(a) 
Designating, Defining and Identifying Wetlands. Wetlands are those areas designated in accordance with the procedures outlined in WAC 173-22-035.
All areas within the city meeting the wetland definition criteria, regardless of whether these areas have previously been identified or mapped, are hereby designated critical areas and are subject to the provisions of Chapter 22.92 FMC and this chapter.
(b) 
Mapping. The approximate location and extent of wetlands are shown on the adopted critical area map contained within the comprehensive plan. In addition, the maps contained within the National Wetlands Inventory are hereby adopted. Additionally, soil maps produced by the U.S. Department of Agriculture National Resources Conservation Service may be useful in helping to identify potential wetland areas. These maps are to be used as a guide for the city, project applicants, and/or property owners, and may be continuously updated as new critical areas are identified.
It is the actual presence of a wetland on a parcel, as delineated by WAC 173-22-035, which triggers the requirements of Chapter 22.92 FMC and this chapter, whether or not the wetland is identified on the adopted maps. The exact location of a wetland's boundary shall be determined through the performance of a field delineation by a qualified wetlands professional in accordance with the approved federal wetland delineation manual and applicable regional supplements pursuant to WAC 173-22-035.
(Ord. 1375 § 2, 2005; Ord. 1512 § 6, 2011)
The following activities are regulated if they occur in a regulated wetland or its buffer:
(a) 
The removal, excavation, grading, or dredging of soil, sand, gravel, minerals, organic matter, or material of any kind;
(b) 
The dumping, discharging, or filling with any material;
(c) 
The draining, flooding, or disturbing of the water level or water table;
(d) 
The driving of pilings;
(e) 
The placing of obstructions;
(f) 
The construction, reconstruction, demolition, or expansion of any structure;
(g) 
The destruction or alteration of wetland vegetation through clearing, harvesting, shading, intentional burning, or planting of vegetation that would alter the character of a regulated wetland; provided, that these activities are not part of a forest practice governed under Chapter 76.09 RCW and its rules; or
(h) 
Activities that result in:
(1) 
A significant change of water temperature;
(2) 
A significant change of physical or chemical characteristics of the sources of water to the wetland;
(3) 
A significant change in the quantity, timing or duration of the water entering the wetland; or
(4) 
The introduction of pollutants.
(Ord. 1375 § 2, 2005)
The activities listed below are allowed in wetlands in addition to those activities listed in, and consistent with, the provisions established in FMC § 22.92.110. These activities do not require submission of a critical area report, except where such activities result in a loss to the functions and values of a wetland or wetland buffer. These activities include:
(a) 
Conservation or preservation of soil, water, vegetation, fish, shellfish, and other wildlife that does not entail changing the structure or functions of the existing wetland.
(b) 
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 alteration of the wetland by changing existing topography, water conditions, or water sources.
(c) 
Drilling for utilities/utility corridors under a wetland with the entrance/exit portals located completely outside of the wetland buffer; provided, that the drilling does not interrupt the ground water connection to the wetland or percolation of surface water down through the soil column. Specific studies by a hydrologist are necessary to determine whether the ground water connection to the wetland or percolation of surface water down through the soil column will be disturbed.
(d) 
Enhancement of a wetland through the removal of nonnative invasive plant species. Removal of invasive plant species shall be restricted to hand removal unless permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies have been obtained for approved biological or chemical treatments. All removed plant material shall be taken away from the site and disposed of appropriately. 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 the species. Revegetation with appropriate native species at natural densities is allowed in conjunction with removal of invasive plant species.
(e) 
Educational and scientific research activities.
(f) 
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 footprint or use of the facility or right-of-way.
(Ord. 1375 § 2, 2005; Ord. 1574 § 3, 2016)
(a) 
Wetlands shall be rated according to the Washington State Department of Ecology Wetland Rating System for Western Washington – 2014 Update (Ecology Publication No. 14-06-030) or as revised by Ecology. Wetland rating categories shall be applied as the wetland exists at the time of the adoption of this chapter or as it exists at the time of an associated permit application. Wetland rating categories shall not change due to illegal modifications.
(b) 
Wetland Rating Categories.
(1) 
Category I. Category I wetlands are: (A) wetlands that are identified by scientists of the Washington Natural Heritage Program/DNR as high quality wetland; (B) bogs; (C) mature and old growth forested wetlands larger than one acre; and (D) wetlands that perform many functions well (scoring between 23 and 27 points).
These wetlands are those that: (A) represent unique or rare wetland types; 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 functions.
