Article IX Special Reports

Purpose. Special reports may be required to provide environmental information and to present proposed strategies for maintaining, protecting, or mitigating impacts to critical areas:

Demonstrate that the submitted proposal is consistent with the purposes and specific standards of this chapter;

Describe all relevant aspects of the development proposal and critical areas adversely affected by the proposal and assess impacts on the critical area from activities and uses proposed;

Where impacts are unavoidable, demonstrate through an alternatives analysis that no other feasible alternative exists; and

Consider the cumulative impacts of the proposed action that includes past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions to facilitate the goal of no net loss of critical areas. Such impacts shall include those to wildlife, habitat, and migration corridors; water quality and quantity; and other geologic or watershed processes that relate to critical area condition, process, or service.

(Ord. 5-20 § 2 (Appx. A))

§ 18.22.905 General requirements.

When Special Reports Are Required. The administrator may require a special report or reports if any portion of a proposed development or use has the potential to negatively impact a critical area or encroach upon a buffer, and that impact or encroachment requires mitigation, consistent with the standards found in this chapter.

Standard Requirements. Special reports shall be prepared for review and approval by the administrator. In addition to specific requirements of particular special reports described in this article, each special report shall describe narratively and show graphically, if applicable, the following:

The proposed activity, location and dimensions;

Existing site conditions and property boundaries preferably on a scaled site plan with structures, features and geographic location described and graphically depicted;

All critical areas and their buffers on the project site;

Assess potential impacts to critical areas function and values per the specific requirements described in this article for each critical area type;

Propose mitigation for unavoidable losses and impacts to critical areas;

Identify amount of and limits of clearing, grading, and impervious surface on a stormwater calculation worksheet, if applicable; and

Present photographs of the project site.

Special reports shall be valid for five years from the date the report was prepared and report validity may be extended by the administrator; provided, critical area conditions, including buffer conditions, have not changed since the special report was written. The administrator shall have the authority to require a revised special report, as needed, to satisfy all the provisions of this chapter.

(Ord. 5-20 § 2 (Appx. A))

§ 18.22.910 Waivers.

The administrator may waive the requirement for a special report in limited circumstances when an applicant demonstrates all of the following:

The proposal involved will not affect the critical area in a manner contrary to the goals, purposes, and objectives of this code; and

§ 18.22.920 Acceptance of special reports.

The minimum protection standards required by this chapter are satisfied.

(Ord. 5-20 § 2 (Appx. A))

§ 18.22.915 Retaining consultants.

Jefferson County may retain consultants to assist in the review of special reports outside the range of staff expertise. The applicant shall pay for the costs of retaining said consultants.

(Ord. 5-20 § 2 (Appx. A))

The administrator shall verify the accuracy and sufficiency of all special reports.

§ 18.22.930 Critical aquifer recharge area reports.

If the administrator finds that a special report does not accurately reflect site conditions, or does not incorporate appropriate protections mechanisms, the administrator shall cite evidence that demonstrates where the special report is insufficient or in error. The applicant may then revise and resubmit the special report.

(Ord. 5-20 § 2 (Appx. A))

General. Critical aquifer recharge area reports serve as the primary means for Jefferson County to verify the accuracy of its critical aquifer recharge area map and to determine specific aquifer protection measures to be applied to prevent significant adverse impacts to groundwater quality, and in some cases water quantity. A critical aquifer recharge area report shall be prepared when required in Article III (Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas) of this chapter.

