The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSPI2004-00002 - SPI Inspections - 1/26/2004 (2) STAT� MASON COUNTY o Py A o N DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT S N Planning Division i o Y P O Box 279, Shelton,WA 98584 (360)427-9670 1864 Site Inspection January 26, 2004 a J J D KEVIN HENDRICKSON 11631 N DOGWOOD LANE EDMONDS WA 98020 Case No.: SPI2004-00002 Parcel No.: 323355000064 Project Description: GRADING FOR ACCESS ROAD PERMIT Dear Applicant: Pursuant to your application, a site pre-inspection (SPI)was performed on your property. Below you will find comments made regarding the proposed development and its critical values. In some cases, setbacks for development from shorelines, steep slopes, streams, and wetlands must be included in your specific proposal-, these setbacks are included as part of the comments listed below. This information is based on County and State regulations as they exist to date. These regulations may change and may affect the requirements for development of the subject property. Please contact me at(360) 427-9670, ext. 286 if you have questions. Sincerely, Scott Lonqanecker Land Use Planner Mason County Planning Department / 1/26/2004 1 of 4 SP12004-00002 Site Inspection 1/26/2004 Case No.: SP12004-00002 Comments: Pre-inspection for K. Hendrickson: Rural Residential 5 zoning designation. Standard building setbacks for this zoning are a 25 foot front yard setback, and 20 foot side and rear yard setback. These setbacks are measured from above grade structures including roof overhangs, and other structures and appurtenances, including heat pumps etc. Other setbacks can apply when critical areas are present such as streams, wetlands, steep slopes etc. Shorelines: The shoreline designation within 200-feet of Tee Lake is Urban Residential. The shoreline and related setbacks of the property were not evaluated as this was not part of the pre-inspection application. Wetlands: The Mason County Resource Ordinance (MCRO), Wetlands Section 17.01.070 provides specific vegetated buffers and building setbacks for regulated wetlands. The largest possible buffer and setback possible under this ordinance would be 140 feet total from the wetland edge. In order to determine the specific wetland buffer/ setback requirements and wetland edge on site, a formal wetland delineation would need to be done following the procedures and protocols contained within MCRO section 17.01.070. Regulated wetlands exist on and adjacent to the subject property. The applicant requested staff to evaluate an access road through a wetland that has already been partially constructed without the required permits. This constitutes a violation of the Mason County Resource Ordinance, section 17.01.070, as well as other state and federal regulations. In order to review any proposal to fill regulated wetlands for any purpose, including an access road the first step would be to have a wetland categorization and delineation done by a qualified wetlands biologist (see enclosed list of wetland consultants for your information). You are not limited to the consultants on this list. Your wetland consultant will need to develop a detailed site plan which indicates where wetlands and associated buffers and setbacks are located on the subject property, and where the recent filling occurred. An alternative to this is to completely restore the site and remove the fill. Kristin French, Code Enforcement Planner can help you with specifics on restoration plans. As part of the project review, other alternatives should be thoroughly evaluated, especially the possibility of obtaining an easement from an adjacent land owner in order to avoid having to create an additional access road through the wetland. This would appear to be the preferred and least impact alternative. If it can 1/26/2004 2 of 4 SP12004-00002 Site Inspection 1/26/2004 Case No.: SP12004-00002 be demonstrated that obtaining an easement from an adjacent land owner is not possible, then the route and methods used to create an access through the wetlands need to be thoroughly evaluated to minimize impacts. This evaluation would be done by your wetland consultant and reviewed by the County. Based upon USGS aerial photos from 1990 and site evaluation, the wetlands appear to be fairly extensive on the site. It should be determined by your wetland consultant whether the wetlands are associated with Tee Lake or are isolated from other surface water. It does not appear that they are associated with the lake based upon the aerial photos, but this should be verified on the ground. Proposals to fill or destroy wetlands and associated buffers are reviewed through a Mason Environmental Permit. After-the-fact permits are subject to triple the standard fee. Additional comments by Kristin French below: Enforcement file number ENF2004-00031 has been tagged for review on March 1, 2004. By this date, you will need to have contracted with a wetland professional to have the wetland system delineated and categorized. If you wish to restore the site and pursue an alternate access option, no permit submittals will be required. You will need to submit a Restoration Plan that meets the