HomeMy WebLinkAboutSHR2015-00008 Retaining Wall Hearing - SHR Letters / Memos - 10/28/2015 Shoreline Management Act
Permit Data Sheet and Transmittal Letter
From: Mason County Planning To: WA Dept of Ecology
P.O.Bog 279 ATTN: Shoreline Permit Reviewer
Shelton,WA 98584 Southwest Regional Office
P.O.Bog 47775
Olympia,WA 98504
Date of Transmittal: November 17th 2015 Date of Receipt:
Permit Type:
Substantial Development X Conditional Use X Variance_ Revision
Applicant Applicant's Representative
Name: Cheryl Ancich Smith Craig Baldwin,WestSound Engineering
Mailing Address: 10530 W Edgewood Dr. 217 SW Wilkins Dr.
Sun City,AZ 985351 Port Orchard,WA 98366
Phone: 253.318.7488 360.876.3770
Email: chelyl.ancichsmith@gmail.com craig@wsengineering.com
Is the applicant the prOReqy owner? Yes X & No
Location of property: (Section,Township, and Range to the nearest'/4, '/4 Section or latitude and longitude,and
a street address where available)
5722 E State Route 302,Belfair,WA
Section 33,Twp 22N,Range 1 W
Near Mason County's border with Pierce County.
Water Body Name: Puget Sound
Shoreline of Statewide Significance: Yes_ No X
Environment Desi agn tion: Urban Residential
Description of Project: A Shoreline Substantial Development and Shoreline Conditional Use Permit for
construction (after the fact) of a small set stairs leading from the top of the existing bulkhead to the bulkhead
footing.
Final Hearing Examiner Decision Date: November 12th,2015
By: Rebecca Hersha,Planner rebeccahgco.mason.wa.us Phone#: 360-427-9670 ext 287
cc: WA Attorney General-Ecology Division • PO Box 40100•Olympia,WA 98504
I
BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR MASON COUNTY
2
3 RE: Cheryl Ancich-Smith
4 FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS
Shoreline Substantial OF LAW AND FINAL DECISION
5 Development
Permit/Conditional Use Permit
6 (SHR2015-00008
7 INTRODUCTION
8 The applicant has applied for a shoreline substantial development permit and a
9 conditional use permit to construct beach stairs. The request is approved with
conditions.
10
TESTIMONY
11
12 Rebecca Hersha, associate Mason County planner, summarized the proposal. Ms.
Hersha noted that she was withdrawing her recommendation for a condition requiring
13 notice of title for the requirements of the habitat management plan.
14 Craig Baldwin, applicant representative, testified that the stairs would have a minimal
impact on the shoreline. 2/3s of the stairs would often be underwater. There's no
15 alternative access available to the beach. Neighboring property owners are not
16 authorizing beach access across their properties. The stairs are four feet wide, which
is the minimum width for stairs.
17
Glen Pszczola, attorney for the applicant, noted that there is no alternative for the
18 stairs because the bulkhead extends over the entire shore frontage of the property.
Access had been possible in the past through neighboring property, but permission for
19 that has been withdrawn. Mr. Pszczola emphasized that the notice of title condition
20 would impair the ability to sell the property and the applicant is in the process of
selling the property.
21
Kim Schaumburg, author of the applicant's habitat management plan, noted that the
22 stairs would have minimum impact since they're of minimum size and the landing is
23 on existing pavement. Ms. Schaumberg also noted that the need for any future follow
up for the mitigation recommended in the habitat management plan was unlikely.
24
EXHIBITS
25
SSDP and CU P. I Findings. Conclusions and Decision
Exhibits 1-10 identified in the exhibit list on page 8 of the October 10, 2015 Staff
I Report were admitted at the hearing. At the hearing an addendum to the staff report
2 applying additional development standards was admitted as Ex. 11.
3 FINDINGS OF FACT
Procedural:
4
5 1. Applicant. The applicant is Cheryl Ancich-Smith.
6 2. Hearing. The Hearing Examiner conducted a hearing on the subject
application on October 28, 2015 at 1:00 p.m. in the Mason County Commissioners
7 Meeting Room.
8 Substantive:
9 3. Project/Site Description. The applicant requests a shoreline substantial
10 development permit and shoreline conditional use permit for existing stairs that
provide beach access to a single-family residence across the face of a bulkhead. The
11 fair market value of the stairs according to the staff report is $7,0001. The stairs are
approximately four feet wide and land on an existing concrete pad that serves as a
12 concrete apron to the bulkhead. The four-foot width of the stairs extends past the
mean higher high water of the shoreline, which conforms to the waterward side of the
13 bulkhead itself. The bulkhead extends across the entire shoreline frontage of the
14 single-family home and is eight feet in height. The applicant needs the stairs because
neighboring property owners are not authorizing beach access over their parcels.
15
4. Characteristics of the Area. The subject property is located on the
16 shoreline of Case Inlet. The surrounding area is composed of similarly situated
17 single-family waterfront homes, many of which are also protected by bulkheads.
18 5. Adverse Impacts of Proposed Use. There are no significant adverse
impacts associated with the proposal. No impacts to views, public access, water
19 quality, navigation or shoreline habitat are anticipated. Since the stairs are of minimal
size and only protrude four feet from the bulkhead, aesthetic impacts are nominal. As
20
21 The staff report contains conflicting information on the value of the stairs. Page 6
22 of the staff report identifies the value of the stairs as $7,000 and concludes that the
stairs are therefore not shoreline exempt because they exceed the $6,416 exemption
23 level. Page 3 of the staff report, Section VI, concludes that stairs are exempt because
they're below the exemption value level, but the market value of the stairs is not
24 identified. Given that the only fair market value identified in the administrative
record is $7,000 and the fact that stairways are typically not exempt due to value, it is
25 determined that the fair market value of the stairs is $7,000 and that this exceeds the
fair market value exemption of WAC 173-27-040(2)(a).
SSDP and CU p. 2 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
detailed in the habitat management plan, Ex. 10, the proposal will have no effect or
1 "may affect, but not likely to adversely affect" all potentially affected species
2 protected by the endangered species act. The conclusions in the habitat management
plan are largely based upon the fact that the stairs will be integrated into an existing
3 structure with a landing on a concrete apron and that recommended mitigation
measures include the reintroduction of native plant species. The recommended
4 mitigation measures are made conditions of approval of this decision.