(2) 
Category II. Category II wetlands are wetlands with a moderately high level of functions (score between 20 and 22 points).
(3) 
Category III. Category III wetlands are those wetlands with a moderate level of functions (scoring between 16 and 19). Wetlands scoring between 16 and 19 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. Category IV wetlands are those wetlands with the lowest levels of functions (between nine and 15 points) and are often heavily disturbed. These are wetlands that are possible to replace, and in some cases improve. However, experience has shown that replacement cannot be guaranteed in any specific case. These wetlands may provide some important functions, and should be protected to some degree.
(Ord. 1375 § 2, 2005; Ord. 1574 § 4, 2016)
(a) 
Activities and uses shall be prohibited in wetlands and wetland buffers, except as provided for in Chapter 22.92 FMC and this chapter.
(b) 
Category I Wetlands. Activities and uses shall be prohibited from Category I wetlands, except as provided for in the public agency and utility exception, reasonable use exception, and variance sections of Chapter 22.92 FMC.
(c) 
Category II and III Wetlands. For activities proposed in Category II and III wetlands, the following standards shall apply:
(1) 
Activities and uses shall be prohibited unless the applicant can demonstrate that:
(A) 
The basic project purpose cannot reasonably be accomplished on another site or sites in the general region while still successfully avoiding or resulting in less adverse impact on a wetland; and
(B) 
All on-site alternative designs that would avoid or result in less adverse impact on a wetland or its buffer, such as a reduction in the size, scope, configuration, or density of the project, are not feasible.
Full compensation for the loss of acreage and functions of wetland and buffers shall be provided under the terms established under FMC § 22.93.070.
(d) 
Category IV Wetlands. Activities and uses that result in unavoidable impacts may be permitted in Category IV wetlands and associated buffers in accordance with an approved critical area report and compensatory mitigation plan, and only if the proposed activity is the only reasonable alternative that will accomplish the applicant's objectives. Full compensation for the loss of acreage and functions of wetlands and buffers shall be provided under the terms established under FMC § 22.93.070.
(Ord. 1375 § 2, 2005)
In addition to the general critical area report requirements of FMC § 22.92.160, critical area reports for wetlands must meet the requirements of this section. Critical area reports for two or more types of critical areas must meet the report requirements for each relevant type of critical area.
(a) 
Preparation by a Qualified Professional. A critical area report for wetlands shall be prepared by a qualified professional who is a certified professional wetland scientist or a noncertified professional wetland scientist with a minimum of five years' experience in the field of wetland science and with experience preparing wetland reports.
(b) 
Areas Addressed in Critical Area Report. The following areas shall be addressed in a critical area report for wetlands:
(1) 
The project area of the proposed activity;
(2) 
All wetlands and recommended buffers within 300 feet of the project area; and
(3) 
All shoreline areas, water features, floodplains, and other critical areas, and related buffers within 300 feet of the project area.
(c) 
Minimum Standards for Wetland Reports. In addition to the minimum required contents in FMC § 22.92.160, a critical area report for wetlands shall contain an analysis of the wetlands including the following site- and proposal-related information at a minimum:
(1) 
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 based on a professional survey from the field delineation (acreages for on-site portion and entire wetland area including off-site portions);
(C) 
Wetland rating and category based on entire wetland complex;
(D) 
Cowardin classification of vegetation communities including vegetation characterization;
(E) 
Habitat elements;
(F) 
Soil and substrate conditions based on site assessment and/or soil survey information;
(G) 
Topographic elevations, at two-foot contours;
(H) 
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 – algal mats, flood debris, and sediment deposits); and
(I) 
Hydrogeomorphic (HGM) classification.
(2) 
A discussion of measures, including avoidance, minimization, and mitigation, proposed to preserve existing wetlands and restore any wetlands that were degraded prior to the current proposed land use activity.
(3) 
A habitat and native vegetation conservation strategy that addresses methods to protect and enhance on-site habitat and wetland functions.
(4) 
Functional evaluation for the wetland and adjacent buffer using a local or state agency staff-recognized method and including the reference of the method and all data sheets.
(5) 
A scale map of the development proposal site and adjacent area.
(6) 
A discussion of ongoing management practices that will protect wetlands after the project site has been developed; including proposed monitoring and maintenance programs.
(7) 
A bond estimate for the installation (including site preparation, plant materials and installation, fertilizers, mulch, stakes) and the proposed monitoring and maintenance work for the required number of years.
(8) 
Title Notification. All activity in critical area protection areas shall be accompanied by a notice on title.
