29.25.020 General provisions | Pasco Municipal Code

29.25.020 General provisions.

(1) Authorizations Required. Prior to fulfilling the requirements of this chapter, the City shall not grant any approval or permission to alter the condition of any land, water or vegetation, or to construct or alter any structure or improvement including, but not limited to, the following:

(a) Building permit;

(b) Special use permit;

(d) Shoreline substantial development permit;

(e) Shoreline variance permit;

(f) Binding site plan;

(g) Short subdivision;

(h) Subdivision;

(i) Zoning variance permit;

(j) Rezone; or

(k) Any other adopted permit or required approval not expressly exempted by this section.

(a) This chapter shall apply to all lands, all land uses and development and all structures and facilities in City’s shoreline jurisdiction. This chapter shall apply to every person, individual, firm, partnership, corporation, governmental agency or other entity that owns, leases, or administers land within the City’s shoreline jurisdiction.

(b) This section provides regulations for land use and development in and adjacent to critical areas within the City’s shoreline jurisdiction.

(a) All allowed activities shall use reasonable methods supported by the most current scientific and technical information or accepted BMPs with the least amount of potential impact to the critical areas. Any incidental damage to or alteration of a critical area that is not a necessary outcome of the exempted activity shall be restored, rehabilitated, or replaced at the responsible party’s expense. This includes, but is not limited to, access ways or paths, vegetation removal or damage beyond a reasonable work zone, and grading and clearing not essential to the ongoing operation of the site’s use. Uses allowed under this section do not give permission to destroy a critical area or ignore risk from natural hazards. See PMC 29.35.080, Exemptions from shoreline substantial development permits, for provisions for exempted activities within shoreline jurisdiction. Allowed uses include:

(i) Modification of any existing structure that does not alter the structure to further intrude into a critical area or established buffer and does not increase risk to life and property. Modification includes construction of tenant improvements, fences, decks, patios, driveways, signs, and accessory structures.

(ii) Operation and maintenance of any system of existing dikes, levees, ditches, drains, or other facilities which were created, developed or utilized primarily as a part of a drainage or diking system. Operation and maintenance does not necessarily include the expansion or new construction of drainage ditches and related facilities. See PMC 29.35.080, Exemptions from shoreline substantial development permits, for additional provisions that may be applicable.

(iii) Removal of hazardous trees and vegetation and, when necessary, measures to control or prevent a fire or halt the spread of disease or damaging insects consistent with the State Forest Practices Act, Chapter 76.09 RCW; provided, that no vegetation shall be removed from a critical area or its buffer without approval from the City.

(iv) Activities involving artificially created wetlands or streams intentionally created from nonwetland sites, including, but not limited to: grass-lined swales, irrigation and drainage ditches, detention facilities, and landscape features, except those features that provide critical habitat for anadromous fish and those features that were created as mitigation for projects or alterations subject to the provisions of this chapter.

(v) Passive recreational activities, including, but not limited to, fishing, bird watching, boating, swimming, hiking, and use of nature trails, provided the activity does not alter the critical area or its buffer.

(vi) The harvesting of wild crops in a manner that is not injurious to natural reproduction of such crops and provided the harvesting does not require tilling soil, planting crops, or changing existing topography, water conditions or water sources.

(vii) Educational and scientific research.

(viii) Existing and ongoing agricultural activities and related development activities, provided no alteration of flood storage capacity or conveyance, or increase in the extent or nature of impact to a critical area or its buffer occurs, beyond that which has occurred prior to the effective date of this chapter.

(b) If the proposed activity meets any of the listed allowed uses, including any BMP and/or restoration requirements, completion of a critical area checklist or further critical area review is not required.

(a) The City of Pasco shall complete a critical area review prior to granting any shoreline permit approval for a development or other alteration on a site that is found to likely include, or be adjacent to, or have significant impact upon one or more critical areas, unless otherwise provided in this chapter. As part of this review, the Shoreline Administrator shall verify the information submitted by the applicant, and:

(i) Confirm the extent, nature, and type of any critical areas identified and evaluate any required critical area detailed study;

(ii) Determine whether the development proposal conforms to the purposes and performance standards of this chapter;

(iii) Assess impacts on the critical area from the activities and uses proposed and determine whether any proposed alterations to, or impacts upon, critical areas are necessary and unavoidable in order to meet the objectives of the proposal; and

(iv) Determine if any required mitigation plans proposed by the applicant are sufficient to protect the critical area and public health, safety, and welfare concerns consistent with the goals, purposes, objectives, and requirements of this chapter.

