The following policies and regulations apply to cultural, archaeological, and historic resources that are either (a) listed on the national, state, or local registers of historic places; (b) recorded by the Washington State Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP), a Native American tribe, and/or a local jurisdiction; or (c)undiscovered, inadvertently uncovered, or yet unrecorded. Archaeological sites located both in and outside shoreline jurisdiction are subject to RCW Chapter 27.44 (Indian graves and records) and RCW Chapter 27.53 (Archaeological sites and records). Shoreline uses or development that may impact such sites shall comply with WAC Chapter 25-48 as well as the provisions of this Shoreline Master Program. Pursuant to RCW 27.53.070, information and documents pertaining to the location of archaeological sites or resources are confidential and not considered public records that require disclosure.
A. 
Policies. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.480, the archaeological and historical resources policies of the 2021 Kittitas County Shoreline Master Program shall be considered as policies of the Kittitas County Comprehensive Plan.
B. 
Regulations.
1. 
Project approval requirements. Prior to issuing a permit, exemption, or other approval for a proposed project in a shoreline area, the County shall determine whether or not a cultural resources review or archaeological survey shall be required under this Section KCC § 17B.05.010(B)(1)*.
a. 
Exceptions. No cultural resources review or survey shall be required under KCC § 17B.05.010(B)(1)* where the project applicant can demonstrate one or more of the following conditions is met:
i. 
The project or use does not include any ground disturbance. Projects that require the insertion of structural elements, but which do not require any excavation and create no spoil piles, shall be considered non-ground-disturbing for purposes of this Section (e.g. driving T-posts, planting tree seedlings with a hoedad).
ii. 
The project is limited to the installation of infrastructure entirely within the same area as an existing project or development.
iii. 
The project’s entire three-dimensional area of proposed ground-disturbance is located within previous fill or previously disturbed earth.
iv. 
A professional archaeologist has surveyed the entire project area within the last ten (10) years, and the survey report(s) show that no cultural, archaeological, or historic resources were found.
b. 
Cultural resources review. The County shall provide electronic notice and a fifteen (15) day comment opportunity to DAHP and affected Native American tribes for all proposed projects in shoreline areas which are not excluded under KCC § 17B.05.010(B)(1)(a)* above.
i. 
When applicable, the above notification requirement will be included in the Preliminary Site Analysis process.
ii. 
Where the proposed project is already subject to a comment period through shoreline permitting and/or SEPA review, this comment period shall be run concurrently.
iii. 
For shoreline projects that fall under a shoreline exemption permit and have no notification requirement, if not already completed through the Preliminary Site Analysis process, the above notification and cultural resources review requirements will occur prior to the issuance of an exemption permit.
c. 
Archaeological survey requirement. A final archeological survey report for the entire project area shall be required prior to the County’s issuance of a permit, exemption, or other approval where the proposed project is not excepted under KCC § 17B.05.010(B)(1)(a)* above, and one or more of the following conditions exist:
i. 
The project area is located within one quarter (1/4) mile from either a protected Native American pre-contact site recorded with DAHP, or a protected historic site that is listed or eligible, or potentially eligible and unevaluated, in the DAHP inventory.
ii. 
DAHP or an affected Native American tribe timely comments through the above cultural resources review process (or concurrent permitting or environmental review process, if applicable), and requests an archaeological survey be completed due to the presence of one or more of the following risk-factors:
Documented historic feature(s) on the property or located within one quarter (1/4) mile from the project area;
Previous positive archaeological survey results from a survey on the property or within one quarter (1/4) mile from the project area; or
A tribally-recorded site located within one quarter (1/4) mile of the project area.
iii. 
DAHP and an affected Native American tribe timely comment through the above cultural resources review process (or concurrent permitting or environmental review process, if applicable), and both DAHP and the affected Native American tribe request that an archaeological survey be completed due to a professional archaeologist’s determination that the project area is in an area that is at high-risk for the presence of archaeological resources (e.g. in an area with high-risk soil deposit types such as historic high-energy soil deposits, or soils with multiple depositional contexts).
iv. 
The County determines that an archaeological survey is otherwise warranted.
d. 
Archaeological survey & reporting standards. Archaeological surveys shall be completed by a professional archaeologist. Archaeological survey reports shall conform to DAHP’s then-current reporting standards. Both DAHP and affected Native American tribes shall receive copies of completed archaeological survey reports, and have a reasonable opportunity (in no case less than fifteen days) to comment on their sufficiency before such reports shall be considered final. Final archaeological survey reports shall be filed with DAHP prior to the County’s issuance of a permit, exemption, or other approval where the proposed project is not exempt under KCC § 17B.05.010(B)(1)(a)*.
e. 
Monitoring alternative. Despite the requirements of KCC § 17B.05.010(B)(1)(c)*, above, an archaeological survey shall not be required where the project proponent, the County, DAHP, and any affected Native American tribes, all approve a written plan for on-site project monitoring by a professional archaeologist throughout all project phases that include ground-disturbing work. This monitoring plan shall be drafted by a professional archaeologist at the applicant’s expense.
f. 
Project modification alternative. Despite the requirements of KCC § 17B.05.010(B)(1)(c)*, above, an archaeological survey shall not be required where the project is modified so that it no longer triggers the risk factor(s) under KCC § 17B.05.010(B)(1)(c)* that would have resulted in the need for an archeological survey under these regulations.
2. 
Inadvertent discoveries. Developers and property owners shall immediately stop work and notify the local government, DAHP, and affected Native American tribes if archaeological resources are discovered. Construction may recommence pursuant to RCW 27.44.040, RCW 27.53.040 and WAC 25-48-030. A notification stating this requirement shall be included on County shoreline permits, exemptions, and other project approval documents.
3. 
Resource management. If significant cultural, archaeological, or historic resources, are identified in the project area, the project proponent shall engage a professional archaeologist (or a historic preservation professional, where appropriate) to prepare a resource management plan. The resource management plan shall, at a minimum, conform to DAHP's then-current management standards. In addition, a permit or other requirement administered by DAHP pursuant to RCW 27.44 and RCW 27.53 may apply.
(Ord. 2021-006, 2021; Ord. 2016-006, 2016; Ord. 2019-003, 2019)
Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.480, the policies for all environmental protection and critical areas of the 2021 Kittitas County Shoreline Master Program shall be considered as policies of the Kittitas County Comprehensive Plan.
(Ord. 2021-006, 2021; Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
The following provisions apply to any use or development occurring in shoreline jurisdiction whether or not a permit or other authorization is required from Kittitas County.
1. 
Proponents of new shoreline use and development, including preferred uses and uses that are exempt from permit requirements, shall employ all reasonable measures to protect shoreline functions and processes.
2. 
Adverse impacts caused by new shoreline use and development shall be mitigated using the following actions in order of priority (referred to as the mitigation sequence):
a. 
Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action;
b. 
Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation by adhering to the dimensional requirements, performance standards and design criteria in this Program and using other technologies or steps, as needed, to avoid or reduce impacts;
c. 
Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment;
d. 
Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations;
e. 
Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments; and
f. 
Monitoring the impact and the compensation projects and taking appropriate corrective measures.
3. 
Proposals for new shoreline uses and developments shall clearly identify potential shoreline impacts. During initial review of the proposal, the Administrator may require the applicant to submit documentation, prepared by a qualified professional, to assess the degree and extent of potential impacts to shoreline functions. When reviewing proposals for new shoreline use and development, the Administrator shall first determine whether identified shoreline impacts have been avoided and secondly minimized. The Administrator shall require compensatory mitigation, designed by a qualified professional, for development proposals that:
a. 
Do not fully conform to one (1) or more of the dimensional requirements, performance standards, and/or design criteria in this Program; or
b. 
Require a variance or conditional use permit; or
c. 
Result in measurable damage, loss and/or displacement of a wetland, aquatic habitat conservation area, wildlife habitat conservation area, flood storage or conveyance area, or critical aquifer recharge area.
4. 
Land divisions: When new lots are created within shoreline jurisdiction they shall meet all of the following conditions:
a. 
All lots shall contain sufficient area outside of the shoreline buffer (see Table 5.5-1), wetland and/or wetland buffer, aquatic habitat conservation area and/or aquatic habitat conservation area buffer, floodway, channel migration zone or landslide hazard area and/or landslide hazard area buffer to accommodate the use and/or development. Land divisions for non-water-dependent and non-water-related developments that create more than four (4) new lots shall adhere to the standard shoreline buffer requirements shown in Table 5.5-1 without buffer averaging or reduction. Buffers that have been averaged or reduced by any prior actions administered by Kittitas County shall not be further averaged or reduced.
b. 
A new lot or parcel may be created in a seismic hazard area as long as there is a note on the face of the plat or other recorded document which indicates the presence of a potential hazard.
c. 
Open space or conservation area lots may be established without a site that is suitable for use and/or development provided there is a note on the face of the plat or other recorded document which indicates the purpose of the lot.
5. 
Compensatory mitigation measures shall occur in the vicinity of the impact or at an alternative location within the same watershed that provides greater and more sustainable ecological benefits. When determining whether offsite mitigation provides greater and more sustainable benefits, the Administrator shall consider limiting factors, critical habitat needs, and other factors identified by the April 2014 Shoreline Restoration Plan, or an approved watershed or comprehensive resource management plan. The Administrator may also approve use of alternative mitigation practices such as in-lieu fee programs, mitigation banks, and other similar approaches when they meet the requirements of 5.2.D.4.
6. 
The Administrator shall prohibit any shoreline use or development that will result in unmitigated cumulative impacts.
7. 
When compensatory mitigation plans for impacts to shoreline resources are required, all of the following shall apply:
a. 
The quality and quantity of the replaced, enhanced, or substituted resources shall be the same or better than the affected resources;
b. 
The mitigation site and associated vegetative planting shall be nurtured and maintained such that healthy native plant communities grow and mature over time;
c. 
The mitigation shall be informed by pertinent scientific and technical studies, including, but not limited to, the May 2013 Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report (ICR), the April 2014 Shoreline Restoration Plan, and other background studies prepared in support of this Program;
d. 
The mitigation shall replace the functions as quickly as possible following the impacts;
e. 
Mitigation activity shall be monitored and maintained to ensure that it achieves its intended functions and values;
f. 
The Administrator shall require the applicant/proponent to post a bond or provide other financial surety equal to one hundred fifty percent (150%) of the estimated cost of the mitigation to ensure the mitigation is carried out successfully. The bond/surety shall be refunded to the applicant/proponent upon completion of the mitigation activity and any required monitoring; and
g. 
Compensatory mitigation plans shall be prepared by qualified professionals with education, training and experience in the applicable field.
8. 
The County shall have the authority to require the applicant/proponent to submit special studies, assessment, and analyses as necessary to identify and address impacts including, but not limited to, impacts on fish and wildlife habitat, public access/use, aesthetics, flood and floodplain impacts and other shoreline attributes.
9. 
Cumulative effects:
a. 
In review of applications for shoreline permits and exemptions, the County shall consider the cumulative impacts of individual uses and developments, including preferred uses and uses that are exempt from permit requirements, when determining whether a proposed use or development could cause a net loss of ecological functions. The geographic scope of the analysis shall include the shoreline water body potentially affected by the proposal within the bounds of the County’s geographic authority, unless the Shoreline Administrator determines that a larger or smaller area of analysis is appropriate.
b. 
The County shall have the authority to require the applicant/proponent to prepare special studies, assessments and analyses as necessary to identify and address cumulative impacts including, but not limited to, impacts on fish and wildlife habitat, public access/use, aesthetics, flood and floodplain impacts and other shoreline attributes.
c. 
Proponents of shoreline use and development shall take the following factors into account when assessing cumulative impacts:
i. 
Current ecological functions and human factors influencing shoreline natural processes;
ii. 
Reasonably foreseeable future use and development of the shoreline; and
iii. 
