS adequately describes the probable significant adverse environmental impacts of development(s) designated as planned actions. If the responsible official determines that the EIS does not adequately describe the probable significant adverse environmental impacts, the responsible official shall issue a report identifying the inadequacies in the EIS. No development may be processed as a planned action until the deficiencies in the EIS have been addressed in additional environmental document(s).

2. If the official determines that the EIS does adequately describe the probable significant adverse environmental impacts, no new environmental document is required.

3. Notice of a determination under this subsection shall be provided to all parties of record for the planned action EIS and to anyone who has requested notification of action under this subsection.

4. Any determination pursuant to this subsection may be appealed by filing a written appeal with the responsible official no later than 14 calendar days following the date of issuance of the determination. Any such appeal shall be processed under Process II (LMC 1.35.200 et seq.).

B. Fees for Preparation of a Planned Action EIS.

1. Where a planned action EIS is prepared for activities initiated by some persons or entity other than the city, the responsible official may require payment of all of the costs for preparing the EIS (including, but not limited to, staff hours and consultant fees) by the person(s) or entity initiating the action, pursuant to LMC 17.02.260.

2. Where a planned action EIS is prepared at the initiation of the city, the city may charge a fee on future development that qualifies as a planned action in order to recover all costs of preparing the EIS. Such a fee shall be set in the ordinance designating the development that qualifies as a planned action, pursuant to WAC 197-11-168.

C. Public Participation.

1. The process for preparation of a planned action EIS shall include a public outreach plan designed for the inclusion of the public in the process. The goals of the public outreach plan shall be:

a. To give notice to the public of the intent to approve a planned action EIS; and

b. To solicit from the public comments on the potential environmental impacts of planned action development.

2. The public outreach plan shall emphasize early and continuing public participation and shall provide for: early notification of preparation of a planned action EIS (including a description of the planned action process), opportunity for written comments (both in establishing the scope of the EIS and in review of the draft EIS), public meetings after effective notice, provisions for open discussion, communication programs, information services, and consideration and response to public comments. Persons who have filed a written request with the community development department shall be notified of preparation of the EIS and of opportunities to participate in that process. (Ord. 2426 § 2, 2002)

17.02.029 Planned action permit process.

Applications for planned actions shall be processed as follows:

A. Applications for planned actions shall be made on forms authorized by the SEPA responsible official, shall include a SEPA checklist and other supporting materials as requested by the SEPA responsible official, and shall be accompanied by applicable fees.

B. The community development department shall determine whether the application is complete as provided in LMC 1.35.015.

C. Within 14 calendar days after the determination of completeness, the SEPA responsible official shall determine that:

1. The proposed project meets the description in the designating planned action ordinance; and

2. The proposed project will implement any applicable conditions or mitigation measures identified in the designating planned action ordinance; and

3. The probable significant adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project have been adequately addressed in the EIS prepared for the planned action, by reviewing an environmental checklist or other project review form as specified in SEPA regulations and filed with the application; and

4. The proposed project is not an essential public facility, as defined in RCW 36.70A.200 or the city of Lynnwood comprehensive plan.

5. The proposed project meets the city’s evaluation criteria for concurrency related transportation impacts as provided for in the city of Lynnwood comprehensive plan. Projects failing to meet such evaluation criteria shall be required to undergo SEPA environmental review to evaluate and address transportation concurrency impacts. Use of SEPA to evaluate concurrency management shall occur only until such time as the city adopts a concurrency management ordinance in accordance with RCW 36.70A.070(6)(b).

Within the same 14-day period, the SEPA official shall also determine whether the proposed project meets the criteria of LMC 17.02.300(C)(1) and 17.02.300(C)(3) or the applicable designating planned action ordinance.

D. If the SEPA responsible official determines that a proposed project qualifies as a planned action pursuant to subsection (C) of this section, then the application shall be processed in accordance with the applicable permit review procedures; except that no SEPA threshold determination, EIS or additional SEPA review shall be required. Although no SEPA threshold determination, EIS or additional SEPA review shall be required for the proposed project, the city may use city code provisions and other applicable laws to place conditions on the project that will mitigate nonsignificant impacts.

E. Public notice and review for projects that qualify as planned actions shall be tied to the underlying permit. If public notice is otherwise required by the provisions of Chapter 1.35 LMC for the underlying permit, the notice shall state that the project has qualified as a planned action. If notice is not otherwise required for the underlying permit, no special notice is required.

F. If the SEPA responsible official determines that a project does not qualify as a planned action, the SEPA responsible official shall so notify the applicant and prescribe a SEPA review procedure consistent with the city’s SEPA regulations and the requirements of state law. The notice to the applicant shall describe the elements of the project and application that result in failure to meet the planned action criteria.