Standards for Critical Aquifer Recharge Area Report or Hydrogeologic Evaluation. A critical aquifer recharge area report or a hydrogeologic evaluation shall be made by a hydrogeologist. The critical aquifer recharge area report shall include:

A detailed description of how the project, including all processes and other activities, has the potential to impact groundwater recharge or for contaminating groundwater;

A hydrogeologic evaluation that includes, at a minimum:

A description of the hydrogeologic setting of the aquifer region;

Site location, topography, drainage, and surface water bodies;

Soils and geologic units underlying the site;

Groundwater characteristics of the area, including flow direction and gradient, and existing groundwater quality;

The location and characteristics of wells and springs within 1,000 feet of the site; and

An evaluation of existing groundwater recharge;

A contaminant transport analysis for the uppermost groundwater supply aquifer assuming an accidental spill or release of project-specific contaminants or on-site sewage discharge, or both if applicable;

A discussion and evaluation that details available on-site spill response and containment equipment, employee spill response training, and emergency service coordination measures;

Best management practices to minimize exposure of permeable surfaces to potential pollutants and to prevent degradation of groundwater quality;

Demonstrate compliance with applicable protection standards in JCC § 18.22.330; and

Requirements for a monitoring program with financial guarantees/assurances that the monitoring program will be implemented.

County Review. Critical aquifer recharge area report or hydrogeologic evaluation shall be forwarded to the Jefferson County department of public health for technical review. The county may request additional information in order to determine the adequacy of the reports and may rely on input from Washington Department of Ecology.

§ 18.22.940 Frequently flooded area reports.

Conditions for Mitigation Identified in the Critical Aquifer Recharge Area Report or Hydrogeologic Evaluation. The administrator shall determine appropriate permit conditions as identified in the critical aquifer recharge area report or hydrogeologic evaluation to mitigate the impacts of proposed activities to critical aquifer recharge areas.

(Ord. 5-20 § 2 (Appx. A))

Habitat Assessment Required. A habitat assessment shall be submitted if any portion of the proposed project occurs within a special flood hazard area (floodplain), as mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

Standards for Habitat Assessment.

In addition to the general requirements found at JCC § 18.22.905, frequently flooded area reports shall be based on 2013 FEMA Region 10 guidance document entitled Regional Guidance for Floodplain Habitat Assessment and Mitigation in the Puget Sound Basin (or as amended by FEMA).

§ 18.22.945 Geologically hazardous area reports.

Habitat assessments also shall be prepared to comply with Article IV of this chapter and the flood damage prevention ordinance, as codified in Chapter 15.15 JCC.

(Ord. 5-20 § 2 (Appx. A))

Standards for All Geological Assessments.

Must be Based on Site Conditions. Recommendations for earthwork, clearing or siting structures in geologically hazardous areas shall be based on existing site conditions rather than measures that have not yet been successfully approved, designed, or constructed (e.g., slope recontouring, slope retaining walls, vegetation improvements, bulkheads, etc.).

Limits on Shoreline Bulkheads and Retaining Walls. Shoreline bulkheads and retaining walls may only be utilized as an engineering solution where it can be demonstrated that:

An existing residential structure or other permitted existing public or private structures or public facilities such as roads or highways cannot be safely maintained without such measures;

Other nonstructural methods of beach stabilization have been considered and determined infeasible; and

The resulting stabilization structure is the minimum necessary to provide stability for the existing structure and appurtenances.

Minor Repair Activities on Existing Permitted Structures. Minor repair activities on existing permitted structures (i.e., those that do not involve design modifications, changes in structure location, or demolition or abandonment of failed structure and replacement with new structure) are not subject to the project submittal standards in subsections (2) and (3) of this section.

Project Submittal Standards for Geological Reports. A geological report is required for site development proposals that involve development activity or the installation of structures within a geologically hazardous area, or as otherwise required but do not involve or require engineering design recommendations. The following minimum information is required:

Site information regarding the critical areas designations that affect site features;

Description of surface and subsurface conditions, including ground materials, vegetation, surface drainage, groundwater, and a preliminary geologic hazard assessment which includes the locations of structures and the identification of the slope and/or coastal processes occurring at the site and factors that contribute to them;

Review of available site information, literature, and mapping;

Detailed description of slope and other topographic features;

Conceptual siting of structures and general recommendations, which include methods and practices that avoid and/or reduce slope and shore impacts. Minimum recommendations should include upland and slope drainage control, groundwater control, site vegetation management, and erosion control;

A description of how the proposal complies with the clearing, grading, excavation, and stormwater requirements in JCC § 18.30.060 and § 18.30.070, and the current version of the Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington;

A description of potential effects of the proposal on stormwater quantity, quality, and runoff patterns post-construction;

(h)

A clear statement whether or not the proposal will affect or alter water movement to the geologically hazardous area and its critical areas buffer if the proposal is implemented; and

Identify measures to avoid or minimize alteration of stormwater runoff patterns post-construction.