Beneficial effects of any established regulatory programs under other local, state, and federal laws; and
iv. 
Mitigation measures implemented in conjunction with the proposed project to avoid, reduce and/or compensate for adverse impacts.
d. 
The County shall add conditions as needed to address any adverse cumulative effects, and shall prohibit any use or development that would result in unmitigated adverse cumulative impacts.
(Ord. 2021-006, 2021; Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
The following provisions apply to any use or development occurring in or adjacent to critical areas or their buffers in shoreline jurisdiction whether or not a permit or other authorization is required from Kittitas County. Critical areas outside of the shoreline jurisdiction shall be regulated by Kittitas County Code (KCC) Title 17A.
1. 
Any land, water, or vegetation within the shoreline jurisdiction that meets the critical areas designation criteria under this Section shall be subject to the provisions of this Program and not KCC Title 17A.
2. 
Critical area maps: The County shall make available to the public maps or other databases, as appropriate, which show the general location, extent, and classification of regulated critical areas. These maps are to be used as a general guide to the potential presence and location of known critical areas; there may be other critical areas that are not shown on the maps and the critical areas that are shown may or may not fully meet the designation criteria contained in the Program. The maps are intended to alert the development community, county residents, as well as current and prospective landowners of the possibility of site development constraints which may limit or alter development plans. Any presumption created by the maps may be rebutted by a preponderance of the evidence.
3. 
Proponents of any new shoreline use or development shall provide information concerning the presence, condition, and location of all critical areas and buffers potentially affected by their proposal. The Administrator shall rely on information provided by the proponent as well as other information including, but not limited to, aerial photographs, published reports or studies, visual observations made by qualified professionals, and information provided by resource agencies, tribes, academic institutions and other reliable sources to determine the presence of critical areas and/or required buffers on or adjacent to the subject property.
4. 
Building setback: Except as provided in KCC § 17B.06.200(B)(12), and where otherwise provided, buildings and other structures shall be set back a distance of fifteen (15) feet from the edges of all critical area buffers or from the edges of all critical areas, if no buffers are required. The following are allowed in the building setback area:
a. 
Landscaping;
b. 
Uncovered decks;
c. 
Building overhangs, if such overhangs do not extend more than eighteen (18) inches into the setback area; and
d. 
Impervious ground surfaces, such as driveways and patios.
5. 
Temporary or permanent field identification: Prior to use and/or development within or adjacent to a critical area, the County should require temporary or permanent field markers delineating the critical area boundary and associated buffer. The type of field markers to be used will be agreed to by the project proponent and the Administrator depending on site conditions and inspection requirements. Field markers shall be spaced at a minimum of every fifty (50) feet, unless alternative placement or spacing is authorized by the Administrator. The location of field stakes must be shown on all site plans and final plats associated with the development proposal. Field markers shall remain in place until any required final inspections are completed and approved. Field markers may be waived by the Administrator if an alternative to field staking achieves the same objective, or if the development and construction activity(ies) is located at a sufficient distance so that impacts to the critical area are unlikely to occur. The Administrator may require permanent fencing and/or signage if necessary to protect a critical area and its buffer from adjacent land uses.
6. 
Notice on title: Any property on which a development proposal is submitted shall have filed with the Kittitas County Auditor:
a. 
A notice on title of the presence and location of the critical area and/or buffer;
b. 
A statement as to the applicability of this Program to the property; and
c. 
A statement describing possible limitations on action in or affecting critical areas or buffer as approved by the Administrator. The County shall record such documents and will provide a copy of the recorded notice to the property owner of record. Development proposals which are defined as normal repair and maintenance of existing structures or development, including, but not limited to, roof repair, interior remodeling, wood stove permits, and on-site sewage disposal systems repairs, are exempt from this requirement.
7. 
Request for technical assistance: The Administrator may engage technical consultants to review and interpret critical areas data and findings submitted by or on behalf of the proponent, in instances where County staff lack the resources or expertise to review these materials. A project proponent may be required to pay for or reimburse the County for the review costs incurred.
8. 
Pre-Qualification of consultants: The Administrator shall prepare and maintain a list of qualified technical consultants and firms that meet the qualified professional standards detailed in this Section. Any proposed consultant whose name is not on the list may submit a statement of qualifications including information on experience in the preparation of critical area studies. Upon approval of the submitted qualifications, the Administrator shall add the name to the list of qualified consultants. The Administrator may reject data and findings from non-pre-qualified consultants or require a third-party review, paid for by the applicant.
9. 
When there is a conflict between the findings of a critical areas study and the findings of the Administrator in review of the study, the applicant or affected party may appeal such decision of the Administrator pursuant to the procedures in KCC Chapter 15A.07.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Proponents of new shoreline use and development, including preferred uses and uses that are exempt from permit requirements, shall employ all reasonable measures to mitigate adverse impacts to critical areas and their buffers. Mitigation shall occur according to the mitigation sequence defined in KCC § 17B.05.020(B)(2) of this Program. The Administrator shall first determine whether identified critical area impacts have been avoided and second, whether minimized. Unless otherwise stated in this Program, development proposals that do not fully conform to the dimensional requirements, performance standards, and/or design criteria in this Section and in the Program shall require a variance and compensatory mitigation to ensure no net loss of ecological function at the project scale. The Administrator shall require compensatory mitigation for development proposals that result in measurable damage, loss and/or displacement of a wetland, aquatic habitat conservation area, wildlife habitat conservation area, or flood storage or conveyance area.
2. 
When critical area compensatory mitigation plans are required pursuant to this Section, all of the following shall apply:
a. 
The quality and quantity of the replaced, enhanced, or substituted critical area, and its buffer, shall be the same or better than the affected critical area and its buffer;
b. 
The mitigation site and associated vegetative planting shall be nurtured and maintained such that healthy native plant communities grow and mature over time;
c. 
The mitigation shall replace the functions as quickly as possible following the impacts;
d. 
The mitigation activity shall be monitored and maintained to ensure that it achieves its intended functions and values;
e. 
The Administrator shall require the applicant/proponent to post a bond or provide other financial surety equal to one hundred fifty percent (150%) of the estimated cost of the mitigation to ensure the mitigation is carried out successfully. The bond/surety shall be refunded to the applicant/proponent upon completion of the mitigation activity and any required monitoring.
3. 
Compensatory mitigation plans shall be prepared by qualified professionals with education, training, and experience in the applicable field:
a. 
Wetland mitigation plans shall be prepared by a qualified professional who is educated/trained in wetland biology or a closely related field, and has demonstrated experience in mitigation plan design, implementation, and monitoring. The overall goal of any such mitigation plan shall be no net loss of wetland functions, acreage, and values.
b. 
Mitigation plans for impacts to aquatic and wildlife habitat conservation areas, including habitat management plans, shall be prepared by a qualified professional with education/training in wildlife biology or a closely related field, and professional experience in habitat mitigation design, implementation, and monitoring. Where this plan is required for the protection of eagle habitat, the eagle habitat management plan shall normally be prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), as required under the Bald Eagle Management Rules. The National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines, shall serve as guidance for preparing mitigation plans to protect wildlife habitat conservation areas.
c. 
Mitigation plans for geologically hazardous areas shall be prepared by a qualified professional who is either a geologist or a geotechnical engineer, or a civil engineer licensed in the state of Washington, who is knowledgeable of regional geologic conditions and who has professional experience in landslide and erosion hazard evaluation, mitigation plan design, implementation, and monitoring.
d. 
Mitigation plans for development within frequently flooded areas shall be prepared by a civil engineer licensed in the state of Washington and familiar with hydrology, hydraulics, and fluvial geomorphology.
4. 
Mitigation banking and in-lieu fee (ILF) mitigation: The County may approve mitigation banking and/or in-lieu fee mitigation as a form of compensatory mitigation for wetland and habitat conservation area impacts when the provisions of this Program require mitigation and when the use of a bank/ILF Program will provide equivalent or greater replacement of critical area functions and values when compared to conventional permittee responsible mitigation. Banks and ILF programs shall only be used when it can be demonstrated that they provide significant ecological benefits including long-term conservation of critical areas, important species, habitats and/or habitat linkages, and when they are documented to provide a viable alternative to the piecemeal mitigation for individual project impacts to achieve ecosystem-based conservation goals. Banks and ILF programs shall not be used unless they are certified in accordance with applicable federal and state mitigation rules and expressly authorized through County legislative action.
(Ord. 2021-006, 2021; Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Baseline Information: Compensatory mitigation plans for all critical area types shall include a written assessment and accompanying maps, and include the following information:
a. 
Impacted critical areas and/or their required buffers, including, at a minimum, existing wetland/stream acreage; vegetative, fauna and hydrologic characteristics; soil and substrate conditions; and topographic elevations.
b. 
Mitigation site, if different from the impacted site, including at a minimum: existing acreage; vegetative, faunal and hydrologic conditions; relationship within watershed and to existing water bodies; soil and substrate conditions topographic elevations; existing and proposed adjacent site conditions; buffers; and ownership.
2. 
Environmental goals and objectives: The mitigation plan shall identify goals and objectives and include:
a. 
The purposes of the compensation measures including a description of site selection criteria, identification of compensation goals, identification of target evaluation species and resource functions, dates for beginning and completion, and a complete description of the structure and functional relationships sought. The goals and objectives shall be related to the functions and values of the original critical area or, if out-of-kind, the type of critical area to be emulated.
b. 
A review of the available literature and/or experience to date in restoring or creating the type of critical area proposed. An analysis of the likelihood of success of the compensation project at duplicating the original resource shall be provided based on the experiences of comparable projects, if any. An analysis of the likelihood of persistence of the created or restored resources shall be provided based on such factors as surface and groundwater supply and flow patterns, dynamics of the ecosystem, sediment or pollutant influx and/or erosion, periodic flooding and drought, presence of invasive flora or fauna, potential human or animal disturbance, and previous comparable projects, if any.
c. 
Performance standards: Specific and measurable criteria shall be provided for evaluating whether or not the goals and objectives of the mitigation plan are being achieved at various stages in the project and for beginning remedial action or contingency measures. Such criteria may include water quality standards, survival rates of planted vegetation, vegetative cover and/or density standards, in-stream habitat conditions, species abundance and diversity targets, habitat diversity indices, or other ecological, geological, or hydrological criteria.
d. 
Detailed construction plans: Written specifications and descriptions of compensation techniques shall be provided, including the proposed construction sequence; grading and excavation details; erosion and sediment control features needed for construction and long-term operation; a planting plan specifying plant species, quantities, locations, size, spacing, and density; source of plant materials, propagules, or seeds; water and nutrient requirements for planting; where appropriate, measures to protect plants from predation; substrate stockpiling techniques and planting instructions; descriptions of water control structures and water-level maintenance practices needed to achieve the necessary hydroperiod characteristics; etc. These written specifications shall be accompanied by detailed site diagrams, scaled cross-sectional drawings, topographic maps showing slope percentage and final grade elevations, and any other drawings appropriate to show construction techniques or anticipated final outcome. The plan shall provide for elevations which are appropriate for the desired habitat type(s).
e. 
Monitoring program: A program outlining the approach for monitoring construction of the compensation project and for assessing a completed project shall be provided. Monitoring may include, but is not limited to:
i. 
Establishing vegetation plots to track plant establishment/survival, and changes in plant species composition and density over time;
ii. 
Using photo stations to evaluate vegetation community response;
iii. 
Measuring physical parameters such as wetland size, stream dimensions, channel characteristics, buffer width;
iv. 
Monitoring shallow groundwater levels to document hydrologic regimes/hydro-periods;
v. 
Sampling surface and subsurface waters to determine pollutant loading and changes from the natural variability of background conditions (pH, nutrients, heavy metals);
vi. 
Measuring base flow rates and stormwater runoff to model and evaluate water quality predictions, if appropriate;
vii. 
Measuring sedimentation rates, if applicable; and
viii. 
