HomeMy WebLinkAboutSHB-13-022 for SHR2013-00004 - SHR Letters / Memos - 4/21/2014 1 I
2
J
4
5
6
7 BEFORE THE SHORELINES HEARINGS BOARD
STATE OF WASHINGTON
8
9 DAVID HAWKE and KOREEN HAWKE;
CLIFFORD KING and LEILA KING; PAULINE
10 M. VAN DER MEER; GENE RUSSO and SHB No. 13-022
11 MARILYN RUSSO;KENT ROBERTS; SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
GABRIELA MELVIN; TROY A.DIFFENACH;
12 DOROTHY ELVIN;JAY YANAMURA; JIM
HYMER; J. WIEL; SANDY PODY and CAROL
13 PODY; RICHARD GASKINS and LINDA
14 GASKINS; LANONNE TRUXTON TERKLA
and DOUG HASER,
15 Petitioners,
16 vs.
17 MASON COUNTY; WASHINGTON
18 DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE; and
WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF
19 ECOLOGY;
20 Respondents.
21
22 Petitioners, represented by their attorneys, Phillips Burgess PLLC and Kelly Wood, and the
23 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife ("WDFW"), represented by its attorney, Michael
24 Young,Assistant Attorney General,hereby submit this Settlement Agreement("Agreement")to the
25 Shorelines Hearings Board ("Board") as a full and final settlement of the above-referenced appeal,
26 and request that the Board dismiss the appeal with prejudice.
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT- 1
1 I. BACKGROUND
2 1. On June 13, 2013, Mason County approved a Shoreline Substantial Development
Pen-nit ("SSDP") and Variance Permit to WDFW for the expansion of a WDFW recreational use
4 facility ("North Bay Facility" or "the Facility") located on the shores of Case Inlet in Mason
5 County, Washington (SHR-2013-00004). On July 8, 2013, Ecology transmitted its approval of the
6 Variance Permit to Mason County and WDFW.
7 2. Petitioners, all residents living adjacent to or in close proximity to the Facility,
8 timely filed the above-captioned Petition for Review with the Board on July 26,2013,appealing the
9 shoreline permits and the associated Determination of Non-Significance("DNS").
10 3. The Parties have agreed to resolve the appeal of the shoreline permits through the
11 Agreement outlined below.
12 II. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
13 A. SCOPE
14 This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties and settles all issues
15 raised by Petitioners' appeal of the shoreline permits.
16 B. RESOLUTION OF APPEAL
17 As to WDFW. In resolution of Petitioners' appeal, WDFW hereby agrees to the following
18 terms:
19 1. North Bay Season: In 2014,the North Bay Facility shall be open the months of June
20 and July. In 2014, the North Bay Facility shall be closed beginning as soon as practicable after
21 execution of this Agreement through May 31; the Facility shall also be closed August 1 through
22 January 31, except that construction activity may occur on the site during this period; such
23 construction activity will necessitate that the Facility be accessible for construction purposes.
24 Beginning with the 2015 season, the North Bay Facility shall be open May and September (the
25 "season"). Beginning in 2015, WDFW agrees to close the North Bay Facility all other months (the
26 "off-season"). During the off-season:
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT-2
I a. The gates to the North Bay Facility will remain closed and locked;and
2 b. WDFW may provide access to the North Bay Facility to authorized parties,
3 including providing keys to such parties.
4 2. Staffingon n Higher Use Pa
vs and Prime Harvest Days:
5 a. High Use Days: During open months, WDFW agrees that at least one Fish and
6 Wildlife Officer will be present at the North Bay Facility during the day, subject to
7 the Officers' other duties and responsibilities off-site, but with presence at the North
g Bay Facility the enforcement priority. "High use days" means weekend days
9 (Saturdays and Sundays) and federally recognized holidays, regardless of predicted
10 tide.
1 1 b. Prime Harvest Days: During open months,WDFW agrees that at least one Fish and
12 Wildlife Officer or other appropriate enforcement personnel will be present at the
North Bay Facility during prime harvest days, at minimum during the staffing
14 window, as defined below. "Prime harvest days" means any day with an extreme
15 low,tide event (predicted tides -2.0 feet and below). At a minimum, the "staffing
16 window"means a period beginning 2 hours before the predicted low tide and ending
17 2 hours after the predicted low tide. When staffing is accomplished via Fish and
18 Wildlife Officers, nothing in this Agreement is intended to interfere with WDFW
19 Officers' responsibilities to respond appropriately to emergencies and other urgent
20 enforcement duties that may arise. When such situations arise, assigned WDFW
21 Officers must return to the North Bay Facility as soon as practicable, if the staffing
22 window remains open. For purposes of this Agreement "emergencies and other
23 urgent enforcement duties" shall mean exigencies involving WDFW Officers' law
24 enforcement and/or resource management duties.
25 3. Completion of Shoreline Improvements: WDFW agrees to install permanent
26 restroom facilities at the North Bay site in accordance with its approved shoreline permit, and to
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT-3
I install a gate at the entrance to the Facility. WDFW agrees to not undertake expansion of the North
2 Bay parking lot during the term of this Agreement.
3 4. North Bay Operations: In addition to the above, WDFW agrees to make good faith
4 efforts to accomplish and/or address the following at the North Bay Facility. At a minimum, this
5 shall include engaging with the Washington State Patrol and/or Department of Transportation
6 regarding prevention of illegal parking along E State Route 302.
7 5. Other Si age: WDFW agrees to erect and maintain appropriate signage at the
8 North Bay Facility. At a minimum, WDFW shall place a conspicuous sign notifying users of the
9 Facility of the following:
10 a. No Camping;
11 b. No Campfires;
12 C. No Parking Along Highway and/or On Private Property
13 d. No Trespassing on Private Property;
14 e. No Off-Leash Pets;
15 f. No Fireworks;
16 g. No Urinating or Defecating on Beach;
17 h. No Overnight Parking or Camping at the North Beach Facility; and
18 i. Violators Will Be Prosecuted.
19 As to Petitioners. In consideration of the foregoing, Petitioners hereby agree to the
20 following terms:
21 1. Dismissal of Current Appeal: Petitioners agree to withdraw Petitioners' current
22 challenge to the shoreline permits and associated SEPA determination related to the North Bay
23 Facility.
24 2. Forego Related Legal Claims: For the tern of this Agreement, Petitioners agree to
25 not file any other claim, whether legal or administrative, with respect to the North Bay Site or
26 WDFW's operation thereof,except to enforce this Agreement.
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT-4
I C. THREE-YEAR EXPIRATION,REVIEW,and RENEWAL OPTION
2 This Agreement shall expire three years from the effective date,unless,prior to expiration, it
3 is extended for another three-year period, or longer period, by mutual agreement of the parties. At
4 least sixty (60) days prior to expiration, or at any other time with the mutual consent of the Parties,
5 the Parties agree to meet and confer regarding extension of this Agreement and operation of the
6 North Bay Facility.
7 D. REMEDIES
8 In the event that any party violates the terms of this Agreement, any other party may pursue
9 all remedies available by law. By entering into this Agreement,the Parties shall have waived their
10 rights to administrative or judicial review of the underlying merits of the shoreline permits and
11 associated DNS. However,the Parties do not waive their rights to contest whether violations of this
12 Agreement have occurred.
13 E. VENUE
14 The Parties agree that the venue for any judicial action to enforce this Agreement shall be in
15 Mason County Superior Court.
16 F. DISH USSAL OF APPEAL
17 The Parties consent to the submission of this Agreement to the Board and request that,based
18 upon a full and final settlement having been reached, the Board dismiss this appeal with prejudice.
19 The Parties further agree to bear their own costs and attorneys' fees associated with this appeal.
20 G. EFFECTIVE DATE
21 This Agreement shall become effective upon issuance of the Board's order dismissing this
22 appeal.
23 H. SIGNATORIES AUTHORIZED
24 The undersigned representatives for WDFW certify that they are fully authorized by the
25 party whom they represent to enter into the terms and conditions of this Agreement and to legally
26 bind such party thereto.
r
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT-5
1 I. EXECUTION
2 This document may be executed in counterparts and may be executed by facsimile,and each
executed counterpart shall have the same force and effect as the original instrument.
4 IN WITNESS THEREOF,the Parties have caused this Agreement to be executed as of
5 the last date set forth below.
6 \\\\
7 \\\\
9 \\\\
10 \\\\
12 \\\\
13 \\\\
14 \\\\
16 \\\\
17 \\\\
18 \\\\
19 \\\\
20 \\\\
21 \\\\
22 \\\\
23
24 \\\\
25 \\\\
26 \\\\
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT-6
I
1 Dated this day of March, 2014.
2
3 ROBERT W. FERGUSON STATE OF WASHINGTON
Attorney General DEPARTMENT OF FISH& WILDLIFE
4
5 By: By:
6 Michael M. Young, WSBA#35562 Michele Culver
Assistant Attorney General Regional 6 Director
7 Attorneys for Respondent State of Washington
State of Washington Department of Fish&Wildlife
8 Department of Fish&Wildlife
9
10 David Hawke Koreen Hawke
11
Clifford King Leila King
12
13
Pauline M. Van Der Meer Gene Russo
14
15 Marilyn Russo Kent Roberts
16
17 Gabriela Melvin Troy A. Diffenach
18
Dorothy Elvin Jay Yanamura
19
20 Jim Hymer J. Wiel
21
22 Sandy Pody Carol Pody
23
Richard Gaskins Linda Gaskins
24
25 Lanonne Truxton Terkla Doug Haser
26
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT-7
1
3
4
5
6
SHORELINES HEARINGS BOARD
7 STATE OF WASHINGTON
8 DAVID HAWKE and KOREEN HAWKE; SHB NO. 13-022
CLIFFORD KING and LEILA KING;
9 PAULINE M.VAN DER MEER; GENE MOTION TO DISMISS AND
10 RUSSO and MARILYN RUSSO; KENT PREJUDICE
R OF DISMISSAL WITH
ROBERTS; GABRIELA MELVIN; TROY A.
11 DIFFENACH; DOROTHY ELVIN; JAY
YANAMURA;JIM HYMER;J. WIEL;
12 SANDY PODY and CAROL PODY;
RICHARD GASKINS and LINDA GASKINS;
13 LANONNE TRUXTON TERKLA and DOUG
14 HASER,
15 Petitioners,
vs.
16
MASON COUNTY; WASHINGTON STATE
17 DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE;
18 and WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT
OF ECOLOGY;
19
Respondents.
20
21 Petitioners, represented by Kelly T. Wood and Phillips Burgess PLLC, and
22 Respondents, Mason County, represented by Chief Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Timothy
23 Whitehead, the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, represented by Assistant
24 Attorney General Michael M. Young, and the Washington State Department of Ecology,
25 represented by Assistant Attorney General Sonia A. Wolfman, hereby submit this agreed
26 Motion to Dismiss and Order of Dismissal.
MOTION TO DISMISS AND 1
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH
PREJUDICE
i
1 I. MOTION TO DISMISS
2 Based upon the attached Settlement Agreement, hereby incorporated by reference, and
3 WAC 461-08-465, Petitioners move the Board for an Order to dismiss this appeal with
I
4 prejudice.
5 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 2- 15�k day of April 2014.
PHI IPS SS�PLLC MAS N COUNTY
7 Chic ose ting Attorney 0''�"
8
Kelly T.r ood, WSBA#40067 Timothy ehead, WSBA#37621
9 Attorneys for Petitioners Attorneys for Respondent
David and Koreen Hawke Mason County
10 (360)742-3500 (360)427-9670 ext. 417
11
12 ROBERT W. FERGUSON, ROBERT W. FERGUSON e-4111- d
Attorney Gel rI� ,,a,f At13
ta ney r rr,
�u
14
MichaelA. Young, WSBA#35562 Sonia olfman, WSBA#39510
15 Assistant Attorney General Assistant Attorney General
Attorneys for Respondent Attorneys for Respondent
16 State of Washington State of Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife Department of Ecology
17 (360)753-6200 (360) 586-6770
18
H. ORDER OF DISMISSAL
19
Based upon the above Motion of the parties,
20
IT IS ORDERED:
21
The above captioned case is DISMISSED with prejudice.
22
DATED this day of April 2014.
23
POLLUTION CONTROL HEARINGS BOARD
24
25
26 KATHLEEN D. MIX, Presiding
MOTION TO DISMISS AND 2
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH
PREIUDICE
1
2
4
5
6
7 BEFORE THE SHORELINES HEARINGS BOARD
STATE OF WASHINGTON
8
9 DAVID HAWKE and KOREEN HAWKE;
CLIFFORD KING and LEILA KING;PAULINE
�� M. VAN DER MEER; GENE RUSSO and SHB No. 13-022
11 MARILYN RUSSO;KENT ROBERTS; SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
GABRIELA MELVIN; TROY A. DIFFENACH;
12 DOROTHY ELVIN; JAY YANAMURA;JIM
HYMER;J.WIEL; SANDY PODY and CAROL
13 PODY; RICHARD GASKINS and LINDA
14 GASKINS; LANONNE TRUXTON TERKLA
and DOUG HASER,
15
Petitioners,
16 vs.
17 MASON COUNTY; WASHINGTON
18 DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE; and
WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF
19 ECOLOGY;
20 Respondents.
21
22 Petitioners, represented by their attorneys, Phillips Burgess PLLC and Kelly Wood, and the
23 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife ("WDFW"), represented by its attorney, Michael
24 Young,Assistant Attorney General,hereby submit this Settlement Agreement("Agreement")to the
25 Shorelines Hearings Board ("Board") as a full and final settlement of the above-referenced appeal,
26 and request that the Board dismiss the appeal with prejudice.
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT- I
1 I. BACKGROUND
2 1. On June 13, 2013, Mason County approved a Shoreline Substantial Development
3 Permit ("SSDP") and Variance Permit to WDFW for the expansion of a WDFW recreational use
4 facility ("North Bay Facility" or "the Facility") located on the shores of Case Inlet in Mason
5 County, Washington (SHR-2013-00004). On July 8, 2013, Ecology transmitted its approval of the
6 Variance Permit to Mason County and WDFW.
7 2. Petitioners, all residents living adjacent to or in close proximity to the Facility,
8 timely filed the above-captioned Petition for Review with the Board on July 26,2013,appealing the
9 shoreline permits and the associated Determination of Non-Significance("DNS").
10 3. The Parties have agreed to resolve the appeal of the shoreline permits through the
11 Agreement outlined below.
12 II. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
13 A. SCOPE
14 This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties and settles all issues
15 raised by Petitioners' appeal of the shoreline permits.
16 B. RESOLUTION OF APPEAL
17 As to WDFW. In resolution of Petitioners' appeal, WDFW hereby agrees to the following
18 terms:
19 1. North Bay Season: In 2014,the North Bay Facility shall be open the months of June
20 and July. In 2014, the North Bay Facility shall be closed beginning as soon as practicable after
21 execution of this Agreement through May 31; the Facility shall also be closed August 1 through
22 January 31, except that construction activity may occur on the site during this period; such
23 construction activity will necessitate that the Facility be accessible for construction purposes.
24 Beginning with the 2015 season, the North Bay Facility shall be open May and September (the
25 "season"). Beginning in 2015, WDFW agrees to close the North Bay Facility all other months (the
26 "off-season"). During the off-season:
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT-2
i
1 a. The gates to the North Bay Facility will remain closed and locked;and
b. WDFW may provide access to the North Bay Facility to authorized parties,
including providing keys to such parties.
4 2. Staffing on Higher Use Days and Prime Harvest Days:
5 a. High Use Days: During open months, WDFW agrees that at least one Fish and
6 Wildlife Officer will be present at the North Bay Facility during the day, subject to
7 the Officers' other duties and responsibilities off-site,but with presence at the North
8 Bay Facility the enforcement priority. "High use days" means weekend days
9 (Saturdays and Sundays) and federally recognized holidays, regardless of predicted
10 tide.
11 b. Prime Harvest Days: During open months, WDFW agrees that at least one Fish and
12 Wildlife Officer or other appropriate enforcement personnel will be present at the
13 North Bay Facility during prime harvest days, at minimum during the staffing
14 window, as defined below. "Prime harvest days" means any day with an extreme
15 low tide event (predicted tides -2.0 feet and below). At a minimum, the "staffing
16 window"means a period beginning 2 hours before the predicted low tide and ending
17 2 hours after the predicted low tide. When staffing is accomplished via Fish and
18 Wildlife Officers, nothing in this Agreement is intended to interfere with WDFW
19 Officers' responsibilities to respond appropriately to emergencies and other urgent
20 enforcement duties that may arise. When such situations arise, assigned WDFW
21 Officers must return to the North Bay Facility as soon as practicable, if the staffing
22 window remains open. For purposes of this Agreement "emergencies and other
23 urgent enforcement duties" shall mean exigencies involving WDFW Officers' law
24 enforcement and/or resource management duties.
25 3. Completion of Shoreline Improvements: WDFW agrees to install permanent
26 restroom facilities at the North Bay site in accordance with its approved shoreline permit, and to
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT-3
I install a gate at the entrance to the Facility. WDFW agrees to not undertake expansion of the North
Bay parking lot during the term of this Agreement.
4. North BayOnerations: In addition to the above, WDFW agrees to make good faith
4 efforts to accomplish and/or address the following at the North Bay Facility. At a minimum, this
5 shall include engaging with the Washington State Patrol and/or Department of Transportation
6 regarding prevention of illegal parking along E State Route 302.
7 5. Other Signagg: WDFW agrees to erect and maintain appropriate signage at the
8 North Bay Facility. At a minimum, WDFW shall place a conspicuous sign notifying users of the
9 Facility of the following:
10 a. No Camping;
11 b. No Campfires;
12 C. No Parking Along Highway and/or On Private Property
13 d. No Trespassing on Private Property;
14 e. No Off-Leash Pets;
15 f. No Fireworks;
16 g. No Urinating or Defecating on Beach;
17 h. No Overnight Parking or Camping at the North Beach Facility;and
18 i. Violators Will Be Prosecuted.
19 As to Petitioners. In consideration of the foregoing, Petitioners hereby agree to the
20 following terms:
21 1. Dismissal of Current Appeal: Petitioners agree to withdraw Petitioners' current
22 challenge to the shoreline permits and associated SEPA determination related to the North Bay
23 Facility.
24 2. Forego Related Legal Claims: For the term of this Agreement, Petitioners agree to
I
25 not file any other claim, whether legal or administrative, with respect to the North Bay Site or
26 WDFW's operation thereof,except to enforce this Agreement.
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT-4
i
I C. THREE-YEAR EXPIRATION,REVIEW,and RENEWAL OPTION
This Agreement shall expire three years from the effective date, unless,prior to expiration, it
3 is extended for another three-year period, or longer period, by mutual agreement of the parties. At
4 least sixty (60) days prior to expiration, or at any other time with the mutual consent of the Parties,
5 the Parties agree to meet and confer regarding extension of this Agreement and operation of the
6 North Bay Facility.
7 D. REMEDIES
i
8 In the event that any party violates the terms of this Agreement, any other party may pursue
9 all remedies available by law. By entering into this Agreement,the Parties shall have waived their
10 rights to administrative or judicial review of the underlying merits of the shoreline permits and
11 associated DNS. However,the Parties do not waive their rights to contest whether violations of this
12 Agreement have occurred.
13 E. VENUE
14 The Parties agree that the venue for any judicial action to enforce this Agreement shall be in
15 Mason County Superior Court.
16 F. DISMISSAL OF APPEAL
17 The Parties consent to the submission of this Agreement to the Board and request that,based
18 upon a full and final settlement having been reached, the Board dismiss this appeal with prejudice.
19 The Parties further agree to bear their own costs and attorneys' fees associated with this appeal.
20 G. EFFECTIVE DATE
21 This Agreement shall become effective upon issuance of the Board's order dismissing this
22 appeal.
23 H. SIGNATORIES AUTHORIZED
24 The undersigned representatives for WDFW certify that they are fully authorized by the
25 party whom they represent to enter into the terms and conditions of this Agreement and to legally
26 bind such party thereto.
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT-5
1 I. EXECUTION
2 This document may be executed in counterparts and may be executed by facsimile,and each
executed counterpart shall have the same force and effect as the original instrument.
4 IN WITNESS THEREOF,the Parties have caused this Agreement to be executed as of
5 the last date set forth below.
6 \\\\
7 \\\\
8 \\\\
9 \\\\
11 \\\\
13 \\\\
14 \\\\
15 \\\\
16 \\\\
17 \\\\
18 \\\\
19 \\\\
20 \\\\
21 \\\\
22 \\\\
i
23 \\\\
24 \\\\
25 \\\\
26
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT-6
I Dated this day of March, 2014.
2
3 ROBERT W. FERGUSON STATE OF WASHINGTON
Attorney General DEPARTMENT OF FISH & WILDLIFE
4
5 By: By:
6 Michael M. Young, WSBA#35562 Michele Culver
Assistant Attorney General Regional 6 Director
7 Attorneys for Respondent State of Washington
State of Washington Department of Fish &Wildlife
8 Department of Fish& Wildlife
9
10 David Hawke Koreen Hawke
11
Clifford King Leila King
12
13 Pauline M. Van Der Meer Gene Russo
14
15 Marilyn Russo Kent Roberts
16
Gabriela Melvin Troy A. Diffenach
17
18
Dorothy Elvin Jay Yanamura
19
20 Jim Hymer J. Wiel
21
22 Sandy Pody Carol Pody
23
Richard Gaskins Linda Gaskins
24
25 Lanonne Truxton Terkla Doug Haser
26
i
it
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT-7
I
it
I
I
I
I Dated this day of March, 2014.
