Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
MEP2007-00098, HMP, Mitigation Plan and Environmental Checklist - MEP Permit / Conditions - 8/30/2008
lk THE WETLAND CORPS Wetland Delineation • Habitat Management Plans • Riparian Restoration • Mitigation Biological Evaluation CARROUGHER MITIGATION PLAN R E lC E v E D JAN 14 2009 Parce1322334400010 7611 East State Route 106 MASON CO. PLANNING DEPT. Union,Washington Mason County,WA Prepared for: John & Gretchen Carroughcr 3516 24tn Avenue Court NW Gig Harbor,WA 98335 Prepared by: Lee Boad and Heather Lane August,2008 THE WETLAND CORPS Wetland Delineation • Habitat Management Plans • Riparian Restoration - Mitigation • Biological Evaluation CARROUGHER 1VIITIGATION PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................1 2.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ......................................................................................2 3.0 APPLICABLE SETBACKS.........................................................................................2 4.0 ANALYSIS OF EFFECTS.... ............................................................3 5.0 MITIGATION MEASURES........................................................................................4 6.0 MONITORING SUMMARY ................................................................5 7.0 SUMMARY....................................................................................................................5 Figures Figure 1. Site Vicinity Map Figure 2. Site Map Figure 3. National Wetland Inventory Map Figure 4. Mason County Soil Survey Figure 5. Department of Natural Resources Water Resource Map Attached: State Wetland Rating Form THE WETLAND CORPS 41rTf Wetland Delineation - Habitat Management Plans - Riparian Restoration - Mitigation • Biological Evaluation August, 2008 TWC08-377 Page No. 1 CARROUGHER MITIGATION PLAN 7611 East State Route 106 Union,Washington 1.0 INTRODUCTION This mitigation plan has been prepared for John and Gretchen Carrougher to address placement of fill within a Category 11 Wetland. The property is located off of State Route 106 in Union, Washington (Parcel number 322334400010). The site is found in the SE 1/4 of Section 33, Township 22 North, Range 3 West. A wetland report titled "Wetland Reconnaissance Report and Water System Access Proposal was prepared by Lee Boad Habitat Management Planning and Wetland Services for this parcel in 2004. That report addressed details of the wetland meeting criteria for a Category H Wetland, and recommended a location for a proposed road to be constructed to access the well head located adjacent to the wetland. The road was proposed to be the minimum width and size necessary to access the water system, and would be constructed at the time of immediate need for the road such as system failure. The road grade, as originally proposed,would occupy approximately 750 square feet within the wetland and buffer. The construction of the road grade took place in spring of 2008, and included some additional critical area modifications, not proposed in the report discussed above. The completed road has been constructed to include a gravel parking area occupying a total project footprint of 4,550 square feet within the property, displacing approximately 3,400 square feet within the wetland, and 1,150 square feet within the associated buffer. Also included in this report is an updated rating of the wetland using the latest version of the Mason County Resource Ordinance, Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington (Hruby 2004). The wetland meets criteria for a Category H Wetland with moderate habitat function, requiring a buffer of 110-feet with an additional 15-foot building setback according to Table 17.01.070 E of the Mason County Resource Ordinance (The rating form is provided in the Appendix of this report). The objectives of this Mitigation Plan are as follows: ■ To evaluate the potential adverse effects to critical area functions as well as fish and wildlife habitat resulting from displacement of 3,400 square feet of wetland area and 1,150 square feet of wetland buffer. Emphasis is placed on the possible loss of habitat for any listed species found to be residing in the vicinity of the parcel. ■ To identify possible mitigation measures that could be implemented to offset the adverse effects resulting from the displacement of the wetland and wetland buffer. PO Box 2854 Belfair, Washington 98528-Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421•boad40@peoplepc.com Carrougher Mitigation Plan TWC08W368 August,2008 Page No.2 The following restoration plan is being provided to be used by Mason County staff, the client, and/or a landscape professional for implementation purposes. The client will ultimately be responsible for the implementation and the overall success of this plan. The goal of this plan is to enhance remaining native vegetation and control non-native invasive species, and mitigate for the modification to the critical areas to the extent feasible. 2.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Bordered to the north by Hood Canal, the parcel spans approximately 212 feet from north to south, and 115 feet from east to west with Highway 106 passing through the center. Based on a parcel map review and field measurements, it appears that the western property line parallels a perennial non-fishbearing stream located on the adjacent ownership while the wetland spans the entire width of the parcel section located south of Highway 106. The well is located south of the wetland near the base of the hillside. An approximately 60-foot segment of the ownership is located between Highway 106 and the Hood Canal OHWM. Soil mapped and confirmed in upland portions of the ownership is Alderwood Gravelly Sandy loam,which is a well drained upland soil. The stream located on the adjacent ownership flows out of a steep forested canyon,through the wetland, and then drains under Highway 106 through a culvert that is perched on the downstream end. As the stream is perennial and nonfishearing, it is regulated as a type Np stream in Mason County. Although the stream is not located on the property, the associated buffer does encompass a portion of the ownership. The stream requires a buffer of 75-feet with an additional 15-foot building setback. The Category II Wetland is located along the lower portion of a hillside and drains into the roadside ditch associated with Highway 106. High watertables and hillside seepage support the wetland hydrological regime. Seasonal flooding of the stream also contributes on an intermittent basis. Vegetation within the wetland is comprised predominately of western red cedar (Thuja plicata, FAC), red alder (Alnus rubra, FAC), slough sedge (Carex obnupta, OBL), skunk cabbage (Lysichiton americanum, OBL) and salmonberry (Rubes spectabilis, FAC+). The wetland appears to occupy approximately 6,000 square feet in size within the property, and continues west off the property. 3.0 APPLICABLE SETBACKS The project site is within the jurisdiction of Mason County. Ordinance 17.01.070 identifies Wetlands adopted by Mason County. The applicable setbacks for this parcel are as follows: Habitat Type Buffer Building Setback from Buffer Category U Wetland 110, 15' PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528 Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421•boad40@peoplepc.com Carrougher Mitigation Plan TWC08W368 August,2008 Page No.3 4.0 ANALYSIS OF EFFECTS The work occurred within a Category H Wetland. Based on the field review and measurements provided by the project applicant, we have approximated the project scale in the protected area to be as follows: Disturbance Habitat Type ADDroximate Scale Road Grade&Parking Area Category H Wetland 3,400 sq. ft. Road Grade& Parking Area Category H Wetland 1,150 sq. ft. 4.1 Vegetation Disturbance Vegetation disturbance entails the displacement of 3,400 square feet of wetland vegetation within a Category 11 Wetland, and 1,150 square feet within the associated wetland buffer. Based on observance of the site in 2004 and vegetation throughout the undisturbed portion of the wetland, the vegetation removed for the road likely entailed and overstory of western red cedar ('Thuja plicata, FAC) and red alder (Alnus rubra, FAC), with an understory comprised of almonberry (Rubus spectabilis,FAC+), slough sedge(Carex obnupta, OBL), and skunk cabbage (Lysichiton americanum, OBL). Vegetation removed from the wetland buffer likely included Douglas fir (Psuedotsuga menziesii, FAC[), red alder (Alnus rubra, FAC), western red cedar (Thuja plicata, FAC), salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis, FAC+), salal (Gaultheria shallon, FACL1), and swordfem(Polystichum munitum, FACU). Y r ..� ram{--Sa���'.' +.• Photo 1. Road grade and parking area over a portion of the wetland. PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528•Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421•boad40@peopiepcocom Carrougher Mitigation Plan TWC08W368 August,2008 Page NoA 5.0 MITIGATION MEASURES Mason County requires specific compensatory mitigation for activities within wetlands. According to table 17.01.0701-1 of the Mason ratio unty of3 to 1;tt or Resource rehabilitated attegory a ratiolof 8 to Wetlands are to be re-established or recreated at atio enhanced at a ratio of 12 to 1; or a combination res that either l 0,00 square feet of wetland be re- the ordinance. Therefore, the Ordnance q 800 square feet established or recreated; or 27,200 square feet of wetland be rehabilitated; or 40, of wetland be enhanced. Site specific limitations do not allow for mitigation to be conducted at a level that will meet Mason County requirements. The remaining upland areas on the property are too steep to accommodate wetland creation and there is not enough wetland area available to satisfy the 12:1 enhancement ratio. These mitigation recommendations are provided to compensate to the extent feasible for the completed work. It is recommended that the entire wetland within the parcel, outside of the completed road,be enhanced with native tree plantings. The total area to be enhanced occupies approximately 2,600 square feet. Since the wetland area already contains a moderately dense understory, no understory species plantings are recommended. It is recommended that trees be planted at a density of 10-feet on center within the wetland, spaced around existing trees. It is recommended that a minimum of three different species from the list below be planted from 5- gallon containers. The trees should be flagged and numbered for monitoring purposes. Western red cedar(Thuja plicata, FAC) Red alder(Alnus rubra,FAC) Oregon Ash(Fraxinus latifolia,FACW) Cascara(Rhamnus purshiana,FAC-) To fulfill the above mentioned planting density recommendation, the wetland will be planted with 26 trees. Typically, planting should occur during winter dormancy. The optimum time for planting is during February and March, however, the need to complete the project in a timely manner may call for planting to occur outside optimum time periods. No machinery earthwork will be necessary to implement this plan; planting holes for specified vegetation installation will be hand dug. No additional clearing or grading should be required for site restoration. Using plants from potted containers (as opposed to bare root)and planting between October 15t' and March 15'h is recommended to ensure survival. Periodic irrigation during extended dry periods may be necessary during the first few years. The monitoring program is recommended to insure project effectiveness. 5.3 NON-NATIVE/INVASIVE SPECIES CONTROL Canadian thistle, fireweed, reed Invasive species such as Himalayan blackberry, scottsbroom, canary grass, Japanese knotweed, and English Ivy may invade the Category lI Wetland. It is recommended that the Category H Wetland be inspected for the presence of nonnative species, listed above. These species are stubborn competitors for light and nutrients and limit success of PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528•Cell Phone 360-620-0618.0ffice Phone 360-372-2421-boad4O@peoplepc.com Carrougher Mitigation Plan TWC08W368 August,2008 Page No.5 native plants. The invasive species should be removed immediately upon inspection to allow the native growth to continue to succeed. Herbicides should not be used to achieve this due to the proximity to the wetland. 5.4 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Recommended Best Management Practices for this project are as follows: • Minimize amount of erodible soils at any given time to the maximum extent feasible. • Comply with all permits and requirements of governing authority. 6.0 MONITORING the first fall following plantings and maintained on a seasonal Monitoring of the site will begin ide the following: 1) condition of reintroduced plant basis. The information gathered will prov species; 2) the use of the site by wildlife species; 3) any unforeseen disturbance and its effect on the protected zones and associated aquatic habi> t that occurrence y bendeemedotic necessarysto pro ide the Category II Wetland; 5) any corrective measures desired conditions. This_monitoring will be in effect for the duration of fiy_ey_e-,- The information gathered will be provided in an annual report and submitted to the Director of Mason County Department of Community Development. 