A. 
Wetlands and their buffer areas are valuable natural systems with significant natural constraints. In their natural state wetlands provide many ecological functions and values that ensure the general health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Leavenworth. Physical functions of wetlands include: water quality values (pollution filtration, sediment removal, oxygen production, nutrient recycling and chemical and nutrient absorption), aquatic productivity, microclimate regulation, and fish and wildlife habitat. Values of wetlands include: flood control, wave damage protection, erosion control, groundwater recharge, domestic/irrigation water supply, timber/natural resources, energy resources (peat), livestock grazing, fishing/hunting, recreation, aesthetics, education/scientific research and migratory waterfowl. This chapter is intended to prevent adverse environmental impacts to proposed development and to designated wetlands and associated buffers. These protection measures are designed to protect designated wetlands based on overall uniqueness and value of the wetland and intensity of proposed land use.
B. 
This chapter is designed to reflect the following priority issues as a part of the overall goal:
1. 
Protect those wetlands designated under RCW 36.70A.170 that are outside of shoreline areas;
2. 
Protect property rights;
3. 
Encourage voluntary creation of wetland areas;
4. 
Compensation for loss of value of lands designated as wetlands and to include their required buffers.
These specific goal components should be sought without infringement on the health and welfare of the citizens of Leavenworth.
(Ord. 1395 § 1 (Exh. A), 2011; Ord. 1597 § 1 (Att. A), 2019)
All lands (including areas of open water) in the city and its UGA, and outside of shoreline jurisdiction, that meet the definition of wetlands in RCW 36.70A.030(21) are designated wetlands and are subject to the provisions of this chapter. Wetlands in shoreline areas are addressed in the Shoreline Master Program.
(Ord. 1395 § 1 (Exh. A), 2011; Ord. 1597 § 1 (Att. A), 2019)
A. 
Preliminary Evaluation.
1. 
A preliminary evaluation shall evaluate known or potential wetlands on or within 300 feet of the site of a proposed alteration.
2. 
At a minimum, the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) maps and the 2016 Regional Stormwater/Wetland Plan, or as amended, shall be used in completing a critical areas checklist or SEPA checklist and in the city's review for the purpose of determining whether a critical areas study will be required.
B. 
Wetlands shall be identified and delineated by a qualified wetland professional in accordance with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys and Coasts. All areas within the city meeting the wetland designation criteria in that procedure are hereby designated critical areas and are subject to the provisions of this chapter.
C. 
In addition to the general requirements for critical area studies, the required critical area study for any wetland shall include the following:
1. 
An overview of the methodology used to conduct the study;
2. 
As part of the identification and characterization, a written assessment and accompanying maps of the wetlands and buffers within 300 feet of the project area, including the following information at a minimum:
a. 
Wetland delineation and required buffers;
b. 
Existing wetland acreage;
c. 
Wetland category;
d. 
Vegetative, faunal, and hydrologic characteristics;
e. 
Soil and substrate conditions;
f. 
Topographic elevations, at two-foot contours; and
g. 
A discussion of the water sources supplying the wetland and documentation of hydrologic regime (locations of inlet and outlet features, water depths throughout the wetland, evidence of recharge or discharge, evidence of water depths throughout the year such as algal layers and sediment deposits);
3. 
When a mitigation plan is required it shall meet the standards of LMC § 16.08.790.
D. 
An applicant should be aware that Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act and other federal and state statutes may apply.
E. 
The information provided by the study will augment the database for the Leavenworth area maintained by the city.
(Ord. 1395 § 1 (Exh. A), 2011; Ord. 1597 § 1 (Att. A), 2019)
A. 
Wetlands shall be rated according to the Washington Department of Ecology wetland rating system, as set forth in the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Eastern Washington: 2014 Update (Ecology Publication No. 14-06-030, or as revised and approved by Ecology), which contains the definitions and methods for determining whether the criteria below are met.
1. 
Category I wetlands are: (a) alkali wetlands; (b) wetlands of high conservation value that are identified by scientists of the Washington Natural Heritage Program/DNR; (c) bogs and calcareous fens; (d) mature and old-growth forested wetlands over one-quarter acre with slow-growing trees; (e) forests with stands of aspen; and (f) wetlands that perform many functions very well (scores between 22 to 27 points). These wetlands are those that (a) represent a unique or rare wetland type; or (b) are more sensitive to disturbance than most wetlands; or (c) are relatively undisturbed and contain ecological attributes that are impossible to replace within a human lifetime; or (d) provide a high level of function.