Project Submittal Standards for Geotechnical Reports. A geotechnical report is required when the department or a geological report determines that a proposal requires additional site information such as engineering design recommendations, slope stability analysis, subsurface exploration and testing, coastal process analyses, or construction recommendations. Depending on the level of activity proposed, the geotechnical report will either be a more limited geotechnical slope evaluation report or a full geotechnical design investigation report as described below.

Geotechnical Slope Evaluation Report. A geotechnical slope evaluation report is required when slope stability analyses are confined to addressing only existing surface and/or drainage conditions, including the relationship of natural and constructed slope features to proposed changes in environmental conditions such as drainage, vegetation removal and slope geometry. The following minimum information is required:

All the information required under subsection (2) of this section (Project Submittal Standards for Geological Reports);

Subsurface data, exploration logs, and testing data, when required by the geotechnical engineer;

Estimated (or surveyed) site plan with ground surface profiles and typical cross-sections;

Relative location of ordinary high water (OHW) on the surface profile and cross-sections, where applicable;

Soil strength parameters;

Stability analysis of existing site;

Analysis of the relationship of vegetation and slope stability; and

(viii)

Conceptual site development plans and cross-sections.

Geotechnical Design Investigation Report. A geotechnical design investigation report is required for site development activities that propose design and construction measures at the slope crest, face and/or toe. If a designed structure does not impact slope stability or coastal processes, the report will not be required to perform all items listed under this section, as long as each item is addressed and the report details why a particular item does not apply. The report shall include all items considered necessary by the engineer to fully address the engineering design requirements of the site. The following minimum information is required:

All the information required under subsection (1)(a) of this section (Geotechnical Slope Evaluation Report);

Geotechnical requirements and measures to reduce risks;

Geotechnical criteria used for any designs including all critical dimensions, lateral earth pressures, soil bearing pressures, location, and limits of structures on or near the slope, maximum constructed slope angles, minimum soil reinforcement embedment, soil compaction requirements, and structure heights;

Temporary construction slope stability recommendations and analysis of proposed final site stability measures;

Required construction specifications and construction monitoring procedures;

Revegetation and surface and groundwater management requirements;

Evaluation of erosion potential, recommendations for erosion avoidance and any proposed mitigation measures;

(viii)

Detailed tabulation of all basic geotechnical engineering test results pertinent to design and construction, and when required for clarification, detailed examples of tests conducted for the project; and

(ix)

Information outlined in the geotechnical design investigation report site evaluation checklist required in subsection (3)(d) of this section.

Additional Requirements for Projects in Landslide-Prone Geologically Hazardous Areas. When a project is located within a landslide-prone geologically hazardous area, the following additional project submittal requirements shall apply:

Erosion Control Information. An evaluation of the erosion potential on the site during and after construction is required. The evaluation shall include recommendations for mitigation, including retention of vegetative buffers and a revegetation program. The geotechnical engineer shall provide a statement identifying buffer areas at the top or toe of a slope based on geotechnical site constraints and the impacts of proposed construction methods on the erosion potential of the slope.

Seismic Information. The geotechnical engineer shall submit a statement that the design criteria consider the one-in-100-year seismic event (an earthquake ground motion that has a 40 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years). Calculations of soil bearing capacity, general soil stability, and wall lateral earth pressures shall be adjusted to reflect a one-in-100-year seismic event and the structural plans for the project shall be reviewed by the geotechnical engineer for consistency with these design criteria:

Analysis for the one-in-100-year seismic event shall be based on a near-crustal event having an assumed magnitude of 6.5 and occurring directly below the site. Based on regional studies performed by others, the department will allow the use of the following minimum general values of horizontal peak ground accelerations for this event:

a = 0.2g for fill, alluvial soils

a = 0.17g for till, firm glaciated soils

a = 0.15g for rock.