7.0 SUMMARY This report addresses mitigation for the displacement of 3,400 square feet of Category II Wetland nd parking area. The and 1,150 square feet of associated buffer, for the construction of a road he wetland and buffer. completed road grade and parking area occupies 4,550 square feet within t Compensation mitigation ratios required by Mason County cannot be met given site specific constraints of the parcel. A proposal to enhance the remaining 2600 square feet of wetland within the parcel with native trees and remove invasive species is proposed for mitigating the completed work to the extent feasible. Mitigation measures and Best Management Practices have that the site can been provided to compensate for wetland and buffer displacement to the extent We trust this information is sufficient for ��needs ou have any questions feel free to you for call. �e Wetland Corps as your environmental co Y Respectfully submitted, The Wetland Corps Le oad Senior Ecologist PO Box 2854 Be If Washington 98528 Cell Phone 360-620-0618.10ffice Phone 360-372-2421•boad40@peoplepc.com Carrougher Mitigation Plan TWC08W368 August,2008 Page No.6 Heather Lane Staff Wetland &Natural Resource Specialist PO Box 2854 Belfair, Washington 98528-Cell Phone 360-620-0618.office Phone 360-3 12-2421•boad40@peoplepc.com REFERENCES Cowardin, L.M.,V. Carter,F.C. Golet and F.T. LaRoe, 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service document FWS/OBS-79/31. 84 pp. Washington, D.C. Hitchcock, L.C. and A. Cronquist, 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press.. 730 pp. Pojar, J. and A. MacKinnon, 1994. Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast. Lone PinePublishing. 528 pp. Vancouver, British Columbia. Speare-Cooke, S., 1997. A Field Guide to the Common Wetland Plants of Western Washington and Northwestern Oregon. Seattle Audubon Society. 417 pp. US Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. Soil Survey of Kitsap County Area, Washington. September, 1980. US Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory. 1978. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 1993. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands Region 9—Northwest. Resource Management Group Washington State Department of Ecology, 1997. Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual. Ecology Publication#96-94, various pagination. Olympia, Washington. t0p0Zone s t ..IWy�N ��fkgg7 W kw*kL < +!I' � - j C � [3 _ �- 3,. 11 -'r r.� r L'��-•yT /.a �. v � �' a ':✓T n 1�.`: '� "- F .• qs � r/ .� r q �� _i�aefhy t �M; �.�f `0 ;�-�e'.9 ��W�,•��+ ^/Yi T� `7M�r _ _i C— •^ 4� 1.T� )rT.soS•vETS': Approximate Parcel s �: Location r r Z. i �, O i f �s • O '/ _ ,.1 Highway 106 {, +� j " _�. _r- t y'ts� -?�� � __- `ar '•( :! .7 r/�J ;I. i ,;r's �J ��17 l� (: mileIFV [aim .. i +;.�5•. + .,b.G .:_ �/ //: FIGURE 1 VICINITY MAP Project Name: Carrougher Mitigation Plan Location: Union,Washington Project: TWC08-W368 Client: John & Gretchen Carrougher Date: 8/08 THE WETLAND CORPS ubject Panel Hood Canal 7-7 Existing SFR State Route 106 i 1 ff I 1 _ 1 r 1 1 Ir ♦; Category 11 Wetland within property 110'buffer+15'building / Well Road and Parking setback ` Area within Area to be wedand& buffer/� replanted with native trees110, 1 5' N 0 100' FIGURE 2. SITE MAP Project Name. C arrow • her Mitigation Plan g Location: Union,Washington 7 Project: TWCO8-W368 THE WETLAND CORPS Client: John& Gretchen Carrougher Date.. 8/08 Map Legend cor+us crtfas Approximate C C4NU5 Statos 1 a„ 00K ia;. •k,,+ Parcel Location 'ii , •{; �,,�'�'4�;r�'i��`}(��'�fte�:�n ��:�'R.�'Z';'�:w" ' ,rs�, ,a,� �,.'•�rT�� ,� ^�Vt.riy. v�v,� , Y, ,,,.�:� SS:•+. ` ,�''";' g i : �d` ' \!j�,�C'0 ,f?>,t.;::4;+,:` v"a, } •,r�.`;"�+.•::,,+: "�a'�s" rr..r,.,+y�.yY�a r ;, .F; i`.S '"�'� �,�,!. )n;,:,'v�.�Q� '�Y» ur,.'!'�. •�, gyr.�.y 2•' !. �,���•:�,..., r:. M Lower.16Y1atland Polygonsr, ,,y, '�+;,� rw•va +"•V,Y°, •r,•.+t y ,", ', L:'r ,.x ��';'". ufY' ,, ;iy,nc} ae a�,,a � � Sp l;. {G, �RI •,'� ,� >, M,., .�, v,�'�S;.'` �", a(�f'"•.i'"J.��`, .f,., ,�� 'R�. � ey, ;,,/,,. . ,"Yi ,. R s;, ,,,{{,S•i; a, F , `:: w:ku,+Y, ,:.:,).••Y a Soy y;;,1>.. nuM�rint4N!pwatB .r,r. ;fn .R , '•�,4, ,ro;SJr.' u1 ,uretl•!, .S,cr, ,' •'�?{��•�,,., ,{,+h.'e}:r.,.,,,.?'{.;., :,�';�,!,.i ,:) f( '•. 0, . + .!;.' !''•„• ' •v�,,��f, �r� a,"iJcr. �y�..y :,,?v�S,.,� Esluannr s gt \ r1; �, �{,,, , 3) ;•i{��ri�. f� �'+; +,:.v,,•»� �k,V. ��1'} ��;. ,:Y:•rtr'+ .ol, '�;,J 4 �,\,f " �,�,�. ,.'{ � Eatuar,ne ariu MJrin*Wpn4kild �cn �� ,pr{�r f�';'f,.�'� �a�q� ••�'+cK�ir+ �^�}`e{+� �•v t�5r - ---- 1n {r,•;Y�. ' •�ti .�;,,Y'. Sj;{;{S•,.a,�tiy.:;( �+'d."', ?rn1.,n ,'?�'���!`:�,;ult,stn�o>i:,�•":;{va�Q,r .;er�kfi�"�C''!�}1�'� "!Sf ---- 'ati1: �,,;,�qp�t� , �n��:;�aaa:$r,,'r`tY�r,4•';fa��,+3'' .;j°1rn#'i�'.�'�I.���•ru,,!,.y,:E1UBL+>.\�'�,;,,5 mt w. ,e, ;�� ' f'�r"4 I�royhwatrr tnwrryvnt Wotl�nd -- -.�,, �pS;<, ',•�, .,�.:o�k`�'!�''��C,.' ",�x.rmLu,rf,; {,p.} :,a�;,;'K'l .t..,./,;�•1a+';�'n.J., • �+} '� C ,� �, ,4.,yk'i,�eY,r!i){ ,` _r 7,')�; ,� ''+•fir n,�,\.,,�''� „",�,.,�/�, a �a•,:;! :•h a�,{,.p ,�e7:[1;gtr�ir;�;;�n{�,1: (� ;x ,, � g.#Yha a IF r"nwater Forastutl5iv ub WMranu I rauhwater Pond LAC Other HA L L E P - - •>.;,k tdi ,rr,, .,•f!�' %a,?�,;';+",?,,. C5,n ,3x% Ef 7�' C�Sf�.C•.' a�i>: ra�!,'7, JHFE Nup LE -.E2NB�USt�,k�;',, , u,�Y' `r:• r.'.:{'� �'•' �o�+(,' ,'•>);�. 5�3,�;' 3• r.:•r;r •';( �`i'utr;^�+.g�,�;>'• u�r7`a/;wl.e,eur,..3i�`+"�uu/ :;,:�;ir:w v �'} a,: 'a tawY•:.;,!R/„Y;t.;,ur;:a{J'Or: ,;J,vYii'YG:'":;(,y;3>n',,x� i° >.;Y, filurrin! .FF,:, UE n1. t,1d.'_.,gN n�+� t �;r { ,><.aj',. Un+on Washington N %i? I,Aao—iter.47'2T 53't. Figure 3 National Wetland Inventory Map Figure adapted from NWI Section 33 Township 22 North Range 3 West Mapper website FIGURE 3 NWI MAP Project Name: Carrougher Mitigation Plan Location: Union,Washington Project: TWC08-W368 Client: John & Gretchen Carrougher -72 Date: 8/08 THE WETLAND CORPS Note: No wetlands mapped within approximate parcel location. F. = - Approximated C _ , Parcel Location `F�rt Onsite Soil Conditions based on Mason County Soil Survey Subject Site Soils: The onsite soil type has been identified as: Ab-Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 5 to 15 percent slopes. The Alderwood series consists of brown, well-drained, upland soils. They have developed from mixed gravelly glacial till dominated by acid igneous rock. The imbedded gravel is mainly granite and quartzite. Rainfall is 45 to 60 inches a year. The native vegetation is a dense forest consisting almost entirely of Douglas-fir and a dense understory of salal, Oregon-grape, vine maple, and huckleberry. Northeast of the Hood Canal the understory is mainly rhododendron. Alderwood soils occupy the extensive rolling glacial moraines, and they are the dominant soils in the eastern part of the county. The Alderwood soils are associated with the somewhat excessively drained Everett and Indianola soils and with the moderately well drained Kitsap soils. Shelton and Hoodsport soils differ from the Alderwood soils in that they have developed under high rainfall and from glacial till having a much higher content of basic igneous rock. The Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 5 to 15 percent slopes (Ab) is the most extensive, soil of the Alderwood series. It occupies undulating to rolling moraines. A more detailed soil description can be found in Appendix B Mason Soil Survey Text. FIGURE 4 SOIL SURVEY Project Name: Carrougher Mitigation Plan Location: Union,Washington Project: TWC08-W368 Client: John & Gretchen Carrougher THE VVETL_iAD CORP—'N Date: 8/08 Note: Hydric soils not present in project vicinity. a Puget Sou ad Approximate parcel location S Puget Rau ad 17 1704064 +704098 1704068 32, Ff z z J 2 F � z z l rt 1 ^n F 47 48A2T04040 +794+ 0 2 s N o y.(4 5 +70 20 f t 04022 1704024 t704 t oo SOILS H=;dric Soils TR__%NSPORTATION STRE-ACIIS Hizhly Unstable /e/Pared Road Stream'%V3terT ne 1-=(-a_:::de; I-Lzw-Erodible :�y vm ab_e Unpaved Road Stream Type L--I:n:)rM iEa.-t E"dible ^1 (� No Data or Grarel pi-- Road(Surface i ILIon-tli Stream tit,ater Type i Ve- s:da; �.�_-�bancloned Road Stream Tv e U--In3 n('[`e:-s:de c>lphaned Road ' Trail FIGURE 5 DNR STREAM MAP Project Name: Carrougher Mitigation Plan Location: Union,Washington Project: TWCO8-W368 Client: John & Gretchen Carrougher Date: 8/08 -THE NAIETL__'�IND CORPS Note: One type N stream mapped in project vicinity. WETLAND RATING FORM —WESTERN WASHINGTON Name of wetland(if known): Carrougher Wetland Location: SEC: 33 TWNSHP:22N PNGE:03W (attach map with outline of wetland to rating form) Person(s)Rating Wetland: H. LANE Affiliation: TWC Date of site visit: 8/16/08 SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland I II X III IV Category I= Score> 70 Score for Water Quality Functions 18 Category II= Score 51 - 69 Score for Hydrologic Functions 16 Category III= Score 30—50 Score for Habitat Functions 23 Category IV= Score< 30 TOTAL Score for Functions 57 Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTCS of Wetland I II Does not apply X Flilal Category(choose the"highest" category from above") II :1 Check the appropriate type and class of wetland being rated. I tB Type Wetland Class De ressional RiverineLake-frin eSloe X Flats Freshwater Tidal X Does the wetland being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland. Check List for Wetlands that Need Special Protection, YES NO and That are Not Included in the Rating SP1. Has the wetland been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered plant or animal species (TIE species)? X For the purposes of this rating system, "documented"means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. X SP2. Has the wetland been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered plant or animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented"means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. X SP3. Does the wetland contain individuals o Priori species listed b the WDFW or the state? X SP4. Does the wetland have a local significance in addition to its functions? For example,the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program,the Critical Areas Ordinance, or in a local management plan as having s ecial si nificance. To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need.to determine the Hydroaeomomhic Class of the wetland being rated. The hydrogcomorphic classification groups wetlands in to those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below. Scc p. 24 for more dctailcd instructions on classifying wetlands. Classification of Vegetated Wetlands for Western Washington Wetland Name: Carrougher Wetland Date: 8/16/08 1. Are the water levels in the wetland usually controlled by tides(i.e. except during floods)? NO—go to 2 YES—the wetland class is Tidal Fringe arts per thousand)? If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 NO Saltwater Tidal (Estuarine) Y ES—Freshwater'Tidal Fringe If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is a Saltwater Tidal Fringe it a rated Wetlands the Hyd ogeomorphic Classification.stEstuarineand nd editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions, the term"Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note,however,that the characteristics that define Category I and 11 estuarine wetlands have changed(see p. _)- 2. Is the topography within the wetland flat and precipitation is only source(>90%)of water to it. NO—go to 3 YES—The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can be classified as a"Flats" wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. of the following criteria? Does the wetland meet both ' non the The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of open water(without any vegetation surface)where at least 20 acres (8ha) are permanently inundated(ponded or flooded); At least 30%of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 (2 m). Lake-fringe Lacustrine Fringe) NO—go to 4 YES—The wetland class is Lak a g 4. Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria? x The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual). x The water flows through the wetland in one direction(unidirectional)and usually comes from seeps. It may now subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks. x The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? ypes of NOTE: Surface depressions or behind hummocks (depressions ar does not pond in these tteausua usually 3nds tft diameter land less thany in very NOfoot deep). shallow depress NO—go to 5 YES—The wetland class is Slope 5. Is the wetland in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river? The flooding should occur at least once every two years, on the average, to answer"yes". The wetland can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding. NO—go to 6 YES—The wetland class is Riverine 6. Is the wetland in a topographic depression higher inwhich at er ponds,rior or is wetland.ted to the surface, at some time of the year. This means that any outlet, f pre NO—go to 7 YES—The wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the wetland located in a very flat area with no obvious depressional and no stream or river running through it and providi ng water. The wetland seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched,but r g has no obvious natura l outlet. No—go to 8 YES—The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland seems to be difficult to classify. For example, seeps at the base of a alonslope may grade into a ri we floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of flooding g its sides. Sometimeess we find characteristics of several different hydrogeomorphic classes within one wetland boundary. Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within your wetland. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10%or more of the total area of the wetland being rated. If the area of the second class is less than 10%classify the wetland using the first class. ass to Use in R HGM Classes Within a Delineated Wetland Bounda Riverine Cl atin Slo e+Riverine De ressional Slo e+De ressional Lake-fringe Slo e+Lake-fringe Depressional+Riverine alongstream within bounda De ressional De ressional Depressional+ Lake-fringe Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special freshwater wetland characteristics If you are unable still to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. n.,..A I of R WATER QUALITY FUNCTIONS—Indicators that wetland functions to improve water quality. S 1 Does the wetland have the potential to improve water quality? (see p.65) S 1.1 Characteristics of average slope of wetland: • Slope is 1%or less (a 1%slope has a 1 ft. vertical drop in elevation for every 100 f... ho...... al distance) ..................................points=3 • Slope is 10%/ -20 ..................................................................................................................points=2 • Slope 1s 2%- 5%..................................................................................................................points= 1 • Sloe is greater than 5%.................. .. ..-Points=0 . ............................................................................... S 1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface is clay,organic,or smells anoxic(hydrogen sulfide or rotten eggs). 3 YES =3 points NO =0 points S 1.3 Characteristics of the vegetation in the wetland that trap sediments and pollutants: Choose the points the wetland. Dense vegetation means you vegetation t» g that best its the veg appropriate for the description .f have trouble seeing the soil surface. • Dense,ungrazed, herbaceous vegetation>90%of the wetland area......................................points=6 6 • Dense,ungrazed, herbaceous vegetation> % of area............................................................points=3 • Dense,woody,vegetation> 1/2.of area.............. points=2 • Dense, ungrazed, herbaceous vegetation> '/a of area............................................................points= 1 • Does not meet any of the criteria above for vegetation .........................................................points=0 Total for S 1 .Add the points in the boxes above 9 S 2 Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? (see p. 68) Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams,lakes or groundwater downgradient from the wetland? Note which of the following conditions provide the sources of pollutants. Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland Multiplier Tilled fields logging in ,or orchards within 150 ft. of wetland of wetland slo a X Residential, urban areas, golf courses are within 150 ft. u p p 2 Other YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 ♦ TOTAL—Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from SI by S2;then add score to table on p. 1 18 Comments: HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS—Indicators that wetland functions to reduce flooding and stream erosion. S 3 Does the wetland have the potential to reduce flooding and stream erosion? (see p.69) S 3.1 Characteristics of vegetation that reduce the velocity of surface flows during storms: Choose the points appropriate for the description that best fits conditions in the 31'et/and. • Dense,uncut, rigid vegetation covers>90%of the area of the wetland: Stems of plants should be 6 thick enough(usually> 1/8 in.)or dense enough to remain erect during surface flows .........points=6 • Dense,uncut, rigid vegetation> 1/2 area of wetland.............................................................points=3 • Dense,uncut, rigid vegetation> 1/4 area.............................................................................points= 1 More than 1/4 of area is grazed, mowed tilled or vegetation is not rigid .............................Points=0 S 3.2 Characteristics of slope wetland that holds back small amounts of flood flows. The slope has small surface depressions that can retain water over at least 10%of its area. 2 YES =2 points NO =0 points Add the points in the boxes above 8 S 4 Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p. 71) Is the wetland in a landscape position where the reduction in water velocity it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows? Note which of the following conditions apply. _ Wetland has surface runoff that drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems Multiplier _ Other (Answer NO if the major source of water is controlled by a reservoir(e.g. wetland is a seep that is on 2 the downstream side of a dam) YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 ♦ TOTAL—Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from S3 by S4;then add score to table on p. 1 16 Comments: HABITAT FUNCTIONS—Indicators that wetland functions to provide important habitat. H j Does the wetland have the potential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure (see P. 73): Check the types of vegetation classes present (as defined by Cowardin) if the class covers more than 10%of the area of the iretland or 114 acre. Aquatic Bed Emergent plants 2 X Scrub/shrub (areas where shrubs have> 30%cover) X Forested (areas where trees have> 30%cover) X Forested areas have 3 out of 5 strata(canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover) Add the number of vegetation types that qualify. If you have: 4 types or more...points=4 3 types..points=2 2 types................points= 1 1 e....points=0 H 1.2 Hydroperiods (seep.74): Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods)present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10%of the wetland or 114 acre to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods). X Permanently flooded or inundated X Seasonally flooded or inundated 4 or more types present.....points=3 Occasionally flooded or inundated 3 types present..................points=2 2 X Saturated only 2 types present..................points= 1 _ Permanently flowing stream or river in,or adjacent to,the wetland Seasonally flowing stream in,or adjacent to,the wetland Lake-fringe wetland.................=2 points _ Freshwater tidal wetland.........=2 points H 1.3 Richness of Plant Species (seep. 76): Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ftZ (different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold) You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian Milfoil, reed canarygrass,purple loosestrife, Canadian Thistle. If you counted: > 19 species.......................points =2 1 5— 19 species....................points= 1 List species below(optional): <5 species.........................points=0 H 1.4 Interspersion of Habitats (see p. 77): Decided from the diagrams below whether interspersion between types of vegetation(described in HLI),or vegetation types and unvegetated areas(can include open water or mudflats)is high,medium, low,or none. (::::) (:E None=0 points Low= 1 point Moderate=^_points r 2 [riparian braided channels] Hiah =3 points Note: If you have 4 or more vegetation types or 3 vegetation types and open water,the rating is always "high". H 1.5 Special Habitat Features (see p. 78): Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points you Pitt into the next column. X Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (>4 in.diameter and 6 ft. long) X Standing snags(diameter at the bottom >4 inches) in the wetland Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft. (2m) and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3 3.3 ft. (I m)over a stream for at least 33 ft. (10m) Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree slope)OR signs of recent beaver activity are present At least 1/4 acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians) X Invasive plants cover less than 25%of the wetland area in each stratum of plants H 1 TOTAL Score—potential for providing habitat Add the points in the column above 10 H 2 Does the wetland have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H 2.1 Buffers (see P. 81): Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of"undisturbed". 100m(330 ft)of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas,rocky areas, or open water >95%of circumference. No developed areas within undisturbed part of buffer (relatively undisturbed also means no grazing). ........................................................points=5 X 100m(330 ft)of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas,rocky areas, or open water > 50%circumference....................................................................................................points=4 50m(170 ft)of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas,or open water >95%circumference....................................................................................................points=4 100m(330 ft)of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas,rocky areas,or open water >25%circumference....................................................................................................points=3 4 50m(170 ft)of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas, rocky areas, or open water for> 50%circumference...............................................................................................points=3 If buffer does not meet any of the three criteria above: No paved areas(except paved trails)or buildings within 25m(80 ft)of wetland> 95%circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK..................................points=2 No paved areas of buildings within 50m of wetland for>50%circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK...................................................................points=2 Heavygrazing in buffer.................................................................................................points=1 Vegetated buffers are<2m wide(6.6 ft)for more than 95%circumference (e.g.tilled fields,paving,basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland).............................points=0 Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above...............................................................points= 1 H 2.2 Corridors and Connections(seep. 82) H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor(either riparian or upland)that is at least 150 ft.wide,has at least a 30%cover of shrubs, forest or native undisturbed prairie,that connects to estuaries,other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (Dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads,paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES=4 points(go to H 2.3) NO=go to H 2.2.2 H. 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor(either riparian 2 or upland)that is at least 50 ft. wide, has at least 30%cover of shrubs or forest,and connects to estuaries,other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a lake- fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? YES=2 points(go to H 2.3) NO=go to H 2.2.3 H. 2.2.3 Is the wetland: . Within 5 mi(8km)of a brackish or salt water estuary OR • Within 3 miles of a large field or pasture(>40 acres)OR YES= I point . Within 1 mile of a lake greater than 20 acres? NO =0 points H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW(see p. 83): Which of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft. (100m)of the wetland? (See text for a more detailed description of these priority habitats.) X Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.8 ha(2 acres) Cliffs: Greater than 7.6m(25 ft)high and occurring below 5000 ft. Old-growth forests: (Old growth west of Cascade Crest) Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings,with at least 20 trees/ha(8 trees/acre)>81cm (32 in)dbh or>200 years of age. X Mature forests: Stands with average diameters exceeding 53cm(21 in)dbh; crown cover may be less than 100%; decay,decadence,numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth; 80—200 years old west of the Cascade Crest. Prairies: Relatively undisturbed areas(as indicated by dominance of native plants) where greases and/or forbs form the natural climax plant community. Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15—2.Om(0.5—6.5 ft), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. Caves: A naturally occurring cavity,recess, void, or system of interconnected passages. Oregon white Oak: Woodlands stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy 4 coverage of the oak component of the stand is 25%. Urban Natural Open Space: A priority species resides within or is adjacent to the open space and uses it for breeding and/or regular feeding; and/or the open space functions as a corridor connecting other priority habitats, especially those that would otherwise be isolated;and/or the open space is an isolated remnant of natural habitat larger than 4 ha(10 acres)and is surrounded by urban development. Estuary/Estuary-like: Deepwater tidal habitats and adjacent tidal wetlands,usually semi-enclosed by land but with open,partly obstructed or sporadic access to the open ocean,and in which ocean water is at least occasionally diluted by freshwater runoff from the land. The salinity may be periodically increased above that of the open ocean by evaporation. Along some low-energy coastlines there is appreciable dilution of sea water. Estuarine habitat extends upstream and landward to where ocean-derived salts measure less than 0.5 ppt. during the period of average annual low flow. Includes both estuaries and lagoons. X Marine/Estuarine Shorelines: Shorelines include the intertidal and subtidal zones of beaches, and may also include the backshore and adjacent components of the terrestrial landscape(e.g., cliffs, snags,mature trees,dunes, meadows)that are important to shoreline associated fish and wildlife and that contribute to shoreline function(e.g., sand/rock/log recruitment,nutrient contribution, erosion control). If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats.=4 points If wetland has 1 priority habit...= 1 point If wetland has 2 priority habitats..............=3 points No habitats...............................