(b) The applicant shall be responsible for the initiation, preparation, submission, and expense of all required assessments, studies, plans, reconnaissance, and other work in support of the application. The applicant shall provide the City with digital copies and paper copies of reports/studies and maps prepared for the reports/studies, including all geotechnical studies and mapping.

(5) Minimum Standards. Any proposed activity shall be conditioned as necessary to mitigate impacts to critical areas to ensure no net loss of ecological function and conform to the performance standards required by this chapter and PMC 29.15.040, Environmental protection.

(6) Concurrent Requirements. Lands characterized by one or more critical area features may also be subject to other regulations established by this chapter due to overlap or multiple functions of some critical areas. In the event of conflict between regulations, the most restrictive regulations shall apply.

(a) For any proposed activity not found to be exempt under subsection (3) of this section or PMC 29.35.080, Exemptions from shoreline substantial development permits, the applicant shall complete a critical area checklist on forms provided by the City. The checklist must be submitted to the Shoreline Administrator prior to consideration of any permit request that requires a critical area review as described in this section.

(b) Following receipt of the checklist, the Shoreline Administrator will conduct a review to determine whether there are any critical area indicators present that may be impacted by the proposal.

(a) If the Shoreline Administrator determines the site potentially includes, or is adjacent to critical areas, or the proposed project could have significant adverse impacts on critical areas, the Shoreline Administrator shall notify the applicant that a critical area detailed study is required for each of the indicated critical area types.

(b) If the review of the checklist and critical area resources do not indicate that critical areas are included or adjacent to the activity, or could suffer probable significant adverse impacts from the activity, then the Shoreline Administrator shall rule that the critical area review is complete. The determination shall be noted on the checklist.

(c) The applicant shall acknowledge in writing that a determination regarding the apparent absence of one or more critical areas by the Shoreline Administrator is not intended to be an expert certification regarding the presence of critical areas and the determination is subject to possible reconsideration and reopening if new information is received. If the applicant wants greater assurance of the accuracy of the critical area review determination, the applicant may hire a qualified consultant to provide, such assurances.

(a) The Shoreline Administrator may waive the requirement for a critical area detailed study if there is substantial evidence that:

(i) There will be no alteration of the critical areas or required buffer;

(ii) The development proposal will not impact the critical area in a manner contrary to the purpose, intent and requirements of this chapter; and

(iii) The performance standards required by this chapter will be met.

(b) In making the determination, the Shoreline Administrator may use any of the most current scientific information and the critical area reference maps and/or inventories identified in PMC 29.25.010(5).

(c) Notice of the findings substantiating the waiver will be attached to the permit and filed with the application records.

(a) Preliminary Reconnaissance. If a critical area detailed study is determined to be necessary, then a data review and field reconnaissance shall be performed by a qualified consultant for that type of critical area. If the detailed study reveals no critical area is present, then a statement of this finding along with supporting evidence shall be prepared by the consultant and submitted to the City. An approved finding of the lack of a critical area shall satisfy all of the requirements for a detailed study.

(b) Minimum Requirements. If the data review and field reconnaissance reveals that a critical area is present, then a complete detailed study shall be prepared by the applicant and submitted to the City. At a minimum, a critical area detailed study shall comply with the specific criteria in PMC 29.25.030 through PMC 29.25.070, and clearly document:

(i) The boundary and extent of the critical area;

(ii) The existing function, value, and/or hazard associated with the critical area;

(iii) The probable impact upon the function, value, and/or hazard associated with the critical area from the project as proposed; and

(iv) A mitigation plan including the items in subsection (13) of this section.

(c) Limitations to Study Area. If the applicant, together with assistance from the City, cannot obtain permission for access to properties adjacent to the project area, then the critical area detailed study may be limited accordingly.