Sampling fish and wildlife populations to determine habitat utilization, species abundance and diversity.
f. 
Monitoring and reporting: A monitoring report shall be submitted annually, at a minimum, documenting milestones, successes, problems, and contingency actions of the compensation project. The compensation project shall be monitored for a period necessary to establish that performance standards have been met, but not for a period less than five (5) years.
g. 
Contingency plan: Identification of potential courses of action, and any corrective measures to be taken when monitoring or evaluation indicates project performance standards are not being met.
h. 
Additional information as specified elsewhere in this Section, as applicable.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Designation: Wetlands are those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include, but are not limited to, swamps, marshes, bogs, ponds, and similar areas. Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non-wetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass-lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway. Wetlands may include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non-wetland areas to mitigate the conversion of wetlands.
2. 
Mapping: The approximate location and extent of wetlands are shown on maps maintained by the County. These maps are useful as a guide for project applicants, and/or property owners but do not provide a conclusive or definitive indication of wetland presence or extent. Other wetlands may exist that do not appear on the maps, and some wetlands that appear on the maps may not meet all of the wetland designation criteria.
3. 
Delineation: Wetlands shall be identified and delineated by a qualified wetlands professional in accordance with the most current approved federal wetland delineation manual and applicable regional supplements. This professional shall field stake, flag or mark the on-site wetland boundary to aid the County in reviewing the development proposal. The County may require the on-site wetland boundary to be surveyed by a professional land surveyor. The County may require an applicant to identify the approximate location or presence of any wetlands within three hundred (300) feet of a proposed development site. Wetlands that occur or extend beyond the boundaries of the development site, onto adjoining properties, do not need to be flagged or formally delineated but their general location must be disclosed in order to assess wetland buffer impacts.
4. 
Categorization and rating: Wetlands shall be rated based on categories that reflect the functions and values of each wetland. Wetlands shall be identified, rated, categorized, and delineated by a qualified wetland professional in accordance with the current version of the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Eastern Washington, the procedure outlined in WAC 173-22-035, and the appropriate rating forms approved by the Washington State Department of Ecology. These categories are generally defined as follows:
a. 
Category I wetlands: Category I wetlands are those that represent a unique or rare wetland type, are more sensitive to disturbance than most wetlands, are relatively undisturbed and contain ecological attributes that are impossible or too difficult to replace within a human lifetime, and provide a high level of functions. The following types of wetlands are Category I:
i. 
Alkali wetlands;
ii. 
Wetlands that are identified by scientists of the Washington State Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Program as high quality, relatively undisturbed wetlands, or wetlands that support state threatened or endangered plant species;
iii. 
Bogs and calcareous fens;
iv. 
Mature and old-growth forested wetlands over a ¼ acre in size with slow growing trees;
v. 
Forest wetlands with stands of Aspen;
vi. 
Wetland scoring between twenty-two and twenty-seven (22-27) points or more (out of twenty seven (27)) in the Eastern Washington Wetland Rating System.
b. 
Category II wetlands: Category II wetlands are difficult, though not impossible, to replace, and provide high levels of some functions. These wetlands occur more commonly than Category I wetlands, but still need a relatively high level of protection. Category II wetlands include:
i. 
Forested wetlands in the floodplains of rivers;
ii. 
Mature and old-growth forested wetlands with native fast growing trees;
iii. 
Vernal pools;
iv. 
Wetlands scoring between nineteen and twenty-one (19-21) points (out of twenty-seven (27)) in the Eastern Washington Wetland Rating System.
c. 
Category III wetlands score between sixteen and eighteen (16-18) points (out of twenty-seven (27)) in the Eastern Washington Wetland Rating System and can often be adequately replaced with a well-planned mitigation project. Wetlands scoring between 16-18 points generally have been disturbed in some ways, and are often smaller, less diverse and/or more isolated from other natural resources in the landscape than Category II wetlands.
d. 
Category IV wetlands have the lowest levels of functions, scoring less than sixteen (16) points in the Eastern Washington Wetland Rating System, and are often heavily disturbed. These are wetlands that should be able to be replaced, and in some cases improved. These wetlands may provide some important functions, and also need to be protected.
(Ord. 2021-006, 2021; Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Buffer widths: Buffers shall be established and maintained to protect all regulated wetlands. Standard minimum buffer for wetlands are listed in the Table at KCC § 17B.50.020G-1. The buffer shall not be altered except as authorized by this Program; provided, that such alterations meet all other standards for the protection of regulated wetlands. Buffers are measured horizontally in all directions from the regulated wetland edge as marked in the field.
17B.50.020G-1. Wetland Buffers for Wetlands in Shoreline Jurisdiction
Wetland Category
Low Intensity Use and Development
Low and Moderate Intensity Use and Development*
High Intensity Use and Development*
Category I
125 feet
190 feet
250 feet
Category II
100 feet
150 feet
200 feet
Category III
75 feet
110 feet
150 feet
Category IV
25 feet
40 feet**
50 feet
* For the purposes of KCC § 17B.05.020G-1, high intensity use and developments include: commercial, urban, industrial, institutional, retail sales, residential (more than 1 unit/acre), conversion from non-agricultural lands to high intensity agriculture (dairies, animal feed lots, nurseries and green houses, and like uses), high intensity recreation (golf courses, ball fields, and like uses) and hobby farms. Moderate intensity use and developments include: residential (1 unit/acre or less), moderate intensity open space (parks with biking, jogging, and like uses), conversion from non-agricultural lands to moderate intensity agriculture (orchard, hay fields, and like uses), paved trails, building of logging roads, and utility corridor or right-of-way shared by several utilities and including access/maintenance roads. Low intensity use and developments include: forestry (cutting of trees only), low intensity open space (hiking, bird-watching, and like uses), unpaved trails, and utility corridor without a maintenance road and little or no vegetation management.
2. 
Wetland buffer condition: Wetland buffer areas shall be retained in a natural condition or may be improved to enhance buffer functions and values. Where buffer disturbance is allowed pursuant to this Program, re-vegetation with native vegetation shall be required. The Kittitas County noxious weed ordinance shall be adhered to. Alterations of the buffer that are not associated with an allowed shoreline use or development shall be prohibited.
3. 
Multiple buffers: In the event that buffers for any shorelines and/or critical areas are contiguous or overlapping, the landward-most edge of all such buffers shall apply.
4. 
Interrupted buffer: When a wetland buffer contains an existing legally established public or private road, the Administrator may allow development on the landward side of the road provided that the development will not have a detrimental impact to the wetland. The applicant may be required to provide a wetland critical areas report to describe the potential impacts. In determining whether a critical areas report is necessary, the County shall consider the hydrologic, geologic, and/or biological habitat connection potential and the extent and permanence of the buffer interruption.
5. 
Buffers of restored wetlands: The buffer for a wetland created, restored, or enhanced as compensation for approved wetland alterations shall be the same as the buffer required for the category of the created, restored, or enhanced wetland.
6. 
Buffer averaging: The Administrator may allow averaging of the standard wetland buffer widths in the Table at KCC § 17B.05.020G-1 when necessary to accommodate a single-family residence or residential subdivision of four (4) or fewer lots. With buffer averaging, the buffer width is reduced in one location and increased in another location to maintain the same overall buffer area. Proposals for buffer averaging shall not require a shoreline variance or compensatory mitigation if the following conditions are met:
a. 
The buffer has not been averaged or reduced by any prior actions administered by Kittitas County;
b. 
No feasible site design could be accomplished without buffer averaging;
c. 
The wetland contains variations in sensitivity due to existing physical characteristics or the character of the buffer varies in slope, soils, or vegetation, and that wetland would benefit from a wider buffer in places and would not be adversely impacted by a narrower buffer in other places;
d. 
A critical area report demonstrates that the averaging will not adversely impact wetland function and values;
e. 
The minimum width of the buffer at any given point is at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the standard width per the Table at KCC § 17B.05.020G-1, or twenty-five (25) feet, whichever is greater; and
f. 
The area that is added to the buffer to offset the reduction is well-vegetated. The Administrator may require vegetation enhancement and a mitigation plan, if needed, to ensure this criterion is met.
7. 
Buffer reduction: On sites that lack well-vegetated wetland buffers, the Administrator may allow reduction of the buffer widths in the Table at KCC § 17B.05.020G-1 when necessary to accommodate a single-family residence or residential subdivision of four (4) or fewer lots. The buffer reduction shall be allowed only in those limited instances when adherence to the standard buffer is infeasible or presents a substantial hardship because of site conditions, lot configuration or other circumstances. Residential subdivisions of more than four (4) lots and non-water-dependent non-water-related developments shall not be eligible for buffer reduction, except through a shoreline variance. Buffers that have been averaged or reduced by any prior actions administered by Kittitas County shall not be further reduced. Proposals for buffer reduction on such sites shall not require a shoreline variance if the following conditions are met:
a. 
The existing buffer is predominantly un-vegetated, composed of nuisance species or in an otherwise highly disturbed condition;
b. 
The minimum width of the reduced buffer is at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the standard width per the Table at KCC § 17B.05.020G-1;
c. 
The reduced portion of the buffer cannot exceed forty percent (40%) of the buffer length on the development property;
d. 
A critical area report demonstrates that the reduction will not result in a net loss of wetland functions and values.
e. 
The reduced buffer area is planted and enhanced with species native to central Washington; and
f. 
A mitigation plan is developed and implemented, per the requirements of KCC § 17B.05.020E.
8. 
Increased wetland buffers: The Administrator shall increase wetland buffer zone widths, up to a maximum of two (2) times the standard width in the Table at KCC § 17B.05.020G-1, for a development project on a case-by-case basis when a larger buffer is necessary to protect wetland functions and values. Such determination shall be based on site-specific and project-related conditions which include, but are not limited to, the following circumstances:
a. 
Wetland sites with known locations of state priority or federally listed endangered, threatened, or sensitive species for which a habitat management plan indicates a larger buffer is necessary to protect habitat values for such species; or
b. 
The adjacent land is susceptible to severe erosion, and erosion control best management practices will not effectively prevent adverse wetland impacts.
9. 
Allowed buffer uses: The following uses may be permitted within a wetland buffer without a variance provided they are not prohibited by any other applicable law, are consistent with the provisions of this Program, and they are conducted in a manner so as to minimize impacts to the buffer and adjacent wetland, including wetland functions and values:
a. 
Conservation or restoration activities aimed at protecting the soil, water, vegetation, or wildlife.
b. 
Passive recreation facilities designed in accordance with an approved critical area report, including:
i. 
Walkways and trails; provided that those pathways which are generally parallel to the perimeter of the wetland shall be located in the outer twenty-five percent (25%) of the buffer area, and constructed with a surface that is not impervious to water. Raised boardwalks utilizing non-treated pilings may be acceptable;
ii. 
Wildlife viewing structures less than five hundred (500) square feet in size.
c. 
Stormwater management facilities, limited to stormwater dispersion facilities, outfalls and bioswales, may be allowed within the outer twenty-five percent (25%) of the buffer of Category III or IV wetlands only, provided that:
i. 
No other location is feasible; and
ii. 
The location of such facilities will not degrade the functions or values of the wetland.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Reporting requirement: If a proposed use or development is located within three hundred (300) feet of a known or suspected wetland, a wetland critical areas report is required, and shall include the following:
a. 
The category and precise location of the boundary of the wetland(s); and
b. 
All wetlands and required buffers within three hundred (300) feet of the project area shall be depicted on the site plan. Best available information should include, but not be limited to, aerial photos, soils maps, and/or topographic maps; and
c. 
An analysis of the onsite wetland(s) including the following site-and proposal-related information:
i. 
Documentation of any fieldwork performed on the site, including, but not limited to, field delineation data sheets for delineations, the wetland rating forms, and baseline hydrologic data;
ii. 
A description of the methodologies used to conduct the wetland delineations; and
iii. 