requirements of Mason County Resource Ordinance section 17.01 .200(1) - enclosed for your reference. Like the delineation and categorization, the Restoration Plan must be prepared by a qualified Wetland Professional. In addition to the Restoration Plan, you will need to submit the following: Restoration Bond (Form Enclosed) in an amount based on a reasonable, formal estimate for the cost of conformance with the Restoration Plan, and • $360 Restoration Plan Review and Monitoring Fee - covers County costs associated with site investigation, Plan review and three-year file tracking efforts. If you choose to restore the site, submit the wetland delineation and categorization, Restoration Plan, Restoration Bond and $360 fee by March 1, 2004. If you choose to apply for a Mason Environmental Permit for an access proposal that will impact the regulated wetland system or associated buffer, submit the wetland delineation and categorization and a Mason Environmental Permit application by 1/26/2004 3 of 4 SP12004-00002 Site Inspection 1/26/2004 Case No.: SP12004-00002 March 1, 2004. The Mason Environmental Permit fee is $1,530 ($510 standard fee tripled due to "after the fact" status). The project proposal will be reviewed for conformance with Mason County Resource Ordinance section 17.01.070. Coordinate with your wetland consultant to ensure that the project proposal satisfies section 17.01.070 requirements. Please note that permit application does not guarantee approval. If you choose to submit a Mason Environmental Permit application, submit the application, application fee, and supporting documentation by March 1, 2004. If you have questions or concerns regarding the enforcement case, please contact Kristin French at (360) 427-9670 ext. 593. 1/26/2004 4 of 4 SP12004-00002 Hood Canal Salmon Enhancement Gr 360-275-0648 12/15/03 03:47P P.001 Spy * �,�iA�i,uUJ io:cu rnn �uu vc� , iro unov„ .,v a.c�v�a ..a�. �+��+ C•� r MASON COUNTY _*Z06 a5 0� PLANNING DEPT. PRE-INSPECTION APPLICATION $zoo 1- 1--00 R oor PLEASE PRINT 1. Owner: ev/h o Applicant- 5� ,-� e 8iio Address: ee Applicant Address: �t/• 116 city; ownerAddressN da City:. 1/�J._Zj Phvnc:_( � to Y Phone:_( 71 z. 7 day Phone;_( /•� 7 7•r - 7 9SS evening 2. Parcel No.3 L 3'S_.S' _ --W _To — Parcel No. Logal Description: �ee /G/«_-' �'Z Planner. OBM RAM DW SAL ages' T2 G 4 . Sf,gp Comp. flan Type of Use Water Body c 3. Purpose of pre—Inspection:- 4_ Use of Building: --- S, Do any of the following exist on or adjacent to property?: Slope CI saltwater❑ lake;X river❑ other stream❑ seasock�l creek Elpond 0wetland seasonal runoff❑ oe ❑ Direttio ^ to Site: �� v h t. 'r u r•+ �✓ I-P ere Y d 6 tip If the information is incomplete, then Mason County must disclaim any errors resulting from deficiencies in the original application. Pre-inspection reports remain valid only until development changes occur in the vicinity which affect the lot evaluated in this inspection. or the laws regulating development of the site change after the time of inspection. Applicant Signature: Date; 0 If you would like to be on site during inspection,please check hens: ❑ Return application to: Department of Cvmmunity Development, Planning Division P.O. l3ox Z79 Shelton,WA 98584 (350)427.91570 Please include a$200,00 check or money order payable to Mason County Treasurer When completed, this form becomes part of the parcel file. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY:Accepted by: Date, Please illustrate below the proposed building alto in rolation to water&property lines: MORE ON BACK SIDE JAN � 9 2U�y 426 W• CEOAR 5T• Hood Canal Salmon Enhancement Gr 360-275-0648 12/1S/03 03:47P P.002 A.41A0/LVV0 iV.LV fAA JVV `S&1 41QV Anvv" Vv •auw�♦ va•• T�•"'- Y Please ilustrate below the proposed building site in relation to wetor and property lines: itT- l�4 a Departmental Review (For Office Use Only) FPIanMDepartment Findings: I , d �') , - �� ? PC20 N"STgTF MASON COUNTY o A �, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT S N Planning Division o Y y P O Box 279, Shelton,WA 98584 (360)427-9670 1864 Site Inspection January 26, 2004 KEVIN HENDRICKSON 11631 N DOGWOOD LANE EDMONDS WA 98020 Case No.: SP12004-00002 Parcel No.: 323355000064 Project Description: GRADING FOR ACCESS ROAD PERMIT Dear Applicant: Pursuant to your application, a site pre-inspection (SPI)was performed on your property. Below you will find comments made regarding the proposed development and its critical values. In some cases, setbacks for development from shorelines, steep slopes, streams, and wetlands must be included in your specific proposal; these setbacks are included as part of the comments listed below. This information is based on County and State regulations as they exist to date. These regulations may change and may affect the requirements for development of the subject property. Please contact me at(360) 427-9670, ext. 286 if you have questions. Sincerely, Scott Lonaanecker Land Use Planner Mason County Planning Department / 1/26/2004 1 of 4 SP12004-00002 Site Inspection 1/26/2004 Case No.: SP12004-00002 Comments: Pre-inspection for K. Hendrickson: Rural Residential 5 zoning designation. Standard building setbacks for