=0 points H 2.4 Wetland Landscape: Choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits • There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile, and the connections between them are (seep. 85) relatively undisturbed(light grazing between wetlands OK, as is lake shore with some boating,but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads,fill, fields,or other development.......................................................................................................................points=5 • The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlandswithin 1/2 mile.....................................................................................................points=5 3 • There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile,BUT the connections between them are disturbed.............................................................................................................................points=3 • The wetland fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within1/2 mile...................................................................................................................points=3 • There is at least I wetland within 1/2 mile...........................................................................points=2 • There are no wetlands within 1/2 mile.................................................................................points=0 H 2 TOTAL Score—opportunity for providing habitat Add the scores in the columns above 7 ♦ Total Score for Habitat Functions Add the points for H I and H 2;then record the result on p. 1 23 CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. Wedand Type—Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Category when the appropriate criteria are met. C1 Estuarine wetlands? (see p.87) Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? The dominant water regime is tidal, Vegetated,and With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. YES =Go to SC 1.1 NO X SC 1.1 Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge,National Park,National Estuary Reserve,Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational,Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332- 30-151? Cat. 1 YES =Category I NO=go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following conditions? YES =Category I NO=Category II Cat. I The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking,ditching, filling, cultivation,grazing, and has less than 10%cover of non-native plant species. If the non-native Spartina spp,. are only species that cover more than 10%of the wetland,then the wetland should be given a dual rating(I/II). Cat. II The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category 1. Do not, however,exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of 1 acre. Dual At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft. buffer of shrub forest, or un-grazed Rating or un-mowed grassland g The wetland has at least 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, I/II or contiguous freshwater wetlands. SC2 Natural Heritage Wetlands (seep. 88) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural heritage Program/DNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 Is the wetland being rated in a Section/Township/Range that contains a natural heritage wetland? (This question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHP/DNR.) S/T/R information from Appendix D or accessed from WNHP/DNR web site YES Contact WNHP/DNR(see p. 88)and go to SC 2.2 NO X SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? Cat I YES =Category 1 NO X C3 Bogs (seep. 88) Does the wetland(or part of the wetland)meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its function. 1. Does the wetland have organic soil horizons(i.e. layers of organic soil),either peats or mucks,that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic soils)? YES=go to question 3 NO=go to question 2 2. Does the wetland have organic soils, either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over bedrock,or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on a lake or pond? YES=go to question 3 NO= is not a bog for purpose of rating 3. Does the wetland have more than 70%cover of mosses at ground level,AND other plants, if present,consist of the"bog"species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30%of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? YES=Is a bog for purpose of rating NO=go to question 4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hold dug at least 16"deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the"bog"plant species in Table 3 are present,the wetland is a bog. 4. Is the wetland forested(>30%cover)with sitka spruce, subalpine fir,western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Englemann's spruce, or western white pine. WITH any of the species(or combination of species)on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover (> 30%coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)? Cat. I YES=Category I NO=Is not a bog for purpose of rating • w C4 Forested Wetlands (seen. 96) Does the wetland have at least 1 acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats?. If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its function. Old-growth forests: (west of Cascade Crest) Stands of at least two three species forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/acre(20 trees/hectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height(dbh)of 32 inches(81 cm or more). NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW criterion is and"OR"so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. _ Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80—200 years old OR have an average diameters(dbh)exceeding 21 inches(53 cm); crown cover may be less than 100%; decay,decadence,numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth. Cat. I YES=Category I NO=X C5 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (seep. 92) Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon? The wetland lies in a depressional adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks gravel banks,shingle,or, less frequently, rocks The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains surface water that is saline or brackish(>0.5 ppt)during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom.) YES =Go to SC 5.1 NO X not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions? The wetland is relatively undisturbed(has no diking, ditching,filling, cultivation, grazing)and has less than 20%cover of invasive plant species(see list of invasive species on p. 74). At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft.buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland. Cat. I The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre(4350 square ft.) YES =Category I NO =Category II Cat. II C6 Interdunal Wetlands (seep. 94) Is the wetland west of the 1889 line(also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? YES=Go to SC 6.1 NO X not an interdunal wetland for rating If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. In practical terms that means the following geographic areas: • Long Beach Peninsula-- lands west of SR 103 • Grayland-Westport-- lands west of SR 105 • Ocean Shores-Copal is—lands west of SR 115 and SR 109 SC 6.1 Is the wetland one acre or larger,or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is one acre or larger? YES=Category 11 NO =go to SC 6.2 Cat. II SC 6.2 Is the wetland between 0.1 and I acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre? YES=Category III Cat. III Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics ♦ Choose the "highest"rating if wetland falls into several categories, and record on p. 1. If you answered NO for all types enter"Not Applicable"on p. 1 c � - 1944767 MASON CO WA oer++rzmoe oziai aM Mtsc !IIIIII III I�IIII 111111111 NNII IIII III IIII IIII uIIIII It IIII IN WII 11111 Name and Return Address: ! 1I John h—r' 351 t 7-4 AY-Pi C"t IJ W a_: :. "T 33 TO BE KEPT IN THE GI� Ha �, vA a8 5 PARCEL FILE TITLE NOTIFICATION OF HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN Legal Description: F-.1 � Parcel Number: i 3 y-q-- Permit(s) HMP Approved By: 4114 {�m l%�►-� � � 0A)P3 WE2> tanner amet-- NOTICE: The property was the subject of a development proposal within a critical area or its buffer. This property is subject to conditions,mitigation,and/or conservation measures as contained within the Habitat Management Plan/Wetland Mitigation Plan submitted to the Mason County Department of Community Development and subject to the conditions for the permit(s) noted above. Restrictions on the use or alteration of the property may exist due to these conditions,which are to remain in perpetuity. A copy of the Habitat Management PlanNvetland Mitigation Plan has been placed in the County parcel record file located at the Permit Assistance Center,Building III,426 WCedar Street,Shelton,WA,98584. Grantor(s): a-LZ �- Last(print) First MI L t(pri ) ; First MI Signature(s): Grantee: P BLIC State of WASHINGTON ) I,the undersigned Notary Public,in and for the )ss. jurisdiction aforesaid,d ,heruebVC-ertify that County of '� CX } T,_��I 6• CIC�C�U� � Naa��irq whose name(s)is(are)signed to the foregoing {SEAL): •• TR t� instrument,appeared before me and personally ` :,a�`s►QN�p,r f '��,,�� acknowledged the same. a' in �►' GIVEN der my hand and seal this�i `day s - ' co of 20 01 GB 00 = i q i,��P4, 09-1 ��'O?= My commission expires: I�-[ 1111110 uwASH�NG.���� �JQJAYOAAA A'c._ Lee Boad Habitat Mana-gement Planning and Wetland Services PO Box 2854 •Belfair,WA 98528 . 360-620-0618 • leeboadC,hctc.com Wetland Reconnaissance Report and Water System Access Proposal Mason County Parcel: 32233-44-00010 7611 E State Route 106 Prepared for: John and Gretchen Carrougher 3 516 24' Ave Court Northwest Gig Harbor, WA 98335 Prepared by: Lee Boad May 2004 5.1 Recommended Best Management Practices Recommended Best Management Practices for the road construction should it be necessary are as follows: • Perform work during dry weather if at all possible • Install silt fencing around the work area to prevent erosion and siltation of waters. • Minimize amount of erodible soils at any given time to the maximum extent feasible. • Check all equipment daily for leaks. Refueling and lubrication of equipment should occur off site. Don't store any fuel, lubricants,chemicals, or hazardous substances overnight within the project area. • Do not apply any chemicals when there is a possibility of rain. • No construction equipment will be allowed in the remaining wetlands on site. • Comply with all permits and requirements of the government authority or agency. 6.0 Conclusion Wetland delineation has been completed applying a standardized methodology required by the Mason County Resource Ordinance. The identified wetland upholds positive wetland indicators and meets the rating criteria for a Category H Wetland in Mason County. No other area within the study site supports positive indicators of wetland conditions. A scaled map is attached showing the location of the wetland and recommended water system access road location in relation to the property boundaries. I trust this information is sufficient for your needs at this time. Thank you for choosing me as your environmental consultant. If you have any questions feel free to call. Lee Boad Lee Boad Habitat Management Planning and Wetland Services PO Box 2854 Belfair, WA 98528 360-620-0618 leeboad(i ,hctc.com Attached: Plot Map, Technical Data 5 Lee Poad Hkb at Management Plarrnlnq and Wetland Services Owner: J0�n & Gretchen Carrougher Property: 1611 �a State PmL- 106 3516 24th Ave Cart NW Lkon, WA Giq Harbor,WA 96559 Parcel #: 5M5-44-00010 recommended Water System Access Hood Canal Noa� 106 Total Weiland nlsplaced; approx. 750 sci, Categoru II Wetland Proposed Poad o � well MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT of HEALTH SERVICES Shelton,Washington 98584 (360)427-9670• Belfair:275-4467 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PERSONAL HEALTH WATER QUALITY P.O.BOX 1666 303 N. FOURTH P.O. BOX 1666 July 21, 1995 Keith Douglas 1784 Bellevue Way NE Bellevue, WA 98004 RE : Parcel Number: 32233-44-00010 Site Address : E 7611 Hwy 106 Dear Mr. Douglas, We want to thank you for your cooperation with the Mason County Department of Health Services, Office of Water Quali- ty, sanitary survey of your on-site septic system. Your septic system was not found to be failing. If problems were observed during the survey that had the potential to shorten the life of your septic system, they were noted by field staff . The purpose of this letter is to inform you of the non-failing status of your system, and to advise you of any such problems . The following are observations our staff made on 5/31/95 while surveying your property: The septic system appeared to be functioning at the time of dye testing. Attached are some general comments about on-site sewage treatment/disposal systems . If you have any further ques- tions, please do not hesitate to contact me at ( 360) 275- 8733 . Sincerely, Grant A. Holdcroft, R.S . Lower Hood Canal Lead e Recycled September 18, 1997 Mr. William L. Martin Region Utilities Engineer Washington State Department of Transportation Olympic Region Headquarters P.O. Box 47440 Olympia, WA 98504-7440 Re: UTILITY PERMIT NO. U97-67 SR 106 MP 7.60 Dear Mr. Martin: In reference to a utility permit executed in June 1997 on my behalf, I wish to correct the description in regard to both the electrical and plastic pipe locations as it relates to the culvert at said address. The electrical service and plastic pipe runs on the south side of the culvert approximately 15" below the bell of the culvert and 12+ inches east. If you have any questions, please contact me at 1784 Bellevue Way N.E., Bellevue, WA 98004, telephone 425-454-0073. Sincerely, Keith Douglas KDrps cc: Peter J. Lorenzo Utilities Engineer t t 1 • a l i o I VW cr,rl c t i 14 I'I I � i� "• ��� i � � 1 r ; I i F {� A MASON CO. ENVIROMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1 . Name of proposed project, if applicable: Carrougher Well Accm RwJ 2. Name of applicant: John C-i . and G efrK--n C4 rro u9hw 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 35 r� -2-4-1h Av'o. Lt . NW. Cm�+a�: ��tzhcn Caren her 61 Harbor, WA. g9335 4. Date checklist prepared: May 61 2OC6 J 5. Agency requesting checklist: Land use, plan/Plan nl n9 Departmr-�/Mason Co — Ryan Croy+P-t'' 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): 7. Do you have any plans for future expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal: If yes, explain. N0 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. UUetland. Re co Inna1Ssa-nc(--, {Zr-purt ar0 WLI-r SySJem Access Frosa I — prepared by l� Poad, May - -W4. Copy Su��rv,.t tied Wit rnl t aP ll'COiiM -t MEP 200 �- 000 8 9 2 2067. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. Final 0,ppwuc-1 access f no 1s+ NWl 10( pendj VV5 DOT C LA Cr- ►Deemer) , To b, Oppvoved fb I I owln F4vl n�{ access. J 10. List ny government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. NA 11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The proposed access and turn-around to our well head is needed in order to make repairs to our existing and only well.The water is deemed contaminated and non-potable due to well dysfunction.The proposed access road/area is to accommodate trucks that weigh 14,000 pounds and are top-heavy.They require a tum-around/back-up space in order to bring the necessary equipment to the well head site.In May 2004,we hired Lee Boad to perform a Habitat Management Plan for our property.He determined that a portion of our property met the wetland indicators for a Category II Wetland in Mason County.In his report,he provided a recommended water system access to minimize wetland impact.This access recommendation was to identify the area of least wetland disturbance but did not specify dimensions needed for heavy equipment access that we have subsequently obtained.Attached is a drawing that outlines the specifics of the access/tum-around for repair of our well.This access will be composed of Typar road fabric,4'to 8"Gubian rock with a top coat of 1.25 rock.Silt fencing will be installed around the work area with straw on remaining exposed soils to prevent erosion and siltation of waters.The total amount of wetlands that will be disturbed is less than 1/10 acre(0.048 acres). 12. What is the location of the proposal? Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. Street- Acid ress 7P I 1 ECLS+ tivvy 10G Union, vvA. 61 9159,z ach ur 33 ; rovvns,i P 2-2- P'cm9 f 3 west &overrnef+ t-of 2 . 51+-_ Plan a+f-ached_. Parcel - 322.33—4L4 - 00010. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: 1. EARTH: a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other en In ins - Olr�� tmpacf b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 8 G/o 51oPe-, C. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. t fYa rf c; 5011 (Pex Lenc 509J Y-T Y-0 d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity: If so, describe. t\40 Mason County Environmental Checklist Page 2 e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. ND � 11 WaS used D +ban '�"- 8"C�ublan rbcJ/_ U.nd 1.25 voct< 6vrluv). Grad 1 nqq was rN o r red so -ghat -the, heAvy 011W ipmfn-l' c bold. accecg the, we-11 head whICh s1+s dt sokfi e >�refl" I f th area. near -the base, a � hlt slde� f Our pro". f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use: If so, generally describe. There is a stream on the western side of our property that flows through the wetlands,and then drains under Highway 106 through an existing culvert.This stream is perennial and non-fish bearing and is a Type 4 Stream in Mason County.To minimize any negative impact on this stream,we 1)have chosen to place the access on the eastern side of our property,2) will use silt fencing around the work area with straw on remaining exposed soils to prevent erosion and siltation of waters, and 3)will mitigate using riparian plantings along the bulkhead using native shrubs and plants. The approximate area of mitigation is 360 sq ft(two separate planting beds). g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project constructions (for example, asphalt or buildings)? uve are 09 u 1 real N ws DOT fio pC .VC (a5pba.t H +hc, en10LJ1CC. the o access fyeyn f+wJ I or. It t s a sma I I percent V e -h)fa r l pnycf opprbx moj-e-11 le> ft- x IS f+ , h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: 5e-f, ox'5 Ue-r -t 4�- 1 above 2. AIR: a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e. dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities, if known. I) Em 1 ssldos fmm +he heavy nna.ch i rle—ry 6�)ri nq amstmeh m t�� OAcccsS Mad- Quo -h�fics un known. N M I ova I T �,PlefiM -,-� ri ecf. f' I `� p J b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No Mason County Environmental Checklist Page 3 C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Our (""ct-mr WQ1 curly use gvi'pmcTr *oJ- has pawl all W 1,551 W5 J 3 WATER: a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. a) dream m 1K;!. vwes-Ie_m sldc, pr a-cl pro'ec�. 5trearn dre�tns in-lz) Culvert Gtllsn Io(o. 5'1reaM rs f nlal and nt -fish beam j, Olassi-PcJ Gts a Tg�pe y 5Vcaln ►n ma BCD ( �r � .P>C c�� rePor-f). J b) Rood 60-na I — I oca}ed a.c ro% t wy I a(,, - In ur-{-h o� p roJ ecl-. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. des 05 nok In our kjArzPA 5tkiomisslon. 6cc' cached plan 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. No II maktia.l vvas 1 6 jD+htr ff a() +"- 8" Lkb10-4 ywI _ t_n l 1 .25 ►ocv_(Su rf a ce) . 6rvrc,r, o �oca.,l -r �ssl0 roc 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. Mason County Environmental Checklist Page 4 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. IUD 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. No. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example; domestic sewage, industrial, containing the following chemicals..., agricultural, etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. KR6 . trot App)ic_abl e-� C. Water runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this flow into other waters? If so, describe. �VW rj-)n f f an4 fYVM ft-)c, 6,u sb n S-�fe -(Y-) d ra.l n i ntl) the �i stl n� ad V� jho-t� runs lie! to Hwy ►oco. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters: If so, generally describe. No , Mason County Environmental Checklist Page 5 d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Dunn msrwch u V e used 50 fenainj wl+h s"w A aund fh� wor� arm. 4. PLANTS: a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: V1 deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other weCXn W (-eda x— evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other (Zed A14e* ' shrubs grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other ✓ other types of vegetation 590M Dr)bff b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? 5 mb bzcs loC0.k3 )11 thc" oxta✓ f thdl 01CCC55 wl {tVvy ld(o had � b& rem Dyed • 5Un V- C a1,1P�. remove-J C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: we vVI II Plant (mifi, ak-) us►n r) pa,rl" OoAt within thf, �'°J�c}- Gu'� 5U-0tn 31 d e) Gt.n d Gl I crn -�h 9 iau,1 Kl�e�d bmrderl food On IV Hatt ve- F la n fs d sh ry bs i-o i 4 I u d c r)a-h Vc, -trees --- v ) I I bf, V StJ. w, I m Pack-d less than what we, had e-0'rmk8 in -the, �.JhRPA r orfiPYvYe fluds dishy-��o IiDw�, wl 1 v r �-S St i I I m1 fi t" a V*) ma�Jpai& 3�o s . ff ( Z p lu he � PP � -}��p � �' r `,gyp Mason County Environmental Checklist as `s�`^- "" Z Q J \�PA Page 6 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, hellfis other noy x e is ppyc' ae� in4-bo X' b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Nvr, knwvn. C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Nmf� Known d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: SI I+ f�ncl nq with stau.0 was us6 /tnst aced &mrd ffe- warp 0-rea— whe-4 5o I--Was e,�cP cGed 1D P regent ey-D Y') aM s i I tat w W60S , 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES: a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. ihrs fs an (Access roadthe y no er)r_�rq / '��u�rernenl3 WC-6 +hc, pyoject 1-5 comple" . b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties: If so, generally describe. WD, C. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: WDt applia-kUe, Mason County Environmental Checklist Page 7 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH: a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. -Owe, wer& too &Y-p aim, sp"os ) w ha.zarivs wa-sk, v+ri* -�h,s ProJed-. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. N26 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: We, h I red CL Cmrr►pelvnf w-1yac#vy- wHfh m ears of mp---nenc& wbv.l n In and a vu" 4- t I A Canal b. Noise. 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? poise fVUM -rhe orucm hvy elUi prnenf 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hour's noise would come from the site. Shot+ - lam noise, f�v�n o�Ai��m -rho heavy eqvTYnen+. bpera-W +his equi p ment was I I ihkd Jb da bM6 hours, 3) Proposed measu es to reduce or control noise impacts, if any. J mWaIIJA t wvrd . Vv� hired o, cfmdroy- v�hD is effmpeot � sensi-hvex fio im 0 his qulp")f �n our nee hb I balled e�xch ov r� ne iq n -to -fiel I them o ih Is i e& (ar)J � rhm f p ad Inv lvej. I reC(2 ed no 1 t � an ) - d. . ' ' 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE: a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Resi d_- -o_l humt) , �r+rya-fie, use . Mason County Environmental Checklist Page 8 b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No, C. Describe any structures on the site. Nye d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Not appl iWk . e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? ru rv1 resid.mb al 5 f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Rural g. If applicable, what is the current Shoreline Master Program designation of the site? Ui�ba� h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. 4�5� W r pVD peg' is " HwJ Canal . i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed proje t? Norp,(16 WiQ r� w 1-fie, acM5s road C p� X)r ent- ft OX&C4s Mbdj cvrwNch is aC h j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Nod- Ow 1 i COM e Mason County Environmental Checklist Page 9 I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: VYe hired I ee DW in . ?.ail fv piwd& a wef-larJ reconna.issa nc>✓ r oyt wowYaUyi CnCeMlirq 4h& G eSS f; pl'�IS ' �W�I S �e Ufl I Z'e -� I 6Y) 9. HOUSING: v1 in cur q icOom a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Noe - b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Nov C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Nc+ o fp I i cable, . 10. AESTHETICS: a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? 1W frvlec� does nofi 16dud& ofl OvddlnT W 1gtwc vrts . b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? No VWW5 wuu.ld �e_ odd_ > W 0�6*vc+_J wi+h ih(s rD fCi . PJ C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Nod- app)i cable -- Y1 ew . Ww pl mb n r-ya ri m pjanb mJ shrubs -- a-esifhe f I c, i m pack P1 van-en-f-. Mason County Environmental Checklist Page 10 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Nod- appli Cable b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. C. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal: Nme� d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Not app►i cabs 12. RECREATION: a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? 5W I rn rn i n9, hVI n , �3h)r) — Boca cma 1 . b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: No+ I i �Pp Mason County Environmental Checklist Page 11 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION: a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. N"6 know . b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. N"e. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: No-- aPPI i ably 14. TRANSPORTATION: a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. E. Rm/ No w 1 l l b?l a cceSSed . /Ym 1� 'G P al+Ip 6Y � is di n avl n Cas ha I t-) Smal vY uy) access road iha�- Caned t P p b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the existing street system? Show on site plans, if any. s. Tlyre 1s a drrec} Gmrncchw fwm au.r access road io E • lob. C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? There, i s ► M)w -P)Y- se-vervi cars ib Pour le un e-- 0,eces5 road. . NO 1::�-1 rl SPaccs , were eA i m 0oAJ . d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). NU . Mason County Environmental Checklist Page 12 e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of)water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project: If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. yvmld esfi mac, that- v-vr CoY►"&r madam Opp rbxi makJ J 12 fnp5/dJ ft daf [)(, Wff)�&J CL� the, PYDP st - g. Prop�ofsed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: nb 15. PUBLIC SERVICES: a. Would the project result in an increased need for public service (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe: NO, b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any: Nbc Off)i Cab IP-, Mason County Environmental Checklist Page 13 16. UTILITIES: a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other: ov r vve i i head 1,,5 a� -Nre, SI it). b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Nb ubhi 6 (os Oen�'fled in Ilia) will 1x, gwrecl' of -his PYDja� Signature: The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: C� 4 Date submitted: (� $ Mason County Environmental Checklist Page 14 i ESA LISTED SALMONIDS CHECKLIST Applicant Information n�,", Project Information b Name John , `i Grethtn (�urrOU Name r " "'t� ess 1w0, L Phone 253- 991-(Aol y Location 7(o1) U 1 n m) VVA. Description G- " 1ok ID - e Se N1 oYl 33: "rOwnShi p 2.