The appropriateness of the above accelerations shall be confirmed by the geotechnical engineer based on the actual site characteristics. Reduction in the above values may be considered when supported by the appropriate analytical evidence. Slope stability, lateral pressures, and liquefaction of the site shall be assessed by using subsurface soil, rock, and groundwater conditions, as well as the seismic parameters discussed above.

Recommendations on Relative Site Stability. The geotechnical engineer shall make recommendations as to which portions of the site are the least prone to instability and the preferred location of the structure. The limits of any area proposed for grading activity shall be identified.

Construction Season Limitation. In general, no excavation will be permitted in landslide-prone geologically hazardous areas during the typically wet winter months. When excavation is proposed, including the maintenance of open temporary slopes, between October 1st and April 30th, technical analysis shall be provided to ensure that no environmental harm, threat to adjacent properties, or safety issues would result. In addition, recommendations for temporary erosion control and shoring/mitigating measures shall be provided. The technical analysis shall consist of plans showing mitigation techniques and a technical memorandum from the geotechnical engineer.

Revisions to Geotechnical Report. Further recommendations shall be provided by the geotechnical engineer should there be additions or exceptions to the original recommendations based on the plans, site conditions, or other supporting data. If the geotechnical engineer who revises the plans and specifications is not the same engineer who prepared the geotechnical report, the new engineer shall, in a letter to the department, express his or her agreement or disagreement with the recommendations in the geotechnical report and state whether the plans and specifications conform to his or her recommendations.

Plan and Specification Review. The geotechnical engineer shall submit a statement that, in his or her judgment, the plans and specifications (if prepared by others) conform to the recommendations in the geotechnical report and that all portions of the site which are disturbed or impacted by the proposed development have appropriate measures or specifications that permit construction to occur while addressing slope stability so that the work does not create additional risk. The statement shall also indicate whether or not a relative gain in slope stability will be achieved after construction is complete.

Construction Inspection. A final inspection report shall be provided by the geotechnical engineer stating that construction has or has not implemented the design recommendations of the geotechnical report and evaluating any deviation from the design recommendations.

Geotechnical Design Investigation Report – Site Evaluation Checklist. The following are report guidelines for geotechnical design investigation reports:

Project information:

(A)

Site owner name;

(B)

Project proponent name;

(C)

Ordinary high water mark (OHWM) where applicable; and

(D)

Critical areas designations affecting site features.

Project description, including:

(A)

Description of proposed structures, site improvements, and adverse impact avoidance and reduction methods; and

(B)

Location and total area of the construction zone.

The site evaluation checklist information shall be included as part of the geotechnical design investigation report. All items listed above must be addressed in the report. However, the above guidelines are not intended to be all-inclusive. It is the responsibility of the geotechnical engineer to address all factors which in their geotechnical design investigation report is relevant to the project. For any items in the site evaluation checklist that are not relevant to a project, information shall be provided to demonstrate why the site evaluation checklist items are not relevant to a project.

Results of Department's Review. The department shall review the geological assessment and either:

Accept the geological assessment and approve the application; or

§ 18.22.950 Habitat management reports.

Reject the geological assessment and require revisions or additional information.

(Ord. 5-20 § 2 (Appx. A))

General. When required in Article VI of this chapter, a site visit conducted by a wildlife biologist is required to determine if a fish and wildlife habitat conservation area (FWHCA) or buffer is present. Based on the site visit, the biologist shall prepare a habitat reconnaissance letter or a habitat management plan and include all of the required information described in JCC § 18.22.905. Habitat reconnaissance letters and habitat management plans shall be prepared based on requirements in Article VI (Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas), the general report requirements of JCC § 18.22.905, and the criteria specified in subsections (2) and (3) of this section.