(d) 
Compensatory Mitigation Reports. When a project involves wetland and/or buffer impacts, a compensatory mitigation report shall be required (in addition to the wetland critical area report), meeting the following minimum standards:
(1) 
Preparation by a Qualified Professional(s). A compensatory mitigation report for wetland or buffer impacts shall be prepared by one or more qualified professional(s) including someone who is a certified professional wetland scientist or a noncertified professional wetland scientist; either of them must have a minimum of five years' experience designing compensatory mitigation designs that have been installed and monitored for a minimum of two years to verify success. In addition, the design team may include civil engineers, landscape architects or landscape designers depending upon the complexity of the project.
(2) 
Minimum Standards for Compensatory Mitigation Report. This report shall include a written report and plan sheets that contain, at a minimum, the following elements. Full guidance can be found in Wetland Mitigation in Washington State, Part 2: Developing Mitigation Plans (Version 1, Ecology Publication No. 06-06-011b, March 2006).
(A) 
The written report must contain, at a minimum:
(i) 
The name and contact information of the applicant, the name, qualifications, and contact information for the primary author(s) of the report, a description of the proposal, a summary of the impacts and proposed compensation concept, and identification of all the local, state, and/or federal wetland related permit(s) required for the project, plus a vicinity map for the project;
(ii) 
Description of the existing wetland and buffer areas proposed to be impacted including: acreages (or square footage) based on professional surveys of the delineations; Cowardin classifications including dominant vegetation community types (for upland and wetland habitats); the results of a functional assessment for the entire wetland and the portions proposed to be impacted; wetland rating based on the provisions of this chapter;
(iii) 
An assessment of the potential changes in wetland hydroperiod from the proposed project and how the design has been modified to avoid, minimize or reduce adverse impacts to the wetland hydroperiod;
(iv) 
A description of the proposed conceptual compensation actions for wetland and upland areas. A description of future vegetation community types for years one, three, five, 10 and 25 post-installation including the succession of vegetation community types and dominants expected. A description of the successional sequence of expected changes in hydroperiod for the compensation site(s) for the same time periods as vegetation success. A description of the change in habitat characteristics expected over the same 25-year time period;
(v) 
An assessment of existing conditions in the zone of the proposed compensation, including: vegetation community structure and composition, existing hydroperiod, existing soil conditions, and existing habitat functions. An estimate of future conditions in this location if the compensation actions are not undertaken (i.e., how would this site progress through natural succession);
(vi) 
The field data collected to document existing conditions and on which future condition assumptions are based for hydroperiod (e.g., soil pit data – hand dug or mechanically trenched; soil boring data). Soil survey data is not sufficient to rely upon for establishing existing conditions;
(vii) 
A discussion of ongoing management practices that will protect wetlands after the project site has been developed, including proposed monitoring and maintenance programs;
(viii) 
A bond estimate for the entire compensatory mitigation including the following elements: site preparation, plant materials, construction materials, installation oversight, maintenance twice per year for up to five years, annual monitoring field work and reporting, and contingency actions for a maximum of the total required number of years for monitoring; and
(ix) 
Proof of establishment of a notice on title for the wetlands and buffers on the project site, including the compensatory mitigation areas.
(B) 
The scaled plan sheets for the compensatory mitigation must contain, at a minimum:
(i) 
Existing wetland and buffer surveyed edges, 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). Existing cross-sections of on-site wetland areas that are proposed to be impacted. 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. Illustration of how data for existing hydrologic conditions were utilized to inform the estimates of future hydrologic regimes;
(iv) 
Proposed conditions expected from the proposed actions on site including future HGM types, vegetation community types by dominant species (wetland and upland), and future hydrologic regimes;
(v) 
Required wetland buffers for existing wetlands and proposed compensation areas. Zones where buffers are proposed to be reduced or enlarged outside of the standards identified in this chapter;
(vi) 
A plant schedule including all species by proposed community type and hydrologic regime, size and type of plant material to be installed, spacing of plants, "typical" clustering patterns, total number of each species by community type, and 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 bi-annum.
(e) 
Additional Information. When appropriate, the director may also require the critical area report to include an evaluation by the state Department of Ecology or an independent qualified expert regarding the applicant's analysis and the effectiveness of any proposed mitigating measures or programs, and to include any recommendations as appropriate.