� 2T�erg�y 131I�eS�" 1�Arcc I 3 2233- -00010 This worksheet was designed to help project proponents, and government agencies, identify when a project needs further analysis regarding adverse effects on ESA (Endangered Species Act) listed salmonids. Salmonids are salmon, trout and chars, e.g. bull trout. For our purposes, "ESA Listed Sahnonids"is defined as fish species listed as endangered, threatened or being considered for listing. If ESA listed species are present or ever were present in the water shed where your project will be located, your project has the potential for affecting them, and you need to comply with the ESA. The questions in this section will help determine if the ESA listings will impact your project. The Fish Program Manager at the appropriate Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW) regional office can provide information for the following two questions. 1. Are ESA listed salmonids currently present in the watershed in which your project will be located? YES ✓ NO Please describe. Per MOJ916 5ch►r o Do DF-W (560) 421- 21 1C1 2. Has there ver been an ESA listed salmonid stock present in this watershed? YES NO Uncertain Please describe. per Ml is schimtD of DFW Cho) 17-z119 If you answered "yes ' to either of the above questions, you should complete the remainder of this checklist. April 2003 Mason County Environmental Checklist Page 15 PROJECT SPECIFICES: The questions in this section are specific to the project and vicinity. 1. Name of watershed: hwd. 0"al 2. Name of nearest waterbody: T 4 *W 3. What is the distance from this project to the nearest body of water: stem f s ( ccess wad . Often a buffer between the project and a stream can reduce the chance of a negativei6pact to fish. p m, II e Ntm canal Is across . J+W I06 (\AOA h O f rid) fYcm (JDrl- bin f y P 4. What is the current land use between the project and the potentially affected water body (parking to s, farmland,etc.)? hccess road tb m,_' well - head 4-hat rs locale d access , J. 5oth of RoM OanoJ . 5. Is the project above a: * natural permanent barrier (waterfall) YES NO * natural temporary barrier (beaver pond) YES NO ✓ * man-made barrier(culvert, dam) YES 6 V NO — * other(explain): A man-made c�,.l v-er� +ho+ parallels E . Hwy 10� is be-low Our road access p�Xejt. m - ci-, i s cu-lvre,rf win� be ma►n Wned . 1- {- I-S Gt.�l m,,3bn 6. If yes, are there any resident salmonid populations above the blockage? YES NO ✓ Don't know 7. What percent of the project will be impervious surface (including pavement & roof area)? AppO rnakJV bb paVeA (0,spho I�) as requ i red W5 DOT. (LOY-V-\l Deemer ° :5W -W-74-3050 . Mason County Environmental Checklist Page 16 FISH MIGRATION: The following questions will help determine if this project could interfere with migration of adult and juvenile fish. Both increases and decreases in water flows can affect fish migration. 1. Does the project require the withdrawal of a. Surface water? YES NO Amount Name of surface water body b. Ground water? YES NO Amount From where Depth of well 2. Will any water be rerouted: YES NO If yes, will this require a channel change? 3. Will there be retention or detention ponds? YES NO If yes, will this be an infiltration pond or a surface discharge to either a municipal storm water system or a surface water body? If to a surface water discharge,please give the name of the waterbody. 4. Will this project require the building of new roads? YES NO ✓ Increased road mileage may affect the timing of water reaching a stream and may Y g g y impact fish habitat. 5. Are culverts proposed as part of this project? YES NO ✓ An Uoil 6wve'r " Vilirl'topography id tD &Nwq l06 wil I� I' 6urlfaiI�as aws' ? � �FItS Ilf 6. changes affect the duration/direction of runoff v YES NO ✓ If yes, describe the changes. 7. Will the project involve any reduction of the floodway or floodplain by filling or other partial blockage of flows? YES NO ✓ If yes, how will the loss of flood storage be mitigated by your project? Mason County Environmental Checklist Page 17 WATER QUALITY: The following questions will help determine if this project could Adversely impact water quality. Such impacts can cause problems for listed species. Water quality can be made worse by runoff from impervious surfaces,altering water temperature,discharging contaminants,etc. l. Do you know of y problems with water quality, in any of the streams, within this watershed? YES NO If yes, describe. 2. Will your roject either reduce or increase shade along or over a waterbody? YES NO ( ossilol : Removal of sh ding vege tion or the building of structures such as docks or floats often results in a change in shade. 3. Will the project increase nutrient loading or have the potential to increase nutrient loading or contaminants (fertilizers, other waste discharges, or runoff)to the waterbody? YES NO t7 4. Will turbidity be increased because of construction of the project or during operation of the project'? YES NO In-water or near water work will often increase turbidity. 5. Will your project require long term maintenance, i.e. bridge cleaning, highway salting, and chemical sprays for vegetation m agement, clearing of parking lots? YES NO v If yes,please describe. Mason County Environmental Checklist Page 18 ✓ VEGETATION: The following questions are designed to determine if the project will affect riparian vegetation, thereby, adversely impacting salmon. 1. Will the p oject involve the removal of any vegetation from the stream banks: YES V NO If yes, please describe the existing conditions, and the amount and type of vegetation to b r moved. v-ee Only I ctai� AifeM j in -tip path t6 access nod re�►ndv� 2. If any vegetation is removed, do you plan to re-plant? YES V NO If yes, what types of plants will you use? f i pw m shrlkbs, 0ant, MA -}tees app►fi"r ak, 3('0d mr proper )oi iI lr�, pI an kd as post a f Otr mt fi-ga-h�rn P Mason County Environmental Checklist Page 19 x;G+� KC 411ER I L.-I tY toe • �i�i`D.�.,YMCA... . ... -- --- -II E D•F ZU -4A -nib TU 4tp M, ' ��t� ••�••` •�_ — .LSD 0, 1��.�� p .. IDN 401 �_r_� �������j .gS1�P��! art � • T& PLAN 5 G:h1. L. Car ro u her M► fi rhm ?Ian w n Pa rr an d� �lar► �(�'n 'i�� S ve). U VO� Ex,sfi n9 �ome� � o m► 90, OYea = 3bD f4. rod � �t►and5 �xtsfin� vv X New r►par)can x plan and Shrubs . To x ►nC-[ud -(fj Thr's are �� _ _ n ail vc, a was not dtsturbed�- - - _ x X .�n, red 014 as ori9rna11y Prra used, �-exe4'n9 saIVV1tmber . 09-17-2007 22:08 JULIE FASSIO 3608987286 �© PAGE2 PERMIT NO.: _ DATE RECEIVED: MN NTY DEPARTMENT OFF COMMUNITY R E C f V E D RESOURCE ORDINANCE (Chapter 17.01 MCC) 411 N.5TH Street/P.O.Box 279.Shelton, WA 98584 SEA. l� ^,i � ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT APPOCATION MCCE) ANNING MASON ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT i.. CONDITIONAL USE n The purpose of the Resource Ordinance is to protect Mason County's natural resource lands and critical areas and is under the authority of Chapters 36.32, 36.70A, 39.34, 58.17, 76.09,84.33, 84.34 and 90.58 RCW. PLEASE PRINT 1.o,,..,khn Greg+ brefrhen 0ArrD0qh6r Own r Maili g Ad&es Site Address:-A 11 E Uq I No city: (1 r State:lNi 7_i �i 33a5 City:DIM __Statc\AW Zipl M L it H0kler Inc f4ss o �� lo Phone. Daytime s I-(00(o p® Address: Fin l)ixtrictli• ...,_. ....-- City:. 4bersbuC .—state: MD zip:gL�qK—q+3? Signature. p-�(Xt 2. Parcel Nu her��� -00010 Legal description: T/7/`1 GT ;1- _ v Parcel size: 2.3i acres wt .1 fidt✓lanc�s 3. Direetiorwti to site:' e_ � �hYV01G, / VI- CY7 it• # v /Do oSt �f � _ State what sections require a permit: 1n-14olding Lands,Chapter 17.01.062 n 4' -T •g Chapter 17.10.060 11 Wetlands,Chapter 17.01.070 Long-Term Commercial Fun..t, 8 Ptd' Mineral Resource Lands.(chapter 17.01.066 n Frequently Flooded Areas,Chapter 17.01.090 Aquifer Recharge Amos,Chapter 17.01.080 n Landslide Hazard Areas,chapter 17.01.100 U Erosion Hazard Areas.(chapter 17-01.104 1.) Seismic Hamel Areas,Chapter 17.01,102 n Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas.Chapter 17.01.110 n 09-17-2007 22:06 JLA-IE FASSIO 3608987286 PAGE1 5. Identify current use of property with existing improvements: rr i W'c, res;derrel 6. Identify and describe the pffq)oqM project,including the type of materials to be used,construction methods,principle ions and other pertinent information teach a0ditional sheets if diniens oil )led ke-eas gQ 41 needed): lei Y17P�1 i 9�>A Ir' en 7. Will there be an alteration of a wetland and/or wetland vegetation area? Yes L;(N,) Cl access a wM" Rek?al-� 11Dpa5ed 1�acoq i ric,cunritAI(5�772-7 1<e-pV7r-,T)J e- 8. Any water on or adjacent to property; Saltwater 0 Lake I..) River n Pond I I Welland U Seasonal Runoff Other. 9. If septic is located an prujwt site,include recm'ds. Connect to septic? I I Community Septic? n Public Water Supply'! 0 Well? ell 10. Type of Job: New WAdd 0 M n Repair VDemolition rl Other Itoo ez V)red- to fe Jr V7 &4-9�5' 1170 well, Alea-,:�-- 0 Mal (Vice-ems.) ffdchdi leffevfkhr ATeM inc This permit is granted pursuant to the Resource Ordinance(Chapter 17.01 MCQ and nothing in this permit shall excuse the applicant from compliance with any other federal, state, or local statutes, ordinances, or regulatiomc applicable to this project,but not inconsistent with the Resource Ordinance. The permit may be rescinded pursuant to the event the permittee.faits to comply with the conditions of this ordinance. MASON ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT: $560.00P035-00(with another Permit) MASON CONDITIONAL USE ENVIR.PERMIT: $1,330.00 HABITAT MANAGFMP-NT PLAN. $395.00 1:7LANNU4GW&R\F.XVYR0NMEWAL REWSE-D01-144)? 09-17-2007 22:06 JULIE FASSIO 3608987286 PAGE2 Show the following on the site plan Lot Dimensions Flood Zones Existing Structures Fences Water Lines Driveways Drainage Plans Shor0lines Septic System Topography Indic-ate DirectionaJ by(N,S,E,W,etc.) Proposed Improvements Easements In relation to plot plan Name it Flanking Street APPLICANT TO DRAW SITE PLAN BELOW: fee'. c woChlfd reeff ► /( a)Ckt vVa-�-r Occ,�-S S ulQf��-� re ark/d�10 plo space, regv,re� fry � O)P heavi equ ` ff)Yf, APPLICANT TO DRAW TOPOGRAPHY BELOW: See. 6tftUCh6 draw)' 4ee= bood- 09-17-2007 22:06 JU-IE FASSIO 3608987286 PAGES MASON COUNTY oxSOUKCE ONUINANC6 'RNly :003 Publication cost is the responsibility of the applicant. Final permit processing will not occur until advertising fees have been paid to the newspaper by the applicant.The Shelton-Mason County Journal will bill the applicant directly. 1 /WE understand that I/WE must sign and date the attached acknowledgment indicating and that I/ WE understand that is MY/OUR responsibility. I/WE must submit the signed page as part of application in order for it to be considered as complete. DATE Jahn Care ay (4pli her 6rek&n CArfz u 7ICAPPANT �� 09-17-2007 22:06 JULIE FASSIO 3608997286 PAGE4 MASON COtTNTY RESOURCE.ORTHNANCE LIST OF ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET OF YOUR PROPERTY BOUNDARIES FOR CONDITIONAL USE AND VARIANCE Addresses are to be obtained from the Mason County Assessor's Office,Bldg. 1, Second Floor. Part•f x R enf "-1�� P �s V71 ia9 X5 a 1i ,I &llevve WA W06 Harlan El erwn /,4a fic, 12 o ep7` �I9 fog l cant of 1 1' Be/�rvve ►�'ti 9�' S . Ardr&ws mSef) eDrmt, c 7550 E . N wy l®6 toc>� UnrM, w�. 9g(5qz- ; et- /'ef'w Jeannie, 6rui Jeanne- Mooro M`5 J' or-6 ltve5 7&00 & . MAly 10,6 ac 55 #wX 1061WM Untm, Wj 9S5%2 us 01 -it vVesf side-)- jW E/ber5� Hr; Elben- /iv-p-S po e0X 94 �'P I e KID z& Unlo-y) Wh 9��2- pr�pe4 y, east tf &', Arcadia Drilling Inc. • P.O.BOX 1790 Shelton,WA.98584 �a fi rn `mil z a e _t RE � a. H August 30,2007 John Carrougher Dear Sir: Arcadia Drilling Inc sent a service crew out to 7611 Hwy 106.We found two problems on why you are out of water.First you have holes in the drop pipe down the well.Since the pump is hung on galvanized drop pipe we will need a road to access the site with our pump truck.Our pump truck weighs fourteen thousand pounds and is top heavy so we will need a road built accordingly.The second problem is the water line running down the hill to the house also has a major leak or possible complete break in it.When we did get 20PSI from the pump the water line was not able to hold the water to the house.This too will also need replaced before you have water and disinfected as by now you may have coliform bacteria in the water line and house by now. So until a road is built and access to install a new water line is available you will be out of water.Any questions please feel free to call me at the office. Sincerely, William M Neal IV Vice—President/Arcadia Drilling Inc. P�0N_STgTFo� MASON COUNTY �,o DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ° 5 N Planning Division A N Y ti P O Box 279, Shelton,WA 98584 (360)427-9670 1864 MASON ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT April 09, 2009 �� JOHN G CARROUGHER 7611 E ST RT 106 3516 24TH AVE CT NW Parcel No.: 322334400010 Issued: 4/9/2009 Case No.: MEP2007-00098 Project Description: ACCESS TO WELL The following critical areas are present on this property: Long-Term Commercial Forest FWHCA Ch. 17,10.060; Ch. 17.01.110; Mineral Resource Lands Frequently Flooded Areas Ch. 17.01.066; Ch. 17.01.090; Inholding Lands Landslide Hazard Areas Ch. 17.01.062; Ch. 17.01.100; x - Wetlands Seismic Hazard Areas revis Ch. 17,01.070; Ch. 17.01.102; Critical Aquifer Recharge Erosion Hazard Areas Ch. 17.01.080; Ch. 17.01.104. This permit, with conditions, is granted pursuant to the Mason County Resource Ordinance (Chapter 17.01 MCC.) Nothing in this permit shall excuse the applicant from compliance with any other federal, state, or local statutes, ordinances, or regulations applicable to this project. This permit may be rescinded if the permitee fails to complete the project as proposed or fails to comply with the standards of this ordinance. � ✓ Q Authorized Local Government Official Date '6 15101 - 31yed a- rn0_ ;-/igjoq v1(i(►ishne- Clc r* a -d d6z =90 60 6T �O f Mason Environmental Permit 4/9/2009 Case No.: MEP2007-00098 Conditions: completed as proposed, so that the d 1.) The applicant acknowledges that the project will be com p ' p project will be consistent with all applicable standards of the Mason County Resource Ordinance. 