5 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
6 Procedural:
7
1. Authority of Hearing Examiner. MCC 15.03.050(10) authorizes the
8 Examiner to review and issue a final decision regarding shoreline substantial
9 development permit and shoreline conditional use requests.
10 Substantive:
11 2• A Shoreline Substantial Development Permit is required for this project
because it exceeds $6,416 in value as outlined in MCC 15.09.055(a)(1). A shoreline
12 conditional use permit is required for the staircase under MCC 17.50.060, Piers and
Docks,No. 21, because the stairway landing is located waterward of the mean higher
13 high water and exceeds $6,416 in value. Under MCC 15.09.055(f)(2)(c), the
14 Examiner must base a decision on a shoreline substantial development permit
application upon the policies and procedures of the Mason County Shoreline Master
15 Program ("SMP") as well as Chapter 90.58 RCW. The generic review criteria for all
Mason County permits reviewed by the Hearing Examiner, MCC 15.09.055(c) also
16 apply. Shoreline conditional use criteria are governed by MCC 17.50.080. All
applicable policies and regulations are quoted below and applied with corresponding
17 conclusions of law.2
18
19 2 The staff report applies all Piers and Docks policies to stairs, even when the policies
only mention piers and docks and not stairs. This is apparently based upon the
20 definition section of the Piers and Docks policy section of the SMP, which includes
stairs in its scope of regulated structures. Staff appears to take the position that since
21 the Piers and Docks policy section is defined to include stairs that therefore any
22 reference to"piers and docks" in the policies themselves must include stairs. There is
some merit to this interpretation, but if references to "piers and docks" in the "Piers
23 and Docks" policies do in fact include stairs, then there would be no need to single
out stairs in some instances. For example, Piers and Docks Policy 2 provides that
24 cooperative use of piers and docks is favored and Policy 6 provides that joint use of
stairs is preferred. If the reference to "piers and docks" in Policy 2 included stairs,
25 there would be no need for Policy 6. Many years ago and many stair applications ago
the examiner adopted the staff position that only the Pier and Dock policies that
SSDP and CU p. 3 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
I MMC 17.50.060 Piers & Docks Regulation No. 22: Stairways shall be located
2 landward of bulkheads except where proven infeasible.
3 3. The entire shoreline frontage of the subject property is a bulkhead.
Placing the stairs landward of the bulkhead would require dismantling a portion of the
4 bulkhead to create an inset for the stairs. This is not considered feasible.
5 Mason County Comprehensive Plan, Chapter IX Piers & Docks Policy No. 6:
6 Joint use Stairways are preferred over individual stairways.
7 4. As noted in the staff report, single-use stairs are appropriate for this case
because adjoining property owners have their own beach access. Neighboring
8 property owners are also not open to joint use of their stairs. Individual stairs are
9 appropriate for this location.
10 RCW 90.58.020: This policy (Shoreline Management Act policy) is designed to
11 insure the development of these shorelines (of the state) in a manner which, while
allowing for limited reduction of rights of the public in the navigable waters, will
12 promote and enhance the public interest. This policy contemplates protecting against
adverse effects to the public health, the land and its vegetation and wildlife, and the
13 waters of the state and their aquatic life, while protecting generally public rights of
14 navigation and corollary rights incidental thereto.
15 5. The proposal will have no impact on navigation and will not create any other
significant adverse impacts as determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, while at the same
16 time enhancing shoreline access for the applicant. For these reasons the proposal is
17 determined to be in the public interest and to otherwise be consistent with the policy
quoted above.
18
RCW 90.58.020(1): Recognize and protect the state-wide interest over local interest.
19
6. The proposal will not create any significant adverse impacts while
20 enhancing shoreline access. For these reasons the state-wide interest is appropriately
21 served as contemplated in the policy quoted above.
22 RCW 90.58.020(2): Preserve the natural character of the shoreline.
23
24 expressly identified stairs applies to stairs. The new staff position on this
interpretation has merit, but there has been no change in circumstances to alter the
25 long standing application of Pier and Dock policies to stairs only when stairs are
expressly identified.
SSDP and CU p. 4 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
7. The stairs are a comparatively minor addition to an existing bulkhead and
1 will have no material impact on the character of the shoreline.
2 RCW 90.58.020(3): Result in long-term over short-term benefit.
3
8. The proposal will provide permanent shoreline access with no
4 corresponding significant adverse impacts and so will result in long-term over short-
term benefit.
5
6 RCW 90.58.020(4): Protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline.
7 9. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal will not create any
significant adverse impacts, which includes impacts to the resources and ecology of
8 the shoreline.
9 RCW 90.58.020(5): Increase public access to publicly owned areas of the
10 shorelines.
11 10. As a private project with no adverse impacts on public access, it would
violate the state's constitution to require the applicant to provide for public access.
12
RCW 90.58.020(6): Increase recreational opportunities for the public in the
13 shoreline.
14
11. As a private project with no adverse impacts on public recreation, it would
15 violate the state's constitution to require the applicant to provide for public recreation.
16 MCC 15.09.055(C): Required Review: The Hearing Examiner shall review
17 proposed development according to the following criteria:
18 1. The development does not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and meets
the requirements and intent of the Mason County Code, especially Title 6, 8, and 16.
19
2. Development does not impact the public health, safety and welfare and is
20 in the public interest.
21 3. Development does not lower the level of service of transportation andlor
22 neighborhood park facilities below the minimum standards established within the
Comprehensive Plan.
23
12. As noted in the Staff Report addendum, Ex. 11, and the above analysis,
24 the project does not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. Title 16 does not apply to
25 the project. SEPA review has already been completed for the project, and a
determination of non-significance has been issued. The conditions of approval
adequately mitigate against any adverse impacts to public health safety and welfare
SSDP and CU p. 5 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
by imposing several measures to ensure that the construction of the stairs does not
1 adversely affect the environment. Since the stairs enhance access to the shoreline with
2 minimal adverse impacts, they are in the public interest. The addition of stairs will
have no impacts on level of service standards. This criterion is met.