2
3 ROBERT W.FERGUSON STATE OF WASHINGTON
Attorney General DEPARTMENT OF FISH &WILDLIFE
4
5 By: By: lkuo' .
6 Michael M. Youn , Wera SB # 62 Michele Culver
Assistant Attorney GenRegional 6 Director
7 Attorneys for Respondent State of Washington
State of Washington Department of Fish &Wildlife
8 Department of Fish &Wildlife
9
10 David Hawke Koreen Hawke
11
Clifford King Leila King
12
13 Pauline M. Van Der Meer Gene Russo
14
15 Marilyn Russo Kent Roberts
16
17 Gabriela Melvin Troy A. Diffenach
18
Dorothy Elvin Jay Yanamura
19
20 Jim Hymer J.Wiel
21
22 Sandy Pody Carol Pody
23
Richard Gaskins Linda Gaskins
24
25 Lanonne Truxton Terkla Doug Haser
26
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT-7
Shoreline Management Act
Permit Data Sheet and Transmittal Letter
From:
To:
Mason County Planning WA State DOE - SW Regional Office
P.O. Box 279 P.O. Box 47775 - attn-. Shoreline Permit Reviewer
Shelton, WA 98584 Olympia, WA 98504
Date of Transmittal: Date of Receipt: (DOE)
Type of Permit: (indicate alf that apply) Substantial Development N. "', Conditional Use ❑
Variance Revision ❑
Other
Local Government Decision: Approval . Conditional Approval ❑ Denial ❑
Applicant Information: Applicant Representative: (if primary contact)
Name WA � � �� � � IZ��/� Name
al, Per K
Mailing Address Mailing Address
0 ;�Lki
City, State, Zip City. State, Zip
Phone (� [ Phone
Email: e� ,e"2s 0:�] U Email:
Is applicant the property owner? Yes " No � TIC
Property Location: (section,Township and Range to the nearest'/,,Y,Section of Latitude and Longitude,and a street address where
available) �rl1 l'4 e,& '6 I f ^� l.'v (,�Z" C7 r �� / (.' r, 4
Shoreline of Statewide
Waterbod
Shoreline Significance? ❑ YES WNO
Designation-.- �LPbd�'y( Tax Parcel Number: t � �� ""Ett
Project Description: (Summary of the intended use pr ect pu oseaej(
=S 4l e!S nahve
Notice of Application Date: �« Final Decision Date: 06
BY At( wrtat Phone: C� �'127
I:PLANNING\PAC\FORMS\SMPdatasheet 10-28-2008
June 13, 2013
Notice of Decision
Case: SHR2013-00004
Applicant: Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife
Notice is hereby given that Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, who is the
applicant for the above-referenced Mason County Shoreline Substantial
Development / Variance Permit, has been granted that Shoreline Permit and
Variance. The request was reviewed on May 28, 2013 by the Mason County
Hearing Examiner and approved with conditions pursuant to the Mason County
Title 17.50 Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations, specifically for
Recreation Development activities and for Variance to standards. SEPA review
for the proposal was completed by Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife as
Lead Agency.
i
This is a final County decision. No further appeals to the County are available.
Appeal of this decision may be made to the State Shorelines Hearing Board as
regulations apply. It is the appellant's responsibility to meet all legal
requirements of any appeal process.
Time Limit for Action. Per the Mason County Code Title 15 - Development Code - No
permit authorizing construction shall extend for a term of more than five years. If
actual construction of a development for which a permit has been granted has not
begun within two years after the approval, the Hearing Examiner shall review the
permit and upon a showing of good cause, may extend the initial two year period by
permit for one year. Otherwise, the permit terminates; PROVIDED that no permit
shall be extended unless the applicant has requested such review and extension
before the Hearing Examiner PRIOR to the expiration date. Work on approved project
must begin by July 2015. This permit expires June 13, 2018.
If you have questions or require clarification on these issues,please contact Allan Borden,Senior
Planner with Mason County Dept. of Community Development at 360-427-9670 x365.
I
BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR MASON COUNTY
2
RE: Washington State Dept. of Fish
4 and Wildlife FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS
OF LAW AND FINAL DECISION
Shoreline Substantial
Development/
6 Variance
7 (SHR2013-00004
8 INTRODUCTION
9 The applicant has applied for a shoreline substantial development permit and
shoreline variance to make improvements to a Washington State Department of Fish
10 and Wildlife("WDFW")park on the North Bay shoreline of Case Inlet along SR 302.
The 1.13 acre park provides public access to tidelands. The improvements are
1 1 comprised of the addition of an ADA accessible restroom, replacing sani-cans with
12 well water and sewer connection; an increase in parking from 24 to 45 spaces; t he
installation of native plants around the parking area and in currently existing lawn
13 areas; and the addition of public information signage. The request variance is to the
recreational development section of MCC 17.50.060, which imposes a 75 foot
14 setback from parking areas to the ordinary high water mark("OHWM") of shorelines.
The applicant proposes to reduce this setback by up to seven feet to 68 feet in order to
1 accommodate parking.
16
TESTIMONY
17
Allan Borden, Community Development, stated the proposal from Washington State
18 Department of Fish and Wildlife is to make improvements to an existing public
access site. These improvements include installing restroom facilities with water and
19 sewer lines, increasing the number of parking spaces from 24 to 45, adding native
20 plant restoration to replace the lawn to the west of the new parking area, and
installing new signage to indicate wetlands and shellfish access. The staff report
21 includes a description of the surrounding area which is mainly single-family
residential. There are cell and other communication towers to the south. Currently,
22 the property has portable restroom units, a small parking area, and a category 3
23 wetland area (which is 35 ft from the existing parking area). It is zoned R-5. In
January,the site was reviewed under SEPA. The notice for the permit was published
24 in April, and surrounding property owners (within 300ft.) were mailed notices of
application. The proposal will require building and environmental restoration
25 permits. The additional facilities are expansion of the approved proposal in 2003, but
the ADA restrooms will not be connected by well and sewer systems.
SSDP/Shoreline Variance—Recreation 1 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1 In regard to the shoreline master plan review, according to Mr. Borden, the site is
designated urban. Previous shoreline permits were issued in 2002. The current
request will allow permanent improvements on the property. The proposal meets the
shoreline development requirements listed in Mason County Code. This site links
public areas on North Bay. In regard to recreational development use regulations,
4 State Fish and Wildlife reviewed the site under SEPA. A cultural resource survey
was conducted on the property. The Department of Archaeology noted an area where
5 cultural resources need to be protected. Compliance with state health regulations will
6 be established by the construction of a well. The site enables users to park along the
shoreline to participate in recreational activities. The proposed parking expansion is
7 the farthest from the shoreline that is possible. Off road vehicles are not permitted on
the beach in tidelands. The parking area will be fenced to limit access so that parking
8 does not go beyond designated areas.
9 Mr. Borden noted that the Shoreline Master Program requires that parking be setback
10 75ft from the ordinary high water mark. However, in order to provide safe ingress
and egress to the parking, a 68ft setback is proposed (this is the minimum necessary
11 for usable dimensions). The planned parking lot is 52ft wide. The property is 11 Oft
deep and bounded by the shoreline on the west and state route 302 on the east. With
12 the archaeology area and the vegetation buffer, 68ft is the minimum setback proposal
possible that still allows a 52ft wide parking area. The increased parking allows users
13 to better access the wetlands. The request is the minimum necessary to accomplish
14 additional parking areas. The adjacent residential properties will be screened to
separate the recreational use from the residential use. There will be no detriments to
15 public interest, and the proposal provides for safe parking. Waste collection should
be arranged to keep areas clean for access area users.
16
Mr. Borden concluded, stating that staff recommends approval of the permit with
1 several conditions. These conditions are listed in the staff report. On page 6 of the
18 staff report, Fish and Wildlife has submitted additional information on shoreline
variance (exhibit 3). The proposal is intended to mitigate the existing overuse
19 problems of the site, but it may attract additional users. There is existing fencing on
the northern side of the parking lot. The new parking lot will be completely fenced.
20 Exhibit 6 shows a new plant buffer on the northern side of the property. Along state
21 route 302, there are no listed additional plantings. In regard to waste collection, the
county does not directly collect waste. There are no closure times for the park.
22 currently.
23 Applicant Testimony
24 John Hansen,Project Manager, stated that the Department of Fish and Wildlife accept
25 the conditions of approval set by the county. In regard to park usage, Fish and
Wildlife is proposing the larger parking space to stop vehicles from parking along the
road. The number of new parking spots was determined by the space available.
SSDP/Shoreline Variance—Recreation 2 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
Occasionally, during the summer, there can be up to one hundred cars using the site.
but this is very rare.
Mr. Brinson, Department of Fish and Wildlife, noted that the park is operated without
any closed hours to meet shellfish harvesting needs. Shellfish are harvested with the
tide, and tide times vary. The noise of harvesting is minimal, but the people
4 harvesting do sometimes create noise. He is unaware if the Department does the
waste collection or contracts out to another collection source.
J
6 John Hansen, Project Manager, stated that a maintenance crew monitors the site at
least once a week during high use periods. The Department rarely has waste
7 collection at access sites becomes the sites become trash drop-off targets and
maintenance becomes overwhelming. Instead, they utilize the pack-it-out method, in
8 which no garbage cans are provided and guests are expected to remove their own
9 trash. He does not view the waste collection as a problem.
10 Public Testimony
11 Jim Hymer testified that the original Commissioner's decision gave Fish and Wildlife
two years to place flushing restrooms into the park, and,if this condition was not met,
12 the park would be closed. It has been eight years, and this condition has not been
met. He submitted pictures of the site during a peak period(exhibit 14). The pictures
13 show cars parked along the highway a 1,000ft in each direction. He does not believe
14 adding 21 more parking spaces will alleviate the problems at the site. The garbage
piles up and is only picked up, at most, once every week. There are only two portable
15 restrooms for thousands of guests. These restrooms are only cleaned/emptied once a
week. WAC regulations state that there should be 5-6 sanitation cans based on the
16 number of people using the facility. In the summer, there are at least 10 weekends
17 where there is adequate low tide for 8-10 hours a day. The site is extremely crowded
during these weekends. During the original application process, Fish and Wildlife
18 anticipated 3-6 people per day which only amounts to 1,000 people a year; however,
1,000 people visit the site in one weekend. Moreover, the signs are all written in
19 English, but English is not the language predominantly spoken by the site users. The
property values of surrounding homes have fallen because of the misuse of the
20 subject site. The access point has allowed overharvest of the area. Additionally,
21 people use the bathroom on surrounding properties because the sanitation cans are
full. A person defecated 50ft from Mr. Hymer's window, and he was forced to call
22 the police. Trespassing occurs on a daily basis. Mr. Hymer has found drug needles
and evidence of campfires on his property. There have been occasions when site
23 users have entered surrounding homes to use telephones and bathrooms, and, when
confronting these activities, Mr. Hymer has been threatened by the site users. The
24 beach was pristine before 2003, but now it is muddy and full of litter. In regard to
25 cars parking, Mr. Hymer suggested that an oil separator be required to protect the
stormwater runoff. There are ospreys, herrings, and river otters living within 600ft
of the proposed parking lot expansion. State Route 302 has no shoulder so site users
SSDP/Shoreline Variance—Recreation 3 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
end up walking in the road causing traffic hazards. Finally, he does not believe
i
I proper public notice was given to surrounding property owners.
2 Ms. Hawke stated that she lives next door to the access point. Her main concern is
3 the safety of her family, especially as the rural location results in slow response time
from emergency services. People use the site at all hours of the day, and the parking
4 expansion will result in these people being even closer to her home. She has seen
drug deals and heard shots fired in the existing parking lot. The traffic is so heavy on
5 state route 302 that emergency vehicles cannot reach their destinations. There is no
6 lighting on the site so criminal activity is prominent. She would rather have her
backyard lit up by overhead lights than nefarious activity occurring. She also has
7 experienced people going to the bathroom in her yard. Additionally, people have
used her steps to shuck oysters. More parking will not solve the problems at the site.
8 Law enforcement's time is consumed with monitoring the parking situation, thus they
cannot monitor the criminal activities on the beach. There are state parks in the
9 vicinity where the users could visit. Moreover, there are gas stations and other
10 service areas for people to use the bathroom within minutes of the site. This public
access is not necessary as a rest area. According to Ms. Hawke, an officer told her
11 the county would only take notice of the situation if someone died on the highway or
some other tragedy occurred at the site.
12
Ms. Truney submitted several photographs depicting garbage left on her property by
13 the access users (exhibit 16). She bought her property in 1999, and, at that time, the
14 Property was beautiful and pristine. Now, the property is covered in waste from the
public access users. The beach has been dug out to extremes and is now hazardous.
15 Her privacy is gone because of the overuse.
16 Staff Rebuttal
17 Allan Borden testified that public notices were sent out in April with images of the
18 site and a description of the proposal. This notice was sent out to property owners
within 300ft of the three Fish and Wildlife properties in the area. Ms. Hawke was on
19 the list of those notified. In regard to stormwater runoff, there will be surface water
infiltration, via a gravel flow spreader, provided along the west edge of the parking
20 lot. This plan complies with the county's stormwater manual. It does not fall under
21 an exemption. There is also a soil and root system to capture the water to control
flow towards the water.
22
Applicant Rebuttal
23
Mr. Hansen noted that the site is very popular. Fish and Wildlife is responsible for
24 providing public accesses. Fish and Wildlife does not have regulation over tow-away
25 zones,thus they cannot change the signage along state route 302.
SSDP/Shoreline Variance—Recreation 4 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
i
i
Ted Jackson, Washington Fish and Wildlife Officer, stated that he testified at the
1 original 2003 hearing. He has asked the Department of Transportation to put up tow-
away zone signs along route 302. The Department of Transportation supports this
request. Fish and Wildlife officers deal with trespassing and public defecation issues.
3 There are only five officers for two and a half counties. On busy weekends, as many
officers as possible monitor the site, but this is still not enough. He noted that
4 vehicles could be towed, but this would require closing downs the road in order to do
SO.
5
6 Public Testimony
7 Jim Hymer added that the officers attempt to monitor the site, but they do not have
enough resources. On the days when rules are obeyed, the site poses no problem to
8 surrounding residents. Additionally, if the property was only used during the day,
9 there would be fewer problems.
10 EXHIBITS
11 Ex. 1-13 identified in the case index of the staff report were admitted into the record
during the hearing. In addition, the following exhibits were also admitted into the
12 record during the hearing:
13 Exhibit 14 James H er letter dated May 22 2013
� y ,
14 Exhibit 15 2003 County Commissioner approval of shoreline permit for park
15
Exhibit 16 photos by Ms. Truney depicting garbage on her property
16
17 FINDINGS OF FACT
Procedural:
18
19 1. Applicant. The applicant is WDFW.
20 2. Hearing. The Hearing Examiner conducted a hearing on the subject
application on May 28, 2013 at or about 1:00 p.m. in the Mason County
21 Commissioners Meeting Room.
22 Substantive:
23 3. Project/Site Description. The applicant has applied for a shoreline
24 substantial development permit and shoreline variance to make improvements to a
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife ("WDFW") park on the North
i
25 Bay shoreline of Case Inlet along SR 302. The 1.13 acre park provides public access
to tidelands. The improvements are comprised of the addition of an ADA accessible
SSDP/Shoreline Variance—Recreation 5 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
restroom with available well water and sewer connection; an increase in parking from
1 24 to 45 spaces; the installation of native plants around the parking area and in
currently existing lawn areas, and the addition of public information signage.
Fencing currently exists along the northern boundary of the property and fencing will
be added along the unfenced perimeter of the new parking area, which will be located
in the northern portion of the site. There are currently no restrooms on the property
4 other than sani-cans. An existing trail will continue to be used to provide pedestrian
5 access from the parking area to the shoreline.
6 The requested variance is to the recreational development section of MCC 17.50.060,
where it imposes a 75 foot setback from parking areas to the ordinary high water
7 mark ("OHWM") of shorelines. The applicant proposes to reduce this setback by up
to seven feet to 68 feet in order to accommodate parking.
8
4. Characteristics of the Area. The general area is characterized by single-
9 family residences (Exhibit #4). The property to the south has power line towers,
10 transmission lines and cellular communication improvements installed on the upper
portions of the towers. Properties immediately to the north and northeast have single-
11 family residences. The site is oriented to the west and the shoreline of Case Inlet.
12 5. Adverse Impacts of Proposed Use. The impacts of the currently existing
park on nearby residents are deplorable. As documented by photographs submitted
13 by Mr. Hymer and Ms. Truney, during peak use vehicles park along SR 302 up to
14 1000 feet in both directions from the park entrance. As testified by at least one
neighbor, the owners of these vehicles don't bother to walk to the park and instead
15 trespass through the shoreline properties of area residents to access the tidelands.
Property trespass is frequent and persons defecate on private property, litter those
16 properties with trash and generate noise as they herd to and use the tidelands. Trash
is also allowed to accumulate at the park site and sani-cans appear to be inadequate to
17 meet demand.
18
As noted at the hearing, however, Mason County cannot legally address the impacts
19 of the existing impacts of the park, but is limited to addressing the impacts of the
proposed improvements to the parks. This is based upon the constitutional principle
20 that permit applicants can only be made to mitigate the impacts of their development
21 proposed by this permit application. See, e.g., Burton v. Clark County, 91 Wn. App.
505, 516-17 (1998). Since the proposed improvements are designed to reduce
22 impacts to neighboring properties, it is not surprising that the impacts of the proposal
that can be addressed are fairly limited. Specifically, the impacts must arise from the
23 increase in vehicles that will park on-site.
24 Limited to impacts created by the addition of 21 parking spaces, it is difficult to find
25 any impacts that are not adequately addressed. Increasing parking could increase the
amount of trash left on-site. The conditions of approval require the applicant to
submit a trash collection plan to County staff that adequately addresses trash. The
i
SSDP/Shoreline Variance—Recreation 6 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
I
i
I
i
parking area will be fenced, which should serve to reduce trespass. The conditions of
1 approvali will require the posting of"no trespass" signs on the perimeter of the park
adjoining residential uses if they are not already present. It is unlikely that the
increase in parking will increase the sanitary waste demand already existing for the
park,but the proposed flush toilets should at any rate serve to mitigate any increase in
demand caused by the addition of 21 parking spaces. There was some testimony
4 about crime on site and the need for lighting to mitigate against those impacts. Given
that the park is open 24 hours, the need for lighting may be greater than for most
5 other parks where hour restrictions are enforced. However, there was no specific
6 evidence of any criminal activity on the parking lot introduced into the record and no
evidence that lighting would reduce that crime. It cannot be reasonably inferred from
7 the evidence presented that crime is a problem at the park itself(as opposed to crimes
against private property in the vicinity, which does appear to be a problem but not a
8 problem attributable to the proposed parking and restroom improvements).
9 The added parking could conceivably increase use of the park, but this appears
10 unlikely since as testified by the neighbors people park along SR 302 if the parking
lot is full. The added parking will certainly serve to mitigate against the current
1 1 dangers and nuisances created by the current illegal parking along SR 302.
12 Given that the applicant is WDFW, it is somewhat surprising that no habitat
management plan or similar biological evaluation was presented to establish that the
1' reduction in the shoreline setback sought in the variance application would not
14 adversely impact natural shoreline resources. The applicant has proposed some
shoreline restoration as well as the introduction of native species into other areas, but
15 there is no analysis provided by any qualified expert that this mitigation is adequate to
offset the setback encroachment. The conditions of approval will address this
16 deficiency. Given the minor nature of the encroachment, it is not expected that a
detailed biological evaluation be performed. WDFW may well have someone on
1 staff with the proper training and experience to assure County staff in a short letter or
18 phone conversation that the mitigation proposed by WDFW is adequate.
19 The increase in parking area and the addition of the restroom will also have nominal
aesthetic impacts. A planted buffer along the northern end of the new parking area is
20 adequate to mitigate against these impacts. The property to the south is exclusively
21 occupied by electrical and cell tower facilities, so no buffering is necessary on the
southern end of the proposal.
22
As noted in Ex. 8, p. 6, the Washington State Dept. of Archaeology and Historic
23 Preservation has determined that the project site contains an archaeological site. This
site has been set-aside as an "archaeological avoidance area" in the site plan and will
24 not be disturbed. See Ex. 6. An archaeological survey was performed for the
25 archaeological site and the conditions of approval require compliance with the
recommendations of the report.
SSDP/Shoreline Variance—Recreation 7 Findings. Conclusions and Decision
Water supply is adequate as a new well will be constructed to serve the restroom.
1
2 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
3
Procedural:
4
1. Authority of Hearing Examiner. MCC 15.03.050(10) authorizes the
5 Examiner to review and issue a final County decision regarding shoreline substantial
6 development permit requests and variance permits.
7 Substantive:
8 2. Shoreline Environment. The Shoreline Master Program environmental
9 designation for the site is Urban.
10 3. Substantial Development. The Applicant is required to obtain a shoreline
substantial development permit for any substantial development within the shoreline
1 1 jurisdiction. MCC 15.09.055(a). Applications for substantial development permits
are subject to review by the Hearing Examiner. MCC 15.09.055(f). The Hearing
12 Examiner bases a decision on a substantial development permit application on the
Shoreline Master Program for Mason County ("MCSMP"), and the policies and
procedures of Chapter 90.58 RCW, the Shoreline Management Act ("SMA"). MCC
14 15.09.055(f)(2)(C). A "substantial development" is any development of which the
total cost for market value exceeds $5,000 or any development that materially
15 interferes with any normal public use of the water or shorelines of the state. MCC
17.50.040. The JARPA application, Ex. 2, lists the value of the improvements as
16 $140,000 to $180,000. This proposal is reviewed under the SMP Section for
Recreational Development. As noted previously, one of the Recreational
1 Development use regulations requires a 75 foot setback for parking areas and a
18 variance to this requirement is requested so that the applicant may encroach up to 8
feet into the setback. The shoreline variance criteria are established by MCC
19 17.50.090. Applicable criteria are quoted in italics and addressed below.
20 Shoreline Substantial Development Permit
21 SMP Recreational Development (Policy No. 1): Shoreline developments that serve
22 a variety of recreational needs should be encouraged.
23 4. The proposal enhances a park that provides public access to tidelands,
which is a unique type of facility in Mason County.
24
25 SMP Recreational Development (Policy No. 2): All proposed recreational
developments should be designed, located and operated to protect the quality of
SSDP/Shoreline Variance—Recreation 8 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
I - -
scenic views and to minimize adverse impacts on the environment. Favorable
1 consideration should be given to those projects which complement their environment.
5. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, as mitigated by the conditions of
3 approval, the proposed increase in parking area and the new restroom will have a
minimal impact on aesthetic and environmental resources.
4
SMP Recreational Development (Policy No. 3): Publicly owned property which
5 provides public access to a body of salt or fresh water should be retained for public
6 use.
7 6. The proposal serves to enhance property used by WDFW to provide public access
to a body of salt water(Case Inlet).
8
SMP Recreational Development (Policy No. 4): Public agencies, private
9 individuals, groups and developers should be encouraged to coordinate development
10 Projects to mutually satisfy recreational.
11 7. As noted in the staff report, the shoreline permitting process helps to provide
some coordination between WDFW,the County and private citizens.