this zoning are a 25 foot front yard setback, and 20 foot side and rear yard setback. These setbacks are measured from above grade structures including roof overhangs, and other structures and appurtenances, including heat pumps etc. Other setbacks can apply when critical areas are present such as streams, wetlands, steep slopes etc. Shorelines: The shoreline designation within 200-feet of Tee Lake is Urban Residential. The shoreline and related setbacks of the property were not evaluated as this was not part of the pre-inspection application. Wetlands: The Mason County Resource Ordinance (MCRO), Wetlands Section 17.01.070 provides specific vegetated buffers and building setbacks for regulated wetlands. The largest possible buffer and setback possible under this ordinance would be 140 feet total from the wetland edge. In order to determine the specific wetland buffer/ setback requirements and wetland edge on site, a formal wetland delineation would need to be done following the procedures and protocols contained within MCRO section 17.01.070. Regulated wetlands exist on and adjacent to the subject property. The applicant requested staff to evaluate an access road through a wetland that has already been partially constructed without the required permits. This constitutes a violation of the Mason County Resource Ordinance, section 17.01.070, as well as other state and federal regulations. In order to review any proposal to fill regulated wetlands for any purpose, including an access road the first step would be to have a wetland categorization and delineation done by a qualified wetlands biologist (see enclosed list of wetland consultants for your information). You are not limited to the consultants on this list. Your wetland consultant will need to develop a detailed site plan which indicates where wetlands and associated buffers and setbacks are located on the subject property, and where the recent filling occurred. An alternative to this is to completely restore the site and remove the fill. Kristin French, Code Enforcement Planner can help you with specifics on restoration plans. As part of the project review, other alternatives should be thoroughly evaluated, especially the possibility of obtaining an easement from an adjacent land owner in order to avoid having to create an additional access road through the wetland. This would appear to be the preferred and least impact alternative. If it can 1/26/2004 2 of 4 SP12004-00002 Site Inspection 1/26/2004 Case No.: SP12004-00002 be demonstrated that obtaining an easement from an adjacent land owner is not possible, then the route and methods used to create an access through the wetlands need to be thoroughly evaluated to minimize impacts. This evaluation would be done by your wetland consultant and reviewed by the County. Based upon USGS aerial photos from 1990 and site evaluation, the wetlands appear to be fairly extensive on the site. It should be determined by your wetland consultant whether the wetlands are associated with Tee Lake or are isolated from other surface water. It does not appear that they are associated with the lake based upon the aerial photos, but this should be verified on the ground. Proposals to fill or destroy wetlands and associated buffers are reviewed through a Mason Environmental Permit. After-the-fact permits are subject to triple the standard fee. Additional comments by Kristin French below: Enforcement file number ENF2004-00031 has been tagged for review on March 1, 2004. By this date, you will need to have contracted with a wetland professional to have the wetland system delineated and categorized. If you wish to restore the site and pursue an alternate access option, no permit submittals will be required. You will need to submit a Restoration Plan that meets the requirements of Mason County Resource Ordinance section 17.01.200(I) - enclosed for your reference. Like the delineation and categorization, the Restoration Plan must be prepared by a qualified Wetland Professional. In addition to the Restoration Plan, you will need to submit the following: Restoration Bond (Form Enclosed) in an amount based on a reasonable, formal estimate for the cost of conformance with the Restoration Plan, and $360 Restoration Plan Review and Monitoring Fee - covers County costs associated with site investigation, Plan review and three-year file tracking efforts. If you choose to restore the site, submit the wetland delineation and categorization, Restoration Plan, Restoration Bond and $360 fee by March 1, 2004. If you choose to apply for a Mason Environmental Permit for an access proposal that will impact the regulated wetland system or associated buffer, submit the wetland delineation and categorization and a Mason Environmental Permit application by 1/26/2004 3 of 4 SP12004-00002 • Site Inspection 1/26/2004 Case No.: SP12004-00002 March 1, 2004. The Mason Environmental Permit fee is $1,530 ($510 standard fee tripled due to "after the fact" status). The project proposal will be reviewed for conformance with Mason County Resource Ordinance section 17.01.070. Coordinate with your wetland consultant to ensure that the project proposal satisfies section 17.01.070 requirements. Please note that permit application does not guarantee approval. If you choose to submit a Mason Environmental Permit application, submit the application, application fee, and supporting documentation by March 1, 2004. If you have questions or concerns regarding the enforcement case, please contact Kristin French at (360) 427-9670 ext. 593. 