(d) Preparation and Determination of Completeness. The critical area detailed study shall be prepared by a qualified consultant for the type of critical area or areas involved. The qualified consultant may consult with the Shoreline Administrator prior to or during preparation of the critical area detailed study to obtain City approval of modifications to the contents of the study where, in the judgment of the qualified consultant, more or less information is required to adequately address the critical area impacts and required mitigation.

If the critical area detailed study is found to be incomplete, the applicant shall be notified and the critical area review process shall be suspended pending correction of the inadequacies. Upon receipt of a complete critical area detailed study a final determination is to be rendered.

(11) Final Determination. Following submission of a completed detailed study, the Shoreline Administrator will review the detailed study and make a determination, based on the critical area detailed study and any other available and appropriate materials. The Shoreline Administrator’s determination will address the adequacy of the project, as proposed, to mitigate any effects it may have on critical areas that are included within or adjacent to the project site. The Shoreline Administrator may elect to request assistance from state resource agency staff if necessary. In addition, the Shoreline Administrator will assess the adequacy of the project proposal’s compliance with the applicable performance standards and this SMP. Notice of this determination shall be attached to the permit and the critical area review shall be completed.

(a) Favorable Determination. A determination that the project proposal adequately mitigates its impacts on the critical areas and complies with the applicable performance standards satisfies the provisions of this title only. It should not be construed as endorsement or approval of the original or any subsequent permit applications.

(b) Unfavorable Determination. When a project proposal is found to not adequately mitigate its impacts on the critical areas and/or not comply with applicable performance standards, the Shoreline Administrator shall prepare written notice of the reasons for the finding of noncompliance. Such notice shall identify the critical area impacted and the nature of the impact.

Following notice of a determination from the critical area review that the proposed activity does not adequately mitigate its impacts on the critical areas and/or does not comply with applicable performance standards, the applicant may request consideration of a revised mitigation plan. If the revision is found to be substantial and relevant to the critical area review, the Shoreline Administrator may reopen the critical area review and make a new determination based on this revised mitigation plan.

(12) Completion of the Critical Area Review. If at any time prior to completion of the public input process on associated permits or approvals, the City receives new evidence that a critical area may be included in, adjacent to, or significantly impacted by the proposed activity, then the City shall reopen the critical area review process and shall require whatever level of critical area review and mitigation as indicated by the evidence. Once the public input process on all associated permits or approvals is completed and the record is closed, then the City’s determination regarding critical areas shall be final, unless appeal is filed as per PMC 29.35.120, Appeals.

(a) All proposed critical area alterations shall include mitigation sufficient to maintain the function and values of the critical area or to prevent risk from a hazard posed by a critical area. Mitigation of one critical area impact should not result in unmitigated impacts to another critical area. Mitigation includes avoiding, minimizing, or compensating for adverse impacts to critical areas or their buffers. The preferred sequence of mitigation is defined in PMC 29.15.040, Environmental protection.

(b) Possible mitigation techniques include, but are not limited to, buffers, setbacks, limits on clearing and grading, creation of artificial wetlands, stream bank stabilization, modified construction methods, and BMPs for erosion control and maintenance of water quality.

(c) All proposed mitigation shall be documented in a mitigation plan included as an element of the critical area detailed study. The mitigation plan shall include a description of the following:

(i) The proposed mitigation;

(ii) How the proposed mitigation will maintain the critical area function, any ongoing monitoring and/or inspection that may be required to ensure the adequacy of the proposed mitigation, and an evaluation of the anticipated effectiveness of the proposed mitigation;

(iii) Any remedial measures that may be required, depending on the outcome of that ongoing monitoring and/or inspection;

(iv) Any required critical areas expertise necessary to install, monitor, or inspect the proposed mitigation; and

(v) Any bonding or other security required to insure performance and/or maintenance of the proposed mitigation.

(a) Buffers have, in some cases, been determined to be necessary to protect critical areas and their functions. Where specific buffers are identified, those buffers are deemed “required” or “standard” buffers. See Table 29.15.020(2) for riparian buffers and PMC 29.25.030 for wetland buffers.