12
SMP Recreational Development(Policy No. 5): Recreational facilities should make
13 adequate provisions for:
14 -traffic, both inside and outside the facility;
-proper water, solid waste and sewage disposal methods;
15 -security and fire protection;
-the prevention of overflow and trespass onto adjacent properties including but
16 not limited to landscaping,fencing and posting of property.
17 -buffering of development from adjacent private property.
18 8. As discussed in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal adequately addresses
the issues outlined above.
19
SMP Recreational Development(Policy No. 6): Facilities for intensive recreational
20 activities should be permitted only where sewage disposal and garbage disposal can
21 be accomplished without altering the environment adversely.
22 9. The proposal includes adding sewage disposal adequate to address any
increase in demand created by the additional 21 parking spaces and the proposal is
23 conditioned to address garbage disposal.
24 SMP Recreational Development (Policy No. 7): Where appropriate, non-intensive
25 recreational use should be allowed on floodplains that are subject to recurring
flooding.
SSDP/Shoreline Variance—Recreation 9 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1 10. There is no evidence to suggest that the proposal is within a floodplain.
2 SMP Recreational Development (Policy No. 8): Off-shore recreational devices
should be allowed and should be designed to not unduly interfere with navigation of
3 waterways-
4 11. The proposal cannot be reasonably made to accommodate any additional
off-shore recreational devices given its objective to reduce off-site parking to the
5 maximum extent possible by the addition of new parking stalls.
6 SAW Recreational Development (Policy No. 9): Trails and pathways on steep
7 shoreline bluffs should be designed to protect bank stability.
8 12. As shown on the contour lines of the site plan, Ex. 5, there are no steep
9 shoreline bluffs between the proposal and the OHWM.
10 SMP Recreational Development (Policy No. 10): Public recreational developments
should be consistent with adopted park, recreation and open space plans for the
11 County.
12 13. The staff report notes that WDFW park/access points are identified in the
13 capital facilities element of the Mason County Comprehensive Plan.
14
SMP Recreational Development (Policy No. 11): The development of small,
j dispersed recreation areas should be encouraged.
� 15
14. The proposal is only 1.13 acres in size and is consistent with the policy
16 quoted above.
17 SMP Recreational Development (Policy No. 12): The linkage of shoreline parks,
18 recreation areas and public access points by linear systems, such as hiking paths,
bicycle paths, easements and scenic drives should be encouraged.
19
15. There are no reasonable opportunities for linkage evident from the record.
20
21 SMP Recreational Development (Policy No. 13): The use of off-road vehicles is
discouraged in all shoreline areas except where special areas have been set aside for
22 this purpose.
23 16. As noted in the staff report, off-road vehicles are not allowed in Case Inlet
and the perimeter fencing included in the proposal should serve to prevent such off-
24 road use.
25
SSDP/Shoreline Variance—Recreation 10 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
SMP Recreational Development(Use Regulation No. 1):All proposed recreational
1 developments shall be analyzed for their potential effect on environmental quality and
natural resources.
3 17. The conditions of approval require an expert assessment of environmental
impacts.
4
SMP Recreational Development (Use Regulation No. 2): Recreational
5 developments shall comply at all times with the updated local and State Health
6 regulations.
7 18. The proposed well and restroom will be subject to separate permit
requirements involving verification of compliance with health regulations.
8
SMP Recreational Development(Use Regulation No.3): Priority shall be given to
9 developments which provide recreational uses and which facilitate public access to
10 shorelines.
1 1 19. The proposal provides public shoreline access.
12 SMP Recreational Development (Use Regulation No. 4): Parking areas shall be
located inland, away from the immediate edge of the water and recreational beaches,
13 unless there is no area available. Provisions shall be made for adequate vehicular
14 parking and safe pedestrian crossings. Design of parking areas shall ensure that
surface runoff does not pollute adjacent waters. Design shall provide for storm water
15 retention and shall be reviewed by Mason County Department of Public Works.
16 20. The parking is proposed as far from the shoreline as possible while still
maximizing the use of the project site for parking, which is greatly needed to mitigate
1 against the hazards and nuisances created by the on-street parking generated by the
18 site. County stormwater standards assure that stormwater runoff will not pollute
adjacent waters. The conditions of approval will require that the applicant's
19 stormwater plan be reviewed and approved by Mason County Department of Public
Works.
20
1 SMP Recreational Development (Use Regulation No. 5): Vehicular traffic is
prohibited on beaches, bars, spits, and streambeds, except for boat launching and
maintenance activities. Perimeters of parking areas shall be landscaped to minimize
visual impacts to the shorelines, roadways and adjacent properties.
21
21. The fencing of the proposal will prevent vehicle access to shoreline areas.
24 The perimeter of the new parking area will be landscaped to minimize aesthetic
25 impacts as determined in Finding of Fact No. 5.
SSDP/Shoreline Variance—Recreation 11 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
SMP Recreational Development se Regulation No. 6 : Trail access shall be
P � g )
provided from upland facilities to the beach area.
22. There is an existing trail from the parking area to the shoreline.
SMP Recreational Development (Use Regulation No. 7): Public access points on
4 lake and marine waters must provide parking space appropriate for the intended use.
5 23. Parking is not adequate to serve the demand created by the existing park.
6 However, the proposal does not involve the creation of a new public access point and
most likely will not result in any increase in use of the public access point.
7 Consequently, no additional parking can be concluded to be necessary as
"appropriate"for the intended use of the proposed improvements.
8
SMP Recreational Development (Use Regulation No. 9): Recreational
9 developments must provide facilities for non-motorized access, such as pedestrian or
10 bicycle paths to link the recreation area to the shoreline.
11 24. As previously noted, a trail provides pedestrian access from the parking
area and restroom to the shoreline.
12
SMP Recreational Development (Use Regulation No. 11): Trailer spaces,
l 3 camping sites, and similar facilities shall not be located on beaches and tidelands.
14
25. No such facilities are proposed.
15
SMP Recreational Development (Use Regulation No. 12): Recreational facilities
16 shall make adequate provisions for water supply, sewage disposal and garbage
collection.
17
18 26. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, as conditioned the proposal
makes adequate provisions for water supply, sewage disposal and garbage collection.
19
SMP Recreational Development (Use Regulation No. 13): Recreational facilities
20 shall make adequate provisions, such as screening, buffer strips,fences and signs, to
21 prevent overflow and to protect the value and enjoyment of adjacent or nearby
private properties.
22
27. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal provides for
23 adequate screening, fencing and signage to mitigate the impacts created by the
24 addition of 21 parking spaces and new restrooms.
25 SMP Recreational Development (Use Regulation No. 14): Signs associated with
recreational facilities shall be kept to a minimum in number and size and shall be
erected as informational or directional aids only.
SSDP/Shoreline Variance—Recreation 12 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1 28. As conditioned.
2 SMP Recreational Development (Use Regulation No. 15): To protect natural
3 features and adjacent properties, park and recreational facilities shall prohibit the
use of all-terrain vehicles in the shoreline area.
4
5 29. The staff report notes that off-road vehicles are prohibited in Case Inlet.
6 SMP Recreational Development (Use Regulation No. 16): All permanent
recreational structures and facilities shall be located outside officially mapped
7 jloodways EXCEPT the County may grant exceptions for non-intensive accessory
uses (e.g.,picnic tables, etc).
8
30. There is nothing in the record to suggest that the proposal is located within
9 any mapped floodway.
10
SW Recreational Development (Use Regulation No. 17): Accessory facilities,
1 I such as restrooms, recreation halls, commercial services, access roads and parking
areas shall be located inland from shoreline areas unless it can be shown that such
12 facilities are shoreline dependent. These areas shall be linked to the shoreline by
13 walkways.
14 31. The recreational development section of the shoreline use regulations,
MCC 17.50.060, set shoreline setbacks of 75 feet from the OHWM for parking
15 facilities within urban areas. Consequently, it is concluded that "inland" as used in
the use regulations quoted above is 75 feet or more from the OHWM. The requested
16 variance to this 75 foot setback is construed as a variance to the criterion above as
well.
17
18 SMP Recreational Development (Use Regulation No. 19): In approving shoreline
recreational developments, the County shall ensure that the development will
19 maintain, enhance or restore desirable features including unique and fragile areas,
scenic views and aesthetic values. To this end, the County may condition project
20 dimensions, location of project components on the site, intensity of use, screening,
21 parking requirements and setbacks, as deemed appropriate to achieve this end.
22 32. The applicant has proposed the restoration and installation of native
vegetation throughout the project site. The conditions of approval require a
23 determination by a qualified expert that this restoration and enhancement is sufficient
to mitigate the impacts of the requested variance. As proposed and conditioned, the
24 proposal complies with the use regulation quoted above.
25 SMP Recreational Development (Use Regulation No. 20): No recreation building
or structure, except piers or docks, or bridges shall be built over the water.
SSDP/Shoreline Variance—Recreation 13 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1 33. No overwater development is proposed.
2 SMP Recreational Development (Use Regulation No. 21): Proposals for
3 recreational development shall include plans for sewage disposal. Where treatment
facilities are not available, the County shall limit the intensity of development to meet
4 strict County and State on-site sewage disposal requirements.
5 34. The proposal includes connection to sewer lines.
6
7 VARIANCE APPLICATION:
8 MCC 17.50.090(1): The strict application of the bulk, dimensional or performance
standards precludes or significantly interferes with a reasonable use of the property
9 not otherwise prohibited by the Master Program.
10 35. The strict application of the 75 foot shoreline buffer would preclude the
11 reasonable use of the property. As noted in past variance decisions, case law provides
that a determination of reasonable use must be based upon a balancing of public
12 benefit verses burden on the property owner. See Buechel v. Department of Ecology,
125 Wn.2d 196 (1994). The public benefit is usually the objectives sought by the
13 regulation in question. In this case that involves the aesthetic and environmental
14 benefit of maintaining distance between parking facilities and the shoreline. The
burden to the property owner is relatively unique, however, in that it is also aligned
15 with a public benefit, i.e. providing adequate public parking for shoreline access.
Maximizing the park for parking will help alleviate the significant adverse impacts
16 associated with the inadequate parking approved for the current park site. As
17 demonstrated by neighboring property owners, the overflow parking along SR 302
has created a dangerous situation where the car owners are forced to walk along SR
18 302 roadway or trespass through adjoining private property to access tidelands. This
trespass has also resulted in litter and other noxious impacts to private property. As
19 noted in the staff report, the nominal eight foot encroachment into the 75 foot buffer
is the minimum necessary to allow for safe and effective parking circulation. As
20 shown in the site plan, an encroachment into the new proposed parking area is
21 necessary along its entire length. Consequently, enforcement of the 75 foot buffer
would preclude the applicant from adding all of the proposed 21 additional parking
22 stalls. Given all these factors and the pressing and urgent need to alleviate the
intolerable inadequate parking for the project site, enforcement of the 75 foot buffer
23 would significantly interfere with a reasonable use of the property.
24 MCC 17.50.090(2): The hardship which serves as the basis for the granting of the
25 variance is specifically related to the property of the applicant, and is the result of
unique conditions such as irregular lot shape, size, or natural features and the
SSDP/Shoreline Variance—Recreation 14 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
application of the Master Program, and not,for example,from deed restrictions oi-
1 the applicant's own action.
36. The hardship is the result of the limited area for development between the
shoreline buffer(a natural feature)and SR 302.
4 MCC 17.50.090(3): The design of the project will be compatible with other
permitted activities in the area and will not cause adverse effects to adjacent
properties or the shoreline environment.
6 37. The existing and proposed fencing and buffering will provide for
7 compatibility. As discussed in Finding of Fact No. 5, the adverse impacts of the site
are associated with the currently approved development and the improvements
8 proposed for the subject application will reduce these impacts and associated
compatibility problems. The conditions of approval will also ensure that the
9 removal of shoreline vegetation for the parking area will not create any adverse
10 environmental impacts.
l 1 MCC 17.50.090(4): The variance authorized does not constitute or grant special
privilege not enjoyed by the other properties in the area, and will be the minimum
12 necessary to afford relief.
1' 38. The variance provides for a minimal buffer encroachment to only partially
14 mitigate for severely inadequate parking. It is likely that such a variance would be
granted to any other property suffering from similar severe inadequacies in parking.
15 For the reasons stated in Conclusion of Law No. 35, the variance is the minimum
necessary to afford relief.
16
17 MCC 17.50.090(5): The public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect.
18 39. The proposal will help mitigate the adverse impacts of a currently existing
park and enhance public shoreline access without creating any new significant
19 adverse impacts. Consequently, the public interest will suffer no substantial
detrimental effect.
20
21 MCC 17.50.090(6): The public rights of navigation and use of the shorelines will not
be adversely affected by the granting of the variance.
22
40. Public navigation will be unaffected and public use of the shorelines will
23 be enhanced by the proposal.
24
25
SSDP/Shoreline Variance—Recreation 15 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
DECISION
1
2 The proposal is approved and satisfies all the use regulations and policies that apply
to the request shoreline substantial development permit and variance, as conditioned
3 below:
4 1. Improvements must be implemented as portrayed in the
5 application and site plan in Exhibit 2 and Exhibit 6.
2. All excavation materials and soils exposed to erosion by all phases of construction
6 shall be stabilized and protected by seeding, mulching or other effective
means,both during and after construction.
7 3. Excess construction materials shall be removed from the shoreline area.
8 4. As depicted in the submitted KPPF Stormwater Report, storm water runoff shall
be controlled to reduce suspended solids and other pollutants as these flows are
9 treated in the west filtration strip adjacent to the new parking area. The
applicant shall acquire approval from the Mason County Public Works
10 department for its stormwater plan prior to construction of any proposed
improvements.
11 5. Control potential trespass with proposed fencing around parking areas, and
landscaping or screen panels that meet Shoreline Master Program standards.
12 6. Informational signage shall be posted to control litter and dumping,
13 potential trespass, and prohibition of all-terrain vehicle use; alert users
to day-use activities and recreational shellfish harvest activities. No
14 trespass signs shall be placed along the property lines shared with
adjoining residential use(s). Beyond this, as required by Recreation Use
15 Regulation No. 14, signs shall be kept to a minimum in number and size
16 and shall be erected as informational or directional aids only. A signage
plan shall be approved by staff prior to any construction of proposed
17 improvements.
18 7. Waste collection service shall be arranged to keep the day-use site
clear of garbage and waste from area residents and visitors. A waste
19 collection plan shall be approved by staff prior to the construction of
any proposed improvements.
20 8. The recommendations of the March 2013 Cultural Resource Survey of the
21 site by Van Galder & Huber shall be implemented during site preparation,
installation of proposed improvements, and operation of the public access
22 area.
9. All facilities shall be constructed by June 2015 and maintained in a safe
23 and sound condition. Abandoned or unsafe structures shall be removed or
24 repaired promptly by the owner.
10. A qualified expert shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of staff that the
25 encroachment to the 75 foot parking lot setback shall result in no net loss
of ecological function to the Case Inlet shoreline. Staff may impose
SSDP/Shoreline Variance—Recreation 16 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
mitigation as necessary to ensure that this objective is met.
1
2 Dated this 1 lth day of June,2013.
3r
4 Phi A.01brechts
5 Mason County Hearing Examiner
6 Appeal Right and Valuation Notices
7
This approval of the shoreline substantial development permit is final and subject to
8 appeal to the Washington State Shoreline Hearings Board as governed by Chapter
90.58 RCW. Appeal deadlines are short and procedures strictly construed. Anyone
9 wishing to file an appeal of this decision should consult with an attorney to ensure that
10 all procedural requirements are satisfied.
11 The shoreline variance is subject to approval by the Washington State Department of
Ecology.
12
Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes
13 notwithstanding any program of revaluation.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
SSDP/Shoreline Variance—Recreation 17 Findings. Conclusions and Decision
PSpN"STATFO� MASON COUNTY
MO
Oc DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
� �
o T Z Planning Division
o N y py P O Box 279, Shelton, WA 98584
864 (360)427-9670
1
Case No.: SHR2013-00004 SHORELINE PERMIT REQUEST
Received: 2/21/2013
Type of Permit: Sub. Dev./Variance
Applicant: WASHINGTON DEPT FISH & WILDLIFE
600 CAPITAL WAY NORTH
OLYMPIA, WA 98501-1091
Location of Proiect: From Allyn or Belfair on North Bay Rd. to State Route 302 to site near
powerlines.
Within NORTH BAY and/or its associated wetlands. The project within
shorelines of statewide significance.
Shoreline Designation: Urban
Parcel Number: 122167590041
Address: 3270 E STATE ROUTE 302 BELFAIR
Legal Description: TR 4-A OF SURV 15/99 TR 1 OF SP #2033
Project Description: Proposed improvements to public access site along North Bay: 1) ADA
access restrooms with available well water and sewer connection; 2) expand
parking area from 24 to 45 spaces; 3) native plant restoration to replace
lawn and around parking area; and 4) new wetland and area public
information signage. Variance to 75-foot shoreline setback standard
requested to allow location of parking area expansion to 68 feet from
ordinary high water mark.
No permit authorizing construction shall extend for a term of more than five (5) years. If actual
construction of a development for which a permit has been granted has not begun within two years
after the approval of the permit by the Board of County Commissioners, the Board shall, at the
expiration of the two-year period, review the permit, and upon a showing of good cause, extend the
permit for one year. Otherwise, the permit terminates; provided that no permit shall be extended
unless the applicant has requested such review and extension prior to the last regular meeting of the
Board coming before the permit exipration date.
Approved: 'Z
Denied: ❑
Authorized Local Government Official Date
THIS SECTION FOR DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY USE ONLY IN REGARD TO A
CONDITIONAL USE OR VARIANCE PERMIT.
Approved: ❑ Date received by Department of Ecology:
Denied: ❑
This permit is approved by the Department of Ecology pursuant to Chapter 90.58 RCW.
Development shall be undertaken pursuant to the attached terms and conditions.
Date Authorized Dept. of Ecology Official
SHR2013-00004 Page 2 of 2
MASON COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Planning Division
P O Box 279
Shelton,WA 98584
(360)427-9670
SHORELINE PERMIT
Case No.: SHR2013-00004 STATUS: ISSUED
Received: 2/21/2013 Issued: 6/13/2013 Expires: 4/18/2016
Tvge of Permit: Sub. Dev./Variance
Applicant: WASHINGTON DEPT FISH & WILDLIFE
600 CAPITAL WAY NORTH
OLYMPIA, WA 98501-1091
Location of Project: From Allyn or Belfair on North Bay Rd. to State Route 302 to site near
powerlines.
Within NORTH BAY and/or its associated wetlands. The project within
shorelines of statewide significance.
Shoreline Desiqnation: Urban
Parcel Number: 122167590041
Address: 3270 E STATE ROUTE 302 BELFAIR
Leqal Description: TR 4-A OF SURV 15/99 TR 1 OF SP #2033
Project Description: Proposed improvements to public access site along North Bay: 1) ADA
access restrooms with available well water and sewer connection; 2) expand
parking area from 24 to 45 spaces; 3) native plant restoration to replace
lawn and around parking area; and 4) new wetland and area public
information signage. Variance to 75-foot shoreline setback standard
requested to allow location of parking area expansion to 68 feet from
ordinary high water mark.
CONDITIONS:
This permit has been granted by Mason County persuant to the Shoreline Management Act of 1971
and 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 but not inconsistent with the
Shoreline Management Act. (Chapter 90.58 RCW).
This permit may be rescinded pursuant to RCW 90.58.140(7) in the event the permittee fails to
comply with the terms and conditions hereof.
SHR2013-00004 Pacle 1 of 1
r
CASE INDEX
Washington State Department of Fish &Wildlife
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit / Variance
SHR2013-00004
Exhibit Date Description
1 May 28, 2013 Staff Report
2 February 21, 2013 Substantial Development &Variance Application
3 March 8, 2013 Variance Additional Information
4 February 21, 2013 Project Vicinity Ma
5 February 21, 2013 Existing Site Plan
6 February 21, 2013 Project Site Plan
7 March 12, 2013 Site Aerial Photo
8 January 22, 2013 SEPA Determination of Non-Significance WFDW
9 March 4, 2013 Cultural Resources Survey for site; Van Galder &
Huber, authors available upon request]
10 Aril 8, 2013 Notice of Application
11 May 21, 2013 Affidavit of Posting
12 May 28, 2013 Letter of comment D. Litowitz
13 May 8, 2013 1 Site Photos
WDFW North Bay SHR2013-00004 case index
b& Al
Mason County
Department of Community Development
Building I * 411 N. 5th Street * P.O. Box 279
Shelton, Washington 98584
May 28, 2013
TO: Mason County Hearing Examiner
FROM: Planning Staff— Allan Borden; 360.427.9670 ext 365; ahb@co.mason.wa.us
RE: Mason County Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (SHR2013-00004).
STAFF REPORT
I. Introduction. This report evaluates an application for a Shoreline Substantial
Development permit and Variance under Chapter 17.50 Mason County Shoreline Master
Program Use Regulations and the Mason County Comprehensive Plan Shoreline
Management Program IX-2 Shoreline Management Program Policies for the construction
of an ADA access restrooms with available well water and sewer connection; expand
parking area from 24 to 45 spaces; install native plant restoration to replace lawn and
around parking area; and place new wetland and area public information signage. The
proposed work further implements park land uses and fish and shellfish access to the
area. See attached drawings for more details (Exhibit #6).
II. Applicant: Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife.
III. Representatives: Larry Peck.
IV. Date of Complete Application: March 18, 2013.
V. Site address and Project Location: 3270 E State Route 302, Belfair, WA 98528;
along North Bay/ Case Inlet 3.5 miles east of Allyn WA.; Parcel Nos. 12216-75-90041
and 12216-75-90042 within the southwest '/4 of Section 16, Township 22 N., Range 1
W. in Mason County.
VI. Evaluations.
A. Characteristics of the area. The general area is characterized by single-family
residences (Exhibit #4). The property to the south has the powerline towers and
transmission lines, and cellular communication improvements installed on the
upper portions of the towers. Properties immediately to the north and northeast
have single-family residences. The site is oriented to the west and the shoreline of
Case Inlet.
Characteristic of the site. The site is a 1.13 acre parcel that currently provides
public access to the saltwater resources, and a small parking area and portable
toilets for users (Exhibit #7). The site has shrub and tree vegetation of native
and invasive plant species around the parking area (Exhibit #13); and a small
category III wetland is situated 35 feet from the south edge of the parking area.
Estuarine wetland vegetation is located along the Case Inlet shoreline.