2. 
Category II wetlands are: (a) forested wetlands in the floodplains of rivers; (b) mature and old-growth forested wetlands over one-quarter acre with fast-growing trees; (c) vernal pools; and (d) wetlands that perform functions well (scores between 19 to 21 points). These 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.
3. 
Category III wetlands have a moderate level of functions (scores between 16 to 18 points). These wetlands can be often adequately replaced with a well-planned mitigation project. Wetlands scoring between 16 to 18 points generally have been disturbed in some ways and are often less diverse or more isolated from other natural resources in the landscape than Category II wetlands.
4. 
Category IV wetlands have the lowest level of functions (scores fewer than 16 points) and are often heavily disturbed. These are wetlands that we should be able to replace, and in some cases be able to improve. However, experience has shown that replacement cannot be guaranteed in any specific case. These wetlands may provide some important functions and also need to be protected.
(Ord. 1395 § 1 (Exh. A), 2011; Ord. 1597 § 1 (Att. A), 2019)
Buffers shall be required in order to protect the integrity, function, and value of a designated wetland area. The following standards shall apply to development activities within 300 feet of wetland areas.
A. 
Buffer Requirements. The following buffer widths have been established in accordance with the best available science. They are based on the category of wetland and the habitat score as determined by a qualified wetland professional using the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Eastern Washington: 2014 Update (Ecology Publication No. 14-06-030, or as revised and approved by Ecology). The adjacent land use intensity is assumed to be high.
1. 
For wetlands that score six points or more for habitat function, the buffers in Table 16.7.1 can be used if both of the following criteria are met:
a. 
A relatively undisturbed, vegetated corridor at least 100 feet wide is protected between the wetland and any other priority habitats as defined by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. The latest definitions of priority habitats and their locations are available on the WDFW web site. The corridor must be protected for the entire distance between the wetland and the priority habitat by some type of legal protection such as a conservation easement.
Presence or absence of a nearby habitat must be confirmed by a qualified professional. If no option for providing a corridor is available, Table 16.7.1 may be used with the required measures in Table 16.7.2 alone.
b. 
All of the measures in Table 16.7.2 are implemented, where applicable, to minimize the impacts of the adjacent land uses.
2. 
For wetlands that score 3 to 5 habitat points, only the measures in Table 16.7.2 are required for the use of Table 16.7.1.
3. 
If an applicant chooses not to apply the mitigation measures in Table 16.7.2, or is unable to provide a protected corridor where available, then Table 16.7.3 must be used.
4. 
The buffer widths in Tables 16.7.1 and 16.7.3 assume that the buffer is vegetated with a native plant community appropriate for the ecoregion. If the existing buffer is unvegetated, sparsely vegetated, or vegetated with invasive species that do not perform needed functions, the buffer should either be planted to create the appropriate plant community or the buffer should be widened to ensure that adequate functions of the buffer are provided.
Table 1: Table 16.7.1 Wetland Buffer Requirements for Eastern Washington if Table 16.7.2 Is Implemented and Corridor Provided
Wetland Category
Buffer width (in feet) based on habitat score
3–5
6–7
8–9
Category I:
Based on total score Forested
75
110
150
Category I:
Bogs and Wetlands of High Conservation Value or Alkali
None Present
Category II:
Based on total score
75
110
150
Category II
Vernal pool
None Present
Category II:
Forested
75
110
150
Category III (all)
60
110
150
Category IV (all)
40
Table 2: Table 16.7.2 Required Measures to Minimize Impacts to Wetlands (All measures are required where applicable to a specific proposal)
Disturbance
Required Measures to Minimize Impacts
Lights
• Direct lights away from wetland
Noise
• Locate activity that generates noise away from wetland
• If warranted, enhance existing buffer with native vegetation plantings adjacent to noise source
• For activities that generate relatively continuous, potentially disruptive noise, such as certain heavy industry or mining, establish an additional 10- foot heavily vegetated buffer strip immediately adjacent to the outer wetland buffer
Toxic runoff
• Route all new, untreated runoff away from wetland while ensuring wetland is not dewatered
• Establish covenants limiting use of pesticides within 150 feet of wetland
• Apply integrated pest management
Stormwater runoff
• Retrofit stormwater detention and treatment for roads and existing adjacent development
• Prevent channelized flow from lawns that directly enters the buffer
• Use low intensity development techniques (for more information refer to the drainage ordinance and manual)
Change in water regime
• Infiltrate or treat, detain, and disperse into buffer new runoff from impervious surfaces and new lawns
Pets and human disturbance
• Use privacy fencing OR plant dense vegetation to delineate buffer edge and to discourage disturbance using vegetation appropriate for the ecoregion
• Place wetland and its buffer in a separate tract or protect with a conservation easement
Dust
• Use best management practices to control dust
Table 3: Table 16.7.3 Wetland Buffer Requirements for Eastern Washington if Table 16.7.2 Is NOT Implemented or Corridor NOT Provided
Wetland Category
Buffer width (in feet) based on habitat score
3–5
6–7
8–9
Category I:
Based on total score Forested
100
150
200
Category I:
Bogs and Wetlands of High Conservation Value or Alkali
None Present
Category II:
Based on total score
100
150
200
Category II:
Vernal pool
None Present
Category II:
Forested
100
150
200
Category III (all)
80
150
200
Category IV (all)
50
B. 