2.) Work must be done in the dry to help prevent disturbance of unstable soil layers and uncontrollable mass wasting. 3.) Temporary erosion control measures must be implemented to prevent water quality degradation of adjacent waters or wetlands. Silt fencing must be installed and maintained until upland vegetation has become established. 4.) Approved per dimensions and setbacks on submitted site plan. REVISED: APPROVED PER SUBMITTED SITE PLAN WITHIN THE WETLAND CORPS CARROUGHER MIT GA PLAN DATED AUGUST 2008 AND RECEIVED JANUARY 14 2009. 5.) A De$artmoint of the Army permit shall be obtained prior to the performance of any activities waterward of the mean higher high water mark or ordinary high water mark or in wetlands. Please contact Oliva Remaro 206-764-6960, repectively, for more information. Information can also be obtained from the US Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Branch, P.O. Box 3755, Seattle, WA 98124. (NOTE: SUBMITTED TO CORPS PER LETTER DATED DECEMBER 7, 2007. 6.) A Hydraulic Project Approval from the Washington State Department of Fish + Wildlife must be granted prior to construction. For more information Gloria Rogers (Freshwater) 249-4628 or Margie Schirato (Saltwater) 427-2179, Habitat Biologists. 7.) Temporary erosion control measures must be implemented to prevent water quality degradation of adjacent waters or wetlands. Silt fencing must be installed and maintained until upland vegetation has become established. 8.) Work must be done in the dry to help prevent disturbance of unstable soil layers and uncontrollable mass wasting. 9.) Proper erosion and sediment control practices must be used on the construction site and adjacent areas to prevent upland sediments from entering shoreline waters_ Erosion control measures must be in place prior to any clearing, grading, or construction. These control measures must be effective to prevent soil from being carried into surface water by stormwater runoff. Sand, silt, and soil will damage aquatic habitat and are considered pollutants. Any discharge of sediment-laden runoff or other poll utapollutants to waters of the state is in violation of Chapter 90.48 RCW, Water Pollution Control, and WAC 173-201A, Water Quality Standards for Surface Waters of the State of Washington, and is subject to enforcement action. Any work in or adjacent to waterways that will adversely affect water quality must receive specific prior authorization from the Department of Ecology pursuant to WAC 173-201A-110. A short-term water quality standards modification may be issued if the proponent agrees to a number of specific construction practices and techniques designed to minimize water quality impacts. All areas disturbed or newly created by construction activities must be revegetated using bioengineering techniques, clean durable riprap, or some other equivalent type of protection against erosion when other measures are not practical. 10.) This permit is issued under the authority of 17.01.170 as an Emergency Repair. 11.) ORIGINAL CONDITION STATED: Approximately 750 sq. ft. of wetland will be filled in permanently. Applicant must mitigate approximately 2,250 sq. ft. of new wetlands on or off site according to MCRO 17,01.070 and any other applicable regulations. Actual mitigation will be based on actual square feet of wetlands filled in. REVISED CONDITION NOW STATES: Based on documentation from Arcadia Drilling (letter dated March 24, 2009), a rocked area of approximately 55ft by 65ft plus highway access is allowed for the purpose of current and future well repair and maintenance access. Mitigation shall be as provid for in The Wetland Corps"Carrougher Mitigation Plan" dated August 2008. 419/2009 Pace 2 of 3 MEP2007-00098 6 -d d62 :90 130 61 -4c0 f Mason Environmental Permit 4/9/2009 Case No.: MEP2007-00098 12.) Applicant must submit a mitigation plan for any and all wetlands filled or displaced. THE WETLAND CORPS CARROUGHER MITIGATION PLAN DATED AUGUST 2008 SUBMITT JANUARY 14, 2009 AND REVIEWED AS ACCEPTABLE. X 13.) Alf ,rmits'f;fom State and Federal agencies must be obtained prior to any work being started. Pe mits must be kept on side for inspection. 14.) Applicant understands that any and all work regarding this project will be reviewed through the SEPA process. 15.) This project is subject to an approved geo-report as slopes greater than 40%are present on site. MCRO 17.01.100 Landslide Hazard Areas. 16.) Work not to exceed 90 calendar days from date of being issued. 17.) Restoration/mitigation of any critical area altered as a result of this emergency activity will be completed within 90 days of permit being issued, except if more than 90 days are needed to complete the required restoration/mitigation as outlined in 17.01.070 (Wetlands)and other applicable codes. 4/9/2009 Paae 3 of 3 MEP2007-00098 Cl d82 =90 60 61 q00 r- C20N"8TATFO� MASON COUNTY o P A o N DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT F o N Planning Division z� N Y P O Box 279, Shelton, WA 98584 1864 (360)427-9670 MASON ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT January 07, 2008 JOHN G CARROUGHER 7611 E ST RT 106 3516 24TH AVE CT NW Parcel No.: 322334400010 Issued: 1/7/2008 Case No.: MEP2007-00098 Project Description: ACCESS TO WELL The following critical areas are present on this property: Long-Term Commercial Forest X FWHCA Ch. 17.10.060; Ch. 17.01.110; Mineral Resource Lands Frequently Flooded Areas Ch. 17.01.066; Ch. 17.01.090; Inholding Lands X Landslide Hazard Areas Ch. 17.01.062; Ch. 17.01.100; X Wetlands Seismic Hazard Areas Ch. 17.01.070; Ch. 17.01.102; Critical Aquifer Recharge Erosion Hazard Areas Ch. 17.01.080; Ch. 17.01.104. This permit, with conditions, is granted pursuant to the Mason County Resource Ordinance (Chapter 17.01 MCC.) Nothing in this permit shall excuse the applicant from compliance with any other federal, state, or local statutes, ordinances, or regulations applicable to this project. This permit may be rescinded if the permitee fails to complete the project as proposed or fails to comply with the standards of this ordinance. Authorized Local Government Official Date 1 0 STgrF MASON COUNTY o P� A o N DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT N Planning Division 1 lyn P O Box 279, Shelton, WA 98584 �0 (360)427-9670 1864 NOTIFICATION OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION October 17, 2007 0k(IV t" R Cat--. o 206 - 76`-( - 4Ot Z D JOHN G CARROUGHER 7611 E ST RT 106 3516 24TH AVE CT NW Parcel No.: 322334400010 Project Description: ACCESS TO WELL Dear Applicant: You have submitted a permit application (case no. MEP2007-00098) for proposed construction or development in the county. Upon review of your application, I have determined that the contents of the application are incomplete or do not provide enough detail for review. Therefore, review of your application will not proceed until the necessary information is provided (see the comment section of this letter for details.) Once the information is submitted and the application is complete, I will continue to process your application accordingly. If the additional information is not provided to the County within 180 days of this request, the application shall expire and no further action on the proposed development shall take place. Please contact me at (360) 427-9670, ext. 577 if you have questions. Sincerely, Ryan Crater Land Use Planner Mason County Planning Department 10/17/2007 Page 1 of 2 MEP2007-00098 III NOTIFICATION OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION 10/17/2007 Case No.: MEP2007-00098 Comments: I have reviewed your MEP application and Wetland Reconnaissance Report from Lee Boad. To further process your permit you will need to submit a wetland mitigation plan per 17.01.070 (F). If this repair is an emergency repair for Health and Welfare reasons please contact me as expedited arrangements can be made per 17.01.070 (D)(1)(f)(5). 10/17/2007 Page 2 of 2 MEP2007-00098 1 � • Mason Environmental Permit 1/7/2008 Case No.: MEP2007-00098 Conditions: 1.) The applicant acknowledges that the project will be completed as proposed, so that the project will be consistent with all applicable standards of the Mason County Resource Ordinance. 2.) Work must be done in the dry to help prevent disturbance of unstable soil layers and uncontrollable mass wasting. 3.) Temporary erosion control measures must be implemented to prevent water quality degradation of adjacent waters or wetlands. Silt fencing must be installed and maintained until upland vegetation has become established. 4.) Approved per dimensions and setbacks on submitted site plan. 5.) A Department of the Army permit shall be obtained prior to the performance of any activities waterward of the mean higher high water mark or ordinary high water mark or in wetlands. Please contact Oliva Remaro 206-764-6960, repectively, for more information. Information can also be obtained from the US Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Branch, P.O. Box 3755, Seattle, WA 98124. 6.) A Hydraulic Project Approval from the Washington State Department of Fish +Wildlife must be granted prior to construction. For more information Gloria Rogers (Freshwater) 249-4628 or Margie Schirato (Saltwater)427-2179, Habitat Biologists. 7.) Temporary erosion control measures must be implemented to prevent water quality degradation of adjacent waters or wetlands. Silt fencing must be installed and maintained until upland vegetation has become established. 8.) Work must be done in the dry to help prevent disturbance of unstable soil layers and uncontrollable mass wasting. 9.) Proper erosion and sediment control practices must be used on the construction site and adjacent areas to prevent upland sediments from entering shoreline waters. Erosion control measures must be in place prior to any clearing, grading, or construction. These control measures must be effective to prevent soil from being carried into surface water by stormwater runoff. Sand, silt, and soil will damage aquatic habitat and are considered pollutants. Any discharge of sediment-laden runoff or other pollutapollutants to waters of the state is in violation of Chapter 90.48 RCW, Water Pollution Control, and WAC 173-201A, Water Quality Standards for Surface Waters of the State of Washington, and is subject to enforcement action. Any work in or adjacent to waterways that will adversely affect water quality must receive specific prior authorization from the Department of Ecology pursuant to WAC 173-201A-110. A short-term water quality standards modification may be issued if the proponent agrees to a number of specific construction practices and techniques designed to minimize water quality impacts. All areas disturbed or newly created by construction activities must be revegetated using bioengineering techniques, clean durable riprap, or some other equivalent type of protection against erosion when other measures are not practical. 10.) This permit is issued under the authority of 17.01.170 as an Emergency Repair. 11.) Approximately 750 sq. ft. of wetland will be filled in permanently. Applicant must mitigate approximately 2,250 sq. ft. of new wetlands on or off site according to MCRO 17.01.070 and any other applicable regulations. Actual mitigation will be based on actual square feet of wetlands filled in. 12.) Applicant must submit a mitigation plan for any and all wetlands filled or displaced. 13.) All permits from State and Federal agencies must be obtained prior to any work being started. Permits must be kept on side for inspection. 14.) Applicant understands that any and all work regarding this project will be reviewed through the SEPA process. 15.) This project is subject to an approved geo-report as slopes greater than 40% are present on site. MCRO 17.01.100 Landslide Hazard Areas. 16.) Work not to exceed 90 calendar days from date of being issued. 1/7/2008 Page 2 of 3 MEP2007-00098 Mason Environmental Permit 1/7/2008 Case No.: MEP2007-00098 17.) Restoration/mitigation of any critical area altered as a result of this emergency activity will be completed within 90 days of permit being issued, except if more than 90 days are needed to complete the required restoration/mitigation as outlined in 17.01.070 (Wetlands) and other applicable codes. 1/7/2008 Page 3 of 3 MEP2007-00098 f y °N-STATE MASON COUNTY �P5 C DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 4k Mo O A U N N Planning Division 0 Y P O Box 279, Shelton,WA 98584 (360)427-9670 1864 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION March 17, 2009 JOHN G CARROUGHER --7614 3516 24TH AVE CT NW Gr►G- 4&Re�D2 , WfW a 833E Parcel No.: 322334400010 Project Description: ACCESS TO WELL Dear Applicant: You have submitted a permit application (case no. MEP2007-00098) for proposed construction or development in the county. Upon review of your application, I require additional information to complete the permit review process. Therefore, review of your application will not proceed until the necessary information is provided (see the comment section of this letter for details.) Once the information is submitted and the application is complete, I will continue to process your application accordingly. If the additional information is not provided to the County .