Habitat Reconnaissance Letter. A habitat reconnaissance letter shall be prepared and submitted only if all project components, including areas of temporary impact and the limits of construction, are outside of all FWHCA buffers, as described in this chapter; provided, no critical areas buffer reduction is proposed. A habitat reconnaissance letter shall document that proposed projects because of their location will not impact FWHCA and will include the following:

A description of all FWHCAs and buffers on the property;

Narratively and graphically present the distance of all FWHCAs from the limits of clearing, as shown on a site plan. The site plan used during the site visit shall be included in the habitat review letter; and

Photographs of the site and the FWHCAs.

Habitat Management Plan. A habitat management plan shall be prepared and submitted if any portion of the proposed activity, including areas of temporary impact and areas within the limits of clearing, are within a FWHCA, as described in this chapter, or if a critical areas buffer reduction is proposed. A habitat management plan shall address the following:

Detailed description of all proposed project components relative to on-site FWHCAs, other on-site development, and limits of clearing;

State whether or not in-water work is proposed, and if so, describe timing and methods of construction;

Date site visits were made and date report was completed;

Detailed description of the field investigation results, including habitat types present on the property, habitat conditions with FWHCAs, location of native vegetation on the property, and location of nonnative or invasive vegetation on the property. The habitat management report should indicate if the critical areas extend off site;

If the project area is identified as potential habitat for threatened or endangered species, methods used to determine presence or absence of listed species, methods used to determine if appropriate habitat occurs on site or in the vicinity of the site, and results of the field investigation;

In addition to complying with the clearing, grading, excavation, and stormwater requirements in JCC § 18.30.060 and § 18.30.070, and the current Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington, describe any potential effects of the proposed activity on stormwater quantity, quality, and runoff patterns post-construction. The report must clearly indicate if the proposal will affect or alter water movement to the FWHCA and buffer if the proposal is implemented and identify measures to avoid or minimize alteration of stormwater runoff patterns post-construction;

Identify all potential impacts of the proposed activity on FWHCAs. The habitat management report shall include:

Mitigation Sequencing. Describe measures to avoid and minimize impacts to FWHCAs. For any unavoidable impacts, describe and justify all project components that cannot avoid impacting the FWHCA. For unavoidable impacts, mitigation plans must be prepared in accordance with subsection (3)(h) of this section.

Types of Impacts. All potential impacts to FWHCAs and their functions and values shall be identified and described in the habitat management report. Habitat management reports shall consider direct impacts, indirect impacts, permanent impacts, temporary (long-term and short-term) impacts, and cumulative impacts.

Impact Area. The area (square footage) of potential impact shall be quantified for each FWHCA. At a minimum, impact area shall include FWHCA that occurs within the limits of clearing, as shown on the site plan;

(h)

Provide a detailed mitigation plan for any unavoidable impacts. Mitigation plans shall include:

Description and scaled, graphic rendering of the mitigation proposal and of the area, suitability, and objectives of the area to compensate for impact area and functions.

A table identifying impact areas (in square feet) and functions affected for each FWHCA and buffer that also identifies mitigation areas (in square feet) and functions. The table shall clearly show a link between potential impacts (area and function) and proposed mitigation (area and function).

Mitigation plans shall include performance standards that are applicable to the objectives of the mitigation effort. Monitoring shall be required annually for five years and quantifiable performance standards shall be specified in the plan for each of the five years of monitoring.

A planting plan, when appropriate, that lists the species to be planted, including quantity and planting density of each species to be installed.

Monitoring schedule, monitoring methods, and monitoring data to be collected shall be described.

Contingency measures shall be described. If any performance standard is not met, the administrator shall require contingency measures be implemented and may extend the monitoring period beyond five years to ensure FWHCAs are adequately mitigated and protected.

Photographs of the site and the FWHCAs.

§ 18.22.955 Process and requirements for designating habitats of local importance as critical areas.

Habitat management plans prepared for any unavoidable development activity within a FWHCA or the inner 75 percent of a standard buffer shall accompany either a financially bonded critical area stewardship plan or critical areas variance application or reasonable economic use exception in JCC § 18.22.250 or § 18.22.260.