Dept. of Fish and Wildlife SHR2013-00004 1 of 8
B. Comprehensive Plan Designation. The Mason County Comprehensive Plan
designation for the site is Rural Area.
C. Zoning. The parcel is zoned Rural Residential 5.
D. Shoreline Master Program Designation. The Shoreline Master Program
environmental designation for the site is Urban.
VII. SEPA Compliance and other public notice requirements. The proposal was
reviewed by Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife under SEPA, (their SEPA File No.
13-009); and the Determination of Non-Significance on Jan. 22, 2013 (Exhibit #8).
The Shoreline Management Permit and Variance application (SHR2013-00004) is
attached (Exhibits #2 & #3). The Notice of Application for Shoreline Management
Permit that appeared in the local paper on April 11 and 18, 2013 is attached (Exhibit
#10). The Affidavit of Publication of Shoreline Management Permit is attached
(Exhibit #11). In Exhibit #12, a neighbor to the subject property has concerns
for increased vandalism, trespass, parking, and illegal activities; he suggests that the
access should be closed for 3 days per week (including weekend day)
VIII. Other Permits. The proposal will require a Mason County Building Permit, and a
Mason Environmental Permit and Buffer Restoration Plan.
IX. Analysis. The proposal is for a public access recreational development within the
shoreline of Case Inlet. Shoreline Environmental Designation is Urban. Per RCW
90.58.030 (3) (e) (vii) and WAC 173.27.040 (2) (a), this proposal requires a
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit due to the cost exceeding $5,800. This
proposal is reviewed under the Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use
Regulations (SMP) Chapter 17.50.060 Recreational Development and 17.50.090
Variance and Mason County Comprehensive Plan — Shoreline Management Program
IX-2 Shoreline Management Program Policies Recreational Development and IX-4
Variance.
The North Bay Access Site was approved by a previous shoreline permit Mason
County SHR2002-00025, and many of the improvements were made (Exhibit #5).
This permit will allow further permanent improvements to be established on the
property situated on two parcels along the east side of Case Inlet (Exhibit #6).
Connection of the ADA access restrooms with available well water and sewer is very
important; expanding the available parking area onto the northern parcel from 24
to 45 spaces is intended to alleviate problems with parking. In addition, installing
native plant restoration to replace lawn on the northern parcel and around parking
area; and placement of new wetland and area public information signage were two
conditions not previously completed.
X. Applicable Recreational Development Policies (from Mason County
Comprehensive Plan IX-2):
1. Shoreline developments that serve a variety of recreational needs should be
encouraged.
Dept. of Fish and Wildlife SHR2013-00004 2 of 8
Since 2003, this public access site enables the residents and visitors of the North
Bay Case Inlet area to park and/or recreate along the saltwater shoreline. Fishing
and shellfish harvest and walking along the shoreline are the primary land uses;
wildlife watching and boating are other activities enjoyed by the public in the
vicinity. Such activities have increased the demand for convenient areas for
parking vehicles of visitors and residents.
2. All proposed recreational developments should be designed, located and operated
to protect the quality of scenic views and to minimize adverse impacts on the
environment. Favorable consideration should be given to those projects which
compliment their environment.
The existing and proposed parking areas and ADA restrooms are situated near the
state highway, and this location leaves the remainder of the property for distant
views and direct access to the saltwater shoreline. New plantings of native plants
will enhance the portion of the property that will treat stormwater from the
parking areas.
3. Publicly owned property which provides public access to a body of salt or fresh
water should be retained for public use.
The Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife provides public access sites for multiple
use activities as its leading purposes for public use. The proposed added parking
and improved restrooms will serve to continue recreational and pedestrian uses in
the vicinity of North Bay Case Inlet.
4. Public agencies, private individuals, groups and developers should be encouraged
to coordinate development projects to mutually satisfy recreational needs.
The WDFW not only actively manages fish and wildlife species on the lands and
waters of the state, but also has purchased lands to serve as access and
interpretative sites for the benefit of the public. Mason County assists in enabling
the proposal to be reviewed through the public process.
5. All proposed recreational facilities should make adequate provisions for:
- traffic, inside and outside of facility adequate aisles for ingress/egress within
the parking areas,
- proper water, solid waste, and sewage disposal provided as planneo;
- security and fire protection available services,
- prevention of overflow and trespass onto adjacent properties (fencing,
landscaping, and posting of property) landscaping, large rocks, and chain link
fence will prevent overflow parking,
- buffering of development from adjacent properties. additional plantings around
the parking areas and on the north side near residences.
10. Public recreational developments should be consistent with adopted park,
recreation and open space plans for the County.
The WDFW park/access points are noted in the Mason County Comprehensive
Plan Capital Facilities Program Element.
11. The development of small , dispersed recreational areas should be encouraged.
Dept. of Fish and Wildlife SHR2013-00004 3 of 8
This public access site is about 0.S acre area along the North Bay shoreline and
is one of the two public sites along the shoreline located from Allyn to south of
victor.
12. The linkage of shoreline parks, recreation areas and public access points by linear
systems, such as hiking paths, bicycle paths, easements and scenic drives should
be encouraged.
The proposed additional parking are is part of the public accesses connected by
county roads and state highway, although the road shoulders are not very wide
for bicyclists and pedestrians.
13. The use of off-road vehicles is discouraged in all shoreline areas except where
special areas have been set aside for this purpose.
Off-road vehicles are not permitted on the beach and tidelands of Case Inlet.
Such use in the parking area would present hazards to residents and visitors.
XIII. Applicable Recreational Development Use Regulations (Chapter 17.50
Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations 17.50.060:
1. All proposed recreational developments shall be analyzed for their potential effect
on environmental quality and natural resources.
Department of Fish and Wildlife circulated its own environmental checklist and
determined that no significant impacts are anticipated. Public agency comments
focused on stormwater and erosion control(Dept. of Ecology) and the need for
cultural resources survey of the property(Dept, of Archaeology and Historical
Preservation). These studies were completed and are part of the application
materials; they are available upon request(Exhibit#9).
2. Recreational developments shall comply at all times with the updated local and
State Health regulations and such compliance made a condition of the permit.
Well water and sewer connection will be part of the proposed services now
provided to this public access site. These services will be stated in the conditions
of this permit.
3. Priority shall be given to developments which provide recreational uses and
which facilitate public access to shorelines.
This public access site enables the residents and visitors of the North Bay Case Inlet
area to park and/or recreate along the saltwater shoreline. Fishing and shellfish
harvest and walking along the shoreline are the primary land uses; wildlife watching
and boating are other activities enjoyed by the public in the vicinity.
4. Parking areas shall be located inland, away from the immediate edge of the
water and recreational beaches, unless there is no area available. Provisions
shall be made for adequate vehicular parking and safe pedestrian crossings.
Design of parking areas shall ensure that surface runoff does not pollute adjacent
waters. Design shall provide for storm water retention and shall be reviewed by
Mason County Department of Public Works.
The design of the proposed added parking area places the proposal next to the
state highway and farthest from the saltwater shoreline. The travel aisles in the
Dept. of Fish and Wildlife SHR2013-00004 4 of 8
parking areas are at the edge of the areas and pedestrians may walk closest to
the rear of parked vehicles. A stormwater plan has been prepared(shown in
Exhibit #6), involves treatment of runoff in a dedicated infiltration area, and will
be reviewed to Public Works standards.
5. Vehicular traffic is prohibited on beaches, bars, spits and streambeds, except for
boat launching and maintenance activities. Perimeters of parking areas shall be
landscaped to minimize visual impacts to the shorelines, roadways and adjacent
properties.
Off-road vehicles are not permitted on the beach and tidelands of Case Inlet.
Such use in the parking area would present hazards to residents and visitors. The
proposed parking area is landscaped with native plantings that will help to screen
the public access use from nearby residential land uses.
6. Trail access shall be provided from upland facilities to the beach area.
There is an existing access trail from the existing parking area to the Case Inlet
shoreline area; this trail will be available for use for the new parking area in the
north location provided by this permit request.
7. Public access points on lakes and marine waters must provide parking space
appropriate for the intended use.
The parking areas previously approved and now proposed are intended to serve
as public access points to the saltwater and provide needed restroom facilities
and informational signage for shoreline users.
9. Recreational developments must provide facilities for non-motorized access, such
as pedestrian or bicycle paths to link the recreation area to the shoreline area.
The proposed parking area and access trail will be available for the use of
pedestrians along the shoreline and bicyclists, mostly affiliated with use along
the state highway.
12. Recreational facilities shall make adequate provisions for water supply, sewage
disposal and garbage collection.
Well water and sewer connection to the improved ADA restrooms will be part of
the proposed services, now to be provided to this existing and expanded public
access site. Local collection service of garbage/waste from day-use visitors
will be arranged to keep the site clear of such waste.
13. Recreational facilities shall make adequate provisions, such as screening, buffer
strips, fences and signs, to prevent overflow and to protect the value and
enjoyment of adjacent or nearby private properties.
Proposed buffer plantings will be located on the north side to screen residential
properties and in the infiltration area to enhance the shoreline area vegetation
buffer. New fencing around the parking area will keep vehicle use confined to
the parking area and limit trespass to adjacent properties.
14. Signs associated with recreational facilities shall be kept to a minimum in
number and size and shall be erected as informational or directional aids only.
Dept. of Fish and Wildlife SHR2013-00004 5 of 8
Information signage for handicapped parking is proposed in the vicinity of the
restrooms, and area information signs proposed at drive from the state highway
and the trail to the shoreline area.
15. To protect natural features and adjacent properties, park and recreational
facilities shall prohibit the use of all-terrain vehicles in the shoreline area.
Off-road vehicles are not permitted on the beach and tidelands of Case Inlet.
Such use in the parking area would present hazards to area residents and
visitors to the access site.
XIV. Variance Evaluation:
Variance to 75-foot shoreline setback standard is requested to allow location of parking
area expansion to 68 feet from ordinary high water mark. The applicant has responded
to the following review criteria (Exhibit #�
Variance Permits for development that will be located landward of the ordinary high
water mark (OHWM), except those areas designated as wetlands, may be authorized
provided the applicant can demonstrate all of the following:
1. That the strict application of the bulk, dimensional or performance standards set
forth in the Master Program precludes or significantly interferes with a reasonable
use of the property not otherwise prohibited by the Master Program;
The location for access to recreational shellfish harvesting has a limited area to sited.
To provide a safe area for added parking, the lot must be 52 It. wide from west to
east, and a portion of the proper 75-1t. setback from ordinary high water mark
(OHWM) for proposed parking areas must be used for the lot area. The proposal is
situated the farthest from the OHWM and provides for the needed storm water
infiltration of the graveled parking area.
2. That the hardship which serves as a basis for the granting of the variance is
specifically related to the property of the applicant, and is the result of unique
conditions such as irregular lot shape, size, or natural features and the application
of the Master Program, and not, for example from deed restrictions or the
applicant's own actions;
The subject property is 110 to 115 feet deep and is bounded by the Case Inlet
shoreline on the west and State Route 302 on the east. The required archaeological
area and shoreline vegetation buffer also limit the proposal, so that a request for
minimal setback variance to 68 feet is needed to locate the 52-ft. width of new
parking area when including these site limitations.
3. That the design of the project will be compatible with other permitted activities in
the area and will not cause adverse effects to adjacent properties or the shoreline
environment;
The project site is adjacent to the north of the existing parking area and portable
restrooms approved in 2003, and the proposal establishes ADA restrooms connected
to water and sewer and expands available parking for access to public tidelands for
recreation and shellfish harvest.
Dept. of Fish and Wildlife SHR2013-00004 6 of 8
4. That the variance authorized does not constitute a grant of special privilege not
enjoyed by the other properties in the area, and will be the minimum necessary to
afford relief;
Due to the site limitations of lot depth, the location of state highway and shoreline
areas, and the presence of vegetation buffer and archaeological areas, the request
for minimal setback variance to 68 feet is needed to locate the 52-ft. width of new
parking area to expand available parking for recreational and shellfish harvest
activities. Adjacent residential properties have now been developed and provisions
of the this project will reduce visual impacts to those new residences.
5. That the public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect.
The project is proposed in order to provide available parking for the recreational
and shellfish harvest activities in Case Inlet on a property with limited parking
areas. Providing sites for safe parking, confining the parking use within fenced
areas, and screening the parking areas from nearby residences will lessen impacts
of unsafe parking and disturbances to local residents that have occurred since the
approval of the southern parking area in 2003.
Variance Permits for development that will be located either waterward of the
ordinary high water mark, or within wetlands, may be authorized provided the
applicant can demonstrate, in addition to Items 1-5 above, that:
6. The public rights of navigation and use of the shorelines will not be adversely
affected by the granting of the variance.
Not applicable to this proposal.
XV. Conclusions: Based upon these policies, regulations, and criteria, the new public
access parking area for North Bay Case Inlet, proposed by Washington Dept. of
Fish and Wildlife, is consistent with the listed Mason County Shoreline Master
Program Policies and applicable Use Regulations regarding recreational
development land uses, and with the Shoreline Master Program Variance criteria.
XVI. Choices of Action. The Hearing Examiner has five (5) choices of action for this
proposal as listed below:
1. Approve.
2. Approve with conditions.
3. Deny (reapplication or resubmittal is permitted).
4. Deny with prejudice (reapplication or resubmittal is not allowed for one year).
5. Remand for further proceedings and/or evidentiary hearing in accordance with
Section 15.09.090 of Title 15.
If the Hearing Examiner approves this permit, staff recommends the following
conditions:
Dept. of Fish and Wildlife SHR2013-00004 7 of 8
1. Implement improvements portrayed in the project site plan: ADA restrooms,
additional parking area, native plant species replanting in the existing lawn area
adjacent to the new parking area.
2. All excavation materials and soils exposed to erosion by all phases of construction
shall be stabilized and protected by seeding, mulching or other effective means,
both during and after construction.
3. Excess construction materials shall be removed from the shoreline area.
4. As implemented in the submitted KPPF Stormwater Report, storm water runoff shall
be controlled to reduce suspended solids and other pollutants as these flows are
treated in the west filtration strip adjacent to the new parking area.
5. Control potential trespass with proposed fencing around parking areas, and
landscaping or screen panels that meet Shoreline Master Program standards.
6. Informational signage shall be posted to control litter and dumping, potential
trespass, and prohibition of all-terrain vehicle use; alert users to day-use
activities and recreational shellfish harvest activities.
7. Waste collection service shall be arranged to keep the day-use site clear of
garbage and waste from area residents and visitors.
8. The recommendations of the March 2013 Cultural Resource Survey of the site by
Van Galder & Huber shall be implemented during site preparation, installation of
proposed improvements, and operation of the public access area.
9. All facilities shall be constructed by June 2015 and maintained in a safe and
sound condition. Abandoned or unsafe structures shall be removed or repaired
promptly by the owner.
Dept. of Fish and Wildlife SHR2013-00004 8 of 8
-------------
- rCGEMCY C.
M
Date received: FEB 2
101
Corp
WASHINGTON STATE '
= .. 0
Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Agency reference#:
Application (JARPA) Form'°2 Tax Iraa;�
USE BLACK OR BLUE INK TO ENTER ANSWERS IN THE WHITE SPACES BELOW. '
------------
Part 1—Project Identification
1. Project Name (A name for your project that you create. Examples: Smith's Dock or Seabrook Lane Development) [tgipj
North Bay Beach Access Improvements
Part 2—Applicant
The person and/or organization responsible for the project. [t@jpJ
2a. Name(Last, First, Middle)
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Capital and Asset Management Program
2b. Organization(If applicable)
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
2c. Mailing Address (Street or PO Box)
600 Capital Way N.
2d. City, State, Zip
Olympia, WA. 98501-1091
2e. Phone(1) 2f. Phone(2) 2 . Fax 2h. E-mail
360) 902-8376 ( ) ( 360) 902-8367 LarryPeck@dfw.wa.gov
Additional forms may be required for the following permits:
• If your project may qualify for Department of the Army authorization through a Regional General Permit(RGP),contact the U.S.Army Corps of
Engineers for application information(206)764-3495.
• If your project might affect species listed under the Endangered Species Act,you will need to fill out a Specific Project Information Form(SPIF)or
prepare a Biological Evaluation. Forms can be found at
htto:/twww.nws.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/Regulatory/PermitGuidebook/EndangeredSoecies.aspx.
• Not all cities and counties accept the JARPA for their local Shoreline permits.If you need a Shoreline permit,contact the appropriate city or county
government to make sure they accept the JARPA.
ZTo access an online JARPA form with[help]screens,go to
htto://www.ei)ermitting.wa.goy/site/alias resourcecenterllaroa iaroa fomV9984fiaroa form.asox.
For other help,contact the Govemor's Office of Regulatory Assistance at 1-800-917-0043 or helpAora.wa.gov.
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 1 of�>�
Part 3—Authorized Agent or Contact
Person authorized to represent the applicant about the project. (Note: Authorized agent(s) must sign 11 b of this
application.) [tg1pi
3a. Name (Last, First, Middle)
Larry Peck
3b. Organization (If applicable)
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
3c. Mailing Address (Street or PO Box)
600 Capital Way N.
3d. City, State, Zip
Olympia, WA, 98501-1091
3e. Phone(1) 3f. Phone(2) 3 . Fax 3h. E-mail
( 360 ) 902-8376 ( ) ( 360) 902-8367 Larry.Peck@wdf.wa.gov
Part 4—Property Owner(s)
Contact information for people or organizations owning the property(ies)where the project will occur. Consider both
upland and aquatic ownership because the upland owners may not own the adjacent aquatic land. tel
X Same as applicant. (Skip to Part 5.)
❑ Repair or maintenance activities on existing rights-of-way or easements. (Skip to Part 5.)
❑ There are multiple upland property owners. Complete the section below and fill out JARPA Attachment A for
each additional property owner.
❑ Your project is on Department of Natural Resources (DNR)-managed aquatic lands. If you don't know,
contact the DNR at(360) 902-1100 to determine aquatic land ownership. If yes, complete JARPA Attachment E
to apply for the Aquatic Use Authorization.
4a. Name(Last, First, Middle)
4b. Organization (if applicable)
4c. Mailing Address (Street or PO Box)
4d. City, State, Zip
4e. Phone(i) 4f. Phone(2) 4 . Fax 4h. E-mail
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 2 of 16
Part 5—Project Location(s)
Identifying information about the property or properties where the project will occur. hel
❑ There are multiple project locations (e.g. linear projects). Complete the section below and use JARPA
Attachment B for each additional project location.
5a. Indicate the type of ownership of the property. (Check all that apply.) hel ]
❑ Private
❑ Federal
X Publicly owned (state,county, city, special districts like schools, ports,etc.)
❑ Tribal
❑ Department of Natural Resources (DNR)—managed aquatic lands (Complete JARPA Attachment E)
5b. Street Address (Cannot be a PO Box. If there is no address, provide other location information in 5p.) [t@jPJ
5c. City, State, Zip(If the project is not in a city or town, provide the name of the nearest city or town.) [help]
.
Located between the town of Allyn and Victor on US Highway 302
5d. County tgio
Mason
5e. Provide the section, township, and range for the project location. [hel
'/4 Section Section Township Range
16 22 N 1 W
5f. Provide the latitude and longitude of the project location. hel
• Example:47.03922 N lat./-122.89142 W long. (Use decimal degrees-NAD 83)
47.389856 N lat/-122.81184 W long
5g. List the tax parcel number(s)for the project location. hf eM
• The local county assessor's office can provide this information.
122167590041
5h. Contact information for all adjoining property owners. (If you need more space, use JARPA Attachment C.) heI
Name Mailing Address Tax Parcel #(if known)
David Hawke (253) 853-5602 122163400040
Viola Smith 3241 State Route 302, Belfair, WA. 122164300050
Midwest Funding & Financial NA 122167590032
122167590032
Larry Haakenstad 3240 State Route 302, Belfair, WA. 122163400020
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Ll `1 age 3 of
5i. List all wetlands on or adjacent to the project location. hei
Category 3 Wetland located approximately 32 feet south of existing access parking area.
5j. List all waterbodies (other than wetlands) on or adjacent to the project location. [hLei
North Bay.
5k. Is any part of the project area within a 100-year floodplain? hei ]
Yes X No ❑ Don't know
51. Briefly describe the vegetation and habitat conditions on the property. [Lei ]
The upland property is approximately 50 percent developed beach access site, the other 50
percent is a undeveloped lot with existing fir, cotton wood and alder trees, a large grassy area
and non-native weeds such as scotch broom, Japanese knotweed and blackberry bushes.
5m. Describe how the property is currently used. hei ]
Property is currently and has been used as a public access site to public tidelands in North Bay
since 2003.
5n. Describe how the adjacent properties are currently used. hei
Rural residential, undeveloped state land and state owned public tidelands. City of Tacoma has
a utility (power pole) ownership immediately on the south end of existing Beach access site.
5o. Describe the structures (above and below ground) on the property, including their purpose(s) and current
condition. Lgj
No formal permanent building structures are on this site; approximately half of the existing site is a
formal gravel parking area with trails leading down to the beach. Site includes access entry sign and
Kiosk for providing public information. There is also an existing fence in the proposed work area that is
planned for removal to expand the existing parking area.. The site is currently equipped with two
portable toilets placed on a concrete pad. The site has been constructed with an asphalted entry way
and an asphalt pad for ADA parking. Additionally the entry way has a gate structure to regulate access.
5p. Provide driving directions from the closest highway to the project location, and attach a map. h( elp]
The proposed project site is reached by turning east off of US Highway 3 north from the town of Allyn
onto North Bay Road, turning right(east) onto US Highway 302, traveling to the large power poles, site is
on the right, beach side of the highway.
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page4of 185
Part 6—Project Description
6a. Briefly summarize the overall project. You can provide more detail in 6b. [Lei
Proposed project consists of four primary elements: 1. Construct restroom facilities (flush) that
are connected to the existing sewer treatment infrastructure, this element also includes the
development of a small on site well to supply water to the new restroom facility. 2. Partially
Clear and Brush, level and gravel existing undeveloped area to expand parking at the site by 20
additional parking spots. 3. Plant native plants around newly developed parking and access
area. All related construction work will be outside the High Ordinary Water Mark. 4. Place
additional signage for wetland information and additional user friendly information.
6b. Describe the purpose of the project and why you want or need to perform it. nei
The purpose of the proposed project is to fulfill the conditions of the original Shoreline Permit
from Mason County, #SHR2002-00025 that specifically required the installation of a restroom
facility that was connected to the existing sewage treatment facilities. WDFW has been
operating the access site with the use of portable toilets. Additionally WDFW is proposing to
increase public parking at the site from approximately 24 spaces to 45 spaces in an effort to
ease parking constraints at this site.