(1) 
If the development proposal site contains or is within a wetland area, the applicant shall submit an affidavit, which declares whether the applicant has knowledge of any illegal alteration to any or all wetlands on the proposed site and whether the applicant previously had been found in violation of this title. If the applicant has been found previously in violation, the applicant shall declare whether such violation has been corrected to the satisfaction of the jurisdiction.
(2) 
The director shall determine if the mitigation and monitoring plans and bonding measures proposed by the applicant are sufficient to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, consistent with the goals, purposes, objectives and requirements of Chapter 22.92 FMC and this chapter.
(Ord. 1375 § 2, 2005; Ord. 1574 § 5, 2016)
(a) 
Compensatory mitigation for alterations to wetlands 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), and Selected Wetland Mitigation Sites using a Watershed Approach (Western Washington) (Publication No. 09-06-32, Olympia, WA, December 2009).
(b) 
Mitigation shall be required in the following order of preference:
(1) 
Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action.
(2) 
Minimizing 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) 
Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment.
(4) 
Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations.
(5) 
Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments.
(6) 
Monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective measures.
(c) 
Compensation for Lost or Affected Functions. Compensation 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 as determined by a site-specific function assessment, 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 introduced species. This should only be attempted when there is an adequate source of water and it can be shown that the surface and subsurface hydrologic regime is conducive for the wetland community that is anticipated in the design.
(3) 
Enhancement of significantly degraded wetlands in combination with restoration or creation. Such enhancement should be part of a mitigation package that includes replacing the impacted area and meeting appropriate ratio requirements.
(e) 
Type and Location of Mitigation. Unless it is demonstrated that a higher level of ecological functioning would result from an alternate approach, compensatory mitigation for ecological functions shall be either in-kind and on-site, or in-kind and within the same stream reach or subbasin. Mitigation actions shall be conducted within the same subdrainage basin and on the same site as the alteration except when all of the following apply:
(1) 
There are no reasonable on-site or in-subdrainage basin opportunities (e.g., on-site options would require elimination of high functioning upland habitat), or on-site and in-subdrainage basin opportunities do not have a high likelihood of success based on a determination of the natural capacity of the site to compensate for the impacts. Consideration should include: anticipated wetland mitigation replacement ratios, buffer conditions and proposed widths, available water to maintain anticipated hydrogeomorphic classes of wetlands when restored, proposed flood storage capacity, potential to mitigate riparian fish and wildlife impacts (such as connectivity);
(2) 
Off-site mitigation has a greater likelihood of providing equal or improved wetland functions than the impacted wetland; and
(3) 
Off-site locations shall be in the same subdrainage basin unless:
(A) 
Established watershed goals for water quality, flood or conveyance, habitat, or other wetland functions have been established by the city and strongly justify location of mitigation at another site; or
(B) 
Credits from a state certified wetland mitigation bank are used as mitigation and the use of credits is consistent with the terms of the bank's certification.
(f) 
Timing of Compensatory Mitigation. It is preferred that compensation projects be completed prior to activities that will disturb the on-site wetlands. At the least, compensatory mitigation shall be completed immediately following disturbance and prior to use or occupancy of the action or development. Construction of mitigation projects shall be timed to reduce impacts to existing fisheries, wildlife, and flora.
The director may authorize a one-time temporary delay in completing construction or installation of the compensatory mitigation when the applicant provides a written explanation from a qualified wetland professional as to the rationale for the delay. An appropriate rationale would include identification of the environmental conditions that could produce a high probability of failure or significant construction difficulties (for example, project delay lapses past a fisheries window; or plan installation should be delayed until the dormant season to ensure greater survivability 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, and 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 mitigation plan. The justification must be verified and approved by the city.
(g) 
Mitigation Ratios.
(1) 
Acreage Replacement Ratios. The following ratios in Table 22.93.A shall apply to creation or restoration, rehabilitation, reestablishment or creation and enhancement, or enhancement only, 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 remedial actions resulting from unauthorized alterations; greater ratios shall apply in those cases. These ratios do not apply to the use of credits from a state-certified wetland mitigation bank. When credits from a certified bank are used, replacement ratios should be consistent with the requirements of the bank's certification. The first number specifies the acreage of replacement wetlands and the second specifies the acreage of wetlands altered.