G. Projects that fail to qualify as planned actions may incorporate or otherwise use relevant elements of the applicable EIS, as well as other relevant SEPA documents, to meet their SEPA requirements. The SEPA responsible official may limit the scope of SEPA review for the nonqualifying planned action project to those issues and environmental impacts not adequately or previously addressed in the planned action EIS.

H. The decision of the SEPA responsible official regarding qualification as a planned action shall be final with no administrative appeals. (Ord. 2943 § 2, 2012)

17.02.030 Additional definitions (WAC 173-806-030).

In addition to those definitions contained within WAC 197-11-700 through 197-11-799, when used in this chapter, the following terms shall have the following meanings, unless the context indicates otherwise:

A. “Department” means any division, subdivision or organizational unit of the city established by ordinance, rule, or order.

B. “SEPA rules” means Chapter 197-11 WAC adopted by the Department of Ecology.

C. “Ordinance” means the ordinance, resolution, or other procedure used by the city to adopt regulatory requirements.

D. “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 determination of nonsignificance (DNS) procedures). (Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

17.02.040 Designation of responsible official (WAC 173-806-040).

A. For those proposals for which the city is the lead agency, the responsible official shall be the community development director and/or his/her designee.

B. For all proposals for which the city is the lead agency, the responsible official shall make the threshold determination, supervise scoping and preparation of any required environmental impact statement (EIS), and perform any other functions assigned to the “lead agency” or “responsible official” by those sections of the SEPA rules that were adopted by reference in WAC 173-806-020.

C. The city shall retain all documents required by the SEPA rules (Chapter 197-11 WAC) and make them available in accordance with Chapter 42.11 RCW. (Ord. 2909 § 2, 2011; Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

17.02.050 Lead agency determination and responsibilities (WAC 173-806-050).

A. In receiving an application for or initiating a proposal that involves a nonexempt action, the responsible official shall determine the lead agency for that proposal under WAC 197-11-050 and 197-11-922 through 197-11-940.

B. When the city is the lead agency for a proposal, the responsible official shall supervise compliance with the threshold determination requirements, and if an EIS is necessary, shall supervise preparation of the EIS.

C. When the city is not the lead agency for a proposal, the responsible official shall use and consider, as appropriate, either the DNS or the final EIS of the lead agency in making decisions on the proposal. The responsible official shall not prepare or require preparation of a DNS or EIS in addition to that prepared by the lead agency, unless required under WAC 197-11-600. In some cases, the city may conduct supplemental environmental review under WAC 197-11-600.

D. If the responsible official receives a lead agency determination made by another agency that appears inconsistent with the criteria of WAC 197-11-922 through 197-11-940, the responsible official may object to the determination. Any objection must be made to the agency originally making the determination and resolved within 15 days of receipt of the determination, or the city must petition the Department of Ecology for a lead agency determination under WAC 197-11-940 within the 15-day time period. Any such petition on behalf of the city may be initiated by the responsible official.

E. The responsible official is authorized to make agreements as to lead agency status or shared lead agency duties for a proposal under WAC 197-11-942 and 197-11-944.

F. When making a lead agency determination for a private project, the responsible official shall require sufficient information from the applicant to identify which other agencies have jurisdiction over the proposal. (That is: which agencies require nonexempt licenses?) (Ord. 2909 § 3, 2011; Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

17.02.060 Transfer of lead agency status to state agency (WAC 173-806-053).

For any proposal for a private project where the city would be the lead agency and for which one or more state agencies have jurisdiction, the city’s responsible official may elect to transfer the lead agency duties to a state agency. The state agency with jurisdiction appearing first on the priority listing in WAC 197-11-936 shall be the lead agency and the city shall be an agency with jurisdiction. To transfer lead agency duties, the city’s responsible official must transmit a notice of the transfer together with any relevant information available on the proposal to the appropriate state agency with jurisdiction. The responsible official of the city shall also give notice of the transfer to the private applicant and any other agencies with jurisdiction over the proposal. (Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

17.02.070 Additional timing considerations (WAC 173-806-058).

A. For nonexempt proposals, the DNS or final EIS for the proposal shall accompany the city’s staff recommendation to any appropriate advisory body, such as the planning commission.

B. If the city’s only action on a proposal is a decision on a building permit or other license that requires detailed project plans and specifications, the applicant may request in writing that the city conduct environmental review prior to submission of the detailed plans and specifications. (Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

Article III. Categorical Exemptions and Threshold Determinations

17.02.080 Purpose of this article – Adoption by reference.

This article contains the rules for deciding whether a proposal has a “probable significant, adverse environmental impact” requiring an environmental impact statement (EIS) to be prepared. This article also contains rules for evaluating the impacts of proposals not requiring an EIS. The city adopts the following sections by reference as supplemented in this article:

WAC

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.

(Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

17.02.090 Use of exemptions (WAC 173-806-080).

A. The responsible official shall determine whether the license and/or the proposal is exempt. The responsible official’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. The city shall not require completion of an environmental checklist for an exempt proposal.

B. In determining whether or not a proposal is exempt, the responsible official shall make certain the proposal is properly defined and shall identify the governmental licenses required (WAC 197-11-060).

C. If a proposal includes both exempt and nonexempt actions, the responsible official may authorize exempt actions prior to compliance with the procedural requirements of this chapter, except that:

1. The city shall not give authorization for:

a. Any nonexempt action;

b. Any action that would have an adverse environmental impact; or

c. Any action that would limit the choice of alternatives;

2. The responsible official may withhold approval of an exempt action that would lead to modification of the physical environment, when such modification would serve no purpose if nonexempt action(s) were not approved; and

3. The responsible official may withhold approval of exempt actions that would lead to substantial financial expenditures by a private applicant when the expenditures would serve no purpose if nonexempt action(s) were not approved. (Ord. 2909 § 4, 2011; Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

17.02.100 Environmental checklist (WAC 173-806-090).

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 197-11-060 with the following additions: noise examples in Question 7-6-1 shall include aircraft noises.

B. 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. (Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

17.02.110 Mitigated DNS (WAC 173-806-100).

A. As provided in this section and in WAC 197-11-350, the responsible official may issue a DNS based on conditions attached to the proposal by the responsible official or on changes to, or clarifications of, the proposal made by the applicant.

B. An applicant may request in writing early notice of whether a DS is likely under WAC 197-11-350. The request must:

1. Follow submission of a permit application and environmental checklist for a nonexempt proposal for which the department is lead agency; and

2. Precede the city’s actual threshold determination for the proposal.

C. The responsible official should respond to the request for early notice within 15 working days. The response shall:

1. Be written;

2. State whether the city currently considers issuance of a DS likely and, if so, indicate the general or specific area(s) of concern that is/are leading the city to consider a DS; and

3. State that the applicant may change or clarify the proposal to mitigate the indicated impacts, revising the environmental checklist and/or permit application as necessary to reflect the changes or clarifications.

D. As much as possible, the city should assist the applicant with identification of impacts to the extent necessary to formulate mitigation measures.

E. When an applicant submits a changed or clarified proposal, along with a revised or amended environmental checklist, the city shall base its threshold determination on the changed or clarified proposal and should make the determination within 15 days of receiving the changed or clarified proposal:

1. If the city indicated specific mitigation measures in its response to the request for early notice, and the applicant changed or clarified the proposal to include those specific mitigation measures, the city shall issue and circulate a DNS 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.

F. A mitigated DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2) requiring a 15-day comment period and public notice.

G. Mitigation measures incorporated in the mitigated DNS shall be deemed conditions of approval of the permit decision and may be enforced in the same manner as any term or condition of the permit, or enforced in any manner specifically prescribed by the city.

H. If the city’s tentative decision on a permit or approval does not include mitigation measures that were incorporated in the 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.

I. The city’s written response under subsection (B) of this section shall not be construed as a determination of significance. In addition, preliminary discussion of clarifications or changes to a proposal, as opposed to a written request for early notice, shall not bind the city to consider the clarifications or changes in its threshold determination. (Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

Article IV. Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS)

17.02.120 Purpose of this article – Adoption by reference (WAC 173-806-110).

This article contains the rules for preparing environmental impact statements. The city adopts the following sections by reference, as supplemented by this article:

WAC

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.

(Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

17.02.130 Preparation – Additional considerations (WAC 173-806-120).

A. Preparation of draft and final EISs (DEIS and FEIS) and draft and final supplemental EISs (SEIS) is the responsibility 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.

B. The DEIS and FEIS or draft and final SEIS 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.

C. The city may require an applicant to provide information the city does not possess, including specific investigations. However, the applicant is not required to supply information that is not required under this chapter or that is being requested from another agency. (This does not apply to information the city may request under another ordinance or statute.) (Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

17.02.140 Additional elements to be covered (WAC 173-806-125).

The following additional elements are part of the environment for the purpose of EIS content, but do not add to the criteria for threshold determinations or perform any other function or purpose under this chapter:

A. Economy;

B. Social policy analysis;

C. Cost-benefit analysis. (Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

Article V. Commenting

17.02.150 Adoption by reference (WAC 173-806-128).

This article contains rules for consulting, commenting and responding on all environmental documents under SEPA, including rules for public notice and hearings. The city adopts the following sections by reference as supplemented in this article:

WAC

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.

(Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

17.02.160 Public notice (WAC 173-806-130).

A. 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:

a. Posting the property, for site-specific proposals;

b. A weekly listing of all DNSs and DSs issued during the past week under WAC 197-11-340(2) and WAC 197-11-360(3) shall be posted at City Hall.

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.

B. Whenever the city issues a DEIS under WAC 197-11-455(5) or a SEIS under WAC 197-11-620, notice of the availability of those documents shall be given by:

1. Indicating the availability of the DEIS in any public notice required for a nonexempt license, and at least one of the following:

a. Posting the property, for site-specific proposals;

b. Publishing notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the county, city or general area where the proposal is located;

c. Notifying public or private groups which have expressed interest in a certain proposal or in the type of proposal being considered;

d. Notifying the news media;

e. Placing notices in appropriate regional, neighborhood, ethnic or trade journals; and/or

f. Publishing notice in agency newsletters and/or sending notice to agency mailing list (general lists or specific list for proposals or subject areas); and/or

g. A weekly listing of any such DEISs and SEISs issued.

C. Whenever possible, the city shall integrate the public notice required under this section with existing notice procedures for the city’s nonexempt permit(s) or approval(s) required for the proposal.

D. The city may require an applicant to complete the public notice requirements for the applicant’s proposal at his or her expense. (Ord. 1451 § 2, 1985; Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

17.02.170 Designation of consulted agency official – Responsibilities (WAC 173-806-140).

A. The responsible official shall be responsible for preparation of written comments for the city in response to a consultation request prior to a threshold determination, participation in scoping, and reviewing a DEIS; and

B. Shall be responsible for the city’s compliance with WAC 197-11-550 whenever the city is a consulted agency and is authorized to develop operating procedures that will ensure that responses to consultation requests are prepared in a timely fashion and include data from all appropriate departments of the city. (Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

Article VI. Existing Environmental Documents

17.02.180 Purpose of this article – Adoption by reference (WAC 173-806-150).

This article contains rules for using and supplementing existing environmental documents prepared under SEPA or National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for the city’s own environmental compliance. The city adopts the following sections by reference:

WAC

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.

(Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

Article VII. SEPA and Agency decisions

17.02.190 Purpose of this article – Adoption by reference (WAC 173-806-155).

This article contains rules (and policies) for SEPA’s substantive authority, such as decisions to mitigate or reject proposals as a result of SEPA. This article also contains procedures for appealing SEPA determinations to agencies or the courts. The city adopts the following sections by reference:

WAC

197-11-650    Purpose of this part.

197-11-655    Implementation.

197-11-660    Substantive authority and mitigation.

17.02.195 Appeals (WAC 173-806-170).

A. The city establishes the following administrative appeal procedures under RCW 43.21C.075 (as amended by Chapter 347, Laws of 1995 (ESHB 1724)), WAC 197-11-680 and RCW 43.21C.060. These administrative appeal procedures supersede procedures for administrative appeals provided for in Chapter 1.35 LMC.

1. Any agency or person may appeal the city’s procedural compliance with Chapter 197-11 WAC for issuance of the following:

a. Determination of nonsignificance;

b. Mitigated determination of nonsignificance;

c. Adequacy of an FEIS.

2. A determination of significance (DS) shall not be subject to appeal.

3. Appeals, with the appeal fee established in Chapter 3.104 LMC, must be filed within the following timelines:

a. An appeal of a determination of nonsignificance (DNS) or mitigated DNS must be filed in writing with the community development department within 14 calendar days of the date that the DNS or mitigated DNS becomes final.

b. Appeals of a final EIS must be filed in writing with the community development department within 14 days of the issuance of the final EIS by the city.

4. The appeal of a determination under SEPA shall be considered with the decision on the underlying governmental action in the following manner:

a. If the initial decision on the underlying governmental action is made by the hearing examiner (e.g., conditional use permit), the SEPA appeal shall be heard by the hearing examiner at the same time as the public hearing on the underlying action. The hearing examiner shall render a decision on both the SEPA appeal and the underlying action.

b. If the initial decision on the underlying governmental action is made by a city employee or official with a right of appeal to the hearing examiner, the SEPA appeal shall be heard by the examiner at the same time as the hearing on the appeal of the underlying action, if the underlying action is appealed. The hearing examiner shall render a decision on both appeals. In cases where the underlying action is not appealed, the hearing examiner shall conduct a public hearing and render the decision on the SEPA appeal.

c. If the initial decision on the underlying governmental action is made by the city council after a public hearing, the SEPA appeal shall be heard and decided by the city council at the same time.

d. If the proposal is a nonproject action (i.e., legislative or other actions not meeting the definition of a project permit pursuant to LMC 1.35.005, Project permit – Definition), then the hearing examiner shall render a decision on the SEPA appeal (prior to the planning commission or city council public hearing).