6c. Indicate the project category. (Check all that apply) hel
❑ Commercial ❑ Residential X Institutional ❑ Transportation ❑ Recreational
❑ Maintenance ❑ Environmental Enhancement
6d. Indicate the major elements of your project. (Check all that apply) [help]
Aquaculture ❑ Culvert ❑ Float ❑ Retaining Wall
❑ Bank Stabilization ❑ Dam /Weir ❑ Floating Home (upland)
❑ Boat House ❑ Dike/ Levee /Jetty ❑ Geotechnical Survey ❑ Road
❑ Boat Launch ❑ Ditch ❑ Land Clearing ❑ Scientific
Measurement Device
❑ Boat Lift ❑ Dock/ Pier ❑ Marina / Moorage
❑ Stairs
❑ Bridge ❑ Dredging ❑ Mining ❑ Stormwater facility
❑ Bulkhead ❑ Fence ❑ Outfall Structure
❑ Swimming Pool
❑ Buoy ❑ Ferry Terminal ❑ Piling/Dolphin
X Utility Line
❑ Channel Modification ❑ Fishway ❑ Raft
X Other: Restroom facility upgrade construction, expanded parking area, landscaping and signage.
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page of 1
6e. Describe how you plan to construct each project element checked in 6d. Include specific construction
methods and equipment to be used. [help]
• Identify where each element will occur in relation to the nearest waterbody.
• Indicate which activities are within the 100-year floodplain.
The proposed project will include clearing of the lot removing medium sized firs approximately10 trees; and two
clusters of small cotton wood colonies, leaving and protecting but limb up established larger trees on the
bayside and road side of the site. Grubbing, excavating, filling and top casting gravel in the proposed new
parking area. Establishing a new concrete ADA parking pad for access to the restroom facility and concrete pad
to support new prefab restroom building. Construction of a new well water supply for the new restroom flush
toilets (including a pressurizes tank), new utility lines to convey new water supply and waste water to existing
sewage treatment line, new electric supply for the new well and restroom facilities. Removal of an existing chain
linked fence (poor condition) that currently separates the existing parking area from the proposed new parking
area. Planting of plants to establish a vegetated filter strip between the new parking area and the beach, and
additional plantings to restore native shoreline habitat. Additional plantings will occur to provide for a 20 foot
buffer between the proposed work site and WDFW's next door neighbor on the north side of the project. In the
unlikely event that cultural resources are uncovered during construction, work in the immediate vicinity of the
discovery will be halted, and WDFW will consult with the Washington State Historic Preservation officer.
6f. What are the anticipated start and end dates for project construction? (MonthNear) [help]
• If the project will be constructed in phases or stages, use JARPA Attachment D to list the start and end dates of each phase or
stage.
Start date: summer/2013 End date: summer/2013 ❑ See JARPA Attachment D
6g. Fair market value of the project, including materials, labor, machine rentals, etc. hg-!Pj
$140,000 to $180,000
6h. Will any portion of the project receive federal funding? hell ]
• If yes, list each agency providing funds.
❑ Yes X No ❑ Don't know
Part 7—Wetlands: Impacts and Mitigation
X Check here if there are wetlands or wetland buffers on or adjacent to the project area.
(If there are none, skip to Part 8.) [help]
7a. Describe how the project has been designed to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to wetlands. ham]
❑ Not applicable
The proposed project is proposing adding new parking area on the north side of the existing site, the
category 3 Wetland A is located just over 30 feet from the south end of the existing parking area. The
proposed project will require WDFW to secure a wetland buffer variance from Mason County. The
proposed project will limit new construction activities to be placed outside the proposed 30 foot Wetland
A buffer. New construction activities will occur well away from the proposed wetland buffer, the one
exception will be the installation of the new well water supply which will be developed just outside the
proposed wetland buffer.
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page of 185
7b. Will the project impact wetlands? [hel
❑ Yes X No Don't know
7c. Will the project impact wetland buffers? hei ]
X Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know Wetland A, project will not encroach existing 30 foot buffer
7d. Has a wetland delineation report been prepared? [tgipj
• If Yes, submit the report, including data sheets, with the JARPA package.
X Yes ❑ No
7e. Have the wetlands been rated using the Western Washington or Eastern Washington Wetland Rating
System? LLLeM
• If Yes, submit the wetland rating forms and figures with the JARPA package.
X Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know Category 3
7f. Have you prepared a mitigation plan to compensate for any adverse impacts to wetlands? [te!pl
• If Yes, submit the plan with the JARPA package and answer 7g.
• If No, or Not applicable, explain below why a mitigation plan should not be required.
❑ Yes X No ❑ Not applicable
The proposed work closest to the wetland buffer will be the construction of a new small well to supply water
to the restroom facilities, the well site was selected by consultants to improve the opportunity to secure
ground water. The proposed well site is located on the existing developed parking area. The need for a
water supply is required to meet the existing Shoreline Conditions placed on the original beach access site
development in 2003.
7g. Summarize what the mitigation plan is meant to accomplish, and describe how a watershed approach was
used to design the plan. [help]
The proposed project was designed to develop additional parking opportunities away from
the existing wetland buffer. A small portion of the existing graveled parking area, (the
southeast corner) will be within the proposed 30 wetland buffer. Please see sheet 4 on
attached permit drawings.
7h. Use the table below to list the type and rating of each wetland impacted, the extent and duration of the
impact, and the type and amount of mitigation proposed. Or if you are submitting a mitigation plan with a
similar table, you can state (below) where we can find this information in the plan. [Lfjpj
Activity (fill, Wetland Wetland Impact Duration Proposed Wetland
drain, excavate, Name' type and area (sq. of impact mitigation mitigation area
flood, etc.) rating ft. or type' (sq. ft. or
category' Acres) acres)
NA Category 3
buffer zone
If no official name for the wetland exists,create a unique name(such as"Wetland 1"). The name should be consistent with other project documents,such
as a wetland delineation report.
z Ecology wetland category based on current Western Washington or Eastern Washington Wetland Rating System.Provide the wetland
rating forms with the JARPA package.
3 Indicate the days,months or years the wetland will be measurably impacted by the activity.Enter"permanent"if applicable.
°Creation(C),Re-establishment/Rehabilitation(R).Enhancement(E). Preservation(P), Mitigation Bank/In-lieu fee(B)
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 7of 6
Page number(s) for similar information in the mitigation plan, if available:
7i. For all filling activities identified in 7h, describe the source and nature of the fill material, the amount in cubic
yards that will be used, and how and where it will be placed into the wetland. Lteipi
No filling in Wetland A proposed.
7j. For all excavating activities identified in 7h, describe the excavation method, type and amount of material in
cubic yards you will remove, and where the material will be disposed. [tg!PJ
No excavation in Wetland A proposed.
Part 8—Waterbodies (other than wetlands): Impacts and Mitigation
In Part 8, "waterbodies" refers to non-wetland waterbodies. (See Part 7 for information related to wetlands.) ne!
X Check here if there are waterbodies on or adjacent to the project area. (If there are none, skip to Part 9.)
8a. Describe how the project is designed to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to the aquatic environment.
hel
❑ Not applicable
Proposed project will require the development of a pollution abatement plan; the selected contractor will
also be required to fulfill all appropriate conditions identified in DOE's storm water manual. All
construction to complete the overall project will be done outside/above the ordinary high water mark.
No in water construction is associated with this project proposal. No sediment will enter the "water
bodies" by incorporating Best Management Practices that includes the use of silt fences and hay bales.
It is also anticipated that the short construction period to complete the proposed project could occur in
a time frame to take advantage of or reduce the likelihood of weather related negative impacts. WDFW
has also included a habitat restoration planting plan to restore native plants between the formal parking
area and mean high water mark.
Please see attached plans page 7 &12 for additional details.
8b. Will your project impact a waterbody or the area around a waterbody? ne!
*vg-4
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page eof 1
8c. Have you prepared a mitigation plan to compensate for the project's adverse impacts to non-wetland
waterbodies? help
• If Yes, submit the plan with the JARPA package and answer 8d.
• If No,or Not applicable,explain below why a mitigation plan should not be required.
X Yes No ❑ Not applicable
No in water work is associated with the proposed project. In an effort to minimize the
potential risks of adverse impacts associated with site runoff see attached stormwater
plan. The proposed project has been designed to ensure that during the construction
period and long term use of the site will not result in untreated run off or sedimentation
entering the watercourse.
Please see attached plans for specific details for runoff and sediment control measures
and planting plan to restore and enhance native plants along shoreline.
8d. Summarize what the mitigation plan is meant to accomplish. Describe how a watershed approach was
used to design the plan.
• If you already completed 7g you do not need to restate your answer here. [help]
Storm water plan and additional site planting plans for restoring and enhancing the buffer
between the proposed new expanded parking area and the mean high water mark. Project will
preclude the introduction of sediment and runoff from reaching North Bay waters.
8e. Summarize impact(s) to each waterbody in the table below. Etgipj
Activity (clear, Waterbody Impact Duration Amount of material Area (sq. ft. or
dredge, fill, pile name' location of impact3 (cubic yards) to be linear ft.) of
drive, etc.) placed in or waterbody
removed from directly affected
waterbody
N/A
I
If no official name for the waterbody exists,create a unique name(such as"Stream 1")The name should be consistent with other documents provided-
2 Indicate whether the impact will occur in or adjacent to the waterbody. If adjacent,provide the distance between the impact and the waterbody and
indicate whether the impact will occur within the 100-year flood plain.
3 Indicate the days.months or years the waterbody will be measurably impacted by the work. Enter"permanent"if applicable.
8f. For all activities identified in 8e, describe the source and nature of the fill material, amount (in cubic yards)
you will use, and how and where it will be placed into the waterbody. heel]
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 9 of M
N/A
8g. For all excavating or dredging activities identified in 8e, describe the method for excavating or dredging,
type and amount of material you will remove, and where the material will be disposed. [hel
Not applicable.
Part 9—Additional Information
Any additional information you can provide helps the reviewer(s) understand your project. Complete as much of
this section as you can. It is ok if you cannot answer a question.
9a. If you have already worked with any government agencies on this project, list them below. hel
Agency Name Contact Name Phone Most Recent
Date of Contact
Mason County Barbara Adkins ( 360) 427-9670 1/17/13
WDFW Robert Cannon ( 360) 249-1207 1/17/13
Mason County Allan Borden (360) 427-9670 2/11/13
9b. Are any of the wetlands or waterbodies identified in Part 7 or Part 8 of this JARPA on the Washington
Department of Ecology's 303(d) List? [hel
• If Yes,list the parameter(s)below.
• If you don't know, use Washington Department of Ecology's Water Quality Assessment tools at:
http://www.ecy wa.gov/programs/wq/303d/.
❑ Yes X No
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page foof 48j
I
9c. What U.S. Geological Survey Hydrological Unit Code (HUC) is the project in? [help]
• Go to httr)://cfr)ub.epa.gov/surf/locateAndex.cfm to help identify the HUC.
HUC 17110019
9d. What Water Resource Inventory Area Number(WRIA#) is the project in? hel ]
• Go to httt):/twww.ecy.wa.gov/services/gis/maps/wria/wria.htm to find the WRIA#.
WRIA 15
9e. Will the in-water construction work comply with the State of Washington water quality standards for
turbidity? he( ei ]
• Go to http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programstwq/swqs/cdteHa.html for the standards.
❑ Yes ❑ No X Not applicable
9f. If the project is within the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act, what is the local shoreline
environment designation? ham]
• If you don't know, contact the local planning department.
• For more information,go to: hftp://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/sma/laws rules/173-26/211 designations.html.
X Rural ❑ Urban ❑ Natural ❑Aquatic ❑ Conservancy ❑ Other
9g. What is the Washington Department of Natural Resources Water Type? [help]
• Go to http://www dnr wa gov/BusinessPermits/Topics/ForestPracticesApplicabons/Pages/fr) watertypinq asox for the Forest
Practices Water Typing System.
X Shoreline Fish ❑ Non-Fish Perennial ❑ Non-Fish Seasonal
9h. Will this project be designed to meet the Washington Department of Ecology's most current stormwater
manual? help]
• If No, provide the name of the manual your project is designed to meet.
X Yes ❑ No
Name of manual:2005 DOE Stormwater Manual
91. Does the project site have known contaminated sediment? [tgipi
• If Yes, please describe below.
❑ Yes X No
9j. If you know what the property was used for in the past, describe below. hf elpl
Property has been used as a Public Access point for North Bay since 2003, prior usage undeveloped residential
lot.
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 14 of
9k. Has a cultural resource(archaeological) survey been performed on the project area? [helvi
• If Yes,attach it to your JARPA package.
❑ Yes X No, However WDFW has contracted for an Archaeological survey prior to disturbing the
proposed new developed lot.
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page itof 1
91. Name each species listed under the federal Endangered Species Act that occurs in the vicinity of the project
area or might be affected by the proposed work. hull i
No known Federally listed species known to occur in vicinity of project.
9m. Name each species or habitat on the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife's Priority Habitats and
Species List that might be affected by the proposed work. nel
Hard Shell Clams
Surf smelt
Estuarine zone
Estuarine intertidal
Bald Eagle nesting tree located outside impact area, closest documented nesting site over 3,000 feet away from
proposed work site.
Part 10—SEPA Compliance and Permits
Use the resources and checklist below to identify the permits you are applying for.
• Online Project Questionnaire at http://apps.ecy.wa.gov/opas/.
• Governor's Office of Regulatory Assistance at(800) 917-0043 or help(a-ora.wa.gov.
• For a list of addresses to send our y JARPA to, click on agency addresses for completed JARPA.
10a. Compliance with
p t the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). (check an that apply.) [help]
• For more information about SEPA,go to www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sealsei)a/e-review.html.
X A copy of the SEPA determination or letter of exemption is included with this application.
A SEPA determination is pending with_WDFW(lead agency). The expected decision date is
_2/06/13_
❑ I am applying for a Fish Habitat Enhancement Exemption. (Check the box below in 1 ob.) nei
❑ This project is exempt(choose type of exemption below).
❑ Categorical Exemption. Under what section of the SEPA administrative code (WAC) is it exempt?
❑ Other:
❑ SEPA is pre-empted by federal law.
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page J�,f �
10b. Indicate the permits you are applying for. (Check all that apply.) hf g_m
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Local Government Shoreline permits:
X Substantial Development ❑ Conditional Use ❑ Variance
Shoreline Exemption Type (explain):
Other city/county permits:
❑ Floodplain Development Permit X Critical Areas Ordinance wetland variance/modification
STATE GOVERNMENT
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife:
❑ Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) ❑ Fish Habitat Enhancement Exemption—Attach Exemption For,
Effective July 10, 2012, you must submit a check for$150 to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife,
unless your project qualifies for an exemption or alternative payment method below. Do not send cash.
Check the appropriate boxes:
❑$150 check enclosed. (Check# )
Attach check made payable to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.
❑Charge to billing account under agreement with WDFW. (Agreement# )
❑My project is exempt from the application fee. (Check appropriate exemption)
❑ HPA processing is conducted by applicant-funded WDFW staff.
(Agreement # )
❑ Mineral prospecting and mining.
❑ Project occurs on farm and agricultural land.
(Attach a copy of current land use classification recorded with the county auditor, or other proof of current land use.)
❑ Project is a modification of an existing HPA originally applied for, prior to July 10, 2012.
(HPA# )
Washington Department of Natural Resources:
❑ Aquatic Use Authorization
Complete JARPA Attachment E and submit a check for$25 payable to the Washington Department of Natural Resources.
Do not send cash.
Washington Department of Ecology:
❑ Section 401 Water Quality Certification
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
United States Department of the Army permits (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers):
❑ Section 404 (discharges into waters of the U.S.) ❑ Section 10 (work in navigable waters)
United States Coast Guard permits:
❑ General Bridge Act Permit ❑ Private Aids to Navigation (for non-bridge projects)
JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page Nof t�
L
Part 11—Authorizing Signatures
Signatures are required before submitting the JARPA package. The JARPA package includes the JARPA form,
project plans, photos, etc. tpipi
11a. Applicant Signature (required) tpjpJ
I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief, the information provided in this application is true, complete,
and accurate. I also certify that I have the authority to carry out the proposed activities, and I agree to start work
only after I have received all necessary permits.
I hereby authorize the agent named in Part 3 of this application to act on my behalf in matters related to this
application. (initial)
By initialing here, I state that I have the authority to grant access to the property. I also give my consent to the
permitting agencies entering the property where the project is located to inspect the project site or any work
related to the project. (initial)
Wash.State Dept.of Fish and Wildlife
Applicant Printed Name Applicant Signature Date
11 b. Authorized Agent Signature Ltjel
I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief, the information provided in this application is true, complete,
and accurate. I also certify that I have the authority to carry out the proposed activities and I agree to start work
onlyafter all necessary permits have been issued.
rY
_Larry Peck
Larry y w. Peck Feb. 15, 2013
Authorized Agent Printed Name Authorized Agent Signature Date
11 c. Property Owner Signature if not applicant). hel
P rtY 9 ( [�1
Not required if project is on existing rights-of-way or easements.
I consent to the permitting agencies entering the property where the project is located to inspect the project site
or any work. These inspections shall occur at reasonable times and, if practical, with prior notice to the
landowner.
Property Owner Printed Name Property Owner Signature Date
18 U.S.0§1001 provides that:Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly
falsifies, conceals,or covers up by any trick,scheme,or device a material fact or makes any false,fictitious, or fraudulent statements or
representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious,or fraudulent statement or
n hall be fined not more than 10 000 or imprisoned not more than 5 ears or both.
entry, s $ p Y
inanother format contact the Governor's Office of Regulatory Assistance ORA at 800 917-0043.
If you require this document g ry ( ) ( )
Y 4
People with hearing loss can call 711 for Washington Relay Service. People with a speech disability can call (877)833-6341.
ORA publication number: ENV-019-09 rev. 06-12
� JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 115f 1'q
lip
MASON COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT �`� '�
PO BOX 279
Shelton, WA 98584
36� ( 0)427 9670
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR SHORELINE VARIANCE
The purpose of the Variance.Permit is strict) limited
Y to granting
nting relief to specific
bulk, dimensional, or performance standards set forth in the Ma
ster Program,
where there are extraordinary or unique circumstances relating to the property
such that the strict implementation of the Master Program would impose
unnecessary hardships on the applicant or thwart the policies set forth in RCW
90.58.020.
Variance.Permits for development.that will be located landward of the ordinary
high water mark (OHWM), except those areas designated as marshes, bogs, or
swamps, may be authorized provided the applicant can demonstrate all'of the
following:
1. Show that the strict application of the bulk, dimensional, or performance
standards set forth in the Master Program precludes or significantly
interferes with a reasonable use of the property not otherwise prohibited by
the Master Program.
►4 CLe 5 5 5
L �T A�,r�•tN Tp e Cv-e4 c�l L111--
V-1-4S 1� wlr`.1l ti; �C-eL
CL
2. Show that the hardshipwhich
serves as a basis for the grantingof the
Variance is specifically .p �cally related to the property of the applicant, and is th
result of uniquep e
conditions
tons such as irregular lot shape, size or natural
features and the application of the Master Program, and not, for example
I
from deed restrictions or the applicant's own actions. p
S
Z, � a
+4 KA , yle e�
r
[ S
3. Show that the design of the project will be compatible with other permitted
activities in the area and will not cause adverse effect
s to adjacent
properties or the shoreline environment 1 nt
.
(,4—
o ��
Revised 1/95
_Srioreline Variance
Page 2
4. Show that the variance authorized does not constitute a grant of special
privilege not enjoyed by other properties in the area, and will be the
minimum necessary to affordr relief.
1ti 2 _ 4 L r p c.J V1 e-V
c— �5
5. Show that the public interest will suffer no substantialdetrimental effect.
r o`e Ct e S c WcP 't'O V`2ct 4,_ c� 4
Variance Permits for development that will be located either waterward of the
ordinary high water mark or within marshes, bogs, or swamps, may be authorized
provided the applicant can demonstrate, in addition to.Items 1 through 5 above,
that:
6. Show that the public rights of navigation and use of the shorelines will not
be adversely/affected by the granting of the variance.
-
-�
S 4- So�•a cis _
rf�CAP
In granting of all Variance Permits, consideration shall be given to the cumulative
impact of additional request for like actions in the area. For example, if variances
were an r
g ted to other developments in the area where
similar circumstances exist,
the total of the variances should also remain consistent wit
h the policies of RCW
90.58 020 and should not produce substantial adverse
environment.
effects to the shoreline
onment
i .
i
i
Revised 1195
&
srrE LOCA710W
STATE MAP
i 0
i p YD 3
SITE LOCATION
m
YIC7°II
302
K ALL
t �
VICINITY MAP
PERMIT DRAWINGS
° I BAR MEASURES NORTH BAY ACCESS SITE PROJECT NO.
ONE INCH ON MN:A671:13-1
ORIGINAL DRAWINGS PARKING AREA EXPANSION
ATE REVISION DESCRIPTION BY
APPROVED AND RELEASED FOR CONSTRUCTION OECKN. SWK RLO SHEET of
CNEC EXISTING SITE @Y
DAM DR—W RLO AND VICINITY MAP 2 13
_....__.Mh..,, 0,1TE 03/15/2013
APPROX. PROPERTY LINE
1 ,r AP OXIW F00OHWM / --
•� OF MAIM D 6
ARCHEOLOGM.AI. • I _ ,�' ,�� �n ryw I I " I'
AV00AACE AREA • i , ' •.!
• 1 JJ C;r �r
� i I I ,•
AP P C UNE 1�
. I X.I P' N�
-Mil
011
x
6;
i
4
I
A
0
I: ► 'I
�;"An
I 11 1rri
11 1pE{[1 ,
TFWEIS
o I PROX. UN j I �) �y r ' 1 �\1 \ \ l l OPERiY UNE
o ;
l
sI ;
W EXISTING SITE PLAN
Y �
' x GRAPHIC SCALE
e 15 30 60 110
Y i> 1 nth= 30 IL
Y
. %
�
•mx
3,F s Q � WASHINGTON STATE
�
2407 f"M 3W Street Wte W
e96407 DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE �, ,.�
(b f, I/li_
EXTEND NEW CHAIN
FLOW SPREADER,
SEE LINK FENCING TO EX
RESTORE GRASS PLANTING PLAN SHEET 12 FENCE PLANTED BUFFER,
FIELD TO NATIVE r SEE SHEET 12
SHORELINE HABITAT.