Increased Wetland Buffer Area Width. Buffer widths shall be increased beyond those indicated above when a critical area study shows that a larger buffer is necessary to protect wetland functions and values. The size of the increase shall be supported by appropriate documentation showing that it is reasonably related to protection of specific functions and values of the wetland, such as:
1. 
The wetland is used by a plant or animal species listed by the federal government or the state as endangered, threatened, candidate, sensitive, monitored or documented priority species or habitats, or essential or outstanding habitat for those species or has unusual nesting or resting sites such as heron rookeries or raptor nesting trees; or
2. 
The adjacent land is susceptible to severe erosion, and erosion-control measures will not effectively prevent adverse wetland impacts; or
3. 
The adjacent land has minimal vegetative cover or slopes greater than 30 percent.
C. 
Buffer averaging to improve wetland protection may be permitted when all of the following conditions are met:
1. 
Different parts of the wetland have significant differences in characteristics that affect its habitat functions, such as a wetland with a forested component adjacent to a degraded emergent component or a "dual-rated" wetland with a Category I area adjacent to a lower-rated area.
2. 
The buffer is increased adjacent to the higher-functioning area of habitat or the more-sensitive portion of the wetland and decreased adjacent to the lower-functioning or less-sensitive portion as demonstrated by a critical areas study from a qualified wetland professional.
3. 
The total area of the buffer after averaging is equal to the area required without averaging.
4. 
The buffer at its narrowest point is never less than either three-fourths of the required width or 75 feet for Categories I and II, 50 feet for Category III, and 25 feet for Category IV, whichever is greater.
D. 
Measurement of Wetland Buffers. All buffers shall be measured perpendicular from the wetland boundary as surveyed in the field. 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. Lawns, walkways, driveways, and other mowed or paved areas will not be considered buffers or included in buffer area calculations.
E. 
Buffers on Mitigation Sites. All mitigation sites shall have buffers consistent with the buffer requirements of this chapter. Buffers shall be based on the expected or target category of the proposed wetland mitigation site.
F. 
Maintenance and Repair.
1. 
Except as otherwise specified or allowed in accordance with this chapter, wetland buffers shall be retained in an undisturbed or enhanced condition. In the case of compensatory mitigation sites, removal of invasive nonnative weeds is required for the duration of the monitoring period.
2. 
Normal and routine maintenance and repair of any existing public or private facilities within an existing right-of-way; provided, that the maintenance or repair does not increase the use of the facility or right-of-way, or increase its footprint by more than 10 percent.
3. 
Removal of hazardous trees according to vegetation management plan prepared by a qualified wetland professional. Revegetation with appropriate native species at natural densities is allowed in conjunction with removal of hazard trees.
G. 
Impacts to Buffers. Compensation for impacts to buffers shall be consistent with the provisions of LMC § 16.08.790.
H. 
Overlapping Critical Area Buffers. If buffers for two contiguous critical areas overlap (such as buffers for a stream and a wetland), the wider buffer shall apply.
I. 
Allowed Buffer Uses. The following uses may be allowed within a wetland buffer in accordance with the review procedures of this chapter, provided said uses are not prohibited by any other applicable law and are conducted so as to minimize impacts to the buffer and adjacent wetland:
1. 
Conservation and Restoration Activities. Conservation or restoration activities aimed at protecting the soil, water, vegetation, or wildlife.
2. 
Passive Recreation. Passive recreation facilities designed and in accordance with an approved critical area study, including:
a. 
Walkways, trails, and minor trail-related facilities such as benches having no adverse impact on water quality.
i. 