B. If the city is the project proponent of the underlying action or is funding the project, is the SEPA lead agency for the project, and exercises its right to conduct review under SEPA, including any appeals of the city’s procedural determinations under SEPA, before the city submits an application for any project permit for the project or action, the hearing examiner shall hear and render a decision on the SEPA appeal.

C. The decision on a SEPA appeal shall be final, with no additional administrative appeal.

D. As provided in RCW 43.21C.075(3)(d), the environmental determination of the responsible official shall be entitled to substantial weight.

E. The appellant shall have the burden of establishing that the environmental determination is clearly erroneous.

F. Only one appeal of an environmental determination made by the responsible official shall be allowed on a proposal. If more than one person files an appeal of an environmental determination on a proposal, such appeals shall be consolidated.

G. The city shall give official notice under WAC 197-11-680(5) whenever it issues a permit or approval for which a statute or ordinance establishes a time limit for commencing judicial appeal.

Note: see also LMC 17.02.200(E). (Ord. 3256 § 2, 2017; Ord. 2957 § 14, 2012; Ord. 2073 § 1, 1996; Ord. 1451 § 1, 1985; Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

Note: see also LMC 17.02.200(E).

17.02.200 Substantive authority (WAC 173-806-160).

A. The policies and goals set forth in this chapter are supplementary to those in the existing authorization of the city.

B. 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 subsection (D) of this section and cited in the license or other decision document.

C. The city may deny a permit or approval for a proposal on the basis of SEPA so long as:

1. A finding is made that approving the proposal would result in probable significant adverse environmental impacts that are identified in a FEIS or final SEIS prepared pursuant to this chapter; and

2. A finding is made that there are not 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 subsection (D) of this section and identified in writing in the decision document.

D. 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:

a. Fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment for succeeding generations;

b. Assure for all people of Washington safe, healthful, productive and aesthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings;

c. Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risk to health or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences;

d. Preserve important historic, cultural and natural aspects of our national heritage;

e. Maintain, wherever possible, an environment which supports diversity and variety of individual choice;

f. Achieve a balance between population and resource use which will permit high standards of living and a wide sharing of life’s amenities; and

g. 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 healthful environment and that each person has a responsibility to contribute to the preservation and enhancement of the environment.

3. The city adopts by reference the policies in the following city codes, ordinances, resolutions and plans as now existing or as may hereafter be amended:

a. Zoning Code, LMC Title 21;

b. Comprehensive Plan, LMC Title 18, including comprehensive plan map;

c. Subdivision Regulations, LMC Title 19;

d. Environment, LMC Title 17;

e. Building Code, LMC Title 16;

f. Storm Drainage Regulations, Chapter 13.40 LMC;

g. Land Clearing and Grading Regulations, Chapter 21.08 LMC.

E. When any proposal or action not requiring a decision of the city council is conditioned or denied on the basis of SEPA by a non-elected official, the decision shall be appealable to the city council. Such appeal may be perfected by the proponent or any aggrieved party by giving notice to the responsible official within 10 days of the decision being appealed. Review by the city council shall be on a de novo basis. (Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

Note: see also LMC 17.02.195.

17.02.210 Notice – Statute of limitations (WAC 173-806-173).

A. The city, applicant for, or proponent of an action may publish a notice of action pursuant to RCW 43.21C.080 for any action.

B. The form of the notice shall be substantially in the form provided in WAC 197-11-990. The notice shall be published by the city clerk, applicant or proponent pursuant to RCW 43.21C.080. (Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

Article VIII. Definitions

17.02.220 Purpose of this article – Adoption by reference (WAC 173-806-175).

This article contains uniform usage and definitions of terms under SEPA. The city adopts the following sections by reference, as supplemented by WAC 173-806-040:

WAC

197-11-700    Definitions.

197-11-702    Act.

197-11-704    Action.

197-11-706    Addendum.

197-11-708    Adoption.

197-11-710    Affected tribe.

197-11-712    Affecting.

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    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    City.

197-11-740    Environment.

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.

197-11-756    Lands covered by water.

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.

(Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

Article IX. Categorical Exemptions

17.02.230 Adoption by reference (WAC 173-806-180).

A. The city adopts by reference the following rules for categorical exemptions, as supplemented in this chapter, including WAC 173-806-080, Use of Exemptions, and 173-806-190, Environmentally Sensitive Areas:

WAC

197-11-800    Categorical Exemptions.

197-11-880    Emergencies.

197-11-890    Petitioning DOE to Change Exemptions.

RCW

43.21C.410    Battery charging and exchange station installation.