3
MCC 17.50.080 Conditional Uses. The purpose of a conditional use permit is to
4 allow greater flexibility in varying the new application of the use regulations of the
master program. Conditional use permits should also be granted in circumstances
5 where denial of the permit would result in a thwarting of the policy enumerated in
6 RCW 90.58. In authorizing a conditional use, special conditions may be attached to
the permit by local government or the department to prevent undesirable effects of the
7 proposed use.
8 Uses which are classified or set forth in the master program as conditional uses may
9 be authorized provided the applicant can demonstrate all of the following:
10 That the proposed use will be consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58 and the
policies of the master program;
11
• That the proposed use will not interfere with the normal public use of the
12 shorelines;
13 . That the proposed use of the site and design of the project will be compatible with
14 other permitted uses within the area;
15 • That the proposed use will cause no unreasonable adverse effects to the shoreline
environment in which it is to be located;
16
•17 That the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect.
18 "'
19 In the granting of all conditional use permits, consideration shall be given to the
cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions in the area. For example, if
20 conditional use permits were granted for other developments in the area where
21 similar circumstances exist, the total of the conditional uses should remain consistent
with the policies of the master program and should not produce substantial adverse
22 effects to the shoreline environment.
23 13. As determined above in Conclusions of Law above, the proposal as
conditioned is consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58 and the policies of the
24 master program. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal will not
25 interfere with the normal public use of the shorelines and will cause no unreasonable
adverse effects to the shoreline environment in which it is to be located. No view of
public or private property owners will be affected by this project.No public access or
SSDP and CU p. 6 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
use will be affected by the project. As a nominal addition to an existing bulkhead on
1 top of a concrete apron, the proposed stairs will blend into the shoreline environment
2 with minimal impact. The public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect.
Given the highly nominal impacts of the proposal coupled with the mitigation
3 imposed from the habitat management plan, the proposal will not create or promote
cumulative impacts for similar projects in the future within the area and would not be
4 inconsistent with the policies of the master program.No substantial adverse effects to
the shoreline environment are anticipated from this proposal individually or similar
5 proposals cumulatively.
6 DECISION
7
The Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and Conditional Use Permit are
8 approved, subject to the following conditions:
9
A. The mitigation detailed in the Habitat Management Plan prepared by
10 BioResources, dated August 2015 shall be completed during the Fall of this year
1 1 (2015).
B. A `Notice of Habitat Management Plan' shall be recorded on the Title prior to
12 issuance of a building permit. In lieu of a recording on title, the applicant may
13 secure a written agreement from the next subsequent purchaser of the property to
comply with the conditions of this decision and to be subject to the County's
14 code enforcement process for failure to comply with the conditions. The
15 applicant shall prepare the agreement and shall acquire approval of the
agreement from Mason County planning staff prior to execution.
16 C. The stairway will be removed if the WA Department of Ecology does not grant
17 final approval of this Conditional Use Permit within two months of approval of
this Conditional Use Permit by the County's Hearing Examiner.
18
19 Dated this 12th day of November,2015.
20 `� ...
1 ftlif A..01brechis
22 Mason County Hearing Examiner
23 Change in Valuation
24 Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes
25 notwithstanding any program of revaluation.
Right of Appeal
SSDP and CU p. 7 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1 This decision may be appealed to the Washington State Shoreline Hearings Board as
2 governed by Chapter 90.58 RCW.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
SSDP and CU P. 8 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER
FOR MASON COUNTY
2
3
i
4 RE: Proposed Beach Access No. SHR2015-00008
Shoreline Substantial Development &
5 Conditional Use Permit DECLARATION OF MAILING
6
I
8 I, Rebecca Hersha, declare and state as follows:
9 On November 17th 2015, 1 deposited in the U.S. Mail, postage properly prepaid, the
10 documents related to the above cited Hearing Examiner Decision and to which this
declaration is attached to:
11
Cheryl Ancich Smith
12 10530 W Edgewood Dr.
Sun City, AZ 985351
13
Craig Baldwin, WestSound Engineering
14 217 SW Wilkins Dr.
Port Orchard, WA 98366
15
16 Glen P. Pszczola
Attorney at Law
17 8903 Key Peninsula Hwy. N.
Lakebay, WA 98349
18
Kim Schaumburg
19 BioResources, LLC
Fisheries biologist
20 10112 Bay View Rd. KPN
Vaughn, WA, 98394
21
1 declare under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington the foregoing
22
information is true and correct.
23 Dated this 17th day of November 2015 at She n, W shington.
24
25 ebecca Hersha, Planner
DECLARATION OF MAILING MASON COUNTY
MASON COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 426 W Cedar.
SHELTON, WA
360-427-9670 TEL.
360-427-8425 FAX
MASON COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Planning Division
426 W Cedar St
Shelton, WA 98584
914 (360)427-9670
SHORELINE PERMIT
Case No.: SHR2015-00008 STATUS: ISSUED
Received: 9/1/2015 Issued: 11/17/2015 Expires: 11/17/2017
Tvr)e of Permit: Conditional Use
Applicant: CHERYLANCICH-SMITH
10530 W EDGEWOOD DR
SUN CITY, AZ 85351
Location of Project: FOLLOW ST RT 3 TO ALLYN, R ON NORTH BAY RD, FOLLOW TO ST
RT 302 TO SITE ADDRESS ON THE RIGHT SIDE
Within CASE INLET and/or its associated wetlands. The projectwill not be
within shorelines of statewide significance.
Shoreline Desiqnation: Urban
Parcel Number: 122335090012
Address: 5722 E STATE ROUTE 302 BELFAIR
Leqal Description: OLYMPIC SHORES LOT B OF SP 1039 PTN TR 2
S 33/93
Project Description: Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and Shoreline Exemption for (ATF) stairs
to the beach (waterward of existing concrete bulkhead and OHW) in Case
Inlet (Puget Sound). Pressure treated wood, 4 feet wide by 8 feet tall.
Concrete landscape blocks lead from the top of the bulkhead footing to the
beach. Mitigation for shoreline impacts include removing invasive species
with hand tools and planting five (5) native trees and ten (10) native shrubs
just landward of the bulkhead, on the west end.
