Alternative Site Analysis. An applicant shall prove to the Department's satisfaction that alternative sites for the proposed project have been examined during the initial planning phase. An applicant shall search during the initial planning phase for one or more alternative sites that meet the project purpose and would result in the least adverse impact to nontidal wetlands. Determining the Initial Planning Phase. The intent of the initial planning phase is to require an applicant to evaluate the feasibility of the project and the adverse impact on nontidal wetlands at the earliest stage of the development process, before the applicant has committed substantial resources in the project site. Consideration of alternative sites at the earliest stage enables the applicant to retain the flexibility to avoid adverse impacts to nontidal wetlands. An applicant shall select the earliest of the following times as the initial planning phase for the proposed project: When an applicant conducts a formal or informal feasibility or market study, prepares an environmental impact statement or assessment, or a similar study for the project; When an applicant enters into an option agreement or contract of sale for the property; When an applicant applies for a Wetland Concept Plan review, a building permit, subdivision or infrastructure approval, zoning change or any other local governmental approvals for the project; At the time an applicant applies for a Unified Nontidal Wetland Permit under this Ordinance; When a budget or financing request is secure; or Any other appropriate time selected by the applicant. For the time selected in subsection (a)(3)(B), an applicant shall provide a written justification of the selection, including copies of any documentation supporting the selection and an explanation of why earlier times would be inappropriate or inapplicable to the proposed project. While the Director will give serious consideration to the initial planning phase selected by the applicant, the Department reserves the right to require additional information from the applicant concerning the initial planning phase selection or to independently determine the appropriate time. To determine if the purpose of the proposed project cannot be reasonably accomplished by using another site, the Department shall consider: Whether an applicant has made, and can document, a reasonable effort to analyze alternative sites in the general area during the initial planning phase to first avoid adverse impacts and then to minimize adverse impacts to nontidal wetlands; Whether an applicant has made, and can document, attempts to obtain land ownership interests or other rights to conduct the proposed project on alternative sites which first avoid adverse impacts and then minimize adverse impacts to nontidal wetlands; The total number of alternative sites and the physical, economic and demographic characteristics of those sites considered by an applicant; The physical, economic and demographic requirements of the proposed project relative to the alternative sites analyzed; The degree to which use of alternative sites is constrained by other governmentally imposed restrictions and requirements, including concern for avoidance of other environmental, social, community, archaeological, historic and park land impacts; Efforts undertaken to reduce adverse impacts to nontidal wetlands through consideration of reducing density, other site designs or project configurations on each alternative site analyzed; and The costs of fulfilling mitigation requirements for each alternative site. An alternative site may not be excluded from consideration because it includes or requires an area not owned by the applicant which could be reasonably obtained, used, expanded or managed to fulfill the basic purpose of the proposed project. Avoidance and Minimization Analysis. The applicant shall demonstrate to the Department's satisfaction that all necessary steps have been taken to first avoid and then to minimize adverse impacts to nontidal wetlands. Losses of nontidal wetlands shall be permitted only when adverse impacts to nontidal wetlands are necessary and unavoidable. In reviewing the sufficiency of the applicant's efforts to first avoid and then to minimize adverse impacts to a nontidal wetland through reduction of the project size, scope, or density or by an alternative configuration or design, the Department shall consider: The spatial requirements of the proposed project; The location of any existing structural or natural features that may dictate the placement or configuration of the proposed project; The purpose of the proposed project and how the purpose relates to placement, configuration or density; Sensitivity of the site design to nontidal wetlands; An applicant's efforts to: Reduce the scope of the proposed project; Remove or accommodate site constraints including zoning regulations, infrastructures, access or natural features; Otherwise avoid or minimize adverse impact; and The costs of fulfilling potential mitigation requirements based on project configuration or design versus the alternative project configuration or design. The Department shall consider pertinent factors when evaluating the extent to which a proposed project has avoided or the regulated activity has minimized, direct or indirect adverse impacts to nontidal wetlands under this Section, including: Reduction in acreage of a nontidal wetland affected by a regulated activity; Harm to a threatened or endangered species in need of conservation, or to the critical habitat of these species; Movement of aquatic and wildlife species indigenous to the nontidal wetland or water body; Ability of the nontidal wetland to continue to support and provide habitat for those aquatic and wildlife species using the area; Hydrologic regime of the areas upstream and downstream of the area of impact; Functions of the impacted or adjacent nontidal wetlands; Passage of normal or expected high flows, or the relocation of water; Subsurface water flow into or out of any nontidal wetland areas; Presence of, or potential for, supporting fish spawning areas; Presence of areas having significant plant or wildlife value; Cumulative impact to nontidal wetlands; and Impacts to the 100-year floodplain.