(i) Except as otherwise specified herein, required buffers shall be retained in their pre-existing condition. If a project does not propose any alteration of buffers or of the associated critical area, then subject to the following provision, no additional mitigation will be required to protect the critical area. Additional mitigation beyond the required buffer shall be required if the Shoreline Administrator finds that, based on unique features of the critical area or its buffer or of the proposed activity, the required buffers will not adequately protect the function of the critical area or prevent risk of hazard from the critical area and that additional mitigation or buffering is required to protect the critical area function or to prevent risk of hazard from the critical area.

(ii) The buffer shall be marked prior to any site alteration, and boundary markers shall be visible, durable, and permanently affixed to the ground. The boundary markers shall remain until all activity is completed and a final site inspection is completed.

(iii) An eight-foot-minimum setback shall be required from the buffer area for any construction of impervious surface area greater 120 square feet. Clearing, grading, and filling within this setback shall only be allowed when the applicant can demonstrate that vegetation within the buffer will not be damaged.

(iv) Where temporary buffer disturbance or alteration has occurred or will occur in conjunction with regulated activities, revegetation with appropriate native vegetation shall be required and completed one month before the end of the growing season.

(v) Normal nondestructive pruning and trimming of vegetation for maintenance purposes, or thinning of limbs of individual trees to provide a view corridor, shall not be subject to these buffer requirements. Enhancement of a view corridor shall not be construed to mean excessive removal of trees or vegetation that impairs views. See also PMC 29.15.050, Shoreline vegetation conservation.

(b) If the applicant proposes to reduce required buffers or to alter the required buffer, then the applicant shall demonstrate why such buffer modification, together with any alternative mitigation proposed in the critical area detailed study, is sufficient to protect the critical area function or to prevent risk of hazard from the critical area.

(c) The critical area detailed study shall make adequate provision for long-term buffer protection. Periodic inspection of the buffers may be required if deemed to ensure long-term buffer protection.

(15) Bonding. The Shoreline Administrator shall have the discretion to require a bond, which will ensure compliance with the mitigation plan if activity related to the protection of the critical area(s) (e.g., monitoring or maintenance) or construction is scheduled to take place after the issuance of the City’s permit. The bond shall be in the form of a surety bond, performance bond, assignment of savings account, or an irrevocable standby letter of credit guaranteed by a financial institution with terms and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney. The bond shall be in the amount of 125 percent of the estimated cost of the uncompleted actions or construction, or the estimated cost of restoring the function and values of the critical area that is at risk, whichever is higher. The term of the bond shall be two years, or until the additional activity or construction has been completed and passed the necessary inspections, whichever is longer.

(16) Incentives. The following incentives are intended to minimize the burden to individual property owners from application of the provisions of this chapter:

(a) Open Space. Any property owner on whose property a critical area or its associated buffer is located and who proposes to put the critical area and buffer in a separate tract may apply for current use property tax assessment on that separate tract through Franklin County, pursuant to Chapter 84.34 RCW.

(b) Conservation Easement. Any person whose property contains an identified critical area or its associated buffer may place a conservation easement over that portion of the property by naming a beneficiary under RCW 64.04.130 as beneficiary of the conservation easement. This conservation easement may be in lieu of a separate critical areas tract that qualifies for open-space tax assessment described in this subsection (16). The purpose of the easement shall be to preserve, protect, maintain, restore, and limit future use of the property affected. The terms of the conservation easement may include prohibitions or restrictions on access.

(17) Critical Areas Mapping. The approximate location and extent of critical areas in the City of Pasco may include the following:

(a) Critical areas shown on the critical areas map adopted as a part of the Comprehensive Plan.

(b) Other mapping resources provided in PMC 29.25.010(5).

Mapping resources are to be used only as guides to alert the user to the possible distribution, location, and extent of critical areas. Mapping shall be utilized as a source of generalized information and shall not be considered as regulatory standards or substitute for site-specific assessments. The actual type, extent, and boundaries of critical areas shall be determined in the field by a qualified specialist according to the procedures, definitions, and criteria established in this chapter. [Ord. 4314 § 2, 2016; Code 1970 § 29.01.510.]