SHR2015-00008 Paae 1 of 2
CONDITIONS:
The Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and Conditional Use Permit are approved, subject to
the following conditions:
A. The mitigation detailed in the Habitat Management Plan prepared by BioResources, dated August
2015 shall be completed during the Fall of this year (2015).
B. A `Notice of Habitat Management Plan' shall be recorded on the Title prior to issuance of a
building permit. In lieu of a recording on title, the applicant may secure a written agreement from the
next subsequent purchaser of the property to comply with the conditions of this decision and to be
subject to the County's code enforcement process for failure to comply with the conditions. The
applicant shall prepare the agreement and shall acquire approval of the agreement from Mason
County planning staff prior to execution.
C. The stairway will be removed if the WA Department of Ecology does not grant final approval of this
Conditional Use Permit within two months of approval of this Conditional Use Permit by the County's
Hearing Examiner.
X
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.
SHR2015-00008 Page 2 of 2
°x �O°kiy MASON COUNTY (360) 427-9670 Shelton ext.352
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (360) 275-4467 Belfair ext. 352
BUILDING• PLANNING• FIRE MARSHAL (360)482-5269 Elma ext. 352
Mason County Bldg. III, 426 West Cedar Street
rasa Shelton, WA 98584 www.co.mason.wa.us
November IT 2015
Notice of Decision - Approval
Case: SHR2015-00008
Project: Residential Beach Access (stairs)
Applicant: Cheryl Ancich-Smith
Location: 5722 E State Route 302, Belfair, WA, 98528.
Notice is hereby given that Cheryl Ancich-Smith, applicant for the above referenced
Shoreline Substantial Development and Conditional Use Permit,has been granted
approval for the project. The Decision of Approval, made by the Hearing Examiner,was
dated November 12, 2015.
The request for the Shoreline Substantial Development and Conditional Use Permit for
beach access (stairs) was approved pursuant to the Mason County Shoreline Master
Program MCC 17.50. A SEPA Determination of Non-Significance was issued on
September 18'h,2015.
If you have any questions or require clarification on this issue please contact Rebecca
Hersha, Planner with the Mason County Department of Community Development at
(360)427-9670, x 287.
This is a final County decision. Appeal may be made to the Shorelines."earings Board
within 21 days of the `date of filing' as defined in RCW 90.58.140. It is the appellant's
responsibility to meet all legal requirements of any appeal process.
The property owner may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes
notwithstanding any program of revaluation.
Time Limit for Action. N/A. This is an `after the fact' permit.
The property owner may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes
notwithstanding any program of revaluation.
SHR2015-00008 Staff Report 10/16/2015
MASON COUNTY
Department of Community Development
Planning Division
BUILDING III * 426 W CEDAR
SHELTON, WASHINGTON 98584
TO: Mason County Hearings Examiner, Phil Olbrechts
FROM: Mason County Department of Community Development
STAFF: Rebecca Hersha-Planner; 360.427.9670 x 287;
rebeccah@co.mason.wa.us
RE: Staff Report for Quasi Judicial Public Hearing
HEARING DATE: October 28th, 2015
STAFF REPORT
I. Application:
A. Application Type/Name. Shoreline Substantial Development& Shoreline Conditional Use
Permit Application(SHR2015-00008).
B. Development Type. Shoreline stairway/beach access for single family residential use.
C. Date of Complete Application. September 1,2015.
D. Property Owner. Cheryl Ancich-Smith.
E. Authorized Re resentative. Craig Baldwin, WestSound Engineering.
pwtrI �o/h�- (�IeA
F. Site Address and Project Location. Case Inlet(Puget Sound), 5722 E State Route 302,
Belfair, WA. Parcel# 12233-50-90012.
II. Introduction:
This report evaluates an application for a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit(Exhibit# 1)under the
Mason County Shoreline Master Program's(MCC 17.50)"Piers and Docks"chapter, for the
approval of an existing shoreline access stairway that is waterward of the Mean Higher High Water
(MHHV)mark.
The property owner, Cheryl Ancich—Smith had the stairs constructed recently to provide access
from the top of the eight foot tall bulkhead down to the beach(Exhibit#2 -site plan) (Exhibit# 3 —
Page 1 of 9
SHR2015-00008 Staff Report 10/16/2015
photo). At that time, a complaint was filed(ENF2015-00077)because permits were not obtained
for the construction. After being apprised of the violation,the property owner promptly submitted
permit applications for the structure.
Staff is recommending that this application be approved.
III. Existing Land Use Evaluations:
A. Characteristics of the area. The location is in Case Inlet of Puget Sound, near Mason
County's border with Pierce County(Exhibit#4). The general area is characterized by Case
Inlet waterfront and single-family residential development(Exhibit# 5). The residential use
appears to be a mix of permanent and vacation homes. Low to medium bank waterfront
residences are immediately east and west of the site,and most are protected by bulkheads.
B. Characteristic of the site. The site consists of a single-family residence. An 8 foot tall
concrete bulkhead was installed prior to 1977(per historic WA Ecology Coastal Atlas photos)
that projects waterward of the adjacent bulkheads approximately 20 feet. There is no
pier/ramp/float on this lot(Exhibit#6).
C. Comprehensive Plan Designation. The Mason County Comprehensive Plan designation for
the site is Rural.
D. Zoning. The parcel is zoned Rural Residential 5 (RR-5).
E. Shoreline Master Program Designation. The Shoreline Master Program environmental
designation for the site is `Urban Residential.'
IV. SEPA and Other Public Notice Compliance:
The proposal required State Environmental Protection Act review(SEP2015-00067). A SEPA
Determination of Non-Significance (Exhibit# 7)was sent to all agencies with potential interest on
September 18th, 2015. The only response received was from Washington Department of Ecology
requesting a site plan showing the MHHW mark(Exhibit# 8). This was provided to them on
October 6,2015.
The Notice of Shoreline Permit SHR2015-00008 (Exhibit#9)was published in the Mason County
Journal for two weeks, starting on October 8th, 2015. The notice was mailed to all neighbors within
300 feet and posted in the County's Building I on October 6th, 2015. Two notices were posted in
front of the subject parcel (along the road) on October 8 h, 2015. No comments have been received
to date.