Table 22.93.A Mitigation Ratios
Category and Type of Wetland
Reestablishment or Creation
Rehabilitation**
1:1 Reestablishment or Creation (R/C) and Enhancement (E)
Enhancement Only
All Category IV
1.5:1
3:1
1:1 R/C and 2:1 E
6:1
All Category III
2:1
4:1
1:1 R/C and 2:1 E
8:1
All Category II
3:1
8:1
1:1 R/C and 2:1 E
12:1
Category I Forested
6:1
12:1
1:1 R/C and 10:1 E
24:1
Category I based on score for functions
4:1
8:1
1:1 R/C and 6:1 E
16:1
Category I Natural Heritage site
Not considered possible*
6:1 rehabilitation of a Natural Heritage site
Case-by-case
Case-by-case
Category I Bog
Not considered possible*
6:1 rehabilitation of a bog
Case-by-case
Case-by-case
* Natural Heritage sites and bogs are considered irreplaceable wetlands, and therefore no amount of compensation would replace these ecosystems. Avoidance is the best option. In the rare cases when impacts cannot be avoided, replacement ratios will be assigned on a case-by-case basis. However, these ratios will be significantly higher than the other ratios for Category I wetlands.
** Rehabilitation ratios are based on the assumption that actions judged to be most effective for that site are being implemented.
(2) 
Increased Replacement Ratio. The director may increase the ratios under the following circumstances:
(A) 
Uncertainty exists as to the probable success of the proposed restoration or creation; or
(B) 
A significant period of time will elapse between impact and establishment of wetland functions at the mitigation site; or
(C) 
Proposed mitigation will result in a lower category wetland or reduced functions relative to the wetland being impacted; or
(D) 
The impact was an unauthorized impact.
(3) 
Reduced Replacement Ratio. The director may reduce the ratios under the following circumstances:
(A) 
Documentation by a qualified wetland specialist demonstrates that the proposed mitigation actions have a very high likelihood of success based on prior experience; or
(B) 
Documentation by a qualified wetland specialist demonstrates that the proposed actions for compensation will provide functions and values that are significantly greater than the wetland being impacted; or
(C) 
The proposed actions for compensation are conducted in advance of the impact and are shown to be successful; or
(D) 
In wetlands where several HGM classes are found within one delineated boundary, the ratios can be decreased if:
(i) 
Impacts to the wetland are all within an area that has a different HGM class from the one used to establish the category; and
(ii) 
The category of this area with a different class is "lower" than that of the entire wetland; and
(iii) 
The proponents provide adequate hydrologic and geomorphic data to establish that the boundary between the HGM classes lies outside of the footprint of the impacts.
(h) 
Preservation. Impacts to wetlands may be mitigated by preservation of wetland areas when used in combination with other forms of mitigation such as creation, restoration, or enhancement at the preservation site or at a separate location. Preservation may also be used by itself, but more restrictions apply as outlined below.
(1) 
Preservation in Combination with Other Forms of Compensation. Using preservation as compensation is acceptable when done in combination with restoration, creation, or enhancement; provided, that a minimum of 1:1 acreage replacement is provided by restoration or creation and the criteria below are met:
(A) 
The impact area is small, and/or impacts are to a Category III or IV wetland;
(B) 
Preservation of a high quality system occurs in the same water resource inventory area (WRIA) or watershed basin where the wetland impact occurs;
(C) 
Preservation sites include buffer areas adequate to protect the habitat and its functions from encroachment and degradation; and
(D) 
Mitigation ratios for preservation in combination with other forms of mitigation shall range from 10:1 to 20:1, as determined on a case-by-case basis, depending on the quality of the wetlands being mitigated and the quality of the wetlands being preserved.
(2) 
Preservation as the Sole Means of Compensation for Wetland Impacts. Preservation of at-risk, high quality habitat may be considered as the sole means of compensation for wetland impacts when all of the following criteria are met:
(A) 
Preservation is used as a form of compensation only after the standard sequencing of mitigation (avoid, minimize, and then compensate) has been applied;
(B) 
Creation, restoration, and enhancement opportunities have also been considered, and preservation is the best mitigation option;
(C) 
The impact area is small, and/or impacts are to a Category III or IV wetland;
(D) 
Preservation of a high quality system occurs in the same water resource inventory area (WRIA) or watershed basin where the wetland impact occurs;
(E) 
Preservation sites include buffer areas adequate to protect the habitat and its functions from encroachment and degradation;
(F) 
The preservation site is determined to be under imminent threat, specifically, sites with the potential to experience a high rate of undesirable ecological change due to on-site or off-site activities. "Potential" includes permitted, planned, or likely actions that are not adequately protected under existing regulations (e.g., logging of forested wetlands); and
(G) 
The area proposed for preservation is of high quality and critical for the health of the watershed or basin. Some of the following features may be indicative of high quality sites:
(i) 
Category I or II wetland rating;
(ii) 
Rare wetland type (e.g., bogs and mature forested wetlands);
(iii) 
Habitat for threatened or endangered species;
(iv) 
Wetland type that is rare in the area;
(v) 
Provides biological and/or hydrological connectivity;
(vi) 
High regional or watershed importance (e.g., listed as priority site in watershed plan); and
(vii) 
Large size with high species diversity (plants and/or animals) and/or high abundance.