The vegetative, faunal, and hydrologic characteristics of the wetland.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Wetland Mitigation Sequencing: Proposed activities or uses that would impact wetlands must follow the mitigation sequencing requirement of KCC § 17B.05.020B(2). Wetland impacts may be allowed when there is no reasonable alternative site design that would result in less adverse impact to a wetland or its buffer. Activities and uses within Category I wetlands shall be limited to the following:
a. 
An existing public facility that must be expanded or extended into the wetland;
b. 
Utility construction or maintenance, where there is no other site that can serve the utility’s function; or
c. 
Development associated with an approved variance that allows the impact.
2. 
Compensatory mitigation requirement: Compensatory mitigation is required for all alterations to wetlands or their buffers, except for buffer averaging when done in accordance with this Section.
3. 
Preference of mitigation actions: Mitigation actions that require compensation by replacing, enhancing, or substitution shall occur in the following order of preference:
a. 
Restoring and/or rehabilitating filled or altered wetlands to their original or near-original condition.
b. 
Creating wetlands on disturbed upland sites such as those with vegetative cover consisting primarily of non-native introduced species. This should only be attempted when there is a consistent source of hydrology and it can be shown that the surface and subsurface hydrologic regime is conducive to the wetland community that is being designed.
c. 
Enhancing significantly degraded wetlands in combination with restoration or creation.
4. 
Mitigation for lost or affected functions: Compensatory mitigation actions shall replace functions affected by the alteration and shall provide equal or greater functions compared to the impacted wetland.
5. 
Mitigation timing: Mitigation projects shall be completed prior to activities that will disturb wetlands. In all other cases, mitigation shall be completed immediately following disturbance and prior to use or occupancy of the activity or development. Construction of mitigation projects shall be timed to reduce impacts to existing fisheries, wildlife, and flora.
6. 
Delay in mitigation: The Administrator may authorize a one-time temporary delay, up to one hundred eighty (180) days, in completing minor construction and landscaping when environmental conditions could produce a high probability of failure or significant construction difficulties. The delay shall not create or perpetuate hazardous conditions or environmental damage or degradation, and the delay shall not be injurious to the health, safety, and general welfare of the public. The request for the temporary delay must include a written justification that documents the environmental constraints which preclude implementation of the mitigation plan. The justification must be verified and approved by the County and include a financial guarantee.
7. 
Mitigation ratios for wetland impacts: Mitigation ratios shall be used when impacts to wetlands cannot be avoided, as specified in the Table at KCC § 17B.05.020I-1. The first number specifies the acreage of replacement wetlands, and the second specifies the acreage of wetlands altered. Compensatory mitigation shall restore, create, rehabilitate or enhance equivalent or greater wetland functions. The ratios shall apply to mitigation that is in-kind, is on-site, is the same category, is timed prior to or concurrent with alteration, and has a high probability of success. These ratios do not apply to the use of credits from a certified wetland mitigation bank or ILF program. When credits from a certified bank or ILF program are used, replacement ratios should be consistent with the requirements of the bank’s/program’s certification.
17B.05.020I-1. Wetland Mitigation Ratios for Unavoidable Wetland Impacts in Shoreline Jurisdiction
Category and Type of Impacted Wetland
Restoration or Creation1,2
Rehabilitation1,2
Enhancement Only1,3
Category I, forested
6:1
12:1
24:1
Category I, non-forested
4:1
8:1
16:1
Category II, forested
4:1
8:1
16:1
Category II, vernal pool4
2:1
4:1
Case-by-case
All other Category II
3:1
6:1
12:1
All Category III
2:1
4:1
8:1
All Category IV
1.5:1
3:1
6:1
1 Natural heritage sites, alkali wetlands, and bogs are considered irreplaceable wetlands because they perform special functions that cannot be replaced through compensatory mitigation. Impact to such wetlands would therefore result in a net loss of some functions no matter what kind of mitigation is provided.
2 Provides gains in a whole suite of functions both at the site and landscape scale. Rehabilitation actions often focus on restoring environmental processes that have been disturbed or altered by previous ongoing human activity.
3 Actions which provide gains in only a few functions. Enhancement action often focuses on structural or superficial improvements to a site and generally does not address larger scale environmental processes.
4 Compensatory mitigation for vernal pool impacts must be seasonally ponded wetland area(s).
8. 
Increased replacement ratios: The Administrator shall increase the wetland mitigation ratios under the following circumstances:
a. 
Uncertainty exists as to the probable success of the proposed restoration or creation;
b. 
A significant period of time will elapse between impact and replication of wetland functions; or
c. 
Proposed mitigation will result in a lower category wetland or reduced functions relative to the wetland being impacted.
9. 
Alternative mitigation ratios: The Administrator may approve different mitigation ratios when the applicant proposes a combination of wetland creation, restoration, rehabilitation, and/or enhancement, provided that federal and state resource agencies approve the mitigation plan and the plan achieves no net loss of wetland functions and values.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Designation and classification: Aquatic habitat conservation areas include:
a. 
Those streams and lakes which meet the criteria for Type S, F, Np, and Ns waters, as defined in the water type classifications in the forest practices rules in WAC 222-16-030. Type S waters are synonymous with shorelines of the state.
b. 
Areas with which federally and/or state-listed endangered, threatened, or sensitive aquatic species have a primary association;
c. 
State priority aquatic habitats and areas associated with state priority aquatic species;
d. 
Naturally occurring ponds under twenty (20) acres in size; and
e. 
Naturally occurring lakes over twenty (20) acres and other waters of the state, including waters planted with game fish by a government or tribal entity.
2. 
Mapping: The approximate location and extent of aquatic habitat conservation areas are shown on the County’s critical area maps. These maps are to be used as a guide and do not provide definitive information about aquatic habitat conservation area size or presence. Other aquatic habitat conservation areas may exist that do not appear on the maps. The County shall update the maps as new aquatic habitat conservation areas are identified and as new information becomes available.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Buffer widths: Buffers shall be established and maintained to protect regulated aquatic habitat conservation areas as shown in the Table at KCC § 17B.05.020K-1 below. These stream buffers shall be measured in all directions from the OHWM as identified in the field. The buffer widths for Type S Waters are shown in the Table at KCC § 17B.05.050-1. Shoreline buffers and vegetation conservation. Buffers shall not be altered except as authorized by this Program. These standard buffer widths are presumed to be adequate to protect aquatic habitat conservation area functions and values provided that the buffer contains relatively intact native vegetation at the time of the proposed use or development. Where the use is being intensified adjacent to a degraded buffer area that is not well vegetated, the Administrator may require the degraded area to be revegetated to maintain aquatic habitat conservation area functions and values.
17B.05.020K-1. Aquatic Habitat Conservation Area Buffers for Type F, Np, and Ns Waters
Aquatic Habitat Conservation Area
Standard Buffer Width
Type F Waters
100 feet
Type Np Waters
50 feet
Type Ns Waters
30 feet
2. 
Buffer condition: Aquatic habitat conservation area buffers shall be maintained in a predominantly well-vegetated and undisturbed condition. Alterations that are not associated with an allowed use or development shall be prohibited.
3. 
Multiple buffers: In the event that buffers for any aquatic habitat conservation areas or other critical areas are contiguous or overlapping, the landward-most edge of all such buffers shall apply.
4. 
Interrupted buffers: When an aquatic habitat conservation area buffer contains an existing legally established public or private road the Administrator may allow a use and/or development on the landward side of the road provided that the use and/or development will not have a detrimental impact to the habitat area. The applicant may be required to provide a critical areas report to describe the impacts. In determining whether a critical areas report is necessary, the County shall consider the hydrologic, geologic, and/or biological habitat connection potential and the extent and permanence of the buffer interruption.
5. 
Increased buffers: The Administrator shall increase the aquatic habitat conservation area buffer shown in the Table at KCC § 17B.05.020K-1 width up to a maximum of two times the standard width where the standard buffer is inadequate to prevent significant adverse environmental impacts or address hazards associated with the site or the proposed development activity. To assess whether a buffer increase is needed to project aquatic habitat conservation area functions and values, the Administrator shall consider:
a. 
The historical and current susceptibility to severe erosion, channel instability, or aggrading;
b. 
The presence of multiple channels or islands;
c. 
The land adjacent to the ordinary high water mark and extending throughout the standard habitat buffer is steeply sloped (greater than forty percent (40%) slope) and there are no designated landslide hazards within the area of shoreline jurisdiction, such that an increased buffer may be required to protect ecological functions; and
d. 
The adequacy of the standard width to prevent habitat degradation and protect the structure and functions of the habitat area.
6. 
Buffer for aquatic habitat conservation area mitigation sites: Any aquatic habitat conservation area that is created, restored, or enhanced as compensation for approved alterations shall be the same as the buffer required for the category of the created, restored, or enhanced aquatic habitat conservation area.
7. 
Buffer averaging: The Administrator may allow averaging of the aquatic habitat buffer widths in the Table at KCC § 17B.05.020K-1 when necessary to accommodate a single-family residence or residential subdivision of four (4) or fewer lots. With buffer averaging, the buffer width is reduced in one location and increased in another location to maintain the same overall buffer area. Proposals for buffer averaging shall not require a shoreline variance or compensatory mitigation if the following conditions are met:
a. 
The buffer has not been averaged or reduced by any prior actions administered by Kittitas County;
b. 
No feasible site design could be accomplished without buffer averaging;
c. 
An approved critical area report demonstrates that the buffer averaging will not reduce stream or habitat functions or adversely affect salmon habitat;
d. 
The minimum width of the buffer at any given point is at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the standard width per the Table at KCC § 17B.05.020K-1, or twenty-five (25) feet, whichever is greater; and
e. 
The area that is added to the buffer to offset the reduction is well-vegetated. The Administrator may require vegetation enhancement if needed to ensure this criterion is met.
8. 
Buffer reduction: On sites that lack well-vegetated buffers, the Administrator may allow reduction of the aquatic habitat buffer widths in the Table at KCC § 17B.05.020K-1 when necessary to accommodate a single-family residence or residential subdivision of four (4) or fewer lots. The buffer reduction shall be allowed only in those limited instances when adherence to the standard buffer is infeasible or presents a substantial hardship because of site conditions, lot configuration or other circumstances. Residential subdivisions of more than four (4) lots shall not be eligible for buffer reduction, except through a shoreline variance. Buffers that have been averaged or reduced by any prior actions administered by Kittitas County shall not be further reduced. Proposals for buffer reduction on such sites shall not require a shoreline variance if the following conditions are met:
a. 
The existing buffer is predominantly unvegetated, composed of nuisance species or in an otherwise highly disturbed condition;
b. 
The minimum width of the reduced buffer is at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the standard width per the Table at KCC § 17B.05.020K-1;
c. 
The reduced portion of the buffer cannot exceed forty percent (40%) of the buffer length on the development property;
d. 
A critical area report demonstrates that the reduction will not result in a net loss of shoreline and aquatic habitat functions and values;
e. 
The reduced buffer area is planted and enhanced with species native to central Washington; and
f. 
A mitigation plan is developed and implemented, per the requirements of KCC § 17B.05.020E.
9. 
Prior to approving a request for buffer averaging or reduction, the Administrator shall ensure the development is designed to separate and screen the stream from impacts such as noise, glare, and vegetation trampling. The site design shall consider the varying degrees of impacts of different land uses. For example, parking lots, store entrances, and roads generally have higher noise and glare impacts than the rear of the store. Site screening should take advantage of natural topography or existing vegetation, wherever possible. Where natural screening is not available, berms, landscaping, and structural screens should be implemented (e.g., orient buildings to screen parking lots and store entrances from critical areas).
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Except for single-family residences located outside of shoreline buffers, if a proposed use or development is located within two hundred (200) feet of a designated aquatic habitat conservation area, a critical areas report is required, and shall include the following:
a. 