B. As provided by WAC 197-11-800(1)(c) and (d), the city adopts the following raised exempt levels for minor new construction that is consistent with the comprehensive plan and zoning code, and not located upon lands covered by water:

1. Single-family residential: 30 dwelling units.

2. Multifamily residential: 60 dwelling units.

3. Office, school, commercial, recreational, service, storage building, and parking facilities: 30,000 square feet and 90 parking spaces.

4. Landfill, excavation and grading: 1,000 cubic yards. (Ord. 3047 § 13, 2014; Ord. 3005 § 2, 2013; Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

Article X. Agency Compliance

17.02.240 Purpose of this article – Adoption by reference (WAC 173-806-185).

This article contains rules for agency compliance with SEPA, including rules for charging fees under the SEPA process, designating environmentally sensitive areas, listing agencies with environmental expertise, selecting the lead agency, and applying these rules to current agency activities. The city adopts the following sections by reference, as supplemented by WAC 173-806-050 through 173-806-053 and this article:

WAC

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 proposals.

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 one of the agencies is a city.

197-11-934    Lead agency for private projects requiring licenses from local agency, not a city, 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.

(Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

17.02.250 Environmentally sensitive areas (WAC 173-806-190).

Repealed by Ord. 3005. (Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

17.02.260 Fees (WAC 173-806-200).

The city shall require the following fees for its activities in accordance with the provisions of this chapter:

A. Threshold Determination.

1. For every environmental checklist the city will review when it is lead agency, the city shall collect a fee as set forth in Chapter 3.104 LMC from the proponent of the proposal prior to undertaking the threshold determination, except that there shall be no checklist fee for building permits. The time periods provided by this chapter for making a threshold determination shall not begin to run until payment of the fee.

B. Environmental Impact Statement.

1. When the city is the lead agency for a proposal requiring an EIS and the responsible official determines that the EIS shall be prepared by employees and the city, the city may charge and collect a reasonable fee, as set forth in Chapter 3.104 LMC, from any applicant to cover costs incurred by the city in preparing the EIS. The responsible official shall advise the applicant(s) of the projected costs for the EIS prior to actual preparation; the applicant shall post bond or otherwise ensure payment of such costs.

2. The responsible official may determine that the city will contract directly with a consultant for preparation of an EIS, or a portion of the EIS, for activities initiated by some persons or entity other than the city and may bill such costs and expenses directly to the applicant. The city may require the applicant to post bond or otherwise ensure payment of such costs, as set forth in Chapter 3.104 LMC. Such consultants shall be selected by mutual agreement of the city and applicant after a call for proposals.

3. If a proposal is modified so that an EIS is no longer required, the responsible official shall refund any fees collected under subsections (B)(1) or (B)(2) of this section which remain after incurred costs are paid.

C. The city may collect a reasonable fee from an applicant to cover the cost of meeting public notice requirements of this chapter relating to the applicant’s proposal.

D. The city may collect a fee for performing its duties as a consulted agency.

E. The city may charge any person for copies of any document prepared under this article, and for mailing the document, in a manner provided by Chapter 42.17 RCW. (Ord. 2656 §§ 1, 2, 2006; Ord. 2242 § 2, 1999; Ord. 1630 § 2, 1988; Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)

Article XI. Forms

17.02.270 Adoption by reference (WAC 173-806-230).

The city adopts the following forms and sections by reference:

WAC

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. 1415 § 2, 1984)

Article XII. Severability

17.02.280 Severability (WAC 173-806-220).

If any provision of this article or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of this chapter, or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected. (Ord. 1415 § 2, 1984)*

*For statutory requirements, see Chapter 90.58 RCW.

Article XIII. City Center Planned Action

17.02.300 City center planned action.

A. Purpose. The city declares that the purpose of this section is to:

1. Combine environmental analysis with land use planning; and

2. Designate projects in the city center sub-area as “planned actions” consistent with state law (RCW 43.21C.031); and

3. Streamline and expedite the land use permit review process by relying on completed and existing environmental analysis for the city center subarea; and

4. Apply the Lynnwood Municipal Code, along with the mitigation framework of this section, to process project applications as planned actions.

B. Findings. The city council finds that:

1. The city is required to prepare and implement plans in accordance with the provisions of the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA), Chapter 36.70A RCW.

2. The city has adopted a comprehensive plan and city center subarea plan in compliance with the GMA.

3. Based on the report prepared by Lynnwood staff and reviewed by the city council in connection with the passage of the ordinance codified in this section, the environmental impacts of a planned action comprised of the city center subarea (city center) have been identified and adequately addressed in the Lynnwood city center final supplemental environmental impact statement dated September 9, 2004, for the Lynnwood city center subarea plan and implementing development regulations, as supplemented by addenda issued April 5, 2006, and May 24, 2011 (final SEIS).