(H) 
Mitigation ratios for preservation as the sole means of mitigation shall generally start at 20:1. Specific ratios should depend upon the significance of the preservation project and the quality of the wetland resources lost.
(i) 
Wetland Mitigation Banks.
(1) 
Credits from a wetland mitigation bank may be approved for use as compensation for unavoidable impacts to wetlands when:
(A) 
The bank is certified under state rules;
(B) 
The director determines that the wetland mitigation bank provides appropriate compensation for the authorized impacts; and
(C) 
The proposed use of credits is consistent with the terms and conditions of the certified bank instrument.
(2) 
Replacement ratios for projects using bank credits shall be consistent with replacement ratios specified in the certified bank instrument.
(3) 
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, bank service areas may include portions of more than one adjacent drainage basin for specific wetland functions.
(j) 
Credit/Debit Method. To more fully protect functions and values, and as an alternative to the mitigation ratios found in the joint guidance "Wetland Mitigation in Washington State Parts I and II" (Ecology Publication No. 06-06-011a-b, Olympia, WA, March, 2006), the director may allow mitigation based on the "credit/debit" method developed by the Department of Ecology in "Calculating Credits and Debits for Compensatory Mitigation in Wetlands of Western Washington: Final Report," (Ecology Publication No. 10-06-011, Olympia, WA, March 2012, or as revised).
(k) 
In-Lieu Fee. To aid in the implementation of off-site mitigation, the city may develop an in-lieu fee program. 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. An approved in-lieu fee program sells compensatory mitigation credits to permittees whose obligation to provide compensatory mitigation is then transferred to the in-lieu program sponsor, a governmental or nonprofit natural resource management entity. Credits from an approved in-lieu fee program may be used when subsections (k)(1) through (6) of this section apply:
(1) 
The approval authority determines that it would provide environmentally appropriate compensation for the proposed impacts.
(2) 
The mitigation will occur on a site identified using the site selection and prioritization process in the approved in-lieu fee program instrument.
(3) 
The proposed use of credits is consistent with the terms and conditions of the approved in-lieu fee program instrument.
(4) 
Land acquisition and initial physical and biological improvements of the mitigation site must be completed within three years of the credit sale.
(5) 
Projects using in-lieu fee credits shall have debits associated with the proposed impacts calculated by the applicant's qualified wetland scientist using the method consistent with the credit assessment method specified in the approved instrument for the in-lieu fee program.
(6) 
Credits from an approved in-lieu fee program may be used to compensate for impacts located within the service area specified in the approved in-lieu fee instrument.
(l) 
Advance Mitigation. Mitigation for projects with pre-identified 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.
(m) 
Alternative Mitigation Plans. The director may approve alternative critical areas mitigation plans that are based on best available science. 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 director shall consider the following for approval of an alternative mitigation proposal:
(1) 
The proposal uses a watershed approach consistent with Selecting Wetland Mitigation Sites Using a Watershed Approach (Western Washington) (Ecology Publication No. 09-06-32, Olympia, WA, December 2009).
(2) 
Creation or enhancement of a larger system of natural areas and open space is preferable to the preservation of many individual habitat areas.
(3) 
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.
(4) 
There is clear potential for success of the proposed mitigation at the proposed mitigation site.
(5) 
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 FMC § 22.93.060(d).
(6) 
The plan shall be reviewed and approved as part of overall approval of the proposed use.
(7) 
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.
(8) 
Mitigation guarantees shall meet the minimum requirements as outlined in FMC § 22.93.060(d)(2)(A)(viii).
(9) 
Qualified professionals in each of the critical areas addressed shall prepare the plan.
(10) 
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. 1375 § 2, 2005; Ord. 1574 § 6, 2016)
The subdivision and short subdivision of land in wetlands and associated buffers is subject to the following:
(a) 
Land that is located wholly within a wetland or its buffer may not be subdivided.
(b) 
Land that is located partially within a wetland or its buffer may be subdivided; provided, that an accessible and contiguous portion of each new lot is located outside of the wetland and its buffer.