(5)

In-Lieu Fee Program. A mitigation plan shall not be required if an actively managed ILF program is used to mitigate project impacts; provided, that the administrator has approved the use of ILF to achieve compensatory FWHCA mitigation.

(Ord. 5-20 § 2 (Appx. A))

Purpose. This section describes the process for designating species and habitats of local importance that are not covered by the federal and state sensitive, threatened, or endangered species regulations. Accordingly, this section details the requirements for designating and monitoring species and habitats of local importance, as well as removing such species and habitats from designation if necessary.

Definition. The use of the term "habitat" in this section means a place or type of site where a plant or animal naturally or normally lives and grows, and includes areas used by a species during any life stage at any time of the year.

Procedure for Designation – Generally. An application/nomination to designate a habitat of local importance as a critical area shall be processed according to the procedures for Type V land use decisions established in Chapter 18.40 JCC.

Nominations/Applications. Any person, organization, or Jefferson County agency may nominate and apply for designation a species or habitat of local importance. A nominating person or organization must be a resident of, or headquartered in, Jefferson County.

(5)

Nomination/Application Submittal.

The applicant shall provide information demonstrating that the species or habitat is native to Jefferson County, existing on or before the date of adoption of the regulations codified in this chapter.

All nominations/applications for designation of a species/habitat of local significance shall include the following:

Identification of the species including its scientific and locally common name(s);

Identification of the geographic location, including Jefferson County parcel numbers, and extent of the habitat associated with a nominated species or the nominated habitat itself if not associated with a nominated species; a map of an appropriate scale to properly describe the location and extent of the habitat will accompany the nomination, as well as geo-referencing information sufficient to allow mapping of the habitat site in the county GIS mapping system;

The status of the species or the occurrence of the type of habitat in surrounding counties and in the rest of the state has been considered in making this nomination;

A management strategy for the species or habitat;

Indications as to whether the proposed management strategy has been peer reviewed, and if so, how this was done and by whom;

Where restoration of habitat is proposed, a specific plan, including how the restoration will be funded, must be provided as part of the nomination;

Recommendations for allowed, exempt, and regulated activities within the area;

(viii)

Recommended buffer and setback requirements and their justification;

(ix)

Seasonal requirements;

(x)

A monitoring plan must be practical and achievable and include the following:

(A)

Baseline data and a description of what measurements will be used to determine the success of the project. The plan shall include the criteria and time period required to evaluate the success of the plan;

(B)

A contingency plan for failure; and

(C)

A list of all parcels not included in the nomination but affected by the monitoring process;

(xi)

The nomination must also include an economic impact, cost, and benefits analysis. The nomination must also include an analysis of alternative solutions to formal designation of the habitat of local importance as a regulated critical area under this chapter.

The applicant shall be responsible for paying all fees and all expenses incurred by Jefferson County to process the application.

(6)

Review and Approval Criteria.

Species nominated for designation under this section must satisfy the following criteria:

Local populations that are in danger of extirpation based on documented trends since the adoption of the Growth Management Act;

The species is sensitive to habitat manipulation;

The species or habitat has commercial, game, or other special value such as locally rare species;

The nomination includes an analysis of the proposal using best available science; and

The nomination specifies why protection by other county, state or federal policies, laws, regulations or nonregulatory tools is inadequate to prevent degradation of the species or habitat and for which management strategies are practicable, and describes why, without designation and protection, there is a likelihood that the species will not maintain and reproduce over the long term, or that a unique habitat will be lost.

Habitats nominated for designation under this section must satisfy the following criteria:

Where a habitat is nominated to protect a species, the use of the habitat by that species must be documented or be highly likely or the habitat is proposed to be restored with the consent of the affected property owner so that it will be suitable for use by the species; and long-term persistence of the species in Jefferson County and adjoining counties is dependent on the protection, maintenance or restoration of the habitat;

Areas nominated to protect a particular habitat must represent either high quality native habitat or habitat that has an excellent potential to recover to a high-quality condition and which is either of limited availability or highly vulnerable to alteration; and

The nomination specifies the specific habitat features to be protected (e.g., nest sites, breeding areas, nurseries, etc.). In the case of proposed wildlife corridors, the nomination shall specify those features that are required for the corridor to remain viable to support and protect the nominated species.