The aquatic habitat conservation area habitat type and location of the OHWM;
b. 
All aquatic habitat conservation areas and required buffers within two hundred (200) feet of the project area shall be depicted on the site plan;
c. 
The vegetative, faunal, topographic, and hydrologic characteristics of the aquatic habitat conservation area; and
d. 
A detailed discussion of the direct and indirect potential impacts on aquatic habitat conservation area by the project. Such discussion shall include a discussion of the ongoing management practices that will protect habitat after the project site has been developed.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Designation: Wildlife habitat conservation areas shall include the following:
a. 
Areas where federal and/or state listed endangered, threatened, and sensitive species have a primary association. This includes locations of nests, rookeries, or other breeding areas of species of concern recognized by local, state, and federal public agencies having jurisdiction over such species; and
b. 
State priority wildlife habitats and areas associated with state priority wildlife species; and
c. 
Other state-identified priority habitats, including Aspen stands, biodiversity areas and corridors, old-growth/mature forest, Oregon white oak woodlands, and shrub-steppe.
2. 
Mapping: The approximate location and extent of wildlife habitat conservation areas are shown on the County’s critical areas maps. These maps are to be used as a guide and do not provide definitive information about wildlife habitat conservation area size or presence. The County shall update the maps as new wildlife habitat conservation areas are identified and as new information becomes available.
3. 
Habitat boundary survey: If the Administrator determines that a wildlife habitat conservation area may be present within the project vicinity, a wildlife habitat boundary survey shall be required. Habitat surveys shall be conducted by a professional wildlife biologist who is knowledgeable of wildlife habitat within Kittitas County, or by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. The management recommendations for Washington’s priority habitats and species or federal equivalent should be used as a tool for identifying and delineating the habitat boundary. The County may waive the requirement for the survey, if:
a. 
The proposed use or development is not within the extended proximity of the associated habitat;
b. 
There is adequate information available on the area proposed for development to determine the impacts of the proposed development and appropriate mitigating measures; and
c. 
The applicant provides voluntary deed restrictions that are approved by the County.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Habitat management plan: When a use or development is proposed in or adjacent to a habitat conservation area, the Administrator shall require the applicant to submit a habitat management plan, prepared by a professional wildlife biologist who is knowledgeable of wildlife habitat within Kittitas County, when the following conditions are met:
a. 
A proposed use or development is located within two hundred (200) feet of a known or suspected Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area; and
b. 
There are potential direct and/or indirect impacts on wildlife species or habitat from the proposed use or activity.
2. 
Habitat management plan contents: The habitat management plan shall include a discussion of the potential direct and indirect impacts, as well as a discussion of the ongoing management practices that will protect habitat after the project site has been developed. The habitat management plan will include any relevant information and recommendations from the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife habitat guidelines for the affected species and/or habitat. Based on the characteristics of the site, the Administrator may require that all or a portion of the following be included in a habitat management plan:
a. 
A map drawn to scale or survey showing the location of the Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area on the subject property, as well as the approximate location of any potential Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation area within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property; and
b. 
Detailed description of vegetation and habitat characteristics within and adjacent to the site.
c. 
Identification of any endangered, threatened, sensitive, or candidate species that have a primary association with habitat on the project area, and assessment of potential project impacts to use of the buffer and critical area on the site by the species.
d. 
Methods and measures to avoid, minimize and/or compensate for adverse impacts associated with the proposed use and development, including, but not limited to:
i. 
Prohibition or limitation of use and development activities within the Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area;
ii. 
Establishment of a buffer around the Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area;
iii. 
Retention of vegetation and/or re-vegetation of areas/habitats critically important to species;
iv. 
Special construction techniques;
v. 
Implementation of erosion and sediment control measures;
vi. 
Habitat enhancement (i.e., fish passage barrier removal);
vii. 
Seasonal restrictions on construction activities on the subject property;
viii. 
Clustering of development activities on the subject property; and
ix. 
Any other requirements and/or recommendations from Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife’s habitat management guidelines.
3. 
Wildlife habitat management and mitigation plan: For unavoidable impacts to Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas, a wildlife habitat management and mitigation plan shall be prepared by a wildlife biologist who is knowledgeable of wildlife habitat within Kittitas County. The Wildlife habitat management and mitigation plan shall:
a. 
Demonstrate, when implemented, that there shall be no net loss of ecological function of habitat; and
b. 
Identify how impacts from the proposed project shall be mitigated, as well as the necessary monitoring and contingency actions for the continued maintenance of the Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area and its associated buffer.
4. 
In addition to the general mitigation plan requirements described above, the wildlife habitat management and mitigation plan shall contain a report containing, but not limited to, the following information:
a. 
A map or maps indicating the boundary of the habitat conservation areas; the width and length of all existing and proposed structures, utilities, roads, easements; wastewater and stormwater facilities; adjacent land uses, zoning districts and comprehensive plan designations;
b. 
A description of the proposed project including the nature, density and intensity of the proposed use or development and the associated grading, structures, roads, easements, wastewater facilities, stormwater facilities, utilities, etc., in sufficient detail to allow analysis of such land use change upon the Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area;
c. 
A description of the vegetation in the Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area, on the overall project site and adjacent to the site;
d. 
A detailed description of the proposed project’s effect on the Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area, and a discussion of any federal, state, or local management recommendations which have been developed for the species or habitats in the area; and
e. 
An explanation of how any adverse impacts created by the proposed use or development will be mitigated, including the following techniques:
i. 
Establishment of buffer zones;
ii. 
Preservation of critically important plants and trees;
iii. 
Limitation of access to the habitat conservation area;
iv. 
Seasonal restriction of construction activities; and
v. 
Establishment of a timetable for periodic review of the plan.
(Ord. 2021-006, 2021; Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Designation: Lands classified as landslide, erosion, mine, volcanic, and seismic hazard areas are hereby designated as geologically hazardous areas and are subject to the standards of this Section.
2. 
Classification: Landslide hazard areas – lands potentially subject to landslides based on a combination of geologic, topographic, and hydrologic factors. They include any areas susceptible because of any combination of bedrock, soil, slope (gradient), slope aspect, structure, hydrology, or other factors. The following shall be designated as landslide hazards and are subject to the requirements of this Section:
a. 
Areas of historic failures, such as:
i. 
Those areas delineated by the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) as having a "severe" limitation for building site development; or
ii. 
Those areas mapped as landslides, as having a liquefaction susceptibility, or having a NEHPR seismic site class of A through D on the most current Washington State Department of Natural Resources Division of Geology and Earth Resources natural hazards web-based map; or
iii. 
Areas designated as quaternary slumps, earth-flows, mudflows, lahars, or landslides on maps published by the U.S. Geological Survey or Washington State Department of Natural Resources Division of Geology and Earth Resources.
b. 
Areas with all three (3) of the following characteristics:
i. 
Slopes steeper than fifteen percent (15%);
ii. 
Hillsides intersecting geologic contacts with a relatively permeable sediment overlying a relatively impermeable sediment or bedrock; and
iii. 
Springs or groundwater seepage.
c. 
Areas that have shown movement during the Holocene epoch (from 10,000 years ago to the present) or which are underlain or covered by mass wastage debris of this epoch;
d. 
Slopes that are parallel or sub-parallel to planes of weakness (such as bedding planes, joint systems, and fault planes) in subsurface materials;
e. 
Slopes having gradients steeper than eighty percent (80%) subject to rock fall during seismic shaking;
f. 
Areas potentially unstable as a result of rapid stream incision, stream bank erosion, and undercutting by wave action, including stream channel migration zones;
g. 
Areas that show evidence of, or are at risk from snow avalanches;
h. 
Areas located in a canyon or on an active alluvial fan, presently or potentially subject to inundation by debris flows or catastrophic flooding; and
i. 
Any area with a slope of forty percent (40%) or steeper and with a vertical relief of ten (10) or more feet except areas composed of bedrock. A slope is delineated by establishing its toe and top and measured by averaging the inclination over at least ten (10) feet of vertical relief.
3. 
Classification: Erosion hazard areas – areas containing soils that may experience significant erosion, including:
a. 
Slopes forty percent (40%) or steeper with a vertical relief of ten (10) or more feet, except areas composed of consolidated rock.
b. 
Concave slope forms equal to or greater than fifteen percent (15%) with a vertical relief of ten (10) or more feet, except areas composed of consolidated rock.
c. 
Channel migration zones: Areas within which the stream channel can reasonably be expected to migrate over time as a result of normally occurring hydrological and related processes when considered with the characteristics of the river and its surroundings. Such hazards are characterized by abandoned channels, ongoing sediment deposition and erosion, topographic position, and changes in the plant community, age, structure and composition.
4. 
Classification: Seismic hazard areas – lands subject to severe risk of damage as a result of earthquake induced ground shaking, slope failure, settlement, soil liquefaction, or surface faulting the following classifications shall be designated as seismic hazard and are subject to the requirements of this Section.
5. 
Classification: Volcanic hazard areas – areas subject to pyroclastic flows, lava flows, debris avalanche, inundation by debris flows, mudflows, or related flooding resulting from volcanic activity. There are no active or dormant volcanoes located within Kittitas County; however, Mount Rainer and Mount St. Helens are relatively near. Hazards to Kittitas County residents from these volcanoes are limited to ash deposition.
6. 
Classification: Mine hazards areas – areas underlain by abandoned mine shafts, secondary passages between shafts tunnels, or air vents. Mine hazards include subsidence, which is the uneven downward movement of the ground surface caused by underground workings caving in; contamination to ground and surface water from tailings and underground workings; concentrations of lethal or noxious gases; and underground fires.
7. 
Mapping: The approximate location and extent of geologically hazardous areas are shown on maps maintained by the County. These maps shall be advisory and used by the Administrator to provide guidance in determining applicability of the standards to a property. These maps shall be updated periodically as new information becomes available.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
New shoreline uses and developments shall be located, designed, constructed, and maintained to avoid geologically hazardous areas. Impact avoidance measures shall include, but not be limited to, locating the use/development outside of the hazard area, reducing the number, size or scale of buildings, driveways and other features; altering the configuration or layout of the proposed development; using environmentally favorable construction materials; implementing special engineering methods for construction, drainage, runoff management etc.; foregoing construction of accessory structures; preserving native vegetation; and other reasonable measures.
2. 
New uses and developments may be allowed in geologically hazardous areas and/or their buffers only when specifically allowed by this Program and when all reasonable measures have been taken to avoid adverse effects on slope stability and protect human health and safety.
3. 
Critical facilities shall be prohibited in geologically hazardous areas and/or their buffers.
4. 
The Administrator shall review each use and development proposal to determine if there is any possible geologically hazardous area on-site. In making the determination, the Administrator shall use the best available information including any previously completed special reports conducted in the vicinity of the subject proposal. If no hazard area is determined to be present, this Section shall not apply to the review of the proposed use or development.
5. 
Hazard present (non-channel migration zone): If it is determined that a severe erosion hazard, mine hazard, seismic hazard, or landslide hazard other than a channel migration zone hazard, may be present on or adjacent to a proposed development site, the applicant shall submit a geologic hazard area risk assessment prepared by a professional engineer, engineering geologist, or geologist. The geologic hazard area risk assessment shall include:
a. 
A description of the geology of the site and the proposed use or development;
b. 
An assessment of the potential impact the project may have on the geologic hazard;
c. 
An assessment of what potential impact the geologic hazard may have on the project;
d. 
Appropriate mitigation measures, if any; and
e. 
A conclusion as to whether further analysis is necessary.
The assessment shall be signed by and bear the seal of the engineer or geologist that prepared it. No further analysis shall be required if the geologic hazard area risk assessment concludes that there is no geologic hazard present on the site, nor will the project affect or be affected by any potential geologic hazards that may be nearby. If the professional preparing the geologic hazard area risk assessment concludes that further analysis is necessary, the applicant shall submit a geotechnical report consistent with the provisions of this Section.