(c) 
Access roads and utilities serving the proposed subdivision may be permitted within the wetland and associated buffers only if the city determines that no other feasible alternative exists and when consistent with Chapter 22.92 FMC and this chapter.
(Ord. 1375 § 2, 2005)
(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 director 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 director may require the applicant to install permanent signs along the boundary of a wetland or buffer.
(1) 
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 sign shall be worded as follows or with alternative language approved by the director:
Protected Wetland Area
Do Not Disturb
Contact City of Fircrest
Regarding Uses, Restrictions, and Opportunities for Stewardship
(2) 
The provisions of subsection (b)(1) of this section may be modified as necessary to assure protection of sensitive features or wildlife.
(c) 
Fencing.
(1) 
The director shall determine if fencing is necessary to protect the functions and values of the critical area. If found to be necessary, the director shall condition any permit or authorization issued pursuant to this chapter to require the applicant to install a permanent fence at the edge of the wetland buffer, when fencing will prevent future impacts to the wetland.
(2) 
The applicant shall be required to install a permanent fence around the wetland or buffer when domestic grazing animals are present or may be introduced on site.
(3) 
Fencing installed as part of a proposed activity or as required in this subsection shall be designed so as to not interfere with species migration, including fish runs, and shall be constructed in a manner that minimizes impacts to the wetland and associated habitat.
(Ord. 1375 § 2, 2005)
(a) 
Buffer Requirements. The standard buffer widths in Table 22.93.B, below, 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 western Washington.
(1) 
The use of the standard buffer widths requires the implementation of the measures in Table 22.93.C, below, where applicable, to minimize the impacts of the adjacent land uses.
(2) 
If an applicant chooses not to apply the mitigation measures in Table 22.93.C, then a 33 percent increase in the width of all buffers is required. For example, a 75-foot buffer with the mitigation measures would be a 100-foot buffer without them.
(3) 
The standard buffer widths 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.
(4) 
Additional buffer widths are added to the standard buffer widths. For example, a Category I wetland scoring 32 points for habitat function would require a buffer of 225 feet (75 plus 150).
Table 22.93.B Wetland Buffer Requirements for Western Washington
Buffer width (in feet) based on habitat score
Wetland Category
3 – 4 (Low)
5 (Medium Low)
6 – 7 (Medium High)
8 – 9 (High)
Category I: Based on total score
75
105
165
225
Category I: Bogs and Wetlands of High Conservation Value
190
225
Category I: Forested
75
105
165
225
Category II: Based on score
75
105
165
225
Category III (all)
60
105
165
225
Category IV (all)
40
Table 22.93.C Required Measures to Minimize Impacts to Wetlands
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 (per PSAT publication on LID techniques)
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
Disruption of corridors or connections
• Maintain connections to offsite areas that are undisturbed
• Restore corridors or connections to offsite habitats by replanting
(b) 
Conditions for Increasing Buffer Widths or Enhancing Buffers.
(1) 
Buffer is not vegetated with plants appropriate for the region. The recommended widths for buffers are based on the assumption that the buffer is vegetated with a native plant community appropriate for the ecoregion or with one that performs similar functions. If the existing buffer is unvegetated, sparsely vegetated, or vegetated with nonnative 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 in the buffer are provided. Generally, improving the vegetation will be more effective than widening the buffer.
(2) 
Buffer has a steep slope. The effectiveness of buffers at removing pollutants before they enter a wetland decreases as the slope increases. If the buffer for a wetland is to be based on the score for its ability to improve water quality rather than habitat or other criteria, then the buffer should be increased by 50 percent if the slope is greater than 30 percent.
(3) 
Buffer is used by sensitive species. If the wetland provides habitat for a particularly sensitive species (such as a threatened or endangered species), the buffer width should be increased to provide adequate protection for the species based on its particular life history needs. Buffer requirements for certain priority species may be obtained from the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife.
(c) 
Buffer Averaging. The widths of buffers may be averaged if this will improve the protection of wetland functions, or if it is the only way to allow for reasonable use of a parcel.
(1) 
Averaging to improve wetland protection may be permitted when all of the following conditions are met:
(A) 
The wetland has 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; and
(B) 
The buffer is increased adjacent to the higher-functioning area of habitat or more sensitive portion of the wetland and decreased adjacent to the lower functioning or less sensitive portion; and
(C) 
The total area of the buffer after averaging is equal to the area required without averaging; and
(D) 
The buffer at its narrowest point is never less than 75 percent of the standard width or 75 feet for Category I and II, 50 feet for Category III, and 25 feet for Category IV, whichever is greater.