Those walkways and trails that are generally parallel to the perimeter of the wetland shall be located in the outer 25 percent of the wetland buffer area. Exceptions may be made for access points and to accommodate variations in topography and similar site factors, provided the impacts are mitigated in accordance with an approved critical area study.
ii. 
All walkways and trails shall be located to avoid removal of significant trees and to minimize disruption and disturbance of natural vegetation and wildlife habitat. Where feasible, walkways and trails should be located in areas that have previously been disturbed, such as road grades and utility corridors. They should be limited to pervious surfaces no more than five feet in width for pedestrian, bicycle, and cross-country ski use only. Raised boardwalks using nontreated pilings may be acceptable.
b. 
Wildlife-viewing structures which, when appropriate, are placed on piles made out of nontreated wood and account for shading impacts.
3. 
Educational and scientific research activities.
4. 
The harvesting of wild crops in a manner that is not injurious to natural reproduction of such crops, and provided the harvesting does not require tilling of soil, planting of crops, chemical applications, or wetland alteration by changing existing topography, water conditions, or water sources.
5. 
Drilling for utilities/utility corridors under a buffer, with entrance/exit portals located completely outside of the wetland buffer boundary; provided, that a qualified wetlands professional has shown that the drilling will not interrupt the groundwater connection to the wetland or percolation of surface water down through the soil column.
6. 
Enhancement of a wetland buffer through the removal of nonnative invasive plant species. Removal of invasive plant species shall be restricted to hand removal. All removed plant material shall be taken away from the site and appropriately disposed of. Plants that appear on the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board list of noxious weeds must be handled and disposed of according to a noxious weed control plan appropriate to that species. Revegetation with appropriate native species at natural densities is allowed in conjunction with removal of invasive plant species.
7. 
Stormwater Management Facilities. A wetland or its buffer can be physically or hydrologically altered to meet the requirements of an LID, runoff treatment or flow control BMP if all of the following criteria are met:
a. 
The wetland is classified as a Category IV or a Category III wetland with a habitat score of 3 to 5 points; and
b. 
There will be "no net loss" of functions and values of the wetland; and
c. 
The wetland does not contain a breeding population of any native amphibian species; and
d. 
The hydrologic functions of the wetland can be improved as outlined in questions 3, 4, 5 of Chart 4 and questions 2, 3, 4 of Chart 5 in the "Guide for Selecting Mitigation Sites Using a Watershed Approach," (available here: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/biblio/0906032.html); or the wetland is part of a priority restoration plan that achieves restoration goals identified in a Shoreline Master Program or other local or regional watershed plan; and
e. 
The wetland lies in the natural routing of the runoff, and the discharge follows the natural routing; and
f. 
All regulations regarding stormwater and wetland management are followed, including but not limited to local and state wetland and stormwater codes, manuals, and permits; and
g. 
Modifications that alter the structure of a wetland or its soils will require permits. Existing functions and values that are lost would have to be compensated/replaced.
Stormwater LID BMPs required as part of new and redevelopment projects can be considered within wetlands and their buffers. However, these areas may contain features that render LID BMPs infeasible. A site-specific characterization is required to determine if an LID BMP is feasible at the project site.
8. 
Nonconforming Uses. Repair and maintenance of nonconforming uses or structures, where legally established within the buffer, provided they do not increase the degree of nonconformity, and provided any impacts to wetlands or their buffers are mitigated.
9. 
Signs and Fencing of Wetlands and Buffers.
a. 
Temporary Markers. The outer perimeter of the wetland buffer and the clearing limits identified by an approved permit or authorization shall be marked in the field with temporary clearing limits fencing in such a way as to ensure that no unauthorized intrusion will occur. The marking is subject to inspection by the administrator prior to the commencement of permitted activities. This temporary marking shall be maintained throughout construction and shall not be removed until permanent signs, if required, are in place.
b. 
Permanent Signs. As a condition of any permit or authorization issued pursuant to this chapter, the administrator may require the applicant to install permanent signs along the boundary of a wetland or buffer.
i. 
Permanent signs shall be made of an enamel-coated metal face and attached to a metal post or another nontreated material of equal durability. Signs must be posted at an interval of one per lot or every 50 feet, whichever is less, and must be maintained by the property owner in perpetuity. The signs shall be worded as follows or with alternative language approved by the administrator: "Protected Wetland Area; Do Not Disturb; Contact the city of Leavenworth Community Development Department Regarding Uses, Restrictions, and Opportunities for Stewardship."
ii. 
