18.04.120 Mitigated DNS.
A. As provided in this section and in WAC 197-11-350, the responsible official may issue a determination of nonsignificance (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 in writing;
2. State whether the city currently considers issuance of a DS likely and, if so, indicate the general or specific areas of concern that 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, and may revise 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 determination of nonsignificance (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, issue 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.
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. The city shall not act upon a proposal for which a mitigated DNS has been issued until the 14-day comment and public notice period has expired; provided, that the requirements of this section shall not apply to a DNS issued pursuant to the optional DNS process described in GHMC 18.04.123.
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 matter 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 mitigated DNS for the proposal, the city should evaluate the threshold determination to assure consistency with WAC 197-11-340(3)(a) relating to the withdrawal of a 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 clarification 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. 1103 § 11, 2007; Ord. 791 § 4, 1998; Ord. 721 § 5, 1996; Ord. 546 § 1(Exh. A), 1988).