Page 2 of 9
PSHR2015-00008 Staff Report 10/16/2015
V. Other Permits:
A. County Permits, Forms, and Reports.
In addition to the Shoreline SDP/CUP and the SEPA Checklist,the applicant has submitted a
`Mason Environmental Permit Application' and a `Habitat Management Plan' (Exhibit#10),
which are required per the Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservations Areas chapter of the Mason
County Resource. As required by MCC 8.52.170,the Habitat Management Plan was provided
to the applicable tribe and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (Exhibit#10) for a
28 day comment period.
The proposal also requires a Mason County Building Permit.
B. State and Federal Permits.
The applicant has applied to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife for `Hydraulic
Project Approval,' however WDFW has stated that they will not issue HPA's for existing
structures. The proposal will not require authorization from the Washington Department of
Natural Resources because it is on private tidelands,not on State Owned Aquatic Lands.
Vl. Analysis/Findings:
Because the stairway is relatively small and was situated on an existing bulkhead footing,the
market value qualifies for a Shoreline Exemption per WAC 173-27-040(2)(a). However, since it is
waterward of the MHI-IW,Regulation#21 of the Piers and Docks chapter of Mason County's SMP
requires a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit.
Therefore,the proposal is reviewed per the applicable policies in the Piers and Docks subsection of
the Comprehensive Plan(IX-2)and the applicable regulations in the Piers and Docks chapter(MCC
17.50.060)of the Shoreline Master Program. It is also reviewed per the criteria in the Conditional
Uses chapter(MCC 17.50.080).
A. Piers and Docks POLICIES.
Definition: A structure built over or floating upon the water, used as
a landing place for marine transport or for commercial or recreational
purposes. Structures regulated include piers and docks, floats,
stairways, marine railways, mooring buoys and boat ramps.
1. Piers and docks should be designed and located to minimize obstruction
of views and conflicts with recreational boaters and fishermen.
Staff. The proposed stairway is small, being only 4 feet wide by 14 feet long and 12 feet
tall (including safety railing). The safety railing is the only portion that is above the
elevation of the existing bulkhead and viewable from upland. From the water,the
proposed stairway only obstructs the view of a portion of the concrete bulkhead. It
would have no impact on boaters and fisherman because it projects only 4 feet
waterward of the face of the bulkhead and rests on the bulkhead footing.
Furthermore,the applicant owns the tidelands in front of this property.
Page 3 of 9
SHR2015-00008 Staff Report 10/16/2015
2. Cooperative uses of piers and docks are favored, especially in tidal
waters.
Staff. Not applicable. Joint use of stairways is addressed in (A)(6)below.
3. The type, design and location of docks and piers should be compatible
with the shoreline area where they are located. Consideration should
be given to shoreline characteristics, tidal action, aesthetics,
adjacent land and water uses.
Staff. Given its size and location(resting on the footing of the concrete bulkhead), Staff
feels that the proposed stairway is very compatible with the shoreline area tidal
action, aesthetics, and adjacent uses.
4. Priority should be given to the use of community piers and docks in
all new waterfront subdivisions. In general, encouragement should be
given to the cooperative use of piers and docks.
Staff. The first sentence is `not applicable,' given this is not an application for a
subdivision. Mason County has been applying the second sentence of this policy to
docks, but not to stairways,and given the small scope of the proposed stairway,
this policy appears to be inconsequential.
5. Mooring buoys and floats are preferred over piers and docks.
Staff. Not applicable.
6. Joint use stairways are preferred over individual stairways.
Staff: There are a few obstacles that prevent the applicant from securing a joint use
agreement for the stairs. (1) The neighbor to the west already has stairs to the
beach. (2) The neighbors to the east have access down to their beach and, in
addition,the applicant and this property owner to the east have been on poor terms.
They were recently involved in a lawsuit against each other, and they each have
filed a complaint to the County about the other. (3)The applicant's property is
quite deep and the proposed stairs are 500 feet from the nearest road,making it
much less desirable for another shoreline property owner to agree to use Ms.
Ancich's stairs rather than construction their own. Therefore,the applicant was not
asked by staff to pursue joint use with the neighbors in this particular case.
7. Boathouses and covered moorages shall be discouraged.
Staff. Not applicable.
B. Piers and Docks REGULATIONS.
1. The location and design of docks and piers, as well as the subsequent
use, shall minimize adverse effects on fish, shellfish, wildlife and
water quality.
Page 4 of 9
MASON Do
DEPARTMENT OFM COMMUNITY OUNTY UNIT DEVELOPMENT ICE CEIWD
Building III—426 west Cedar Street
P.O. Box 279,Shelton,WA 98584 SEP 0 11015
(360)427-9670—Ext. 352
426 W. CEDAR ST.
SHORELINE PERMIT APPLICATION
PERMIT NO. :5R I~ZAI S-U=P) SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT
SHORELINE VARIANCE*
DATE RECEIVED -2015 SHORELINE CONDITIONAL USE* X
SHORELINE EXEMPTION
The Washington State Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58) requires that substantial developments within
designated shorelines of the state comply with its administrative procedures(WAC 173-14)and the provisions of the
Mason County Shoreline Management Master Program. The purpose of this Act and local program is to protect the
state's shoreline resources. The program requires that substantial development(any development of which the total
cost or fair market value exceeds $5,718.00 or materially interferes with the normal public use of the water or
shorelines of the State be reviewed with the goals, polices, and performance standards established in the Master
Program.
Answer all questions completely. Attach any additional information that my further describe the proposed
development. Incomplete applications will be returned.
Shoreline Variances and Conditional uses have additional pages that shall be attached to this application.
APPLICANT: Cheryl Ancich-Smith
ADDRESS: 10530 W. Edgewood Dr.
(street)
Sun City AZ 85351
(city) (state) (zip)
TELEPHONE: 253-318-7488
(home) (business)
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE:
ADDRESS: 2 7 Syi/41/4-1h r
(street)
(city) (state) (zip)
TELEPHONE: 3 tr `1i7(o- 3_77 D
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
General location(include property address,water body and associated wetlands—identify the name of the
shoreline):
The site is located at 5722E State Route 302 Belfair WA. It is near the northwest corner of
Pierce County on the shoreline of Rocky Bay.