4. A planned action comprised of the city center:

a. Is a subsequent or implementing project covered by the final SEIS, the city comprehensive plan and the city center subarea plan; and

b. Is not an essential public facility, as defined in RCW 36.70A.200 or the city of Lynnwood comprehensive plan; and

c. Is consistent with the comprehensive plan and the city center subarea plan.

5. The final SEIS was prepared pursuant to RCW 43.21C.031 in anticipation of the city center being designated a planned action.

6. There are no specific mitigation measures, other than development regulations, that must be applied to a project application for development in the city center.

7. A streamlined process for review of project applications for development in the city center will benefit the public, protect the environment, and enhance economic development.

8. Opportunities for public involvement and review have been provided, and comments considered, as part of preparation of the draft and final SEIS for the city center subarea plan, implementing development regulations and amendments thereto, and the ordinance codified in this section.

C. Qualifying criteria for evaluating and determining projects as city center planned actions.

1. Planned Action Area. A proposed project must be located in the city center, which shall be comprised of an approximately 250-acre area generally bounded by 194th Street SW and the planned extension of 194th St. on the north; 33rd Avenue West on the east; Interstate 5 on the southeast; and 48th Avenue West on the west, as depicted in the diagram attached as Exhibit A to the ordinance codified in this section.

2. Environmental Documents. Review of a project proposed as a planned action for a site-specific development permit application shall be based on the environmental analysis contained in the city center planned action environmental impact statement composed of the draft supplemental EIS (April 19, 2004) and the final supplemental EIS (September 9, 2004); the city of Lynnwood adoption of DS issued April 5, 2006, for the Lynnwood city center subarea plan with an addendum for the adoption of certain city center related code amendments and the city of Lynnwood adoption of DS issued May 24, 2011, for the Lynnwood city center subarea plan with an addendum to address certain city center related code amendments (collectively, the final SEIS).

3. Planned Action Qualifications. The following criteria and thresholds shall be used to determine whether a proposed project qualifies as a city center planned action:

a. Land Use. The project land uses and activities must be permitted in the city center zoning district (Chapter 21.60 LMC). The project may include the demolition of existing buildings and/or demolition/construction of parking facilities. The project shall not be for new public street projects that would not otherwise be exempt from WAC 197-11-800.

b. Development Thresholds. The proposed project, combined with city center projects approved by or pending with the city, cumulatively do not exceed the development envelope established by the final SEIS, as shown in the following City Center Summary Development Table (Table 17.02.01). Table 17.02.01 identifies the maximum amount of planned action development for SEPA purposes. The data is based on anticipated market and economic conditions over a 20-year period. Development could occur anywhere within the city center and at potentially differing rates from the estimates.

Table 17.02.01 City Center Summary Development Table 

Land Use

Square Feet (sf) or Dwelling Units (du)

Stories or Density

Office (1)

4 million sf

15 – 34*

Retail (2)

1.5 million sf

1 – 2

Residential (3)

3.6 million sf

3,000 du

50 – 70 du/acre

5 – 13 story*

Total buildout (4)

9.1 million sf

 

Net new development

6.6 million sf

 

NOTES:

1. Includes approximately 1,000,000 square feet of existing development.

2. Retail development would replace existing retail.

3. New development.

4. Includes the city center planned action area (see Exhibit A to the ordinance codified in this section) and the Alderwood-city center transition area.

* The development regulations offer bonuses which could allow buildings to exceed the indicated heights.

c. Total Build-Out. A geographic shifting of the total build-out of development among uses within the city center is allowed; provided, that:

i. The total build-out does not exceed the aggregate amount of development provided in Table 17.02.01; and

ii. The impacts of the development have been identified and mitigated by applicable adopted development regulations.

d. Elements of the Environment Analyzed in the Final SEIS. A project that would result in new significant adverse environmental impacts that were not identified in the EIS shall not qualify as a planned action.

e. Time Horizon. A proposed city center planned action project application may be considered; provided, that all of the development shown in Table 17.02.01 (City Center Summary Development Table) has not been constructed, or until the year 2025, whichever occurs first.

f. Significant Changes. If the project significantly changes the assumptions for the environmental analysis identified in the final SEIS, the project shall not qualify as a planned action and the SEPA responsible official shall require additional SEPA review.

D. Applications for planned actions shall be processed in accordance with LMC 17.02.029. (Ord. 2943 § 1, 2012)

Article XIV. Lynnwood Place Planned Action

17.02.400 Lynnwood Place planned action.

A. Purpose. The city declares that the purpose of this section is to:

1. Combine environmental analysis with land use planning; and

2. Designate the development known as “Lynnwood Place” at 3001 184th Street SW as a “planned action” consistent with state law (Chapters 36.70A RCW, 43.21C RCW and 197-11 WAC); and

3. Streamline and expedite the land use permit review process by relying on completed and existing environmental analysis for Lynnwood Place; and

4. Apply the Lynnwood Municipal Code and other applicable development standards, along with the mitigation framework of this section, to process project applications as planned actions.