The provisions of subsection (I)(9) of this section may be modified as necessary to assure protection of sensitive features or wildlife.
c. 
Fencing.
i. 
The applicant may be required to install a permanent fence around the wetland or buffer to mitigate impacts identified in an approved critical area study, such as disturbance by humans, pets, or grazing animals.
ii. 
Where no fence is required, fencing may be allowed, provided it does not interfere with wetland hydrology, structure, or function, and provided it complies with this subsection.
iii. 
Wetland and buffer fencing shall be designed to facilitate species migration, including fish runs, and shall be constructed in a manner that minimizes impacts to the wetland and associated habitat.
(Ord. 1395 § 1 (Exh. A), 2011; Ord. 1597 § 1 (Att. A), 2019)
Any private or public road or street construction (including expansion of an existing road) which is allowed within a designated wetland or buffer shall comply with the following minimum development standards:
A. 
No other practicable alternative exists.
B. 
Mitigation sequencing must be followed.
C. 
Where appropriate, the roadway section shall provide for other purposes, such as utilities or pedestrian facilities.
D. 
Stormwater runoff facilities associated with road and street construction shall be located outside of wetlands. Such facilities shall be limited to dispersion outfalls and bioswales or alternate facilities that do not create erosion or degrade function and values of critical areas. They may be permitted within the outer 25 percent of wetland buffers; such facilities must be consistent with LMC § 16.08.750(I)(7).
(Ord. 1395 § 1 (Exh. A), 2011; Ord. 1597 § 1 (Att. A), 2019)
All proposed divisions of land which include designated wetlands shall comply with the following procedures and development standards:
A. 
Up to 50 percent of the total wetlands on a development site, other than lands that are usually inundated and submerged during the spring wet season, may be used in calculating minimum lot area for proposed lots, provided the development proposal includes adequate provisions to protect wetland functions and values.
B. 
Wetland buffers may be included in the calculation of minimum area for proposed lots, provided the development proposal includes adequate provisions to protect wetland functions and values.
C. 
New lots shall contain at least one site, adequate in size to accommodate the proposed use, (including access) that is suitable for development and is not within the designated wetland or its buffer area.
D. 
In order to implement the goals and policies of this section, to accommodate innovation, creativity, design flexibility and the potential for density bonuses to achieve a level of environmental protection that would not be possible by typical lot-by-lot development, the use of planned development and/or cluster subdivision as described in the city code is strongly encouraged for any project on a site that includes a designated wetland.
(Ord. 1395 § 1 (Exh. A), 2011; Ord. 1597 § 1 (Att. A), 2019)
Work performed in designated wetlands and their associated buffers that involves filling, grading or disturbance, shall comply with an approved mitigation plan prepared by a qualified wetland professional. That plan shall identify the work to be performed, including any proposed filling or cutting, and shall be consistent with all provisions of this section. Protection measures required and identified in the mitigation plan may include temporary measures applied during construction, such as the use of filter fabrics in the construction area or temporary vegetative cover intended to stabilize the site immediately following construction.
(Ord. 1395 § 1 (Exh. A), 2011; Ord. 1597 § 1 (Att. A), 2019)
A. 
Mitigation Sequencing. Before impacting any wetland or its buffer, an applicant shall demonstrate that the following actions have been taken. Actions are listed in the order of preference.
1. 
Avoid the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action.
2. 
Minimize impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation, by using appropriate technology, or by taking affirmative steps to avoid or reduce impacts.
3. 
Rectify the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment.
4. 
Reduce or eliminate the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations.
5. 
Compensate for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments.
6. 
Monitor the required compensation and take remedial or corrective measures when necessary.
B. 
Requirements for Compensatory Mitigation.
1. 
Compensatory mitigation for wetland alterations shall be used only for impacts that cannot be avoided or minimized and shall achieve equivalent or greater biologic functions. Compensatory mitigation plans shall be consistent with Wetland Mitigation in Washington State – Part 2: Developing Mitigation Plans (Version 1), Ecology Publication No. 06-06-011b, Olympia, WA, March 2006 or as revised.
2. 
The mitigation ratios in Table 16.08.790.1 of this article shall be used as a general guide in establishing mitigation ratios. Ratios for rehabilitation and enhancement may be reduced when combined with 1:1 replacement through creation or reestablishment. See Table 1a or 1b, Wetland Mitigation in Washington State – Part 1: Agency Policies and Guidance – Version 1, Ecology Publication No. 06-06-011a, Olympia, WA, March 2006 or as revised.