1/26/2004 4 of 4 SP12004-00002 1 3/27/201 r, II Case Activity Listing 1:43:43PM Case #: SPI2004-00002 Parcel#: 323355000064 Description: GRADING FOR ACCESS ROAD PERMIT Assigned Done Activity Descript�on Date 1 Date 2 Date 3 Hold Disp To By Updated Updated B` SPIA010 Application Received 1/9/2004 1/9/2004 None DONE KS 1/9/2004 KS SPIA100 Site Inspection 1/9/2004 1/22/2004 None DONE RAM SAL 1/26/2004 SAL Pre-inspection for K.Hendrickson: Rural Residential 5 zoning designation. Standard building setbacks for this zoning are a 25 foot front yard setback,and 20 foot side and rear yard setback. These setbacks are measured from above grade structures including roof overhangs,and other structures and appurtenances,including heat pumps etc. Other setbacks can apply when critical areas are present such as streams,wetlands,steep slopes etc. Shorelines: The shoreline designation within 200-feet of Tee Lake is Urban Residential. The shoreline and related setbacks of the property were not evaluated as this was not part of the pre-inspection application. Wetlands:The Mason County Resource Ordinance(MCRO),Wetlands Section 17.01.070 provides specific vegetated buffers and building setbacks for regulated wetlands. The largest possible buffer and setback possible under this ordinance would be 140 feet total from the wetland edge. In order to determine the specific wetland buffer/setback requirements and wetland edge on site,a formal wetland delineation would need to be done following the procedures and protocols contained within MCRO section 17.01.070. Regulated wetlands exist on and adjacent to the subject property. The applicant requested staff to evaluate an access road through a wetland that has already been partially constructed without the required permits. This constitutes a violation of the Mason County Resource Ordinance,section 17.01.070,as well as other state and federal regulations. In order to review any proposal to fill regulated wetlands for any purpose,including an access road the first step would be to have a wetland categorization and delineation done by a qualified wetlands biologist(see enclosed list of wetland consultants for your information). You are not limited to the consultants on this list. Your wetland consultant will need to develop a detailed site plan which indicates where wetlands and associated buffers and setbacks are located on the subject property,and where the recent filling occurred. An alternative to this,as you may have already discussed with Kristin French,our enforcement planner is to completely restore the site and remove the fill. Kristin can help you with specifics on restoration plans. As part of the project review,other alternatives should be thoroughly evaluated,especially the possibility of obtaining an easement from an adjacent land owner in order to avoid having to create an additional access road through the wetland. This would appear to be the preferred and least impact alternative. If it can be demonstrated that obtaining an easement from an adjacent land owner is not possible,then the route and methods used to create an access through the wetlands need to be thoroughly evaluated to minimize impacts. This evaluation would be done by your wetland consultant and reviewed by the County. Based upon USGS aerial photos from 1990 and site evaluation,the wetlands appear to be fairly extensive on the site. It should be determined by your wetland consultant whether the wetlands are associated with Tee Lake or are isolated from other surface water. It does not appear that they are associated with the lake based upon the aerial photos,but this should be verified on the ground. Proposals to fill or destroy wetlands and associated buffers are reviewed through a Mason Environmental Permit. After-the-fact permits are usually subject to triple the standard fee. No other critical areas were identified on the North end of the property. If you have any questions please feel free to call. Thank you. Page 1 of 3 CaseActivityrpt Case Activity Listing 3/27/201 r 1:43:43PM Case #: SPI2004-00002 Parcel#: 323355000064 lip, Description: GRADING FOR ACCESS ROAD PERMIT Assigned Done Activity Description Date 1 Date 2 Date 3 Hold Disp To By Updated Updated B'-� SPIA600 SP1 Letter- Field Review 1/26/2004 None DONE SAL L27i2004 SAL Pre-inspection for K.Hendrickson: Rural Residential 5 zoning designation. Standard building setbacks for this zoning are a 25 foot front yard setback,and 20 foot side and rear yard setback. These setbacks are measured from above grade structures including roof overhangs,and other structures and appurtenances,including heat pumps etc. Other setbacks can apply when critical areas are present such as streams,wetlands,steep slopes etc. Shorelines: The shoreline designation within 200-feet of Tee Lake is Urban Residential. The shoreline