6. 
Geotechnical report (non-channel migration zone): The geotechnical report shall include a certification from the engineering geologist or geotechnical engineer preparing the report, including the professional’s stamp and signature. The geotechnical report shall include the following:
a. 
A detailed description of the geology and soil conditions of the site;
b. 
Evaluation of the geologic conditions giving rise to the geologic hazard;
c. 
An evaluation of the safety of the proposed project;
d. 
Conclusions and recommendations regarding the effect of geologic conditions on the proposed use or development;
e. 
Conclusions and recommendations on the suitability of the site to be developed;
f. 
A statement regarding the risk of damage from the project, both on-and off-site; and whether or not the project will materially increase the risk of occurrence of the hazard;
g. 
Recommendations concerning drainage practices, vegetation retention and other mitigation and monitoring measures which may be needed to ensure slope stability;
h. 
Recommended erosion and sediment control measures;
i. 
A bibliography of scientific citations; and
j. 
Any other specific measures which must be incorporated into the design and operational plan of the project to eliminate or reduce the risk of damage due to the hazard. This shall include a recommendation on the required buffer or setback distance that must be maintained between the proposed action and the hazard to ensure the safety of the use or development.
7. 
Hazard present (channel migration zone): If County maps indicate that a potential channel migration zone hazard exists on or adjacent to a proposed use or development site, the applicant shall either:
a. 
Locate the proposal landward of the channel migration hazard area as indicated on the map; or
b. 
Submit a channel migration zone study, prepared by a geologist, engineering geologist, or professional engineer licensed in the state of Washington with at least five (5) years of experience in analyzing channel response in the fluvial systems of the Pacific Northwest, that demonstrates the following:
i. 
The parcel on which the development or use is proposed is effectively protected (disconnected) from channel movement due to the existence of permanent levees maintained by public agencies or infrastructure such as roads and bridges constructed and maintained by public agencies (not all roads and levees will be considered disconnection points); or
ii. 
The proposed use or development site has minimal risk of channel migration during the next one hundred (100) years as indicated by the existing channel type, land cover (and low likelihood of future alterations in land cover); surficial geology, low soil erosion potential; lack of evidence of likely avulsion pathways (including areas upstream of, but proximate to, the site); low inundation frequency(ies). The assessment shall include a review of available data regarding historical channel locations at the site; identification of the site within a broader geomorphic reach of the river system, and the general characteristics of that reach; description of existing channel type, existing channel alterations and likelihood of future alterations with changes in land cover; surficial geology, soils and erosion potential; and geotechnical setbacks relating to erosion at the toe of adjacent slope(s). The approach to assessing local migration shall be generally equivalent to the methods detailed in "A Framework for Delineating Channel Migration Zones" (Ecology Publication # 03-06-027), or similar method approved or sanctioned by Ecology.
8. 
Based upon the results of the channel migration zone assessment, the Administrator may prohibit or limit use or development within a channel migration zone and/or require a buffer of undisturbed natural vegetation from the edge of the channel migration zone.
9. 
The Administrator may impose conditions on any new shoreline use and developments in a geologically hazardous area as needed to:
a. 
Protect slope stability and minimize erosion, seismic, and/or landslide hazard risks;
b. 
Maintain natural sediment and erosion processes that are integral to the health and sustainability of freshwater ecosystems;
c. 
Minimize the potential for property damage related to seismic events, erosion and/or landslides;
d. 
Minimize the need for structural shoreline stabilization in the future;
e. 
Protect human health and safety; and
f. 
Reduce public liabilities for damages associated with seismic events, erosion and/or landslides.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Designation and mapping: All lands classified as floodway or special flood hazard areas in the Federal Emergency Management Agency report titled "Flood Insurance Rate Maps and Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps" dated November 5, 1980, as now or hereafter amended are designated as frequently flooded areas. The report and maps are on file at Kittitas County. When base flood elevation data has not been provided in the report, the Administrator shall obtain, review, and reasonably utilize any base flood elevation and floodway data available from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington State Department of Ecology, or other qualified source. Where base flood elevation data and floodway delineation are not available either through the report or from a qualified source, historical data, high water marks, and photographs of past flooding shall be used to determine base flood elevations.
2. 
Additional areas may be classified by the Administrator as frequently flooded areas, based upon the following criteria:
a. 
Documented history of flood damage; and/or
b. 
Evidence of stream channel instability and susceptibility to erosion.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
New uses and developments within frequently flooded areas, including flood control structures regulated in KCC § 17B.05.030, shall comply with the Kittitas County Flood Prevention Ordinance (KCC Chapter 14.08 – December 2014) which is hereby adopted by reference.
2. 
Floodplain storage: New uses or developments shall not reduce the effective flood storage volume within a frequently flooded area. If proposed grading, fill, or other activity would reduce effective flood storage volume, then mitigation is required per KCC § 17B.05.020T below.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Development proposals shall provide compensatory storage if grading, fill, or other activity will reduce the effective base flood storage volume of the floodplain. Compensatory storage shall comply with KCC § 14.08.315 (December 2014) and the following:
a. 
Provide equivalent volume at equivalent elevations to that being displaced. For this purpose, "equivalent elevation" means having similar relationship to ordinary high water and to the best available ten-(10)-year, fifty-(50)-year, and one hundred-(100)-year water surface profiles;
b. 
Be hydrologically connected to the source of flooding;
c. 
Provide compensatory storage in the same construction season as when the displacement of flood storage volume occurs and before the flood season begins;
d. 
If the newly created storage area is accessible to fish during flood events, the area shall be designed, graded and maintained to prevent fish stranding; and
e. 
The Administrator may approve equivalent compensatory storage off the site if acceptable legal arrangements are made to assure that the effective compensatory storage volume will be preserved over time.
2. 
Mitigation plans for development within frequently flooded areas that will reduce the effective base flood storage volume of the floodplain shall be prepared by an engineer licensed in the state of Washington and familiar with hydrology, hydraulics, and fluvial geomorphology. Plans shall include the following information:
a. 
Potential that materials may be swept during flooding onto other lands to the detriment of others;
b. 
Actual danger to life and property if flooding or erosion occurs;
c. 
Susceptibility of the proposed development and its contents to flood damage;
d. 
Availability of alternative locations for the proposed use which are not subject to flood or erosion damage;
e. 
Relationship of the proposed use to the comprehensive plan and floodplain management program for that area;
f. 
Safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles;
g. 
Expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise, and sediment transport of the flood waters and the effects of wave action at the site;
h. 
Costs of providing governmental services during and after flood conditions, including maintenance and repair of public utilities and facilities;
i. 
Location and extent of storage area for floodwater which will be displaced by the proposed development; and
j. 
The risk to public and private property and public health, safety and welfare due to rising of water levels, shifting of stream channels (including related erosion) as well as costs to individuals and the general public for items which are not insured such as loss of productivity due to closed roads, risk to emergency response workers, loss of uninsured property (cars, landscaping, etc.) and habitat damage as a result of loss of riparian zones and floodplain function.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Designation: Critical aquifer recharge areas are areas where an aquifer that is a source of drinking water is vulnerable to contamination that would affect the potability of the water. These recharge areas have geologic conditions that allow high infiltration rates, which contribute significantly to the replenishment of ground water. These conditions also create a high potential for ground water contamination. All lands and shorelands classified as having high aquifer recharge potential and aquifer susceptibility are hereby designated as critical aquifer recharge areas. Critical aquifer recharge areas also include known wellhead protection areas for Class A water systems. A wellhead protection area is the surface and subsurface area surrounding a well or wellfield that supplies a public water system through which contaminants are likely to pass and eventually reach the water well(s) as designated under the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act.
2. 
Mapping: The general location and extent of critical aquifer recharge are shown on maps maintained by the County. These maps are useful as a guide for Kittitas County, project applicants, and/or property owners, and may be updated as more information on aquifer recharge and susceptibility becomes available. These maps are a reference and do not provide a conclusive or final critical area designation.
3. 
Classification: All Kittitas County shorelands shall be classified as having either a high, medium, or low aquifer recharge potential. At a minimum, classification shall be based on soil permeability and recharge potential as described within the Soil Survey of Kittitas County. Where adequate information is available, aquifer recharge potential shall be further classified based on the recharge potential of surficial geologic materials, presence or absence of restrictive layers, surface and groundwater monitoring data, wellhead protection areas, depth to groundwater, topography (i.e., slopes), and locally adopted groundwater protection plans and studies. Land classified as having a high, medium, or low aquifer recharge potential shall also be classified as having a high, medium, or low susceptibility to contamination of an underlying aquifer, respectively. Based on these criteria, the potential for recharging aquifers or transmitting contaminants to the underlying aquifer is greatest where the aquifer is close to the ground surface, where ground surface slopes are minimal, and where the recharge potential of the soils and/or surficial geologic material is greatest. All wellhead protection areas shall be designated as highly susceptible critical aquifer recharge areas. Wellhead Protection Areas are the areas defined by the boundaries of the 10-year time of ground water travel, in accordance with WAC 246-290-135.
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
Protection standards for critical aquifer recharge areas have been incorporated into the water quality regulations in KCC § 17B.05.060 and into the provisions for specific shoreline uses in KCC Chapter 17B.04. Such standards shall be considered the minimum necessary to protect critical aquifer recharge areas.
2. 
New use and development in a critical aquifer recharge area shall meet the following standards:
a. 
The proposed use and/or development will not cause contaminants to enter the aquifer and will not significantly adversely affect the recharging of the aquifer.
b. 
The proposed use and/or development must comply with applicable water source protection requirements of the Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Washington State Department of Health, and the Kittitas County Health Department.
c. 
The proposed use and/or development must be designed and constructed in accordance with applicable stormwater management standards
3. 
When located within an area of medium or high aquifer susceptibility, aboveground/underground storage tanks or vaults for the storage of hazardous substances, animals wastes, sewage sludge, fertilizers, or other chemical or biological hazards or dangerous wastes as defined in WAC Chapter 173-303, or any other substances, solids, or liquids in quantities identified by Kittitas County Public Health, consistent with WAC 173-303, as a risk to groundwater quality, shall be designated and constructed so as to:
a. 
Prevent the release of such substances to the ground, groundwaters, or surface waters;
b. 
Be contained or enclosed by an impervious containment area with a volume greater than the volume of the storage tank or vault to avoid an overflow of the containment area;
c. 
Provide for release detection;
d. 
Provide written spill response and spill notification procedures to the local fire district;
e. 
Use material in the construction or lining of the storage containment area which is compatible with the substance to be storage to protect against corrosion or leakage, or otherwise designed in a manner to prevent the release or threatened release of any storage substance; and
f. 
Comply with chapters 173-303 and 173-360 WAC.
g. 
The tanks must comply with Ecology regulations contained in WAC Chapters 173-360 and 173-303 as well as International Building Code requirements.
4. 
The Administrator may grant a waiver from one or more of the above requirements (in 3.a. through g.) upon a finding that the aboveground storage activity would not create a significant risk to groundwater quality. Aboveground or underground storage facilities designed and maintained according to an approved plan from the Natural Resources Conservation Service or Kittitas County Conservation District are exempt from these requirements but remain under the jurisdiction of the County to ensure compliance with the protective features of this Section and for enforcement purposes.
5. 
The use of fertilizers, herbicides, pesticides, or other chemical for vegetation management within critical aquifer recharge areas shall adhere to the best management practices to prevent impacts to water quality and water supply. Where the application of such chemicals covers five (5) or more acres, a mitigation plan shall be required pursuant the regulations listed below.
6. 
The following uses and development activities, when proposed in medium or high susceptibility critical aquifer recharge areas, have the potential to adversely affect ground water quality and/or quantity and may only be allowed subject to the County’s review and approval of a special hydrogeological assessment prepared by a qualified professional:
a. 