(2) 
Averaging to allow reasonable use of a parcel may be permitted when all of the following conditions are met:
(A) 
There are no feasible alternatives to the site design that could be accomplished without buffer averaging; and
(B) 
The averaged buffer will not result in degradation of the wetland's functions and values as demonstrated by a report from a qualified wetland expert; and
(C) 
The total area of the buffer after averaging is equal to the area required without averaging; and
(D) 
The buffer at its narrowest point is never less than 75 percent of the standard width or 75 feet for Category I and II, 50 feet for Category III, and 25 feet for Category IV, whichever is greater.
(d) 
Buffers on Mitigation Sites. All mitigation sites shall have buffers consistent with the buffer requirements of this chapter and based on expected or target category of the proposed wetland mitigation site.
(e) 
Buffer Maintenance. Except as otherwise specified or allowed in accordance with Chapter 22.92 FMC and this chapter, wetland buffers shall be retained in an undisturbed or enhanced condition. Removal of invasive nonnative weeds is required for the duration of the mitigation bond.
(f) 
Buffer Uses. The following uses may be permitted within a wetland buffer in accordance with the review procedures of Chapter 22.92 FMC and this chapter, provided they are not prohibited by any other applicable law and they are conducted in a manner 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 report, including:
(A) 
Walkways and trails; provided, that those pathways are limited to minor crossings that have no adverse impact on water quality. They should be generally parallel to the perimeter of the wetland located only in the outer 25 percent of the buffer area, and located to avoid removal of significant trees. They should be limited to pervious surfaces no more than five feet in width for pedestrian use only. Raised boardwalks utilizing nontreated pilings area may be acceptable; and
(B) 
Wildlife viewing structures.
(3) 
Educational and scientific research activities.
(4) 
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 footprint or use of the facility or right-of-way.
(5) 
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 alteration of the wetland by changing existing topography, water conditions, or water sources.
(6) 
Drilling for utilities/utility corridors under a buffer with the entrance/exit portals located completely outside of the wetland buffer boundary; provided, that the drilling does not interrupt the ground water connection to the wetland or percolation of surface water down through the soil column. Specific studies by a hydrologist are necessary to determine whether the ground water connection to the wetland or percolation of surface water down through the soil column will be disturbed.
(7) 
Enhancement of a wetland buffer through the removal of nonnative invasive plant species. Removal of invasive plant species shall be restricted to hand removal unless permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies have been obtained for approved biological or chemical treatments. 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 the species. Revegetation with appropriate native species at natural densities is allowed in conjunction with removal of invasive plant species.
(8) 
Stormwater management facilities. Stormwater management facilities are limited to stormwater dispersion outfalls and bioswales. They may be allowed within the outer 25 percent of the buffer of Category III or IV wetlands only; provided, that:
(A) 
No other location is feasible;
(B) 
The location of such facilities will not degrade the functions or values of the wetland; and
(C) 
Stormwater management facilities are not allowed in buffers of Category I or II wetlands.
(9) 
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.
(Ord. 1375 § 2, 2005; Ord. 1574 § 7, 2016)
The purpose of on-site density transfer is to cluster development in a manner that provides protection for wetlands and allows transfer of residential density from a wetland and/or wetland buffer to an area on the same site that is neither wetland nor buffer. A request for on-site density transfer shall be considered pursuant to the planned development review process in Chapter 22.76 FMC.
Those portions of the wetland and/or wetland buffer in which regulated activities are proposed to occur shall not be considered in calculating density transfer. Density transfer shall be determined as follows:
(a) 
For sites containing regulated wetland buffer areas, full density credit may be transferred from the buffer area to the nonbuffer area.
(b) 
For sites containing regulated wetland areas, density transfer shall be calculated from the following table.
On-Site Density Transfer
Percentage of site in wetland
Amount of credit
0 – 25%
75%
26 – 50%
50%
51 – 100%
25%
(Ord. 1375 § 2, 2005)
When an Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 permit is required for a project involving wetlands, the Army Corps permitting process may be substituted for the city permitting process. If a proposal reviewed and conditioned by the Corps satisfies the intent of this chapter, no further wetland review shall be required by the city. If a proposal reviewed and conditioned by the Corps does not satisfy the intent of this chapter, then a critical areas report shall be prepared in accordance with FMC § 22.93.030, and modifications made to the project if warranted, in order to demonstrate compliance with this chapter. All permits and approvals required by other city development regulations shall be required.
(Ord. 1375 § 2, 2005)