(7)

Review and Approval Process.

The department of community development shall determine whether the application submittal is complete. If deemed complete, the department shall evaluate the proposal for compliance with the approval criteria in this section and make a recommendation to the planning commission based on those criteria. The department shall also notify all parcel owners affected of the terms and contents of the proposal.

Upon receipt of a staff report and recommendation from the department, the planning commission shall hold a public hearing, and make a recommendation to the board of commissioners based upon the approval criteria in this section.

The Jefferson County board of commissioners shall consider the recommendation transmitted by the planning commission at a regularly scheduled public meeting, and may then adopt an ordinance formally approving the designation. Should the board wish to vary from the planning commission recommendation and alter or reject the application, such action may only occur following a separate public hearing conducted by the board.

Upon approval, the ordinance designating and regulating the species or habitat of local importance shall be codified in this article for public information and implementation by the department, and a notice to title shall be placed upon all parcels affected by the designation.

Each ordinance creating a species or habitat of local importance shall include periodic review or reassessment of the initial designation. The length of the periodic review may be dependent on the characteristics of the species or habitat.

(8)

Removal from Designation. Species or habitats of local significance may be removed at any time; provided, they no longer meet the criteria in subsection (6) of this section (e.g., as a result of a natural catastrophe or climatic change event); and provided further, that the procedural requirements of this section and the procedural requirements established for Type V land use decisions within Chapter 18.40 JCC are met.

(Ord. 5-20 § 2 (Appx. A))

§ 18.22.960 Wetland reports.

General. When required by Article VII of this chapter, a site visit conducted by a qualified wetland professional is required to determine if a wetland is present. Based on the site visit, a wetland reconnaissance letter or a wetland delineation report shall be prepared. Wetland reconnaissance letters and wetland delineation reports shall be prepared based on requirements in Article VII (Wetlands) of this chapter, the general report requirements of JCC § 18.22.905, and the criteria specified in subsections (2) and (3) of this section.

If a proposed activity is unavoidable and occurs within a wetland or the inner 75 percent of a wetland buffer the wetland reports shall accompany either a financially bonded critical area stewardship plan or critical area variance application in JCC § 18.22.250 or reasonable economic use exception in JCC § 18.22.260.

Wetland Reconnaissance Letter. A wetland reconnaissance letter shall be prepared and submitted only if all the project components are at least 300 feet from areas of temporary impact and the limits of clearing; provided, no buffer reduction is proposed. A wetland reconnaissance letter shall document that proposed projects because of their location will not impact wetlands and will include the following:

Describe all wetlands and buffers on the property;

Narratively and graphically describe the distance of all wetlands from the limits of clearing, as shown on the site plan. The site plan used during the site visit shall be included in the wetland reconnaissance letter;

Provide a wetland delineation field data form for all potential wetland areas assessed;

Plot locations shall be shown on the site plan that is attached to the wetland reconnaissance letter; and

Photographs of the site and the wetlands.

Wetland Delineation Report. A wetland delineation report shall be prepared and submitted if any portion of the proposed activity is within 300 feet of areas of temporary impact and areas within the limits of clearing, or if a buffer reduction is proposed. A wetland delineation report shall address the following:

Date site visits were made and date report was completed.

Summary of information reviewed (such as maps and reports) to determine the potential for wetlands to be present. Based on this review, describe wetlands within 300 feet of the proposed activity.

Detailed description of the field evaluation results, location and types of wetlands identified, and buffer conditions. Discuss all on-site wetlands identified, potential off-site wetlands, and wetland ratings and buffer widths. Indicate locations of wetland boundary flagging and plot flagging, including flag color, type, and number.