Table 4: Table 16.08.790.1 Wetland Mitigation Ratios
Category and Type of Wetland
Creation or Reestablishment
Rehabilitation
Enhancement
Preservation
Category I:
Bog, Natural Heritage site
None Present
Category I:
Mature forested
6:1
12:1
24:1
24:1
Category I:
Based on functions
4:1
8:1
16:1
20:1
Category II
3:1
6:1
12:1
20:1
Category III
2:1
4:1
8:1
15:1
Category IV
1.5:1
3:1
6:1
10:1
3. 
Buffer Mitigation Ratios. Impacts to buffers shall be mitigated at a 1:1 ratio. Compensatory buffer mitigation shall replace those buffer functions lost from development.
C. 
Compensating for Lost or Affected Functions. Compensatory mitigation shall address the functions affected by the proposed project, with an intention to achieve functional equivalency or improvement of functions. The goal shall be for the compensatory mitigation to provide similar wetland functions as those lost, except when either:
1. 
The lost wetland provides minimal functions and the proposed compensatory mitigation action(s) will provide equal or greater functions or will provide functions shown to be limiting within a watershed through a formal Washington state watershed assessment plan or protocol; or
2. 
Out-of-kind replacement of wetland type or functions will best meet watershed goals formally identified by the city, such as replacement of historically diminished wetland types.
D. 
Preference of Mitigation Actions. Methods to achieve compensation for wetland functions shall be approached in the following order of preference:
1. 
Restoration (reestablishment and rehabilitation) of wetlands.
2. 
Creation (establishment) of wetlands on disturbed upland sites such as those with vegetative cover consisting primarily of nonnative species. This should be attempted only when there is an adequate source of water and it can be shown that the surface and subsurface hydrologic regime is conducive to the wetland community that is anticipated in the design.
3. 
Enhancement of significantly degraded wetlands in combination with restoration or creation. Enhancement alone will result in an overall loss of wetland acreage and is less effective at replacing the functions lost. Where enhancement is used as compensation, it must be part of a mitigation package that includes replacing the impacted area and meeting ratio requirements specified in this section.
4. 
Preservation. Preservation of high-quality, at-risk wetlands as compensation is generally acceptable when done in combination with restoration, creation, or enhancement; provided, that a minimum of 1:1 acreage replacement is provided by reestablishment or creation. Preservation of high-quality, at-risk wetlands and habitat may be considered as the sole means of compensation for wetland impacts when the following criteria are met:
a. 
Wetland impacts will not have a significant adverse impact on habitat for listed fish, or other ESA-listed species.
b. 
There is no net loss of habitat functions within the watershed or basin.
c. 
Mitigation ratios for preservation as the sole means of mitigation shall be consistent with an approved critical area study prepared by a qualified wetland professional, based on the significance of the preservation project and the type and quality of the wetland resources lost.
d. 
The impact area is small (generally less than one-half acre) and/or impacts are occurring to a low-functioning system (Category III or IV wetland).
All preservation sites shall include buffer areas adequate to protect the habitat and its functions from encroachment and degradation.
E. 
Type and Location of Compensatory Mitigation. Selecting Wetland Mitigation Sites Using a Watershed Approach (Department of Ecology Publication No. 10-06-007, November 2010) shall be the preferred guidance for establishing the location of compensatory mitigation. Unless it is demonstrated that a higher level of ecological functioning would result from an alternative approach, compensatory mitigation for ecological functions shall be either in kind and on site, or in kind and within the Wenatchee River Basin (WRIA 45).
1. 
Compensatory mitigation actions shall be conducted within the same subbasin of the Wenatchee River Basin and on the site of the alteration except when all of the following apply:
a. 
An approved critical area study shows that there are no reasonable opportunities on site (e.g., on-site options would require elimination of high-functioning upland habitat), or opportunities on site do not have a high likelihood of success based on a determination of the capacity of the site to compensate for the impacts; and
b. 
Off-site mitigation has a greater likelihood of providing equal or improved wetland functions than the impacted wetland.
2. 
Off-site locations shall be in the Wenatchee River Basin unless:
a. 
Watershed goals for water quality, flood storage or conveyance, habitat, or other wetland functions have been established by the city and strongly justify location of mitigation outside the basin; or
b. 
Credits from a wetland mitigation bank may be approved for use as compensation for unavoidable impacts to wetlands when:
i. 
The bank is certified under Chapter 173-700 WAC;
ii. 