and related setbacks of the property were not evaluated as this was not part of the pre-inspection application. Wetlands:The Mason County Resource Ordinance(MCRO),Wetlands Section 17.01.070 provides specific vegetated buffers and building setbacks for regulated wetlands. The largest possible buffer and setback possible under this ordinance would be 140 feet total from the wetland edge. In order to determine the specific wetland buffer/setback requirements and wetland edge on site,a formal wetland delineation would need to be done following the procedures and protocols contained within MCRO section 17.01.070. Regulated wetlands exist on and adjacent to the subject property. The applicant requested staff to evaluate an access road through a wetland that has already been partially constructed without the required permits. This constitutes a violation of the Mason County Resource Ordinance,section 17.01.070,as well as other state and federal regulations. In order to review any proposal to fill regulated wetlands for any purpose,including an access road the first step would be to have a wetland categorization and delineation done by a qualified wetlands biologist(see enclosed list of wetland consultants for your information). You are not limited to the consultants on this list. Your wetland consultant will need to develop a detailed site plan which indicates where wetlands and associated buffers and setbacks are located on the subject property,and where the recent filling occurred. An alternative to this is to completely restore the site and remove the fill. Kristin French,Code Enforcement Planner can help you with specifics on restoration plans. As part of the project review,other alternatives should be thoroughly evaluated,especially the possibility of obtaining an easement from an adjacent land owner in order to avoid having to create an additional access road through the wetland. This would appear to be the preferred and least impact alternative. If it can be demonstrated that obtaining an easement from an adjacent land owner is not possible,then the route and methods used to create an access through the wetlands need to be thoroughly evaluated to minimize impacts. This evaluation would be done by your wetland consultant and reviewed by the County. Based upon USGS aerial photos from 1990 and site evaluation,the wetlands appear to be fairly extensive on the site. It should be determined by your wetland consultant whether the wetlands are associated with Tee Lake or are isolated from other surface water. It does not appear that they are associated with the lake based upon the aerial photos,but this should be verified on the ground. Proposals to fill or destroy wetlands and associated buffers are reviewed through a Mason Environmental Permit. After-the-fact permits are subject to triple the standard fee. Additional comments by Kristin French below: Enforcement file number ENF2004-00031 has been tagged for review on March 1,2004. By this date,you will need to have contracted with a wetland professional to have the wetland system delineated and categorized. If you wish to restore the site and pursue an alternate access option,no permit submittals will be required. You will need to submit a Restoration Plan that meets the requirements of Mason County Resource Ordinance section 17.01.200(1)-enclosed for your reference. Like the delineation and categorization,the Restoration Plan must be prepared by a qualified Wetland Professional. In addition to the Restoration Plan,you will need to submit the following: Restoration Bond(Form Enclosed)in an amount based on a reasonable,formal estimate for the cost of conformance with the Restoration Plan,and $360 Restoration Plan Review and Monitoring Fee-covers County costs associated with site investigation,Plan review and three-year file tracking efforts. If you choose to restore the site,submit the wetland delineation and categorization,Restoration Plan,Restoration Bond and$360 fee by March 1,2004. If you choose to apply for a Mason Environmental Permit for an access proposal that will impact the regulated wetland system or associated buffer,submit the wetland delineation and categorization and a Mason Environmental Permit application by March 1,2004. The Mason Environmental Permit fee is$1,530($510 standard fee tripled due to"after the fact"status). The project proposal will be reviewed Page 2 of 3 CaseActivity..rpt Case Activity Listing 3/27/2017 1:43:43PM Case#: SPI2004-00002 Parcel#: 323355000064 Description: GRADING FOR ACCESS ROAD PERMIT Assigned Done ,... n_ ,,.. Activity Description Date 1 Date 2 Date 3 Hold Disp To By Updated„ for conformance with Mason County Resource Ordinance section 17.01.070. Coordinate with our �Netland consultant to ensure that the project proposal satisfies section 17.01.070 requirements. Please note that permit application does not guarantee approval. If you choose to submit a Mason Environmental Permit application,submit the application,application fee,and supporting documentation by March 1,2004. If you have questions or concerns regarding the enforcement case,please contact Kristin French at(360)427-9670 ext.593. Page 3 of 3 Casenctivity-nA REcE �