In addition to complying with the clearing, grading, excavation, and stormwater requirements in JCC § 18.30.060 and § 18.30.070, and the 2014 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (or as amended), describe any potential effects of the proposed activity on stormwater quantity, quality, and runoff patterns post-construction. The report must clearly indicate if the proposal will affect or alter water movement to the wetland if the proposal is implemented and identify measures to avoid or minimize alteration of stormwater runoff patterns post-construction.

Describe how the proposal complies with all the requirements of Article VII (Wetlands) of this chapter.

Wetland rating form for each wetland identified shall be included in the wetland report.

Figure showing mitigation areas on the property. Square footage of each mitigation area shall be shown on the figure. If buffer averaging is proposed, the area of increase shall be shown relative to the area of decrease on the figure.

(h)

Photographs of the site and the wetlands or buffer.

§ 18.22.965 Critical area stewardship plans.

A mitigation plan shall not be required if an actively managed ILF program is approved by the administrator and used to mitigate project impacts.

(Ord. 5-20 § 2 (Appx. A))

Property Owner Election. Property owners may elect to develop site-specific critical area stewardship plans (CASPs) as an alternative to the prescriptive requirements of Article VI (Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (FWHCAs)) and Article VII (Wetlands) of this chapter.

The administrator may approve CASPs for critical area buffer reductions greater than 25 percent; provided, the project does not require a reasonable economic use variance.

Review and Approval of CASPs. The administrator shall be responsible for reviewing and approving submitted CASPs. The administrator may, at the administrator's discretion, seek technical assistance from the Jefferson County conservation district, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife or the Washington Department of Ecology when reviewing CASPs.

Applicability and Limitations. The following provisions define the applicability and limitations of the CASP:

CASPs may be used in any zoning designation if the provisions of this article can be met. CASPs may not be used in the urban growth area if a buffer reduction implemented while using transitional zoning (i.e., rural zoning designation prior to connection with a sewer system) has the potential to preclude future density requirements. The overall goal of the CASP is to maintain existing functions and values of the watershed and subbasin, while addressing the needs and desires of the property owner.

CASPs can be applied to properties one-quarter acre or larger.

CASPs are only applicable to fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas and associated buffers (Article VI of this chapter) or wetlands and associated buffers (Article VII of this chapter).

CASPs must provide equal or greater protection of critical area functions and values than the prescriptive standards of buffers and setbacks.

CASPs will be administered as a Type I permit, per Chapter 18.40 JCC.

(5)

Implementation.

A CASP permit is valid for the same timeframe as the underlying permit (e.g., building permit, septic permit, shoreline permit). If the underlying permit does not have a specified expiration date or if the CASP application is a standalone application, the CASP permit shall be valid for three years from the date the CASP permit is issued. A CASP permit shall not be considered valid beyond five years from the date the CASP permit is issued. If the underlying permit remains valid beyond five years, the CASP permit shall be considered null and void. Once the permit has expired, it shall not be renewed.

The applicant shall record a notice title for any approved mitigation at the auditor's office and shall post a mitigation performance bond with the department. The administrator shall provide the necessary paperwork to the applicants. Assuming the administrator does not need to designate staff (or contract with other qualified professionals) to ensure that maintenance and monitoring are completed as required by this section, the performance bond is to be refunded to the applicant at the end of the specified monitoring period or when all performance standards are met, whichever is greater. The CASP permit is a conditional approval and no other permits (such as building, shoreline, septic) shall be approved until the applicant has recorded the notice to title and posted the performance bond.

(6)

As-Built Plan Requirement. An as-built plan shall be prepared by a wetland specialist describing the action taken to implement the CASP. This as-built plan shall include:

A contour map describing final contours if grading is required;

A quantitative description of the vegetation planted;

Establishment of two or more permanent photo documentation stations with established bearings and monuments to ensure that subsequent photographs depict the same landscape for comparative purposes;

Additional photographic documentation that shows the condition of mitigation area(s) once CASP mitigation has been implemented;

A site plan showing the location of the mitigation areas relative to the mitigation proposal as presented in the approved CASP report and to the CASP permit conditions; and