SEE SHEET 12
A AIN ul
`7.7.
......... .....
r2 STRAND BARBED
o
WIRE FENCE + + ++1
79
ALONG TOP OF K
150 LF
+ +
DO NOT DISTURB EXISTING ...........
C
VEGETATION W okww
......r.. ...
AVOIAN CE AREA
......... .. ......
SEE DNOTE 8
+++
Z).... .......... ......
..........
............... ........
RESTORE, -A
FIELD TO to
SHORELINE HABITAT, AL :
SEE SHEET 12 PARALLEL P
+ + 4 OVERFLOW
2 • 02 1 1
+ + i
GRAVEL SURFA�
...... .....
T
+ +
f
2o 1"n, /C'ONTROL POINT
NOT U RARCELI'221k
0 .........
+ +
I PARCEL[l 22
o EJEIND NEW VORE EX OqG 7 9
75. O"WM K
E .IFENC SETBAC
�—
ED CMIBLE
KIJG la DETiL
12
7 9
4
26�L
LINK C)rr
MF T OR APIPRr 7 It
5
'o SANITARY
u:ir
< I r
IT I
CONNECT To
67;8 PLAIN TCH iCXf II
ZZUFAC
RE YEN rl B k= \7
F NOTE 4
/ 1 �\\\ \\\\` ♦ I , 11i i
/ \♦ \\\ \\\\,� �` I jl I
c?
MAINTAIN EXISTING
PARKING LOT' / t
Y y
CPS
/ / / I
S SEE IOTE 3
SEE NOTE3
PROPOSED WELL
$ / / / , ( / I NO
LOCATION SEE
PARKIL
NOTES/
t SIGN i 7.Q !II�I i'/ / I� r
30 WETLAND \\\ \\\
N,
sETBAck Il
5 WETLAND cc
DELINEAPON
PER GEOENGINEERS SITE PLAN
7012312012
A
w011wtlr*Ergi— WASHINGTON STATE
2407 NxM 35t Street-ate W
SYM DATE
T800M W8sNrQton 98407
00 396-OZ50
Pax am 39&-ow DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE I CN
' � -
ORAL IEF APPROVCC
EW�
l
2-/z
GRAPHIC SCALE
10 20 b ao
/ -
APPROX. PROPERTY LINE, SEE NOTE 1 1 FtA 20 R
SURFACE QUANTITIES
1 SURFACE TYPE (SEE NOTE AREA (AC)
NEW NOTES,
1. BOUNDARY LINES NORTH OF PARCEL 12216-75-90042 ARE
r GRAVE PCIS 0.17 APPROXIMATE. A BOUNDARY SURVEY HAS NOT BEEN
/ COMPLETED.
!It I ADA CONIC. PARKING AND PCIS 0.02
T CXT PAD 2. THE OHWM LANE WAS IDENTIFIED, DELINEATED AND MARKED WITH
/ CXT STRUCTURE NPGIS 0.DO4 SURVEY FLAGS BY GEOENGINEERS IN OCTOBER 2012. THE
JI� / METHOD OF DELINEATION IS DESCRIBED IN THE CRITICAL AREAS
I('If I PLANTED AREA NPGPS 0.21 REPORT - WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH k WILDLIFE
NORTH BAY/VICT
RH OR ACCESS AREA MASON COUNTY, WASHINGTON
/ 1 0 EA AIN BY GEOENGINEERS (FILE NO. 3730-143-00. DATED NOVEMBER
) 9, 2012).
'/N; GRAVEL PCIS 0.19 3. TRENCHING FOR UTILITIES SHALL BE PER DETAILS 1, 2, 3,AND
ASPHALTI PGIS 0.03 4 ON SHEET 10.
1
I 4. IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT 11 PRECAST CURB BUMPERS CAN BE
CUT/FILL QUANTITIES - PARKING/PLANTING AREA SALVAGED FROM CURRENT PARKING LOT AND REUSED.
1 5. THE PROPOSED WELL LOCATION IS ONLY VALID FOR A
CUT (CUBIC FILL (CUBIC NET (CUBIC NON-POTABLE WATER WELL.
AREA YARDS) YARDS) YARDS) 6. SEE SHEET 6 FOR SURVEY CONTROL POINT INFORMATION.
' CLEAR AND GRUB 146 0 -146 CUT 7. SURFACE TYPE ABBREVIATIONS ARE PER THE STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR WESTERN WASHINGTON FROM THE
TO REACH SUB GRADE 80 0 -80 CUT DEPA THEN. OF ECOLOGY. SEE SHEET 1 FOR SURFACE TYPE
JI IMPORT MATERIAL 0 185 185 FILL
1i t 8. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AVOIDANCE AREA INCLUDES ARCHAEOLOGICAL
I AREA AND BUFFER PER FINDINGS REPORT PREPARED BY
TOTAL 226 185 -41 CUT STATISTICAL RESEARCH, INC (DATED FEBRUARY 2013).
t221 —75J9OD41 J! APPROX. PARCEL BOUNDARY, SEE NOTE 1 LEGEND,
\ PARCEL 1221�-75 8OD42
I W WATER LINE
\� 3 \ CUT/FILL QUANTITIES - CONCRETE PAD/TOILET
\ 7 9 \\ \ cn 1 g SANITARY SEWER
CUT (CUBIC FILL (CUBIC NET (CUBIC
DA E591BLE'
5 \
I i AREA YARDS) YARDS) YARDS) E ELECTRICAL
G DETAIL 7 9 EXCAVATION 39 0 -39 CUT
I I VEGETATED FILTER STRIP
II I IMPORT MATERIAL 0 38 38 FILL
I
TOTAL 39 38 -1 CUT 1
PROPOSED GRAVEL 7 9
1'I
CUT/FILL QUANTITIES — UTILITY 2
l PROPOSED CONCRETE AREAAREACUT (CUBIC FILL (CUBIC NET (CUBIC 7 9
j YARDS) YARDS) YARDS)
EXISTING GRAVEL
I EXCAVATION 80 0 -80 CUT
I I Il TOTAL BO 80 80 OFILLLL a`7Tz.°T'-<r ' EXISTING ASPHALT
I I II /• ARCHEOLOGICAL AVOIDANCE AREA
OHWM
30' WETLAND SETBACK
® THREE MAN BOULDER (8' OC,
UNO)
1/ 1
I !1 I I SHEETPLANTED AREA 12)
PI EE PLANTING
PRECAST CURB BUMPER
If 1 I I I / X—X X— 4' CHAIN LINK FENCE
�' f�l � �/ 7
75' OHWM SETBACK
2
ti -0 4 STRAND BARBED WIRE FENCE 7 T
Y.E:
PERMIT DRAWINGS
° 1 BAR MEASURES NORTH BAY ACCESS SITE PROJECT NO.
ONE INCH ON MN:A671:13-1
PARKING AREA EXPANSION
ORIGINAL DRAWINGS
tAIE REVISION DF'SCRIP710N BY RLO SHEET OF
APPROVED AND RELEASED FOR CONSTRUCTION DMONIM SITE PLAN
DHEDIQD w Sm
DATE DMw 9 7 1r RLO / 1 3
.................. ...................................... .....DATE........................ DATE 03/15/2013
.�r 122163400010 1z2164390015 122164390016
ei
' 1221643000201=
4
t
r
F ,r
s
t
m.
T22N '
a
r
rr
t
A* 12216759
a ti
122167590032
"
_
a ,
4
44
r
> 9 x
s a
,
,
}
µ
2 ,
+
;7590044 r
a
1675�
122167590034 _ � _� ��
N
1 inch = 100 feet
W E
1 inch = 0 miles
S
�tub� 8
J � �
12-22- 13AO9 : 37 RCVD
State of Washington
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
Mailing Address: 600 Capitol Way N-Olympia,Washington 98501-1091 -(360)902-2200,TDD(360)902-2207
Main Office location:Natural Resources Building-1111 Washington Street SE-Olympia,WA
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS)
Name of Proposal: NORTH BAY BEACH ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS
Description of Proposal:
The proposed project has three major elements:
1. Fulfill the conditions of the Shoreline Permit# SHR2002-0025 which includes the
construction of a Restroom Facility that is connected to the public sewer system. This element
will require the development of an onsite well to supply water to properly operate proposed flush
toilets on the existing developed access site.
2. Expand the existing parking area to ease parking along State Highway 302.
3.New plant planting alongside and below new proposed expanded parking area.
All proposed project work for both elements will be completed outside the OHW mark.
Proponent/Applicant: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife(WDFW)
Larry Peck,600 Capital Way N; Olympia,WA. 98501-1091.(360)902-8376
Location of Proposal,including street,if any:North Bay near Allyn, Washington, Mason
County; Section 16, Township 22 North, Range 01 West WM
Lead Agency:Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife(WDFW)
WDFW has determined that this proposal will likely not have a significant adverse impact on the
environment. Therefore, state law' does not require an environmental impact statement(EIS).
WDFW made this determination of nonsignificance(DNS)after we reviewed the environmental
checklist and other information on file with us.
We issued this DNS according to state rules? We will not act on this proposal for 14 days
from the date we issued the DNS. Agencies, affected tribes, and members of the public are
invited to comment on this proposal or DNS. We must receive your comments within 14 days of
the date of this letter. This means we must receive your comments by February 6,2013.
Method of Comment:
The following procedures shall govern the method to comment on agency SEPA proposals.
Comments received through these procedures are part of the official SEPA record for this
proposal.
You can submit your comments any one of the following ways: r
• Email to SEPAdesk2@,dfw.wa.gov
• Online at the WDFW SEPA website comment link at: http://wdfw.wa.gov/licensing/sepa/
• Fax to(360)902-2946;
• Mail to the address below.
Responsible Official: Bob Zeigler
Position/Title: SEPA/NEPA Coordinator, WDFW Regulatory Services Section
Address: 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, WA 98501-1091
After the comment period closes, applicants may view the updated status of this proposal on the
WDFW SEPA website: http://wdfw.wa.gov/iicensine/sepa/ Once the status is posted as final,
applicants and permittees may take action on the proposal. When a proposal is modified or
withdrawn,notice will be given in accordance with state law.1
If you have questions about this DNS or the details of the proposal, contact Bob Zeigler at the
address, e-mail, or fax number above; you can also call her at (360) 902-2578.
DATE OF ISSUE: January 22, 2013 SIGNATURE:
Footnotes
1. RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c)
2. WAC 197-11-340(2).
SEPA Log Number: 13-009.dns
2(7
t STATr
l P£
J
t
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
PO Box 47775 •Olympia, Washington 98504-7775 -(360)407-6300
711 for Washington Relay Service -Persons with a speech disability can call 877-833-6341
February 6, 2013
Bob Zeigler, SEPA/NEPA Coordinator
WA State Department of Fish& Wildlife
Regulatory Services Section
600 Capitol Way North
Olympia,WA 98501-1091
Dear Mr. Zeigler:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the determination of nonsignificance for the North
Bay Beach Access Improvements project located at North Bay near Allyn in Mason County as
proposed by Larry Peck, WA State Department Fish& Wildlife(WDFW). The Department of
Ecology(Ecology)reviewed the environmental checklist and has the following comment(s):
SHORELANDS &ENVIRONMENTAL ASSISTANCE: Rick Mraz(360) 407-6221
As configured, the proposal will require a shoreline variance,which includes Department of
Ecology final approval. Ecology requests a pre-hearing site visit to discuss the proposal with
the applicant and county staff. Please contact Rick Mraz at the phone number given above to
schedule the visit.
TOXICS CLEANUP: Joyce Mercuri (360)407-6260
If contamination is suspected, discovered, or occurs during construction,testing of the
potentially contaminated media must be conducted. If contamination of soil or groundwater
is readily apparent, or is revealed by testing, Ecology must be notified. Contact the
Environmental Report Tracking System Coordinator at the Southwest Regional Office at
(360)407-6300. For assistance and information about subsequent cleanup and to identify the
type of testing that will be required, contact Joyce Mercuri with Ecology's Toxic Cleanup
program at the phone number given above.
SEPA REVIEWER: Sonia Mendoza
WATER QUALITY CONTACT: Deborah Cornett(360)407-7269
Any discharge of sediment-laden runoff or other pollutants 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.
Erosion control measures must be in place prior to any clearing, grading, or construction.
These control measures must be effective to prevent stormwater runoff from carrying soil
3l-
February 6,2013
Page 2
and other pollutants into surface water or stormdrains that lead to waters of the state. Sand,
silt, clay particles, and soil will damage aquatic habitat and are considered to be pollutants.
Proper disposal of construction debris must be on land in such a manner that debris cannot
enter water of the state and stormdrains draining to waters of the state or cause water quality
degradation of state waters.
WATER RESOURCES: Vicki Cline(360)407-0278
Any ground water withdrawals in excess of 5,000 gallons per day or for the irrigation of
more than one-half acre of lawn or noncommercial garden, requires a water right permit from
Ecology.
All water wells shall be constructed in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 173-160
WAC by a driller licensed in the State of Washington. Well reports must be submitted to
Ecology within 30 days after completion of a well.
All water wells that may be drilled must be a minimum of 100 feet from any known,
suspected, or potential source of contamination. Wells shall not be located within 1,000 feet
of a solid waste landfill. WAC 173-160-171(1)The proposed water well shall be located
where it is not subject to ponding and is not in the floodway,except as provided in Chapter
86.16 RCW. (2) It shall be protected from a one hundred year flood and from any surface or
subsurface drainage capable of impairing the quality of the ground water supply.
The Growth Management Act(Section 63)requires an applicant to submit evidence of an
adequate water supply before a building permit can be issued for any building requiring
potable water.
Ecology's comments are based upon information provided by the lead agency. As such, they
may not constitute an exhaustive list of the various authorizations that must be obtained or legal
requirements that must be fulfilled in order to carry out the proposed action.
If you have any questions or would like to respond to these comments,please contact the
appropriate reviewing staff listed above.
Department of Ecology
Southwest Regional Office
(SM:13-0308)
cc: Deborah Cornett, WQ
Vicki Cline, WR
Joyce Mercuri, TCP
Rick Mraz, SEA
Larry Peck, WDFW (Applicant)
Peck, Larry (DFW)
From: Peck, Larry (DFW)
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2013 12:27 PM
To: Mendoza, Sonia (ECY); SEPADesk2 (DFW)
Cc: Mraz, Richard A. (ECY); Mercuri,Joyce (ECY);Cornett, Deborah (ECY); Cline, Vicki (ECY)
Subject: RE: ECY 13-0308 - North Bay Beach Access Improvements project-Comments
Sonia, thank you providing Ecology's comments on WDFW's proposed North Beach Access Project located in Mason
County. WDFW has already begun consultation with Mason County to ensure all county requirements are fulfilled, and I
will be happy to coordinate with Mason County to facilitate a pre-hearing meeting with Ecology and Fish and Wildlife
staffs.
I also appreciate receiving the appropriate Ecology contact information to assist us if have questions or need assistance
in addressing critical environmental elements associated with the North Bay Access Project. Again thank you for your
timely and helpful comments.
Larry Peck
Fish and Wildlife Biologist,CAMP Program
360.902.8376
From: Mendoza, Sonia (ECY)
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2013 10:11 AM
To: SEPADesk2 (DFW)
Cc: Mraz, Richard A. (ECY); Mercuri, Joyce (ECY); Cornett, Deborah (ECY); Cline, Vicki (ECY); Peck, Larry (DFW)
Subject: ECY 13-0308 - North Bay Beach Access Improvements project- Comments
Importance: High
Mr. Zeigler,
Attached are Ecology's comments for the North Bay Beach Access Improvements project (Ecology
SEPA No. 13-0308). Comments are due today 2/6/13.
Attached is the original final copy.
Please reply to this message for confirmation. Thank you.
03mif CG!endaaa�
Department of Ecology-SWRO
SEPA Coordinator
P:360-407-6313& F:360-407-6305
sonia.mendoza c(Decy.wa.gov
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
ARTMENT OF
HAEOLOGY 3 Allyson kooks Ph.D.,D'nctor
HISTORIC PRESERVATION State Historic Preservation Officer
ctec?%ne Pos`Shoce're Fcule
February 6, 2013
Mr. Bob Zeigler
SEPA/NEPA Coordinator
WDFW
600 Capitol Way North
Olympia, WA 98501-1091
In future correspondence please refer to:
Log: 082112-03-WDFW
Property: North Bay Access Project
Re: SEPA Review
Dear Mr. Zeigler:
Thank you for contacting the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic
Preservation (DAHP). The above referenced project has been reviewed under Executive Order
05-05 and an archaeological survey was requested. The survey was performed and we
understand that an archaeological site was identified in the project area. However, we have not
received a copy of the survey and archaeological site form for review and were informed that
more work was needed in order to complete both. Therefore we reserve our comments on the
project until after We have received and reviewed the archaeological survey and site form.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment.
Sincerely,
Gretchen Kaehler
Assistant State Archaeologist
(360) 586-3088
gretchen.kaehleradahp.wa.4ov
cc. Kris Miller, THPO, Skokomish Tribe
Gideon Cauffman, Archaeologist, Jamestown S'klallam
Rob Whitlam, State Archaeologist, DAHp
41N
State of Washington • Department of Archaeology&Historic Preservation
P.O.Box 48343 • Olympia,Washington 98504-8343 • (360) 586-3065 _
www.dohp.wo.gov
ne►
WDFW Reply to DAHP on North Bay Access
From: Peck, Larry(DFW)
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 9:32 AM
To: Kaehler,Gretchen (DAHP)
Cc: Zeigler, Robert C(DFW); Hansen,John P(DFW)
Subject: North Bay Beach Access Site 082112-03WDFW
Gretchen,thank you for your comments on Fish and Wildlife's(WDFW) proposed project at the North
Bay Beach Access Site located in Mason County.WDFW has hired a professional archeologist firm,SIR to
assist us in developing appropriate actions for our project planning and construction development plan.
I have been assured that our consultant has already been in contact with the Department of
Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP)to ensure proper coordination and additional information
requests are fully satisfied. It is also my understanding that additional surveys are nearing completion
and the new information will be provided to DAHP to assist your agency's review and may result in
additional direction as required to WDFW.
We look forward to DAHP's comments and direction and are committed to do our part in ensuring great
coordination for this project. If you have any additional concerns or if we can assist in any manner,
please feel free to contact me directly, direct phone 360.902.8376 or email Larry.Peck@dfw.wa.gov.
Thank you;
Larry Peck
WDFW Fish and Wildlife Biologist
I
Cultural Resources Survey for the North Bay
Access Project, Mason County, Washington
Sarah J. Van Galder and Edgar K. Huber
Draft report prepared for
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife
Capital and Asset Management Program
600 Capitol Way North
Olympia,Washington 98501
A
Technical Report 13-23
Statistical Research
Lacey,Washington
March 2013
Y Y
1
CONTENTS
Listof Figures......................................................................................................................................................ii
Listof Tables........................................................................................................................................................ii
Environment..................................................................................................................................................1
CulturalBackground.....................................................................................................................................1
RecordsSearch Results.................................................................................................................................3
FieldMethods and Results............................................................................................................................4
SiteDescription......................................................................................................................................7
NRHP Eligibility Discussion and Recommendations................................................................................10
Site45MS210.......................................................................................................................................10
Summary and Recommendations...............................................................................................................10
ReferencesCited.........................................................................................................................................12
AppendixA.Site Record.................................................................................................................................15
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.Project location map showing records-search results..........................................................................2
Figure 2.Project area map showing the locations of shovel test probes(STPs)and Site 45MS210................5
Figure 3. Overview of the southern portion of the project area,view to the south............................................7
Figure 4.Overview of the northern portion of the project area,view to the southeast......................................8
Figure 5.Overview of Site SRI 45MS2101ocation,view to the north...............................................................8
Figure 6.Black site deposit shown within STP 1 ...............................................................................................9
Figure 7.Black deposit with shell fragments shown eroding in bank near tree roots.......................................9
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Known Archaeological Sites Located within 1 Mile of the Project APE............................................4
Table 2.Previous Projects Completed within 1 Mile of the Project APE..........................................................4
Table 3.Shovel-Probe Stratigraphy.....................................................................................................................6
Table 4. UTM Coordinates for the Boundary of Site 45MS210 as Shown in Figure 2...................................I I
ii
w �
Statistical Research,Inc.(SRI),was contracted by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife(WDFW)
to conduct a records search and a cultural resource survey for the proposed North Bay Access Project near
the town of Victor in Mason County,Washington(Figure 1).The WDFW proposes to install a vault toilet at
the existing parking area;clear and grade a new,20-stall gravel parking area;and plant native vegetation.
The project is funded with State capital funds by State Capital Jobs Now.Because the project is funded by
the State,WDFW must comply with state regulations.The Washington State Environmental Policy Act
(SEPA)requires that properties listed in or eligible for listing in the Washington State Heritage Register be
taken into account when undertakings enabled or funded by a state agency affect properties of historical,
archaeological,scientific,or cultural importance(Washington Administrative Code 197-11-960).In
addition,WDFW must comply with Governor's Executive Order 05-05, which directs that projects with
state capital funds must consult with the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation(DAHP)and
with interested and affected Indian tribes regarding potential project impacts to cultural resources.The DAHP
requested an archaeological survey because the proposed construction activities will cause ground disturbance.
All conducted work meets or exceeds the state requirements.
SRI has completed a records search and an archaeological inventory survey,including a surface survey
and excavation of ten shovel test probes(STPs)within the project area.Figure 1 shows the project area and
the locations of previously identified cultural resources near but outside the project area.One site,
45MS210,consisting of a prehistoric shell midden deposit,was identified along the shoreline bank,within
molehills and within two STPs.On March 7,2013,SRI consulted with Rhonda Foster,the Tribal Historic
Preservation Officer for the Squaxin Tribe.Ms.Foster concurred with DAHP's and with SRI's
recommendations to avoid impacts to the site.
Environment
The geology and landforms of the Southern Puget Sound were formed by the Vashon Stade of the Fraser
glaciation(Kruckeberg 1991).The glacial maximum,between 17,000 and 18,000 years ago,reached
20 miles south of Olympia near the town of Centralia(Easterbrook 1993;Porter and Swanson 1998).
Between 17,000 and 14,000 years ago,the advance and retreat of glaciers scoured landforms,and melt waters
carved drainage channels and the Puget Sound into existing landforms.