The administrator determines that the wetland mitigation bank provides appropriate compensation for the authorized impacts; and
iii. 
The proposed use of credits is consistent with the terms and conditions of the bank's certification.
c. 
Replacement ratios for projects using bank credits shall be consistent with replacement ratios specified in the bank's certification.
d. 
Credits from a certified wetland mitigation bank may be used to compensate for impacts located within the service area specified in the bank's certification. In some cases, the service area of the bank may include portions of more than one adjacent drainage basin for specific wetland functions.
3. 
In-Lieu Fee. To aid in the implementation of off-site mitigation, the city may develop a program which prioritizes wetland areas for use as mitigation and allows payment of fees in lieu of providing mitigation on a development site. This program shall be developed and approved through a public process and be consistent with federal rules, state policy on in-lieu fee mitigation, and state water quality regulations. The program should address:
a. 
The identification of sites within the city/county that are suitable for use as off-site mitigation. Site suitability shall take into account wetland functions, potential for wetland degradation, and potential for urban growth and service expansion; and
b. 
The use of fees for mitigation on available sites that have been identified as suitable and prioritized.
4. 
The design for the compensatory mitigation project must be appropriate for its location (i.e., position in the landscape). Therefore, compensatory mitigation shall not result in the creation, restoration, or enhancement of an atypical wetland (i.e., the water source(s) and hydroperiod proposed for the mitigation site are not typical for the geomorphic setting). Likewise, it should not provide exaggerated morphology or require a berm or other engineered structures to hold back water. For example, excavating a permanently inundated pond in an existing seasonally saturated or inundated wetland could result in an atypical wetland. Another example would be excavating depressions in an existing wetland on a slope, which would require the construction of berms to hold the water.
F. 
Timing of Compensatory Mitigation. If feasible, compensatory mitigation projects shall be completed prior to activities that will disturb wetlands. If that is not feasible, compensatory mitigation shall be completed immediately following disturbance and prior to use or occupancy of the development or other alteration. Construction of mitigation projects shall be timed to minimize impacts to existing fisheries, wildlife, and flora.
1. 
The administrator may authorize one or more temporary delays in completing construction or installation of the compensatory mitigation when the applicant provides an appropriate written explanation from a qualified wetland professional as to the rationale for such delay; however, temporary delays exceeding a cumulative period of two years shall not be authorized. An appropriate rationale would include identification of the environmental conditions that could produce a high probability of failure or significant construction difficulties (e.g., project delay lapses past a fisheries window, or installing plants should be delayed until the dormant season to ensure greater survival of installed materials). 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, or general welfare of the public. The request for the temporary delay must include a written justification that documents the environmental constraints that preclude implementation of the compensatory mitigation plan. The justification must be verified and approved by the city.
2. 
Advance Mitigation. Mitigation for projects with preidentified impacts to wetlands may be constructed in advance of the impacts if the mitigation is implemented according to federal rules, state policy on advance mitigation, and state water quality regulations.
G. 
Compensatory Mitigation Plan. When a project involves wetland and/or buffer impacts, a compensatory mitigation plan prepared by a qualified professional shall be required, meeting the following minimum standards:
1. 
Compensatory Mitigation Report. Full guidance can be found in Wetland Mitigation in Washington State – Part 2: Developing Mitigation Plans (Version 1) (Ecology Publication No. 06-06-011b, Olympia, WA, March 2006 or as revised).
2. 
The report must include a written report and plan sheets that must contain, at a minimum, the following elements:
a. 
The name and contact information of the applicant; the name, qualifications, and contact information for the primary author(s) of the compensatory mitigation report; a description of the proposal; a summary of the impacts and proposed compensation concept; identification of all the local, state, and/or federal wetland-related permit(s) required for the project; and a vicinity map for the project.
b. 
A description of reasonable efforts made to apply mitigation sequencing, as defined in these regulations, to avoid, minimize, and otherwise mitigate impacts to critical areas.
c. 
Description of the existing wetland and buffer areas proposed to be impacted. Include acreage (or square footage), water regime, vegetation, soils, landscape position, surrounding land uses, and functions. Also describe impacts in terms of acreage by Cowardin classification, hydrogeomorphic classification, and wetland rating, based on LMC § 16.08.740, Classification – Wetland rating system.
d. 
Description of the compensatory mitigation site, including location and rationale for selection. Include an assessment of existing conditions: acreage (or square footage) of wetlands and uplands, water regime, sources of water, vegetation, soils, landscape position, surrounding land uses, and functions. Estimate future conditions in this location if the compensation actions are not undertaken (i.e., how would this site progress through natural succession?).
e. 