Vehicle repair, servicing, and salvaging facilities, provided that the facility must be conducted over impermeable pads and within a covered structure capable of withstanding normally expected weather conditions. Chemicals used in the process of vehicle repair and servicing must be stored in a manner that protects them from weather and provides containment should leaks occur. Dry wells shall not be allowed on sites used for vehicle repair and servicing. Dry wells existing on the site prior to facility establishment must be abandoned using techniques approved by the Washington State Department of Ecology prior to commencement of the proposed activity;
b. 
Use of reclaimed wastewater must be in accordance with adopted water or sewer comprehensive plans that have been approved by Ecology;
c. 
Any other uses or development activity that the Administrator determines is likely to have a significant adverse impact on ground water quality or quantity, or on the recharge of the aquifer. The determination must be made based on credible scientific information;
d. 
New landfills, including hazardous or dangerous waste, municipal solid waste, special waste, wood waste of more than two thousand (2,000) cubic yards, and inert and demolition waste landfills;
e. 
Underground injection wells. Class I, III, and IV wells and subclasses 5F01, 5D03, 5F04, 5W09, 5W10, 5W11, 5W31, 5X13, 5X14, 5X15, 5W20, 5X28, and 5N24 of Class V wells;
f. 
Wood treatment facilities that allow any portion of the treatment process to occur over permeable surfaces (both natural and manmade); and
g. 
Facilities that store, process, or dispose of chemicals containing perchloroethylene (PCE) or methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE).
(Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
1. 
When required by this code, hydrogeological reports for proposed uses and developments in critical aquifer recharge areas shall include the following information in addition to the general mitigation requirements listed above:
a. 
Geologic setting and soils information for the site and surrounding area;
b. 
Water quality data, including pH, temperature, dissolved oxygen, conductivity nitrates, and bacteria;
c. 
Location and depth of perched water tables;
d. 
Recharge potential of facility site (permeability/transmissivity);
e. 
Hydrologic budget;
f. 
Local groundwater flow, direction, and gradient;
g. 
Location, depth, and other water quality data on the three (3) shallowest wells or springs located within one thousand (1,000) feet of the site;
h. 
Impacts on wellhead protection areas located within the proposed site;
i. 
Surface water locations within one thousand (1,000) feet of the site;
j. 
Discussion of the effects of the proposed project on groundwater quality and quantity;
k. 
Recommendations on appropriate mitigation, if any, to assure that there shall be no measurable exceedance of minimum state groundwater quality standards or measurable reduction in available quantity of groundwater;
l. 
Emergency management plan; and
m. 
Containment release detection.
(Ord. 2021-006, 2021; Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
The following provisions apply to actions taken to reduce flood damage or hazard and to uses, development, and shoreline modifications that may increase flood hazards. Flood hazard reduction measures may consist of non-structural measures, such as setbacks, land use controls, wetland restoration, dike removal, use relocation, biotechnical measures, and stormwater management programs as well as structural measures such as dikes, levees, revetments, floodwalls, channel realignment, and elevation of structures consistent with the National Flood Insurance Program.
A. 
Policies. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.480, the flood hazard reduction policies of the 2021 Kittitas County Shoreline Master Program shall be considered as policies of the Kittitas County Comprehensive Plan.
B. 
Regulations.
1. 
Use and development in floodplains shall not significantly or cumulatively increase flood hazards or be inconsistent with comprehensive flood hazard management plans adopted pursuant to RCW Chapter 86.12.
2. 
New uses or development in shoreline jurisdiction, including the subdivision of land, shall not be permitted when it would be reasonably foreseeable that the uses and/or development would require structural flood hazard reduction measures within the channel migration zone or floodway.
3. 
The following uses and activities may be appropriate and/or necessary within the channel migration zone or floodway:
a. 
Actions that protect or restore the ecosystem-wide processes or ecological functions.
b. 
Forest practices in compliance with the Washington State Forest Practices Act and its implementing rules.
c. 
Existing and ongoing agricultural practices provided that no new restrictions to channel movement occur.
d. 
Mining when conducted in a manner consistent with KCC § 17B.06.120 Mining, the shoreline environment designation, and with the provisions of WAC 173-26-241(3)(h).
e. 
Bridges, utility lines, and other public utility and transportation structures where no other feasible alternative exists, or the alternative would result in unreasonable and disproportionate costs. Where such structures are allowed, mitigation shall address impacted functions and processes in the affected shoreline.
f. 
Repair and maintenance of an existing legal use, provided that such actions do not cause significant ecological impacts or increase flood hazards to other uses.
g. 
Use and development with a primary purpose of protecting or restoring ecological functions and ecosystem-wide processes.
h. 
Modification or additions to an existing nonagricultural legal use, provided that channel migration is not further limited and that the new uses and/or development includes appropriate protection of ecological functions.
i. 
Use and development in incorporated municipalities and designated urban growth areas, as defined in RCW Chapter 36.70A, where structures exist that prevent active channel movement and flooding.
4. 
Allow new structural flood hazard reduction measures in shoreline jurisdiction only when it can be demonstrated by a scientific and engineering analysis that they are necessary to protect existing development; that nonstructural measures are not feasible; that impacts on ecological functions and priority species and habitats can be successfully mitigated so as to assure no net loss; and that appropriate vegetation conservation actions are undertaken consistent with KCC § 17B.05.020G Shoreline buffer and vegetation conservation, and WAC 173-26-221(5).
5. 
Structural flood hazard reduction measures shall be consistent with the adopted Kittitas County Multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (October 2012).
6. 
Place new structural flood hazard reduction measures landward of the associated wetlands, and designated vegetation conservation areas, except for actions that increase ecological functions, such as wetland restoration; provided that such flood hazard reduction projects be authorized if it is determined that no other alternative to reduce flood hazard to existing uses and/or development is feasible. The need for, and analysis of feasible alternatives to, structural improvements shall be documented through a geotechnical analysis.
7. 
New structural public flood hazard reduction measures, such as dikes and levees, shall dedicate and improve public access pathways unless public access improvements would cause unavoidable health or safety hazards to the public, inherent and unavoidable security problems, unacceptable and unmitigated significant ecological impacts, unavoidable conflict with the proposed use, or cost that is disproportionate and unreasonable to the total long-term cost of the use or development.
8. 
The removal of gravel for flood management purposes shall be consistent with an adopted flood hazard reduction plan and with the provisions of WAC 173-26, KCC § 17B.06.070 Dredging and dredge material disposal and KCC § 17B.06.120 Mining; and be allowed only after a biological and geo-morphological study shows that extraction has a long-term benefit to flood hazard reduction, does not result in a net loss of ecological functions, and is part of a comprehensive flood management solution.
(Ord. 2021-006, 2021; Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
Public access includes the ability of the general public to reach, touch, and enjoy the water’s edge, to travel on the waters of the state, and to view the water and the shoreline from adjacent locations. Public access provisions below apply to all shorelines of the state unless stated otherwise.
A. 
Policies. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.480, the public access policies of the 2021 Kittitas County Shoreline Master Program shall be considered as policies of the Kittitas County Comprehensive Plan.
B. 
Regulations.
1. 
Public access shall consist of a dedication of land or easement and a physical improvement in the form of a walkway, trail, bikeway, corridor, viewpoint, park, deck, observation tower, pier, boat launching ramp, dock or pier area, or other area serving as a means of view and/or physical approach to public waters and may include interpretive centers and displays.
2. 
New shoreline use and development by public entities, such as local governments, port districts, state agencies, and public utility districts, shall provide public access as part of each development project, unless such access is shown to be incompatible with the Program due to reasons of safety, security, or adverse impacts to shoreline functions and processes.
3. 
New shoreline use and development by private entities shall provide public access when:
a. 
The development would generate a public demand for one or more forms of such physical or visual access;
b. 
The development will impair existing legal access opportunities or rights; or
c. 
The development is not a preferred shoreline use (e.g., non-water-oriented commercial or industrial development).
4. 
Public health and safety concerns associated with community or public access sites shall be adequately mitigated.
5. 
Efforts to implement the public access provisions of this Section shall be consistent with all relevant constitutional and other legal limitations on regulation of private property and the principles of nexus and proportionality.
6. 
Public access requirements on privately owned lands shall be commensurate with the scale and character of the use and/or development and shall be reasonable, effective and fair to all affected parties, including, but not limited to, the landowner and the public.
7. 
Where feasible, providers of shoreline public access shall:
a. 
Locate and design public access improvements in a manner that is compatible with the natural shoreline character and avoids adverse impacts to shoreline ecological processes and functions; and
b. 
Ensure public access improvements and amenities are safe, respect individual privacy, and avoid or minimize visual impacts from neighboring properties; and
c. 
Provide maps, signage, and orientation information to inform the public of the presence and location of privately held shorelands, especially those adjacent to public access and recreational areas; and
d. 
Incorporate programs, signage and informational kiosks into public access locations, where appropriate, to enhance public education and appreciation of shoreline ecology and areas of historical or cultural significance.
8. 
Opportunities to provide visual public access shall be evaluated during the review and conditioning of all proposed commercial and industrial shoreline developments and residential developments involving more than four (4) residential parcels.
9. 
Dedicated space for physical public access shall be incorporated into all use and development proposals on public lands, all public and private commercial and industrial uses and developments, multi-family residential development of more than four (4) dwelling units, and all residential subdivisions of greater than four (4) parcels unless the project proponent demonstrates that any of the following conditions exist:
a. 
Unavoidable public health or safety hazards exist and cannot be prevented through reasonable means; or
b. 
The use and/or development has inherent security or cultural sensitivity requirements that cannot be mitigated through reasonable design measures or other solutions; or
c. 
The provision of public access for the proposed use or development is not consistent with all relevant constitutional and other legal limitations on regulation of private property and the principles of nexus and proportionality; or
d. 
The cost of providing the access, easement or an alternative amenity is disproportionate to the total long-term cost of the proposed use or development; or
e. 
The public access will cause unacceptable environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated; or
f. 
The access would create significant, undue, and unavoidable conflicts with adjacent uses that cannot be mitigated.
10. 
To be relieved from public access requirements the project proponent must demonstrate that all feasible alternatives have been considered, including, but not limited to:
a. 
Regulating access through means such as maintaining a gate and/or limiting hours of use; and
b. 
Separating uses and activities (e.g., fences, terracing, use of one-way glazing, hedges, landscaping, etc.).
11. 
When physical public access is deemed to be infeasible, the proponent shall provide visual access to the shoreline or provide physical access at an off-site location geographically separated from the proposed use or development (e.g., a street end, vista, or trail system), or for a residential development, provide community access to the shoreline or to a common waterfront lot/tract for non-commercial recreational use of the property owners and guests within the proposed subdivision.
12. 
Public access shall be located and designed to be compatible with the natural shoreline character, to avoid adverse impacts to shoreline ecological functions and processes, and to ensure public safety.
13. 
Public shoreline access provided by public road ends, public road rights-of-way, public utilities and rights-of-way shall not be diminished by the County, neighboring property owners, or other citizens, unless the property is zoned for industrial uses in accordance with RCW Chapter 36.87.130.
14. 
Public access sites shall be directly connected to the nearest public street and shall include improvements that conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) when feasible and impacts to shoreline ecology are mitigated.
15. 
Opportunities for boat-in public access and access to primitive shorelines not accessible by automobile shall be provided where feasible and appropriate.
16. 
When required for public land, commercial, port or industrial use or development, public access sites shall be fully developed and available for public use prior to final occupancy of such use or development.
17. 
Public access easements, dedications, and permit conditions shall be recorded on the deed of title and/or the face of a short or long plat as a condition running, at a minimum, for a period contemporaneous with the duration of the authorized land use. Recording of such easements, dedications, and conditions shall occur at the time of final approval for all subdivisions and binding site plans or prior to final occupancy for other permits.
18. 
Where there is an irreconcilable conflict between water-dependent shoreline uses or physical public access and maintenance of views from adjacent properties, the water-dependent uses and physical public access shall have priority, unless there is a compelling reason to the contrary.