B. Findings. The city council finds that:

1. The city is required to prepare and implement plans in accordance with the provisions of the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA), Chapter 36.70A RCW.

2. The city has adopted a comprehensive plan in compliance with the GMA.

3. Based on the report prepared by Lynnwood’s SEPA responsible official and reviewed by the city council in connection with the passage of the ordinance codified in this section, the environmental impacts of a planned action comprised of the Lynnwood Place project have been identified and adequately addressed in the Lynnwood Place environmental impact statement (EIS) (consisting of the draft EIS (DEIS) issued October 7, 2011, and the final EIS (FEIS) issued March 30, 2012), and implementing development regulations, as supplemented by the development agreement between the city, the district and the developer.

4. A planned action comprised of Lynnwood Place:

a. Is project or nonproject action covered by the Lynnwood Crossing DEIS issued October 11, 2011, the Lynnwood Crossing FEIS issued March 30, 2012; and

b. Is not an essential public facility, as defined in RCW 36.70A.200 or the city of Lynnwood comprehensive plan; and

c. Is consistent with the city of Lynnwood comprehensive plan.

5. The EIS was prepared pursuant to RCW 43.21C.031 in anticipation of the Lynnwood Place project being designated a planned action.

6. There are no specific mitigation measures, other than applicable development regulations, the mitigation specified in the EIS, and the terms of the development agreement that must be applied to a project application for development of Lynnwood Place.

7. A streamlined process for review of project applications for development in the Lynnwood Place project will benefit the public, protect the environment, and enhance economic development.

8. Opportunities for public involvement and review have been provided, and comments considered, as part of preparation of the DEIS and FEIS for Lynnwood Crossing (Lynnwood Place), the comprehensive plan and zoning code amendments related to Lynnwood Place, and the ordinance codified in this section.

C. Qualifying criteria for evaluating and determining projects as Lynnwood Place planned actions.

1. Planned Action Area. A proposed project must be located in or related to the 40.2-acre Lynnwood Place project area, located at 3001 184th Street SW, Lynnwood, Washington, as depicted in the diagram attached as Exhibit A to the ordinance codified in this section.

2. Environmental Documents. Review of a project proposed as a Lynnwood Place planned action for a site-specific development permit application shall be based on the environmental analysis contained in the Lynnwood Place EIS and described therein as “Alternative 2.”

3. Planned Action Qualifications. The following criteria and thresholds shall be used to determine whether a proposed project qualifies as a Lynnwood Place planned action:

a. Land Use. The project land uses and activities must be permitted in the Commercial-Residential zoning district (Chapter 21.54 LMC). The project may include the site grading, demolition of existing buildings, and construction of associated infrastructure.

b. Scope of Development. Lynnwood Place development shall not exceed the amount of new building area identified and evaluated as Alternative 2 in the EIS, and as provided in the following Lynnwood Place Development Table (Table 17.02.400C). Development is expected to occur over a 10- to 15-year period.

Table 17.02.400C Lynnwood Place Development 

Land Use

Square Feet (sq. ft.) or Dwelling Units (d.u.)

Costco Wholesale with tire center and fueling facility

160,000 sq. ft.

Multifamily residential

500,000 sq. ft./500 d.u.

Retail

192,000 sq. ft.

Restaurant

33,000 sq. ft.

Amusement/recreation

105,000 sq. ft.

Health club

40,000 sq. ft.

Movie theater

35,000 sq. ft.

Bowling

30,000 sq. ft.

Total build-out (gross building area)

990,000 sq. ft.

NOTES:

1.    As specified by the EIS and development agreement, project includes construction of a new three-lane road through the site from 184th Street SW to Alderwood Mall Parkway at Maple Road.

2.    The project may be constructed in phases, with infrastructure improvements made as specified by the development agreement(s).

c. Environmental Impacts. A project that would be likely to result in adverse environmental impacts that were not identified in the EIS shall not qualify as a planned action.

d. Significant Changes. If requested by the owner, the city may consider project amendments that would have the effect of varying the proposed mix of uses described above. The owner will have the obligation of demonstrating that the cumulative impact of such an amendment is equal to or less than what was analyzed in the FEIS. If the owner proposes significant changes to the assumptions for the environmental analysis identified in the EIS, the project shall not qualify as a planned action and the SEPA responsible official shall require additional SEPA review.

D. Applications for planned actions shall be processed in accordance with LMC 17.02.029. (Ord. 3030 § 3 (Exh. C), 2013)