- within 180 days of this request, the application shall expire and no further action on the proposed development shall take place. Please contact me at (360) 427-9670, ext. 287 if you have questions. Sincerely Pam Bennett-Cummiin 9 Land Use Planner Mason County Planning Department Pp�m-�C C , ►tea srsr) , L-)a , L)S 3/17/2609 Page 1 of 2 MEP2007-00098 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 3/17/2009 Case No.: MEP2007-00098 Comments: Per staffs phone conversation with Ms. Carrougher on March 16, 2009, we provide the attached information. The purpose of this letter is to "walk" you through the project information that we are working with, and to discuss how to move forward to a resolution that works for both you, and the County. If you have any questions in the meantime, please feel free to contact me at 360-427-9670 ext 287 or by email at pambc@co.mason.wa.us Attachment #1 is the Wetland Recon Report and Water System Access Proposal prepared by Lee Boad dated May 2004. On page 4 the access road is described as 15 feet wide, affecting approximately 750 square feet of wetland. Planner Ryan Crater approved the Environmental permit to expedite your well repair (Attachment 2) and requested a mitigation plan to be completed by a wetland professional, in several letters in 2007 and 2008. As you can see on the permit approval, his review was for 750 sq. ft of wetland impact based on the wetland report dated in May 2004. In early 2009 we received a different document completed by Lee Boad, dated August 2008 - which described the project as having covered 3,400 square feet of wetland, and 1,150 square feet of buffer (Attachment 3). The project that planner Ryan Crater approved in October of 2007 was the project represented in the May 2004 wetland report (site plan in Attachment 1, and condition #11 of issued permit). Consequently when staff received the second wetland report (Attachment 3) - we responded with our letter dated March 9, 2009 indicating that the project on the ground appeared not to be the minimum necessary to access the well for the repairs. The project now includes a parking area not reviewed in the original application or permit. Attachment 4 provides the regulatory guidance used by planning staff to review this case. Our concern is that we have no supporting documentation which indicates a fill of this magnitude was necessary for the rig to access the well, therefore no way to approve the current project. However it may be that you have such information, or that your well driller can provide you/us with documentation that would be helpful - for example, something noting that he actually found he needed the extra area to allow for turning. We hope you understand this letter is sent in the interest of working with you, it's just that right now there is no documentation currently on file to support the larger footprint being needed. We hope you can assist our decision-making process by providing more information. Thank you. 3/17/2009 Page 2 of 2 MEP2007-00098 �N.STA MASON COUNTY o P� A o N DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT > s N Planning Division i T 7 Ny P O Box 279, Shelton,WA 98584 O z � Y (360)427-9670 1864 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION May 12, 2009 " (�'JOHN G CARROUGHER 7611 E ST RT 106 �1 3516 24TH AVE CT NW q Z33 S- Parcel No.: 322334400010 I Project Description: ACCESS TO WELL Dear Applicant: You have submitted a permit application (case no. MEP2007-00098) for proposed construction or development in the county. Upon review of your application, I require additional information to complete the permit review process. Therefore, review of your application will not proceed until the necessary information is provided (see the comment section of this letter for details.) Once the information is submitted and the application is complete, I will continue to process your application accordingly. If the additional information is not provided to the County within 180 days of this request, the application shall expire and no further action on the proposed development shall take place. Please contact me at (360) 427-9670, ext. 287 if you have questions. Sincerely, Pam B nett-Cumming Land Use Planner Mason County Planning Department 511212009 Page 1 of 2 MEP2007-00098 i REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 5/12/2009 Case No.: MEP2007-00098 Comments: On April 9, 2009 we mailed you a Revised Mason Environmental Permit for initial and return. We also mailed you a Title Notification of Habitat Management Plan for notarized signature and recording with the Mason County Auditor. We requested that you return a copy of that document to us. To date we have received neither document. This letter is being sent as a friendly reminder that this information is required in order for us to consider your case in compliance and completed. We request that you take the time to complete and return these items within the next 30 days, or your case will be considered non-compliant. Your attention is appreciated. cc: Christine Clark, Planninig enforcement. (s53) 061- 6,07 5/12/2009 Page 2 of 2 MEP2007-00098 E RECEIVED APR 0 1 2VUj MCC D - PLANNING March 27, 2009 Ms. Pam Bennett-Cummiing Land Use Planner Mason County Planning Department Dear Ms. Bennett-Cummiing, As we have discussed several times over the past few weeks, much was accomplished regarding the permit application(MEP2007-00098)that was unavailable to you at the time of your letter dated 9 March 2009. As you know, we had extensive input from the Army Corps of Engineers and the Washington State Department of Transportation. The excavator contractor and the well-repair company utilized the environmental data and the hill topography to design the most environmentally-friendly access possible. This was all done with the full knowledge of Mr. Ryan Crater of your department. He misfiled the permit using the wrong data, resulting in the confusion we are now reconciling. I appreciate your efforts to discover the facts. To conclude our permit file,you have asked that Arcadia Drilling provide more specific information to satisfy your prerequisites. They were happy to comply and the letter is enclosed. I trust this concludes the county's interest in this permit. Please call or write with any concerns. Sincerely, John G. Carro her etchen Carrougher Enclosure II �I I Ryan Crater-Completion of we permit 1 From: Robert Fink To: gcarrougher@comcast.net Date: 7/2/2008 5:42:44 pm Subject: Completion of wetland permit CC: Ryan Crater Dear Mr. Carrougher, As we discussed today, in order to comply with and complete your permit MEP2007-00098, you need to have a wetland mitigation plan prepared by a qualified professional biologist, approved by the county through a notarized and recorded agreement between yourself and the county, bonded, implemented, monitored with annual reports for at least 5 years, and successfully completed. I apologize for the confusion and apparent lack of clear communication.We did receive a "Carrougher Mitigation Plan"attached at the end of the SEPA Checklist, and some of your SEPA responses did address planting you intended to do as mitigation.We should have let you know that the attached plan was not adequate to meet the requirements of the ordinance-or at least asked you if you had intended it for that purpose. With regard to the enforcement case, ENF2008-00062, I have asked Mr. Crater to close it. The only issue was the wetland mitigation plan. Now that we have cleared up the confusion, I am optimistic that you will address it promptly. I will not attempt here to provide you with details of the mitigation plan requirements. If you or your consultant have questions regarding them, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Robert Fink, AICP Planning Manager Mason County Department of Community Development PO Box 279 Shelton, WA 98584 Phone: (360)427-9670 x 366 Fax: (360)427-8425 PS0N COUmrF MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Planning Shelton(360)427-9670 Mason County Bldg. I Belfair(360)275-4467 411 N 5th Street Elma(360)482-5269 - _ PO Box 279 1854 Shelton,WA 98584 HOME PAGE-www.co.mason.wa.us March 9,2009 John&Gretchen Carrougher 3516 240'Ct NW Gig Harbor,WA 98335 RE: Mason Environmental Permit MEP 2007-00098 for access road to well at 7611 East State:Route 106,Union WA. Parcel no. 32233-44-00010. Dear Mr and Ms. Carrougher: I This letter is being sent to you in reference to outstanding items relating to the above permit.`:In 2008 planner Ryan. Crater sent you several letters identifying the information needed to complete the after-the-fact review of.your Mason Environmental Permit. It was our understanding that you were allowed to install a-small aceess road to the well located on your property, so that maintenance of your water supply could take place. On January 14,2009 we received fzom you a copy of a mitigation plan completed by the WEtldnd+Corps in'August 2008. This report identifies an area of approximately 4'500 square feet that has been filled the create an access driveway to your well,plus what appears to be a parking area. Of that fill,approximately 3;400 square feet is in the wetland. The report also indicates that given the size of the parcel it is not possible to meet the County'.s mitigation requirements. Your initial proposal-which was.not-acted.on-was to displace only 750 square feet of wetland;.with.a relatively narrow road to the well site for the purpose.—as stated in your application. This smaller fill.footprint would have' been more consistent with the provisions of Chapter 17.01.070.F,in that it minimizes the irrapactao:the wetland. As of June 19,2008 the County was waiting for a mitigation plan for the 750 sq ft of wetland fill proposal: Mason County Resource Ordinance Wetlands Chapter 17.01.070.17 guides in review of impacts to wetlands. As a condition of any permit allowing alteration of wetlands and/or wetland buffers,the County shall Trequir.&Ahat.the. applicant engage in the restoration,creation or enhancement of wetlands and their buffers in orderAo.offset the impacts resulting from the applicant's actions. In these cases a sequence of review must be:considered:'!First the applicant must consider avoiding the wetland or wetland buffer. If the applicant cannot avoid,the wetland.or wetland buffer,they must consider reducing or minimizing the impact. Your substantially larger area of fill which cover 3,440 square feet of wetland plus more than.100 square feet of. buffer is not considered the minimum to conduct repair of your well. Mason County has sent you four letters requesting the wetland mitigation plan for the original proposal. Given the amount of time that has passed,and the fact that your originally proposed 750 square feet of fill has not been adhered to,your fill is considered in violation of Mason County Resource Ordinance Chapter 17.01.070 and is being forwarded for enforcement to Christine Clark,Enforcement Planner. Within 30 days of the date of this letter,please submit the originally requested mitigation plan for 750 square feet of wetland fill,together with a mitigation and restoration plan for removing the excess fill,and restoring the wetland. Sincerely, Pamela D Bennett-Cumming, Senior Planner(3 427-9670 ext 287 Cc: Christine Clark,Enforcement Planner(360)427=9679 ext 577 �oN coa4F MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Planning Shelton(360)427-9670 Mason County Bldg. I Belfair(360)275-4467 411 N 5th Street Elma(360)482-5269 --— PO Box 279 �x4._.. Shelton,WA 98584 HOME PAGE—www.co.mason.wa.us April 9,2009 Gretchen&John Carrougher 3516 20 Ave Ct NW Gig Harbor,WA 98335 Re: requested information to complete review of MEP2007-00098 at your site located at 7611 E State Route 106 in Mason County,Washington. Dear Mr.And Ms. Carrougher: Thank you for your letter dated March 27,2009,which enclosed a letter from Arcadia Drilling. We had requested this information—to document the size of landing area that was needed for the well repair conducted by Arcadia on your site. Arcadia Drilling indicates that they needed a flat area of approximately 55ft by 65 ft plus highway access in order to complete the well repair and any future well service. While it is hard to exactly scale from the revised wetland report from The Wetland Corps(dated August 2008), it appears that Arcadia's area need and the graded,filled area shown in the report approximately correspond. This information allows us to revise your permit accordingly,to reflect the actual area filled. In your letter you also discuss some actions of former enforcement planner Ryan Crater,and some concerns that he mis-filed documents. We are unable to speak to those issues for two reasons: 1. Looking at the materials and the facts in the case, it was necessary that we request the documentation from Arcadia to reconcile the difference between the allowed fill amount on the original permit,and the amount actually placed on the ground. 2. Ryan Crater was one of the planners laid off by the County as a result of the economic downturn, so he is not available to respond. However,we now have the information to revise your permit. Enclosed you will find two copies of a Mason Environmental Permit—revised. Please initial the conditions on the original,and return. The second copy is for you records. Also enclosed you will find a Title Notification ofBabitat Management Plan for notarized signature and recording with the Mason County Auditor. Please also return a copy of the recorded Title Notification to me at the address above. Thank you for your willingness to work with us to resolve the issues to revise your permit. We look forward to receiving the two documents. If you have any questions,please feel free to contact me at 360-427-9670 ext 287. SincM Paming, Senior Planner