The project's area of potential effects is on the east side of the North Bay of Case Inlet.Freshwater
streams,forest,wetlands,and tidal marshes are within the vicinity.Alderwood gravelly sand loam is the soil
type within the project APE.The project area is within the Tsuga heterophylla(western hemlock)vegetation
zone typical of the Puget Lowland(Franklin and Dymess 1973).This zone is characterized by dense
coniferous forests with high primary biomass accumulations and long-lived tree species.Forests consist of
western hemlock,western red cedar,Douglas fir,salal,Oregon grape,sword and bracken fern,salmonberry,
elderberry,trailing blackberry,huckleberry,and other species.However,some of the native vegetation was
destroyed during highway and parking lot construction and other park alterations.
Cultural Background
Most archaeologists agree that human occupation in western Washington has been continuous for the last
12,000 years.The earliest occupations are distinguished by the presence of fluted points and extinct mammals.
The period between 12,000 and 5,000 years ago saw little cultural change.Archaeological sites are located on
1
.r f�
i
inland stream terraces and consist of remnant hunting camps or stone-tool workshops(Daugherty and Kirk
2010).Little is known about the subsistence economy or settlement patterns of this period;however,it is
generally believed that these were broad-spectrum foragers who occupied small foraging camps.During the
middle and late Holocene,between 5000 and 2500 B.P.,populations increased,and more-complex settlement-
subsistence patterns developed.The resource base diversified,showing greater utilization of locally
available resources,such as salmon,land mammals,roots,and berries.The changing technology and site
location suggest increased sedentism and specialization(Ames and Maschner 1999;Samuels 1993).A full-
scale marine-and riverine-oriented culture,involving riverine fishing and intensive seasonal hunting and
gathering,developed between 2500 and 250 B.P.
The current project APE is within the traditional lands of the Squaxin(Ruby and Brown 1986;Suttles
and Lane 1990).Similar to other tribes'patterns throughout western Washington,the Squaxin practiced a
seasonal round,hunting for and gathering resources as they became available throughout the year.People
lived in permanent winter villages that were usually located on the banks of large waterways or above the
confluence of streams(Hollenbeck 1987;Smith 1940).
The fast explorations by Euroamericans into western Washington occurred with the arrival of Robert
Gray—the first American to explore the coastline of Washington State,in 1788 and 1789—Captain George
Vancouver and the British Royal Army in 1792,and the Wilkes party and the United States Exploring
Expedition in 1841.Wilkes named Case Inlet after Lieutenant Augustus L.Case,one of the expedition
officers.
The first Euroamerican fur traders settled in Mason County in the 1830s,near the town of Union,
Washington.The county was settled 10 years later.The Northern Pacific Railroad created another wave of
settlers in the 1930s,when it was extended to Shelton.The fast settlers formed the community of Allyn,the
largest town on North Bay and less than a mile from the project area on the west side of the Bay,when
Sherwood's mill was opened(Flenniken and Trautman 2002;Long 2010).In 1889,the Eberhart and
Wickersham families platted the town,named for Judge Frank Allyn of Tacoma.By 1890,Allyn had a post
office,school,newspaper,sawmill,hotel,and wharf.Oyster collecting and logging played a major role in
building the economy of the area(Davis 1995;Trost and Kaschko 2011).The commercial oyster industry in
the region dates back to 1859(Deegan 1971;Trost and Kaschko 2011)but did not grow in size until the
1890s.The small Olympia oysters were harvested,but by 1887,many beds around the sound had been
depleted,and oyster reseeding became necessary.The Olympia oyster was depleted to near extinction and
replaced commercially by the larger,imported Japanese Pacific oyster in 1937(Nelson 1990).The largest
oyster grower in the area was W.W.Waldrip,in the late 1890s and early 1900s.
Records Search Results
A records search covering the area within 1 mile of the project APE was conducted using the Washington
Information System for Architectural and Archaeological Records Data(WISAARD),the online database of
DAHP.Within 1 mile of the project area are eight previously documented archaeological sites(Table 1;see
Figure 1)and five previously conducted projects(Table 2;see Figure 1).There are no NRHP-eligible sites
within 1 mile of the project APE and no Historic Inventory Properties—properties older than 50 years listed
on the state database—within'/a mile of the project APE.
To the west,Flenniken and Trautman(2002)conducted archaeological investigations for the Port of
Allyn Boat Ramp Renovation Project.During the course of their work,they identified two archaeological
sites less than 1 mile west of the project area on the other side of the Bay:a prehistoric lithic-scatter site
(45MS 142)and a Native American petroglyph site(45MS 104).Nelson(1994)conducted a survey for a
sewer-system project along most of North Bay;the two sites identified,45MS9 and 45MS 10,are more than
1 mile from the current project area.A cultural resources assessment also was conducted for the North Bay—
Case Inlet Bulkhead Removal and Wetland Restoration project,during which Site 45MS207,a historic
debris scatter,was identified(Van Galder and Huber 2012).Five known archaeological sites have been
3
Table 1. Known Archaeological Sites Located within 1 Mile of the Project APE
Site No. Description References
45MSO4 prehistoric shell midden Avey et al.2001a,Winterhouse 1948a
45MS05 prehistoric shell midden with lithic materials,fire-affected rock and bone Avey et al.2001b,Winterhouse 1948b
45MS49 prehistoric shell midden with lithic materials Avey et al.2001c
45MS 103 prehistoric pecked petroglyphs on a boulder Leen 1990a
45MS 104 pecked petroglyphs on granite boulder Leen 1990b
45MS 107 prehistoric lithic scatter with fire-affected rock Wessen 1993
45MS142 prehistoric lithic scatter Flenniken 1978
45MS207 historic debris scatter Van Calder and Huber 2012
Table 2. Previous Projects Completed within 1 Mile of the Project APE
DAHP No. Project Description Associated Sites Reference
1343394 Archaeological Investigation of Port of Allyn Boat Ramp 45MS 104 Flenniken and Trautman 2002
Renovation Project
1334133' Cultural Resource Investigations for the Proposed North 45MS9b,45MS 10' Nelson 1994
Bay—Case Inlet Sewer System
1344794 Archaeological Site Survey Activities in the TPU none Wessen 1993
Transmission Line Corridor Potlatch and Tacoma
1351955 Cultural Resources Review for the WA 4 Allyn-Alt.#2 none Stipe 2008
Cellular Tower
1683084 Cultural Resources Assessment for the North Bay—Case 45MS207 Van Galder and Huber 2012
Inlet Bulkhead Removal and Wetland Restoration Project
'Project encompasses all of North Bay,not mapped.
bSites farther than I mile of the project APE.
documented within I mile of the project area in addition to the three mentioned above:45MS04,45MS05,
45MS49,45MS 103 and 45MS 107.These are all prehistoric sites located along the shoreline of the North
Bay of Case Inlet(see Figure 1 and Table 1).
Field Methods and Results
On January 31,2013,SRI Archaeologist Sarah Van Galder excavated five STPs and conducted pedestrian
survey within the North Bay Access project area(Figure 2).The pedestrian survey was confined to areas with
ground visibility,including areas around the gravel parking lot in the southern portion of the project area;
molehills,which were abundant across much of the northern project area;and some exposed ground in
wooded areas.As a result of survey findings,an additional five STPs were excavated on February 21,2013,
to determine the boundaries of an identified shell midden site,discussed further below.The STPs were
excavated to depths between 42 and 74 cm and were approximately 40 cm in diameter.Three STPs were
further excavated with a 4-inch auger to depths between 100 and 130 cm below surface(Table 3).All
excavated sediments were screened through '/4-inch hard mesh cloth.
4
� A
STP 9
Site 40IV1
STP 6
STP TP 3
TP 10
TP 7
STP 2
STP 6
TP 4
7
STP 5
0 5 10 15 20 meters
49 Positive shovel probe
Shovel test probe
Q Archaeological site
�] Project boundary
Scale 1:550
Universal Transverse Mercator coordviate system and gnd
Prolection:Transverse Mercator ,
Datum:North American 1993.Zone 1 ON
Ellipsoid:Geodetic Reference System 19W
Unit meter �T
Base data:2013 Bing aerial photo mosaic 1 r
Statistical Research.Inc..Febnjary 2013 c�d
Figure 2. Project area map showing the locations of shovel test probes(STPs)and Site 45MS210.
5
y �
Table 3.Shovel-Probe Stratigraphy
Probe No. Depth(cmbs) Stratum Stratigraphy
1' 44 In 0-30 cm: IOYR2/1(black),sand,rounded gravels<10 percent,sparse clam shell
fragments,roots throughout,larger root at bottom of stratum
II 30- 4: IOYR5/2(grayish brown)sand,gravels 10 percent,rounded cobbles 1 percent,
large root from bottom of Stratum I which extends through Stratum II
2 62 I 0-34: IOYR 2/2(very dark brown),sandy loam,no shell
II 34-62cm: 10YR4/2(dark grayish brown),sand,rounded cobbles(fist sized), 10 percent,
3 42 I 0-36 cm: IOYR3/1 (very dark gray),sandy loam,rounded cobbles(fist sized),which
increase near bottom of stratum,no shell
II 36-42 cm: IOYR4/4(dark yellowish brown),sand,cobbles(10-15 percent)increase
deeper
4 74 I 0-45 cm: IOYR3/1(very dark grayish brown),sandy loam,rounded cobbles(5-10 per-
cent),very few small rounded cobbles,no shell
II 45-74 cm: IOYR4/4(dark yellowish brown),sand,rounded gravels(10 percent),rounded
cobbles increase with depth,small roots
5 28 I 0-28 cm: IOYR3/I (very dark grayish brown),sand,filled up with water immediately,
1 piece of large concrete between 15-28,additional piece of concrete at bottom
6 61 I 0-47 cm: 10YR3/I(very dark gray),sandy loam,rounded gravels and cobbles up to fist
size(5 percent),no shell
II 47-61 cm: 1OYR4/2(dark grayish brown),sand,cobbles up to fist size(5 percent)
7- 42 I° 0-30 cm: IOYR2/1 (black),silty sand,rounded gravels<10 percent,sparse clam shell
fragments,roots throughout,larger roots near bottom of stratum,small red plastic tube
near surface
II 30-42 cm: I OYR4/4(dark yellowish brown),sand,rounded cobbles and gravels up to
10 percent),no shell,many roots near bottom
8 67 I 0-42: IOYR 2/2(very dark brown),silty sand,I shell fragment
II 42-67: 1 OYR4/3(dark yellowish brown),sand,rounded gravels 2 percent,2 rounded
cobbles,stratum continues in auger probe to 80 cm
III 80-120 cm: IOYR5/2(grayish brown),sand,rounded cobbles at bottom`
9 52 I 0-32 cm: IOYR 3/1 (very dark gray),silty sand, 10 percent rounded gravels
II 32-52 cm: IOYR 4/3(dark yellowish brown),sand,stratum continues in auger probe to
100 cm
III 100-130 cm: I OYR5/2(grayish brown),sand,15 percent rounded gravels,water at
bottom`
t0 42 I 0-38 cm: IOYR 3/1 (very dark gray),silty sand, 10 percent rounded gravels
II 38-42 cm: I OYR 4/3(dark yellowish brown,sand, 15 percent rounded gravels
100-120 cm: IOYR5/2(grayish brown),sand,15 percent rounded gravels`
"Probe with site deposits.
'Cultural stratum.
`Excavated into stratum with an auger.
6
y y'
Figure 3.Overview of the southern portion of the project area,view to the south.
Because most of the southern portion of the project area consisted of the gravel driveway,parking lot,
and concrete slab(Figure 3),only one STP was excavated there.This area was also disturbed by highway
construction,and there was standing water on the lawn between the gravel parking lot and highway.The
STP excavated in this portion of the project area extended to 28 cm below the surface—pieces of concrete
and standing water prohibited further excavations.Four STPs were excavated in the northern portion during
the initial survey in the lawn and in wooded areas,as minimal disturbance has occurred in this area
(Figure 4). One site,designated 45MS210,was identified during the survey.No other cultural materials
were identified during the survey.
Site Description
Site 45MS210 was identified in the northern portion of the project area and consists of a small shell midden
consisting of black,organic-rich sediments and containing sparse clam-shell fragments(Figure 5).The
midden is visible eroding form the shoreline bank,in molehills,and in two STPs(1 and 7)in the northwest
portion of the project area(Figures 6 and 7).The site was first identified in the shoreline bank and molehills.
Site deposits were identified within one shovel probe excavated during the initial survey.An additional five
probes were excavated to determine the extent of the site.The midden was found in one additional STP.
This work determined that the site area is relatively small—about 88 mZ and 4 m wide by 12 in long and
confined to a easily avoided portion of the project APE.Shovel-text excavations indicate that cultural
deposits extend from the ground surface to 40 cm below surface. Site deposits are shallower in STP 7
compared with STP 1,which is slightly further from the shoreline.No artifacts other than shell were
identified during shovel probe excavations or in the bank or molehills.The inventory form for Site
45MS210 is provided in Appendix A.
7
r . i
1 '
Figure 4. Overview of the northern portion of the project area,view to the
southeast.
JUT1� R
y »,
�,�{� •tom' s�
t
♦ �` Ate: _�R'��:"s�Y��.. -
fi y
Figure 5.Overview of Site 45MS210 location, view to the north.
8
Figure 6. Black site deposit shown within STP 1.
irk
��y w
AW
o/K,•�cq
CIA
5 sue.. f' ��'��'. •�`�. � J!t
r•
Ir
I1 • j
q•-r �v rr. r -
�l
a.
r
Figure 7. Black deposit with shell fragments shown eroding
in bank near tree roots.
9
NRHP Eligibility Discussion and Recommendations
The significance of archaeological sites and historical-period buildings and structures are assessed according
to National Register of Historic Places(NRHP)guidelines and eligibility criteria as defined in 36 CFR 60,
which states that sites may be considered eligible for listing under the following guidelines:
The quality of significance in American history,architecture,archaeology,engineering,and
culture is present in districts,sites,buildings,structures and objects that possess integrity of
location design,setting,materials,workmanship,feeling and association,and
(a) that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad
patterns of our history;or
(b) that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past;or
(c) that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type,period,or method of construction,
or that represent the work of a master,or that possess high artistic values,or that
represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack
individual distinction;or
(d) that have yielded,or may be likely to yield,information important in prehistory or
history.
Below,we evaluate Site 45MS210.
Site 45MS210
Site 45MS210 consists of black,organic-rich sediments containing sparse clam-shell fragments.This
cultural deposit was identified eroding from shoreline bank deposits, within molehills,and in two STPs;
however,no artifacts other than shell fragments were identified.The site appears to retain moderate
integrity.Although site deposits may be seen eroding out of the bank,intact deposits were identified in the
STPs.However,it is unknown how much of the site has eroded from the bank.
This shell-midden site is not recommended for listing in the NRHP under Criterion a,b or c.The site is
not known to be associated with events(Criterion a)or people(Criterion b)significant in our past.The site
does not embody distinctive characteristics of a type or period and therefore is not significant under
Criterion c.The small size of the site,lack of artifacts,and the scarcity of shell remains(ecofacts)within the
black deposits suggest that the site is unlikely to contribute significant knowledge that is important to
prehistory or history and may,pending further investigation,be eligible for listing in the NRHP under
Criterion d.
Summary and Recommendations
The southern portion of the project area has been extensively disturbed by the construction of the existing
driveway,parking lot,and concrete block,as well as highway construction.The existence of this disturbance
suggests that the proposed work will not impact any intact cultural materials.The northern portion of the
project area is largely undisturbed.One site,45MS210,was identified in this location.We recommend that
Site 45MS210 be avoided during construction activities.Clearance to proceed for the remainder of the project
area is recommended,with the following stipulation.SRI,with approval from DAHP,performed additional
shovel testing to clarify the boundaries of the cultural deposit within the project APE in order to avoid impacts
to the archaeological site.The GPS coordinates for the shovel test probes that establish the site's boundaries
10
are presented in the table below(Table 4).Based on the results of the additional shovel-probe testing,we
confirmed the site's boundaries,and we recommend that a 5-m exclusion buffer be maintained within which
there should be no construction or alterations that could adversely affect the site.Consultation with WDFW
and the Squaxin Tribe have resulted in concurrence with this avoidance strategy by both parties.
In order to protect the site,SRI,after discussion with John Hansen at WDFW,recommends that a 4 foot
chainlink fence be installed at the edge of the parking lot at the edge of the 5 meter buffer zone.To protect
shoreward side of the site,we recommend installation of a fence along the top of bank at the beach.In this
area,a 4-strand barbed wire fence and metal fence posts would be placed within the outer margin of the 5-m
buffer,but still outside the site area.The metal posts can be placed 12 feet apart.The fence posts used will
be standard steel T-posts that can be driven into the ground by hand,and do not require digging
emplacement holes. Should additional cultural deposits,artifacts,or human remains be encountered in the
course of construction,work in the vicinity should be halted immediately and the DAHP should be contacted
as soon as feasible.
Table 4. UTM Coordinates for the Boundary of
Site 45MS210 as Shown in Figure 2
Easting Northing
514155.3 5248616.1
514150.5 5248601.1
514150.4 5248609.0
514156.5 5248607.4
514152.3 5248614.4
514149.1 5248604.2
514157.9 5248612.7
514154.6 5248603.3
11
References Cited
Ames, Kenneth M.,and H.D.G.Maschner
1999 Peoples of the Northwest Coast, Their Archaeology and Prehistory.Thames and Hudson,
London.
Avey,Mike,Jennifer Aranda,and Cheryl Iodice
2001a Site 45MS4 Inventory Form.On file,Washington Information System for Architectural and
Archaeological Records Data,Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation,Olympia,
Washington.Available online,https://fortress.wa.gov/dahp/wisaard,accessed January 2013.
2001b Site 45MS5 Inventory Form.On file,Washington Information System for Architectural and
Archaeological Records Data,Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation,Olympia,
Washington.Available online,https://fortress.wa.gov/dahp/wisaard,accessed January 2013.
2001c Site 45MS49 Inventory Form.On file,Washington Information System for Architectural and
Archaeological Records Data,Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation,Olympia,
Washington.Available online,https://fortress.wa.gov/dahp/wisaard,accessed January 2013.
Daugherty,Richard D.,and Ruth Kirk
2010 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of Charles Sparkman Property, Enumclaw, King
County, Washington.Published by authors,Lacey,Washington.
Deegan,Harty W.
1971 History of Mason County, Washington.Revised ed.Published by the author.
Davis,Irene B.
1995 Allyn History.On file,Mason County Historical Society,Shelton,Washington.
Easterbrook,Don J.
2003 Cordilleran Ice Sheet Glaciation of the Puget Lowland and Columbia Plateau and Alpine
Glaciation of the North Cascade Range,Washington.In Western Cordillera and Adjacent
Areas,edited by T.W. Swanson,pp. 137-157.Geological Society of America,Boulder,
Colorado.
Flenniken,Jeffrey J.
1978 Site 45MS 142 Inventory Form.On file,Washington Information System for Architectural and
Archaeological Records Data,Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation,Olympia,
Washington.Available online,https://fortress.wa.gov/dahp/wisaard,accessed January 2013.
Flenniken,Jeffrey J. and Pam Trautman
2002 Archaeological Investigation of Port of Allyn Boat Ramp Renovation Project Area.Lithic
Analysts, Pullman, Washington.Prepared for Kirkbride Group,Lacey,Washington.
Foster,Rhonda
2013 Personal communication,via e-mail,March 7,2013.
Franklin,Jerry F.,and C.T.Dymess
1973 Natural Vegetation of Oregon and Washington. General Technical Report PNW-8.U.S.
Department of Agriculture,Forest Service.
12
Hollenbeck.Jan L
1987 A Cultural Resource Overview Prehistory, Ethnography, and History,Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie
National Forest.U.S.Department of Agriculture,Forest Service,Pacific Northwest Region,
Seattle,Washington.
Kruckeberge,Arthur R.
1991 The Natural History of Puget Sound.University of Washington Press.Seattle.
Leen,D.
1990a Site 45MS 103 Inventory Form.On file,Washington Information System for Architectural and
Archaeological Records Data,Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation,Olympia,
Washington.Available online,https://fortress.wa.gov/dahp/wisaard,accessed January 2013.
1990b Site 45MS 104 On file,Washington Information System for Architectural and Archaeological
Records Data,Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation,Olympia,Washington.
Available online,https://fortress.wa.gov/dahp/wisaard,accessed January 2013.
Long,Priscilla
2010 Voters Approve Formation of Port of Allyn in Mason County on September 10, 1921.
HistoryLink.org Online Encyclopedia of Washington State History.Electronic document
http://www.historylink.org/,accessed on October 2,2012.
Nelson,Margaret A.
1994 Cultural Resource Investigations for the Proposed North Bay—Case Inlet Sewer System,Mason
County, Washington.Prepared by Northwest Archaeological Associates,Seattle,Washington.
Report prepared for Gray and Osborne,Inc.
Nelson,Humphrey
1990 The Little Man and The Little Oyster.Ye Galleon Press,Fairfield,Washington.
Porter,Stephen C.and Terry W.Swanson
1998 Radiocarbon Age Constraints on Rates of Advance and Retreat of the Puget Lobe of the
Cordilleran Ice Sheet during the last Glaciation.Quaternary Research 50:205-213.
Ruby,Robert H.,and John A.Brown
1986 A Guide to the Indian Tribes of the Pacific Northwest.University of Oklahoma Press,Norman,
Oklahoma.
Samuels,Stephan R.(editor)
1993 The Archaeology of Chester Morse Lake:Long-term Human Utilization of the Foothills in the
Washington Foothills in the Washington Cascade Range. Project Report 21.Center for
Northwest Anthropology,Department of Anthropology,Washington State University,Pullman.
Smith,Marian W.
1940 The Puyallup-Nisqually.Contributions to Anthropology, vol. 32.Columbia University Press,
New York.
Stipe,Frank
2008 Cultural Resources Review for the WA 4 Allyn-Alt. #2 Cellular Tower. Prepared for Verizon
Wireless,Washington.TetraTech,Bothell,Washington.
13
Suttles,Wayne,and Barbara Lane
1990 Southern Coast Salish.In Northwest Coast,edited by Wayne Suttles,pp.485-502.Handbook
of North American Indians,vol.7.,William C.Sturtevant,general editor.Smithsonian
Institution Press,Washington,D.C.