19. 
Public access facilities shall be maintained over the life of the use or development. Future actions by successors-in-interest or other parties shall not diminish the usefulness or value of required public access areas and associated improvements.
20. 
Maintenance of the public access facility shall be the responsibility of the owner or homeowner’s association, unless otherwise accepted by a public or non-profit agency through a formal agreement recorded with the County Auditor's Office. Applicants shall make provisions to assure permanence and maintenance of public access facilities.
21. 
Access improvements shall not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions and values.
22. 
Rights of navigation shall be protected in conformance with the provisions of this Program.
(Ord. 2021-006, 2021; Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
Shoreline buffers protect shorelines from the adverse effects of adjacent land use and development. Buffers also help protect people and property from natural hazards that are present on some shorelines. Vegetated buffers provide habitat, maintain water quality, stabilize slopes and streambanks, and help achieve no net loss of shoreline ecological functions; to function effectively, buffers must be well-vegetated. As a result, the Program promotes vegetation conservation including restrictions on clearing and grading, vegetation restoration and enhancement, and the control of invasive weeds and non-native species. Unless otherwise stated, buffer and vegetation conservation regulations of this Program do not apply to those activities covered under the Washington State Forest Practices Act, except for conversion of forest uses to other uses and those other forest practice activities over which local governments have authority. As with all master program provisions, buffer and vegetation conservation provisions apply even to those shoreline uses and developments that are exempt from the requirement to obtain a shoreline permit. Like other master program provisions, buffer and vegetation conservation standards do not apply retroactively to legally established existing uses and structures, such as existing agricultural activities.
A. 
Policies. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.480, the shoreline buffers and vegetation conservation policies of the 2021 Kittitas County Shoreline Master Program shall be considered as policies of the Kittitas County Comprehensive Plan.
B. 
Regulations-shoreline buffers.
1. 
New uses and developments shall be located landward of the shoreline buffers shown in the Table at KCC § 17B.05.050-1 in accordance with the shoreline environment designation, unless this Program specifically allows the use/development within the shoreline buffer. Shoreline buffers shall be measured in all directions from the OHWM. Uses/development may also be subject to additional buffers prescribed in KCC § 17B.05.020K of this Program due to presence of critical areas. In such cases, the landward-most buffer shall apply.
17B.05.050-1. Standard Shoreline Buffers (Type S Waters)
Shoreline Environment Designation
Type S Standard Shoreline Buffer Width (feet)
Urban Conservancy
100
Shoreline Residential
100
Rural Conservancy
100
Natural
150
2. 
Buffer condition: Shoreline buffers shall be maintained in a well-vegetated condition. For purposes of this Program, a well vegetated buffer is one that supports a predominance of native plant species at densities that would occur in similar relatively undisturbed settings. Vegetation conservation standards do not apply retroactively to existing legally established uses and developments. Vegetation associated with existing structures, uses and developments may be maintained within shoreline jurisdiction. A letter of exemption pursuant to KCC § 17B.07.030 is not required for this normal maintenance.
3. 
Interrupted buffer: When a shoreline buffer contains an existing legally established public or private road, the Administrator may allow development on the landward side of the road provided that the development will not have a detrimental impact to the shoreline. The applicant may be required to provide a critical areas report to describe the impacts. In determining whether a critical areas report is necessary, the County shall consider the hydrologic, geologic, and/or biological habitat connection potential and the extent and permanence of the buffer interruption.
4. 
Allowed shoreline buffer alterations: Alteration or disturbance of the standard shoreline buffers shown in the Table at § 17B.05.050-1 shall not be allowed except in those limited instances when the Administrator finds that the alteration is necessary to accommodate one of the following uses/developments. In all cases, the buffer alteration shall be the minimum necessary to accommodate the proposed use/development. The Administrator may require vegetation enhancement outside of the disturbed area as compensation for the buffer alteration:
a. 
Shoreline view corridors: The Administrator may allow limited and selective tree removal, pruning, and/or limbing within the shoreline buffer to create one view corridor on a lot, when otherwise consistent with this Program and if the following conditions are met:
i. 
The view corridor shall be limited to twenty-five (25) feet in width or twenty-five percent (25%) of the width of the lot frontage, whichever distance is less;
ii. 
The removal of vegetation shall not require any ground-disturbing equipment and shall not materially alter soils or topography;
iii. 
A view clearance plan may be requested by the Administrator when determined that a substantial amount of vegetation is proposed for modification. The plan shall be prepared by a qualified ecologist, forester, arborist, or landscape architect prior to approving the view corridor and will include:
(A) 
Identification and description of the location and extent of the proposed tree removal, pruning, and limbing, and the view corridor; and
(B) 
A critical areas report prepared by a qualified ecologist demonstrating the proposed removal of vegetation will not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological function.
iv. 
Proposed view clearance within a designated landslide or erosion hazard area shall require review of the proposed clearance by an engineering geologist or geotechnical engineer to ensure that the proposed removal of vegetation will not cause or exacerbate hazards.
b. 
Selective pruning. Selective pruning of trees for views is allowed. Selective pruning of trees does not include removal of understory vegetation, and must not compromise the health of the tree. A letter of exemption pursuant to KCC § 17B.07.030 is not required for selective pruning, provided the development is exempt pursuant to WAC 173-27-040(2)(a), as amended.
c. 
Private pathways: Private pathways which provide pedestrian access to the shoreline may be allowed within a shoreline buffer provided they are constructed of pervious material, are less than or equal to six (6) feet wide, and follow a route that minimizes erosion and gullying (e.g., a winding but direct path). Pathways shall be co-located within the view corridor if one is available in order to minimize buffer disturbance. A letter of exemption pursuant to KCC § 17B.07.030 is not required for private pathways, provided the development is exempt pursuant to WAC 173-27-040(2)(a), as amended.
d. 
Hazard tree removal: Removal of a hazard tree, including removal for compliance with Chapter KCC 20.10, Wildland Urban Interface Code, may be allowed in the shoreline buffer when trimming is not sufficient to address the hazard. Where the hazard is not immediately apparent to the Administrator, the Administrator may require the applicant to submit a hazard tree determination report prepared by a qualified arborist or forester.
e. 
Invasive species management: Removing invasive, non-native shoreline vegetation listed on the Kittitas County Noxious Weed List or Washington State Noxious Weed Board Monitor List should be allowed in the shoreline buffer when otherwise consistent with this Program. The disturbed areas must be promptly re-vegetated using species native to Kittitas County and appropriate for the ecological sitting. If the removal area is greater than ten thousand (10,000) square feet or requires soil disturbance using non-handheld mechanized equipment, the Administrator shall require a vegetation management plan prepared by a qualified ecologist, forester, arborist, or landscape architect prior to approving the invasive species removal. The vegetation management plan shall identify and describe the location and extent of vegetation management. For properties within designated landslide or erosion hazard areas, the Administrator may require review of the vegetation management plan by an engineering geologist or geotechnical engineer to ensure that the vegetation management will not cause or exacerbate hazards associated with soil or slope instability. The location and size of the invasive species management area shall be clearly defined on the site plan.
f. 
Public trails and other public access improvements: Public trails and public access improvements may be allowed in the shoreline when there is no suitable alternative location outside the buffer and when they are otherwise consistent with the policies and regulations of this Program.
g. 
Utilities and essential public facilities: Utilities and essential public facilities that meet the definition of water-dependent or water-related may be allowed in the shoreline buffer when there is no suitable alternative location outside the buffer and when they are consistent with the policies and regulations specified in KCC § 17B.06.190.
h. 
Irrigation structures: Water control structures and sprinkle irrigation structures that reduce siltation and retard surface runoff, and associated leveling and filling on land not currently in agricultural use, may be allowed in the shoreline buffer provided the new agricultural activities are located landward of existing agricultural activities. A letter of exemption pursuant to KCC § 17B.07.030 is not required for irrigation structures, provided the development is exempt pursuant to WAC 173-27-040(2)(e), as amended.
i. 
Water-dependent and water-related uses: Water-dependent and water-related uses provided the amount of buffer encroachment and disturbance are the minimum needed to accommodate the use or development.
5. 
Buffer averaging: The Administrator may allow averaging of the shoreline buffer widths in the Table at KCC § 17B.05.050-1 when necessary to accommodate a single-family residence, residential subdivision of four (4) or fewer lots, or a water-dependent or water-related use or development. The buffer averaging shall be allowed only in those limited instances when adherence to the standard buffer is infeasible or presents a substantial hardship because of site conditions, lot configuration or other circumstances. Buffers that have been averaged or reduced by any prior actions administered by Kittitas County shall not be further averaged. Prior to approving buffer averaging the Administrator shall require a critical area report (per the requirements in KCC § 17B.05.020W). With buffer averaging, the buffer width is reduced in one location and increased in another location to maintain the same overall buffer area. Proposals for buffer averaging shall not require a shoreline variance or compensatory mitigation if the following conditions are met:
a. 
The minimum width of the buffer at any given point is at least seventy five percent (75%) of the standard width per the Table at KCC § 17B.05.050-1, or twenty-five (25) feet, whichever is greater;
b. 
The net buffer area (acreage) after averaging is the same as the buffer area without averaging; and
c. 
The area that is added to the buffer to offset the reduction is well-vegetated. The Administrator may require vegetation enhancement if needed to ensure this criterion is met.
6. 
Where possible, development and uses within the urban conservancy, rural conservancy, and natural designations shall be situated to avoid or minimize impacts to forest habitat and other relatively undisturbed native vegetation communities.
(Ord. 2021-006, 2021; Ord. 2016-006, 2016)
The following section applies to all uses and development in shorelines of the state, as defined in WAC 173-26-020, that affect water quality. To ensure mutual consistency between shoreline management provisions and other regulations that address water quality and stormwater quantity, including public health, stormwater, and water discharge standards, the regulations that are most protective of ecological functions shall apply.
A. 
Policies. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.480, the water quality, stormwater, and nonpoint pollution policies of the 2021 Kittitas County Shoreline Master Program shall be considered as policies of the Kittitas County Comprehensive Plan.
B. 
Regulations.
1. 
Shoreline use and development shall incorporate measures to protect and maintain surface and groundwater quantity and quality in accordance with all applicable laws.
2. 
New uses and developments shall provide stormwater management facilities designed, constructed, and maintained in accordance with the current stormwater management standards. Deviations from these standards may be approved where it can be demonstrated that off-site facilities would provide better treatment, or where common retention, detention and/or water quality facilities meeting such standards have been approved as part of a comprehensive stormwater management plan.
3. 
Best management practices for control of erosion and sedimentation shall be implemented for all use and development proposals in shorelines through an approved temporary erosion and sediment control (TESC) plan, identified in the Stormwater Management Manual for Eastern Washington, as amended.
4. 
On-site sewage systems shall be located, designed and maintained to meet all applicable water quality, utility, and health standards.
5. 
All building materials that may come in contact with water shall be constructed of untreated wood, cured concrete, or steel. Materials used for decking or other structural components shall be approved by applicable state agencies for contact with water to avoid discharge of pollutants. Wood treated with creosote, arsenate compounds, copper chromium arsenic or pentachlorophenol is prohibited in shoreline water bodies.
6. 
Permanent stormwater management systems serving property within the shoreline shall be designed using BMP’s ensuring water quality treatment in compliance with the Stormwater Management Manual for Eastern Washington to prevent stormwater runoff from degrading or adding to the pollution of recipient waters or adjacent properties. Maintenance of storm drainage facilities on private property shall be the responsibility of the property owner(s). This responsibility and the provision for maintenance shall be clearly stated on any recorded subdivision, short plat, or binding site plan map, building permit, property conveyance documents, maintenance agreements and /or improvement plans.
(Ord. 2021-006, 2021; Ord. 2016-006, 2016)