Legal description (include section, township, and range to the nearest quarter, quarter section or latitude and
longitude to the nearest minute. Projects located in open water areas away from land shall provide a longitude
location)—include all parcel numbers:
West 100 feet of the East 200 feet of Government Lot 1,Section 33,Township 22 North,
shoreline 2011 app.doc
SHR2015-00008 Staff Report 10/16/2015
Staff: It would have negligent impact upon wildlife and water quality because it projects
only 4 feet waterward of the face of the bulkhead and rests on the bulkhead footing.
The construction and the use of the stairway did/does not disrupt any aquatic or
riparian vegetation. In fact, a Habitat Management Plan was submitted that
recommends planting an area adjacent and upland of the bulkhead with at least 5
native trees and 10 native shrubs.
2. Docks and piers shall be located, designed and operated to not
significantly impact or unnecessarily interfere with the rights of
adjacent property owners, or adjacent water uses. Structures shall be
located a minimum of five feet from side property lines. Community
use or joint use facilities may be located on the property line.
Staff. The proposed stairway is small,being only 4 feet wide by 14 feet long and 12 feet
tall (including safety railing). The safety railing is the only portion that is above the
elevation of the existing bulkhead and viewable from upland. From the water,the
proposed stairway only obstructs the view of a portion of the concrete bulkhead. It
would have no impact on boaters, fisherman,public shellfish harvesting,or
commercial aquaculture because it rests on the bulkhead footing and the applicant
owns the tidelands in front of this property.
The stairway is located more than 5 feet from the side property line.
3. If the location of side property lines on a cove cannot be officially
established without a survey, the Administrator may require a survey
by a registered land surveyor before a permit is issued.
Staff. The proposal is not located in a cove.
4 . No pier, dock, or float or similar device shall have a residential
structure. . .
5. Prior to final project approval of a residential subdivision. . .
6. There is no maximum length, width or height for commercial or
industrial. . .
7. Maximum overall length of a recreational pier or dock facility. . .
8. Only one dock is allowed per lot.
9. The width of recreational piers and docks shall not exceed. . .
10. At the end of a dock or pier, a float may be attached. . .
11. On lakes throughout the County a float may be attached. . .
12. Unattached recreation floats shall not exceed. . .
13. Recreational piers shall be no higher than 11 feet above. . .
14. The surface of floating structures shall be. . .
15. All floating structures shall include. . .
Staff. Regulations 4 through 15 are `not applicable.'
16. All facilities shall be constructed and maintained in a safe and sound
condition. Abandoned or unsafe docks and piers shall be removed or
repaired promptly by the owner. Where any such structure constitutes
a hazard to the public, the County may, following notice to the owner,
abate the structure if the owner fails to do so within a reasonable
time, and may impose a lien on the related shoreline property in an
amount equal to the cost of the abatement.
Page 5 of 9
f ?
SHR2015-00008 Staff Report 10/16/2015
Staff: The structure is brand new, and the design has been reviewed by the engineering
firm hired by the applicant and it will also be reviewed by the Mason County
Building Department.
17. Recreational Mooring Buoys are exempt from. . .
18. There is no maximum length or width for commercial industrial or
community use marine railways or boat ramps. . .
19. Marine railways and concrete boat ramps may be permitted. . .
20. Design standards for boat ramps and marine railways are. . .
Staff: Regulations 17 through 20 are `not applicable.'
21. Stairways less than $5,718 in value located landward of mean higher
high water and less than ten feet waterward of the toe of the bank do
not require a Substantial Development Permit. Stairways exceeding
$5, 718 in value located landward of mean higher high water and less
than ten feet waterward of the toe of the bank require a Substantial
Development Permit. Stairways located waterward of mean higher high
water, exceeding $5, 718 in value shall require a Conditional Use
Permit. Stairways shall not be located more than ten feet waterward
of the toe of the bank. Stairways located waterward of mean higher
high water but less than $5,718 in value shall require a Conditional
Use Permit.
Staff: The last sentence of this regulation describes the proposal, hence this application
for a Conditional Use Permit. However,this sentence is misleading because
development that is not shoreline exempt also requires a Shoreline Substantial
Development Permit. A few years ago,the updated exempt market value increased
from $5718 to $6416. Since the proposed stairs is values at$7,000,the application
is for Substantial Development and Conditional Use.
22. Stairways shall be located landward of bulkheads except where proven
infeasible.
Staff: `Feasible' and `infeasible' are not defined in the Mason County SMP. If one were
to locate the stairway landward of the bulkhead(or inset into the bulkhead),this
would require cutting into the massive concrete bulkhead and repouring concrete
for steps. Staff feels that any benefits of locating the stairways land ward of the
existing bulkhead are outweighed by the potential impacts to the shoreline
environment.
In addition,except for the concrete blocks,the stairway is not waterward of the
bulkhead footing. As for the concrete blocks, Staff isn't sure that the WA
Department of Fish and Wildlife will grant Hydraulic project approval for these,
since they don't appear to be anchored. The Shoreline Permit will be conditioned
for obtaining HPA from WDFW.
23. Covered moorage and over the water boat houses are prohibited. . .
Staff: Not applicable.
Page 6 of 9
s ,
SHR2015-00008 Staff Report 10/1.6/2015
C. Shoreline Conditional Use Criteria.
The Conditional Uses Subsection of the Mason County SMP(MCC 17.50.080) states:
1. Uses which are classified or set forth in the master program as
conditional uses may be authorized provided the applicant can
demonstrate all of the following:
a. That the proposed use will be consistent with the policies of RCW
90.58 and the policies of the master program;
Staff: RCW 90.58 pertains to the Shoreline Management Act of 1971. The proposed
stairway complies with the Act and the County's Shoreline Master Program
policies.
b. That the proposed use will not interfere with the normal public
use of the shorelines;
Staff. As discussed in subpart VI(B)(2)above,the proposal will not interfere with
the normal public use of the shoreline.
c. That the proposed use of the site and design of the project will
be compatible with other permitted uses within the area;
Staff: It is Staff s opinion that the proposed stairway is compatible with other
residential uses as well as recreational and aquacultural uses in the area and
will not even be noticed.
d. That the proposed use will cause no unreasonable adverse effects
to the shoreline environment in which it is to be located;
Staff: The proposal is small and doesn't involve covering tidelands, uprooting
riparian vegetation, or excavating or cutting into the bank or bulkhead. In
addition,the permit will be conditioned that the recommended mitigation
detailed in the Habitat Management Plan will be completed and maintained.