Trost,Teresa,and Michael Kaschko
2011 Archaeological Survey for the Proposed North Bay Trail Coulter Creek Property Acquisition,
Mason County, Washington.Prepared for Mason County Parks and Trails,Shelton,
Washington.Cascadia Archaeology,Seattle.
Van Galder,Sarah J.and Edgar K.Huber
2012 Cultural Resources Assessment for the North Bay-Case Inlet Bulkhead Removal and Wetland
Restoration Project,Mason County, Washington.Prepared for South Puget Sound Salmon
Enhancement Group,Lacey,Washington.Statistical Research,Lacey,Washington.
Wessen,Gary
1993 Archaeological Site Survey Activities in the TPU Transmission line Corridor Potlatch and
Tacoma, Washington.Prepared for Tacoma Public Utilities,Tacoma,Washington.Wessen&
Associates,Seattle.
Winterhouse,John
1948a Site 45MS4 Site Inventory Form.On file,Washington Information System for Architectural
and Archaeological Records Data,Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation,
Olympia,Washington.Available online,https://fortress.wa.gov/dahp/wisaard,accessed May-
July 2012.
1948b Site 45MS5 Site Inventory Form.On file,Washington Information System for Architectural
and Archaeological Records Data,Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation,
Olympia,Washington.Available online,https://fortress.wa.gov/dahp/wisaard,accessed May-
July 2012.
14
r
APPENDIX A
Site Record
15
STATE OF WASHINGTON
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM
Smithsonian Number:
*County: Mason
*Date: 3/8/2013 *Compiler: Sarah J. Van Galder
Location Information Restrictions (Yes/No/Unknown): Human Remains? ❑
SITE DESIGNATION
Site Name:
Field/ Temporary ID: 45MS210
*Site Type(s) (Refer to the DAHP Survey and Inventory Guidelines Page 19): Pre contact shell
midden
SITE LOCATION
*USGS Quad Map Name(s): Belfair, WA 1994
*Legal Description: T 22 N R 1 E/W: W Section(s): 16
Quarter Section(s):
UTM: Zone Easting Northing
Latitude: Longitude: Elevation (ft/m): 10 feet
Other Maps: Type:
i
Scale: Source:
Drainage, Major: Drainage, Minor: River Mile:
Aspect: Slope:
*Location Description (General to Specific): The site is located along the eastern shore of North
Bay of Case Inlet north of Victor, WA and East of State Route 302 at the powerline crossing.
*Directions (For Relocation Purposes): Travel north on State Route 302 from Victor, Washington
approximately 3000 feet. Turn right into WDFW parking lot. The site is north of this parking lot
along the shoreline in a grassy area (Figure 1).
*Mandatory Information for Official Smithsonian Number designation. Revised 1012010
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM Smithsonian Number:
Page 2 of 9
SITE DESCRIPTION
*Narrative Description:
Site 45MS210 consists of a small shell midden of black sediments and sparse clam shell fragments (Figures 2 and
3). The midden is visible eroding form the shoreline bank, in mole hills,and in two STPs(1 and 7)in the northwest
portion of the project area(Figures 4 and 5). The site was first identified in the shoreline bank and molehills. Site
deposits were identified within two shovel probes. The site extends 16 by 6 meters and is 88 mZ in size. Shovel probe
excavations indicate that cultural deposit extends from the ground surface to 40 cm below surface. Site deposits are
shallower in STP 7 compared with STP 1, which is slightly further from the shoreline.No artifacts were identified during
shovel probe excavations, or in the bank or mole hills.
*Site Dimensions:
*Length: 16 m *Direction: N-S *Width: 6 m *Direction: E-W
*Method of Horizontal Measurement: GPS/Measuring tape
*Depth: 40 cm * Method of Vertical Measurement: Measuring tape
*Vegetation (On Site): lawn grass
Local: Wetland vegetation Regional: Western hemlock vegetation zone
Landforms (On Site): Shoreline of the North Bay of Case Inlet
Local: Case Inlet
Water Resources (Type): North Bay of Case Inlet Distance: 1 m Permanence: Yes
CULTURAL MATERIALS AND FEATURES
*Narrative Description: No artifacts or features were identified
*Method of Collection: N/A
*Location of Artifacts (Temporary/Permanent): N/A
SITE AGE
*Component: Pre Contact *Dates: *Dating Method:
Phase: Basis for Phase Designation: Site type
*Mandatory Information for Official Smithsonian Number designation. Revised 6/2010
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM Smithsonian Number:
Page 3 of 9
SITE RECORDERS
Observed by: Sarah J. Van Galder
Address: 1110 Golf Club Road SE STE 102 Lacey, WA 98503
Date Recorded: 1/31/2013
*Recorded by (Professional Archaeologist): Sarah J. Van Galder
*Organization: Statistical Research, Inc.
*Organization Phone Number: (360) 918-8621
Organization Address: Same as above *Organization E-mail: sarahjvg@gmail.com
Date Revisited: 2/21/2013 Revisited By: Sarah J. Van Galder
"Previous Archaeological Work (Done at Site): None that we know of
LAND OWNERSHIP
Owner: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Address: State Route 302 at powerline crossing Victor, WA
Tax Lot/ Parcel No:
RESEARCH REFERENCES
Items/Documents Used In Research (Specify):
*Mandatory Information for Official Smithsonian Number designation. Revised 612010
V w LWY11 MIL-1 0 Emu I K WA.4 K SILVA Kin SO ELWISUI]=
MA
p
,4
WE
Jwl
055
4 4r
!4. r
1 0 500 1,000 meters
Project location
Scale 1:24,000
Universal Transverse Mercator coordinate system and grid
Pixiledion:Transverse Mercator
Datum:North American 1983,Zone 1ON
Ellipsoid:Geodetic Reference System 1980
nd:met r
Base dat ,1994 Beltair and 1994 Vaughn,Washington
7-5-m de USGS topographic,quadrangle Cd
atist"I Research I Inc..Mamh 2013
�,,. Aa1MEMOf STATE OF WASHINGTON
AKNAO�." ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM
/EfOR,C f+eE$E4VAt1ON
SKETCH MAP
*Sketch Map Description:
'Legend: Known Boundary Symbology:
Possible Boundary Symbology:
Other Symbols(Other Than USGS):
'Scale:
'North Arrow (Magnetic/True North):
� DTP
-T' 7
o s iowwws
Pbsfte&Nose"M Paw
p Atcn..dWWd ad.
sea.,:300
tA.wntl haro.ww bwWw cooede,Yft syw—and 9W
Ropat Tt.eorsns Macaltx
Oahrn:NMh A—IN3.Zoos ION
SVV—
`A"`rrtd
B.-data 2013 Siq a.""o enoa.c N
StmMral Research.Inc..F 2013 o,a
Figure 2.Site sketch map.
*Mandatory Information for Official Smithsonian Number designation. Revised 1012010
w
AaMENof STATE OF WASHINGTON
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM
IIRTomC v4ESERv�irOt+
PHOTOGRAPH(S)
•? �1-` -_yam �
4. t-
�i?
Figure 3.Overview photograph of Site 45MS210 location,view north.
*Mandatory Information for Official Smithsonian Number designation. Revised 1012010
l
STATE OF WASHINGTON
N.CNwEOtOGr6 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM
N61CRiC RRESERv�Ib+
PHOTOGRAPH(S)
� y
l I�Y�
1,'
-', gaffN;+::i��.
s
Figure 4.Black site deposit shown within STP 1.
I
*Mandatory Information for Official Smithsonian Number designation. Revised 10/2010
,�.
R ��� •~� S��.i•� ` a�iM-.. ems• "`•� -`��+%
*MandatoryI • for •nian Number designation. • 1012010
STATE OF WASHINGTON
1
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE INVENTORY FORM
CONTINUATION/ ADDENDUM SHEET
Label all additional pages by corresponding headings.
(e.g. Site Description, Site History, Research References)
II
I
I
*Mandatory Information for Official Smithsonian Number designation. Revised 1012010
67K - �D
MASON COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Planning Division
P.O. Box 279, Shelton,WA 98584
(360)427-9670
SHR2013-00004 NOTICE OF SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT.
Notice is hereby given that Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife who are the owners of the
described property below,has filed an application for a Shoreline Substantial Development
Permit and Variance for the development of:
Proposed improvements to public access site along North Bay: 1)ADA access
restrooms with available well water and sewer connection; 2) expand parking
area from 24 to 45 spaces; 3) native plant restoration to replace lawn and around
parking area; and 4) new wetland and area public information signage.
Variance to 75-foot shoreline setback standard requested to allow location of
parking area expansion to 68 feet from ordinary high water mark.
Parcel Number: 12216-75-90041, 12216-75-90042, and 12216-75-90043.
Site Address: 3270 E State Route 302, Belfair WA.
Location of Project: Along North Bay/Case Inlet 3.5 miles east of Allyn WA.; within the
southwest 1/4 of Section 16, Township 22 N., Range 1 W. in Mason County Washington.
Said proposed development is subject to shoreline management permit review M.C.C. 17.50 and
P Po P J g P ( )
associated Mason County Development Regulations standards. Any Person desiring to express their
view or to be notified of the action taken on the application should notify in writing of their interest to:
MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PO BOX 279
SHELTON,WA 98584
The comment period is at least 30 days from the final date of publication given pursuant to WAC 173-
14-020. The final date of publication,posting or mailing of notice is April 18, 2013.
The proposal was subject to environmental review by WA. Dept. of Fish& Wildlife; a Determination of
Non-significance was issued on January 22, 2013 under WAC 197-11-340.
Written comments will be accepted up to the date of the Hearings Examiner public hearing Tuesday
May 28, 2013; 1:00 PM. Contact this office at(360)427-9670, ext. 365 for further information.
/y(�`5o� Co P✓Id� orw lI ti1U. Fib , 5(�eI+M
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE
STATE OF.WASHINGTON )
ss.
COUNTY OF MASON )
posted 5 co ies of
do hereby certify that I p p
the attached
fie
on 204day of 20 t3 in 3 public places.as follows:
one at Cl �i 5 6
one at '�—
one at
In witness whereof, the party has signed this Affidavit of posting Notice this days
of 0�
By.
Address: 6 6 S vs �.
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
ss
COUNTY OF MASON )
Subscribed and sworn to me this &44- day of 20/3
Notary Public
State of Washingtoa
DEBBERA COKER 6L�Public for the State of Washington
tAy COMMISSION EXPIRES Residing at �so�
11/15/2014 g
Commission Expires
6A!b&*- ( z-
Allito Properties, LLC
P.O Box 26116
Federal Way, WA 98093
Phone: 253-927-6116
i
Fax: 253-927-4652
i
i
May 101h 2013
RE: Objection to increase parking and upgrading bath facilities
J P g Pg g
To Whom It May Concern;
We have been long time owners of property at 3160 East SR302 near the relatively new public
access facility. We object to any further improvements that will result in more activity,vandalism,
trespass, and illegal activity in the area. We try to be good stewards of the beach and our land. We no
longer can enjoy the quiet enjoyment. We have been threatened, mocked, intimidated, by many of the
throngs of people that are now on the beach.
Our property values have plummeted as anyone can see by the waterfront homes near the
access that have been for sale for so many years and if they sell it is for a discount of 30%+- below
similar houses away from the access.
On nice days with low tide we can't leave our property because of the illegal parking and we
spend time picking up all the litter that was left in front of our house as well as people crapping on our
property.
For this reason we would suggest at a minimum the access site be closed for at least three
(3)days a week, one being a weekend as we all can see the damage to the beach through overharvest as
the beach is now closed.
Sincerely,
Xvid'
owitz
RECEIVED
MAY 13 2013
�"^5 `-Q: CEDAR ST.,
r` +
r �*
• r' ' r4ll" �i�f
•
w• , r f t t.. 1
w
�� ,� ,.i, t'V,��r .ir 4 �k y�, ".fa s� 'yr�'lr, •. �- '^fir^, -...
.v` �,�!'Lr4+Cfjyf'.�' yh. � �'j ,{- r'� r1��Y�}•��r� \ '� i ^'f .� ''I+� �� .�1"f'°.d r.. - -
Zf`i'�1rtu'Y,rij4+�{� ; �r��l. r ,�lifi �r H x?``�'�•�jY .1 .y.�.�j 7..✓ ',.. • S
1t �
�,_jy� •,��? t .N4 - f lrt, a uf,I,ve��Mtl�L � t° ,may �� �+ .._:. -
}
# � d,"'x���'r �+ y;, „e .,Crs,��4r ,..�Y,�^a ��' S• � xiy1 1 k -�.
a _ _ i �' yY�'!�•f� i i F � r
•' .rrt :fK+�,,"s•. �,:� r�,T" j�, T3ili (-yrf;, f
.M •' it
r
MASON COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Planning Division
P.O.Boa 279, Shelton,WA 98584
(360) 427-9670
SHR2013-00004 NOTICE OF SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT.
Notice is hereby given that Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife who are the owners of the
described property below,has filed an application for a Shoreline Substantial Development
Permit and Variance for the development of:
Proposed improvements to public access site along North Bay: 1)ADA access
restrooms with available well water and sewer connection; 2) expand parking
area from 24 to 45 spaces; 3) native plant restoration to replace lawn and around
parking area; and 4) new wetland and area public information signage.
Variance to 75-foot shoreline setback standard requested to allow location of
parking area expansion to 68 feet from ordinary high water mark.
Parcel Number: 12216-75-90041, 12216-75-90042, and 12216-75-90043.
Site Address: 3270 E State Route 302,Belfair WA.
Location of Project: Along North Bay/Case Inlet 3.5 miles east of Allyn WA.; within the
southwest 1/ of Section 16, Township 22 N., Range 1 W. in Mason County Washington.
Said proposed development is subject to shoreline management permit review(M.C.C. 17.50) and
associated Mason County Development Regulations standards. Any person desiring to express their
view or to be notified of the action taken on the application should notify in writing of their interest to:
MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PO BOX 279
SHELTON,WA 98584
The comment period is at least 30 days from the final date of publication given pursuant to WAC 173-
14-020. The final date of publication,posting or mailing of notice is April 18,2013.
The proposal was subject to environmental review by WA. Dept. of Fish&Wildlife;a Determination of
Non-significance was issued on January 22,2013 under WAC 197-11-340.
Written comments will be accepted up to the date of the Hearings Examiner public hearing Tuesday
May 28, 2013; 1:00 PM. Contact this office at(360)427-9670, ext. 365 for further information.
Die 0 & , F�
RECEIVED
Y-- 2 2 M3
426 W1 CEDAR ST.
RESIDENTS CONCERNS REGARDING THE FUTURE ESPANSION OF THE VICTOR
ACCESS:
Per the planning staff on the Feb. 10, 2003
The following were agreed be implemented, but were not done
5) Recreation facilities should make adequate provisions for:
- traffic, both inside and outside facility;
- proper water, solid waste and sewage disposal methods;
- security and fire protection;
- the prevention of overflow and trespass onto adjacent properties;
USE REGULATIONS:
7) Public access points on marine waters must provide parking space appropriate for the
intended use.
12) Recreational facilities shall make adequate provisions for water supply, sewage
disposal and garbage collection.
13) Recreational facilities shall make adequate provisions for such as screening buffer
strips, fences and signs, to prevent overflow and protect the value and enjoyment of
adjacent or nearby properties.
VIII. CONCLUSIONS.
CAPACITY - No depletion of shellfish resources is expected to occur as the result of
the proposed access area based on scientific calculations provided by Alex
Bradbury...Currently less than 20% of the total allowable shellfish sport catch is taken in
North Bay per year. This equates to3 to 6 people per day if averaged annually. However
the majority of the harvesters are expected to visit the s* during several low-tide
weekends in the summer. During these weekends,the parking area will provide the
number of slots necessary to accommodate peak capacity.
.....shellfish depletion as a result of this project would be extremely unlikely.
4) SECURITY AND ENFORCEMENT-
....Property boundary signs...These signs successfully discouraged trespassing onto
private property adjacent to public shellfish areas. Where appropriate no trespassing
signs may be installed to further discourage trespassing onto private_ lands adjacent to
public tidelands.
Case Inlet is a pristine body of water...
CONDITIONS:
-Year round portable toilets are to be installed for the park's opening and must be
replaced within two years by permanent facilities that are connected to the public sewer
system.
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
PUBLIC HEARING- JANUARY 28, 2003
FROM THE PRECEEDING FACTS...
3) ...Adequate provisions shall be made...to prevent overflow and to protect the value
and enjoyment of adjacent or nearby private property owners.
4) ....The purpose of the signs will be to control litter and dumping, trespassing, day-
use only...
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
PUBLIC HEARING-FEBRUARY 11, 2013
FROM THE PROCEEDING FACTS...
1) Adequate provisions for sewage...
- Year round portable toilets are to be installed with the park's opening and must be
replaced within two years by permanent facilities that are connected to the public sewer
system. Restrooms shall be maintained regularly.
4) Should the applicant fail to provide provisions for sewage and garbage collection as
required, for any reason, including lack of funding,the applicant shall immediately close
the gate at the entrance and post appropriate signage to inform the public that the site is
closed.
Many of the private property owners raised concerns (see homeowners and lawyers
letters to the Mason County Commissioners) in the preliminary stages of the initial
improvement. All of the addressed concerns were ignored in the final stages of the
WSDFW fiasco, and have come to fruition.
The BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, The Department of Community Development,
The Planning Committee should not even consider WDFW request for further expansion
in a residential area. In fact, the existing facility should have been closed 8 years ago per
their own agreement to the requirements of Mason County officials.
Considering the number of harvesters on those"busy weekends", the number of portable
toilets do not meet the standards of the W.A.0 and are filled to the brim on Saturday and
are not pumped till mid-week reeking and unsanitary, The"visitors"will then use the
property of the residents to do their business including baby diapers, sanitary product
changes, and the usual urination and defecation. As the"visitors"move further north and
south of the access,they are less inclined to walk the 500 to 1500 feet back to a full
portable toilet leaving the residents to live with the mess and smell after the Visitor"
trespassers leave your property.
The garbage is stacked-up right in front of the"Pack-It-Out" sign 4 to 5 feet high some
times for over a week in the summer heat.
Litter is rampant on and off the site and is left up to the residents to clean up.
The NO PARKING area on the shoulder of the road is violated by hundreds of vehicles,
driveways are blocked,residents are intimidated by threats of violence if they are asked
politely to move and private driveways become accesses to the beach. The"visitors"
help themselves to your deck, your picnic tables, your lawn furniture, in one case your
barbeque, or even walk in your house and use your phone!
Because of the continual over harvest(and shellfish limit violations) this beach was
closed January 1, 2013 through April 1, 2013 to all clams and oysters per WDFW
biologist Alex Bradbury (360) 586-1498 ext. 208, and will close again September 15,
2013. See emergency closures for 2013 WDFW.
This site should be closed permanently, or at a minimum, 1 weekend day and 3 weekdays
so that the residents can use the public beach just as the "visitors" do without being
intimidated, trespassed,threatened and argued with.
Since we the residents pay a VERY large share of the tax burden of the County, we
should expect a measure of privacy, quiet and peace,not"visitors"harvesting shellfish at
3 am or crowds of hundreds or coming onto your property to tear out the Eel Grass.
Additional parking will not fix the problem and will only tend to infringe more on our
rights as citizens and residents of Mason County.
Please vote NO to accepting more of this insanity.
Do not allow this project to proceed since it should be CLOSED now.
Thank you in advance,
James Hymer
3080 E SR 302
Belfair,Wash. 98528
360-277-9463
1 t
� � � lei►. ,c` '� � �i ��� _ �" .
- I: 5" ... , / s►_''}�.+ 'gyp
as 1.
� .. ._ . _ r�...` ''' fzt�;t '.���,,y�� � '� ;� 1 .fit . /4 �r- t,�• ��S> �,d,7, f� CCC,��.> .,
r.
� I• +•step
c
x }�F�, �1 r r •� �+ - �� ;psi •• � t "S �
+
��,
:.. �,
��.
��
,1
-� .,
� ,.
e
. . - N,
{
-_ - � � �f
f �. � �
. e
. ..
e, t'
r��
I L� � ,.A
... _. � �-s . ..
- - --� _;
F � - •'
.� , � �;.��+' ��'. a i
r ' ,��, � - � �,
��� -- ��v
.� - _ __
�� v
�, �'� F
,. � �, � j
• ,�•.
,� °"�
�� -
���
i ""1 fit,�",
,,,�. ,
i
i _
,. �.
- .•-
__
- — _ ---
I _ �
41P A,
i ► r � .
•.C�'.:a11f•�\T�.1
141
yA .'} •a. ;�, .4�.\>.�,�`i�n �:tT ray�nr,�►,.r
44
.� -�-,may t". .� .�°'• t / _
Aw
97
L r
.i
��^* 4a �. - �� ;,•4' Opt4.
>r - _•h yam., � -
lo
\V ''r •��� RM` 3 #►�i �yam',. �' ��, `�iy 1 . - .'^
-
AW
jv
I
�.K.II •y, _
y
e
wdW,
w w"'�r � 1 411•'p:• 1111/,11111117A N' :}' -
onvit alul 1sQW03 sinm unoe.rautr� ;._�J''��i
SH3163AIIVH �y.
f 0If/, NOIIyN1�y1JIV ( i
nba)j
ssed iJNIINUV-f.'► , y"
)3sla
Ti y�
I�
� �11
-
M l
j I w . •C.
00111
, 1y
I
and 19-VWIS
ME
� 3j � 11K� . _ 5 y nJ$ � �d z►L � �-'y16) 71�1! ����-t-'
o
�. .fig�.: ti
tR
��t`.�i'� �.F�� t iti-�'��S„ '�S � ��`�,r•,iS.ti• r"� _
,4��'T �N.y�\-�MYS ;"fit C ti-\qr� ��~• -L?�l^ .YEA�.� � ''i ; �'.t
.y,t,•����i��'''; +� `�,i�li' .��T r ��iYY���.�,S�A��F�K�c�'c' '�"�:�"ar i�t.'•.A° ,% b�' ;. 'y4�;
�� wrv�` � <�w+'\-sN � �`�'}fY•§so il'�''' 'e-i�= � �+ W s•4 , � dl t ,: '+!1
:J - _ t ..-Y••G. T•��� �i �N _ -fin.stir a'x,
- 1 l
�' �' _ �
y l� '1#4' .. �'�r•
� ', ��
4
_ 1L" �L ..` `.�.
_ J/
�- .� `J �
_•_
,..s ..,
,�..-r
l� & �Ij*
i