A description of the proposed actions for compensation of wetland and upland areas affected by the project. Include overall goals of the proposed mitigation, including a description of the targeted functions, hydrogeomorphic classification, and categories of wetlands.
f. 
A description of the proposed mitigation construction activities and timing of activities.
g. 
A discussion of ongoing management practices that will protect wetlands after the project site has been developed, including proposed monitoring and maintenance programs (for remaining wetlands and compensatory mitigation wetlands).
h. 
Documentation of compliance with LMC § 16.08.730.
i. 
The scaled plan sheets for the compensatory mitigation must contain, at a minimum:
i. 
Surveyed edges of the existing wetland and buffers, proposed areas of wetland and/or buffer impacts, location of proposed wetland and/or buffer compensation actions.
ii. 
Existing topography, ground-proofed, at two-foot contour intervals in the zone of the proposed compensation actions if any grading activity is proposed to create the compensation area(s). Also existing cross-sections of on-site wetland areas that are proposed to be impacted, and cross-section(s) (estimated one-foot intervals) for the proposed areas of wetland or buffer compensation.
iii. 
Surface and subsurface hydrologic conditions including an analysis of existing and proposed hydrologic regimes for enhanced, created, or restored compensatory mitigation areas. Also, illustrations of how data for existing hydrologic conditions were used to determine the estimates of future hydrologic conditions.
iv. 
Conditions expected from the proposed actions on site including future hydrogeomorphic types, vegetation community types by dominant species (wetland and upland), and future water regimes.
v. 
Required wetland buffers for existing wetlands and proposed compensation areas. Explain how buffers comply with LMC § 16.08.750(A) through (D), Wetland buffers, and the rationale for any deviations from the provisions of those subsections.
vi. 
A plant schedule for the compensation area including all species by proposed community type and water regime, size and type of plant material to be installed, spacing of plants, typical clustering patterns, total number of each species by community type, timing of installation.
vii. 
Performance standards (measurable standards reflective of years post installation) for upland and wetland communities, monitoring schedule, and maintenance schedule and actions by each biennium.
j. 
Monitoring. Mitigation monitoring shall be required for a period necessary to establish that performance standards have been met, but not for a period less than five years. If a scrub-shrub or forested vegetation community is proposed, monitoring may be required for 10 years or more. The project mitigation plan shall include monitoring elements that ensure certainty of success for the project's natural resource values and functions. If the mitigation goals are not obtained within the initial five-year period, the applicant remains responsible for restoration of the natural resource values and functions until the mitigation goals agreed to in the mitigation plan are achieved.
3. 
Alternative Mitigation Plans. The administrator may approve alternative critical areas mitigation plans that are based on best available science, such as priority restoration plans that achieve restoration goals identified in the SMP. Alternative mitigation proposals must provide an equivalent or better level of protection of critical area functions and values than would be provided by the strict application of this chapter.
The administrator shall consider the following for approval of an alternative mitigation proposal:
a. 
The proposal uses a watershed approach consistent with Selecting Wetland Mitigation Sites Using a Watershed Approach (Ecology Publication No. 09-06-32, Olympia, WA, December 2009).
b. 
Creation or enhancement of a larger system of natural areas and open space is preferable to the preservation of many individual habitat areas;
c. 
Mitigation according to subsection (E) of this section is not feasible due to site constraints such as parcel size, stream type, wetland category, or geologic hazards;
d. 
There is clear potential for success of the proposed mitigation at the proposed mitigation site;
e. 
The plan shall contain clear and measurable standards for achieving compliance with the specific provisions of the plan. A monitoring plan shall, at a minimum, meet the provisions in LMC § 16.08.220;
f. 
The plan shall be reviewed and approved as part of overall approval of the proposed use;
g. 
A wetland of a different type is justified based on regional needs or functions and values; the replacement ratios may not be reduced or eliminated unless the reduction results in a preferred environmental alternative;
h. 
Mitigation guarantees shall meet the minimum requirements as outlined in LMC § 16.08.230;
i. 
Qualified professionals in each of the critical areas addressed shall prepare the plan;
j. 
The city may consult with agencies with expertise and jurisdiction over the resources during the review to assist with analysis and identification of appropriate performance measures that adequately safeguard critical areas.
(Ord. 1395 § 1 (Exh. A), 2011; Ord. 1597 § 1 (Att. A), 2019)