Since the property owner has listed the parcel for sale, Staff will require that
she record a Notice of Habitat Management Plan on the Title,to ensure future
owners are aware of the mitigation and maintenance requirements.
e. That the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental
effect.
Staff: The public interest will not suffer. See `c' and `d' above.
2. Other uses which are not classified or set forth in the master program
may be authorized as conditional uses provided that the applicant can
demonstrate, in addition to the criteria set forth above, that
extraordinary circumstances preclude reasonable use of the property in
a manner consistent with the use regulations of the master program.
Staff. Not applicable. This use is classified and set forth in the Piers and Docks Chapter.
3. Uses which are specifically prohibited by the master program may not
be authorized.
Page 7 of 9
r i
SHR2015-00008 Staff Report 10/16/2015
Staff: Not applicable. This is not a prohibited use.
4. In the granting of all conditional use permits, consideration shall be
given to the cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions
in the area. For example, if conditional use permits were granted for
other developments in the area where similar circumstances exist, the
total of the conditional uses should remain consistent with the
policies of the master program and should not produce substantial
adverse effects to the shoreline environment.
Staff: If everyone on the shoreline who does not already have beach access were to
construct a stairway of similar size and scope and were to plant native vegetation
similar to that recommended in the Habitat Management Plan, Staff feels that there
would not be a net negative impact on the shoreline environment.
VII. Conclusions:
Based upon these policies and regulations,the project appears consistent with the Mason County's
Shoreline Master Program, Comprehensive Plan, and other policies and regulations. Staff
recommends approval of the Shoreline Conditional Use Permit,provided the property owner
complies with the following conditions:
A. The mitigation detailed in the Habitat Management Plan prepared by BioResources, dated
August 2015 shall be completed during the Fall of this year(2015).
B. A `Notice of Habitat Management Plan' shall be recorded on the Title prior to issuance of a
building permit.
C. The stairway will be removed if the WA Department of Ecology does not grant final approval
of this Conditional Use Permit within two months of approval of this Conditional Use Permit
by the County's Hearing Examiner.
VIII. Choices of Action:
A. Approve.
B. Approve with conditions.
C. Deny(reapplication or resubmittal is permitted).
D. Deny with prejudice (reapplication or resubmittal is not allowed for one year).
E. Remand for further proceedings and/or evidentiary hearing in accordance with Section
15.09.090 of Title 15.
Page 8 of 9
SHR2015-00008 Staff Report 10/16/2015
List of Exhibits
Exhibit#1 - Shoreline Conditional Use Permit Application/JARPA
Exhibit#2- Site Plan
Exhibit #3 - Photo of Stairway
Exhibit #4 - Area Map
Exhibit #5 - Parcel Map of Vicinity with 2009 Aerial Photo Overlay
Exhibit#6 - 2006 Aerial Photo from WA Ecology's Coastal Atlas
Exhibit#7- SEPA DNS (State Environmental Protection Act Determination of Significance)
Exhibit#8- SEPA Comment Letter from Washington Department of Ecology
Exhibit #9 - Notice of Application/Hearing
Exhibit #10 - Habitat Management and Notice of HMP
Page 9 of 9
F
Range 1 West,lying south of SR302, except the north 110 feet.
OWNERSHIP: Contract
Applicant Owner X Lessee Purchaser (Identify) Other
Owner:
same as applicant
(street)
(city) (state) (zip)
DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTON
Development(identify and describe the proposed project,including the type of materials to be used,construction
methods,principle dimensions,and other pertinent information):
To construct a wooden stairway from the top of the existing concrete bulkhead to the top of the
bulkhead footing. Concrete block steps will provide access from the top of the footing to the
shoreline. The stairs are about 4 feet wide and 8 feet tall.The concrete steps are 3 feet wide
and 1.5 feet tall.
Use(identify current use of property with exist improvements:
The current house was built as a sin a farngy residence in 1973. The concrete bulkhead was
4k-Z�� 0��'
constructed in 1987. The tidelands have been used for farming_
Reason for requesting development:
To provide safe access from the top of the bulkhead to the shoreline.
ACKOWLEDGEMENT
I hereby declare,to the best of my knowledge and belief,the forgoing information and all attached information is
true and corn ct.
pplicant or authorized representative) ( te)
shoreline 2011 app.doc
MASON COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Building III, 426 W. Cedar St.
Shelton, WA 98584
(360) 427-9670
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR SHORELINE CONDITIONAL USE
The purpose of Conditional Use Permit is to allow greater flexibility in varying the new application
of the Use Regulations of the Master Program. Conditional Use Permits should also be granted in
circumstances where denial of the permit would result in a thwarting of the policy enumerated in
R.C.W. 90.58. In authorizing a Conditional Use, special conditions may be attached to the permit by
local government or the Department of Ecology to prevent undesirable effects of the proposed use.
Uses that are classified, or set forth in the Master Program as conditional uses, may be authorized
provided the applicant can demonstrate all of the following:
1. Show that the proposed use will be consistent with the policies of R.C.W. 90.58.
and the policies of the Master Program. I�
`7A-0— u S is 6.C c.e s s -fro S
l e 5e 5 ✓'�s;cF�...-��« l r►j a 7 rr -,Vr C� Jc C.-
2. Show that the proposed use will not interfere with the normal public use of the
shoreline.
1J
5 �/'5 G/�e. X, 07
LR-'-AZ oJ- -)-/-Q- 5A-0I.c.bfo- .
3. Show that the proposed use of the site and design of the project will be compatible
with other permitted us s within the area. ,
L�r is 0.7 �us
A � a UA- o
�n� ���s 0� �f- ;�►��-�r� w�� 5� ��,�-� (.eye br
4. Show that the proposed use will cause no unreasonable adverse effects to the shoreline
environment in which it is to be located. b/ [3
� vifl
5. Show that the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect.
T 5 l CJa 6 4 Cv'j 4h z LILI>C- a
Page 1 of 2
Other uses, which are not classified or set forth in the Master Program, may be authorized as
conditional uses provided that the applicant can demonstrate, in addition to the criteria set forth
above, that extraordinary circumstances preclude reasonable use of the property in a manner
consistent with the Use Regulations of the Master Program.
Uses, which are specifically prohibited by the Master Program,may not be authorized.
In the granting of all Conditional Use Permits, consideration shall be given to the cumulative impact
of additional requests for like actions in the area. For example, if Conditional Use Permits were
granted for other developments in the area where similar circumstances exist, the total of the
conditional uses should remain consistent with the policies of the Master Program and should not
produce substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment.
Please attach any additional information, as needed.
ACKOWLEDGEMENT
I hereby declare,to the best of my knowledge and belief,the forgoing information and all attached
information is true and correct.
(property owner onzed representa ' e) (date)
Page 2 of 2
Other uses, which are not classified or set forth in the Master Program, may be authorized as
conditional uses provided that the applicant can demonstrate, in addition to the criteria set forth
above, that extraordinary circumstances preclude reasonable use of the property in a manner
consistent with the Use Regulations of the Master Program.
Uses,which are specifically prohibited by the Master Program, may not be authorized.
In the granting of all Conditional Use Permits, consideration shall be given to the cumulative impact
of additional requests for like actions in the area. For example, if Conditional Use Permits were
granted for other developments in the area where similar circumstances exist, the total of the
conditional uses should remain consistent with the policies of the Master Program and should not
produce substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment.
Please attach any additional information, as needed.
ACKOWLEDGEMENT
I hereby declare,to the best of my knowledge and belief,the forgoing information and all attached
information is true and correct.
- <��- �-/-/s
(property owner onzed represents e) (date)
Page 2 of 2
1---------------------------------------
® � AGENCY USE ONLY �
l l
Date received:
US Army Co
5• rpe
WASHINGTON STATE orEngl l
elUa WWstddricl l l
Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Agency reference#:.sf//Q.�/
Application (JARPA) Form'�2 ; TaxParcet#(s>: o��
l l
l l
USE BLACK OR BLUE INK TO ENTER ANSWERS IN THE WHITE SPACES BELOW. '
i
-----------------------------
1 �
l l
l l
I
Part 1-Project Identification
1. Project Name(A name for your project that you create.Examples:Smith's Dock or Seabrook Lane Development) ftlpl
Ancich-Smith Stairs
Part 2—Applicant
The person and/or organization responsible for the project. ftejpj
2a. Name (Last,First,Middle)
Cheryl Ancich-Smith
2b. Organization(If applicable)
NA
2c. Mailing Address (Street or Po Box)
10530 W. Edgewood Dr.
2d. City, State, Zip
Sun City, Arizona 85351
2e. Phone(1) 2f. Phone(2) 2g. Fax 2h. E-mail
( 253 ) 318-7488 ( ) ( ) cheryl.ancichsmith@gmaii.com
lAddilional 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
httr)://www nws usace armv mll/Missions/ClviWorks/Regulatory/PermitGuidebook/EndangeredSaecies asox.
• 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.
2To access an online JARPA form with[help)screens,go to
hoo://www epermitting wa oov/site/alias resourcecenterfiama iaroa form/9984/iaroa form.aspx.
For other help,contact the Governor's Office for Regulatory Innovation and Assistance at(800)917-0043 or help()-ora.wa.00v.
JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 1 of 14
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
appllcation.) hel
3a. Name (Last, First,Middle)
Baldwin, Craig, T.
3b. Organization (If applicable)
WestSound Engineering, Inc.
3c. Mailing Address (street or Po Box)
217 SW Wilkins Drive
3d. City, State, Zip
f
Port Orchard, WA 98366
3e. Phone(1) 3f. Phone(2) 3g. Fax 3h. E-mail
( 360 ) 876-3770 360-340-6794 360-876-.439 craig@wsengineering.com
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. [ eel
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(1) 4f. Phone(2) 4g. Fax 4h. E-mail
JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 2 of 14
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.) hel
3a. Name (Last, First,Middle)
Baldwin, Craig, T.
3b. Organization (If applicable)
WestSound Engineering, Inc.
3c. Mailing Address (Street or Po Box)
217 SW Wilkins Drive
3d. City, State, Zip
Port Orchard, WA 98366
3e. Phone(1) X Phone(2) 3g. Fax 3h. E-mail
( 360 ) 876-3770 360-340-6794 360-876-.439 craig@wsengineering.com
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. lhelpl
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 DARPA Attachment A for
each additional property owner.
❑ Your project is on Department of Natural Resources (DNR)-managed aquatic lends. If you don't know,
contact the DNR at (360) 902-1100 to determine aquatic land ownership. If yes, complete DARPA 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(1) 0. Phone(2) 4g. Fax 4h. E-mail
JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 2 of 14
Part 5—Project Location(s)
Identifying information about the property or properties where the project will occur. hMM
❑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.) h[ elp]
Private
❑ Federal
❑ 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 tip.) h[ elp�
5722 E. State Route 302
5c. City, State, Zip(If the project is not in a city or town,provide the name of the nearest city or town.) h[ ell ]
Belfair, WA 98528
5d. County h( ei
Mason
5e. Provide the section, township, and range for the project location. ihelw
Y4 Section Section Township Range
NE 33 22 North 1 West
5f. Provide the latitude and longitude of the project location. h[ gm
• Example:47.03922 N lat./-122.89142 W long.(Use decimal degrees-NAD 83)
47.35847/ 122.80194
5g. List the tax parcel number(s)for the project location. tLpel.�
• The local county assessor's office can provide this information.
12233-50-90012
5h. Contact information for all adjoining property owners. (if you need more space,use JARPA Attachment C.) h[ eiw
Name Mailing Address Tax Parcel #(if known)
Softich, Anthony J 5730 E. State Route 302 12233-50-00008
Belfair,WA 98528-9394
Herron, Thomas M. &Verna L. 5108 Cromwell Dr NW 12233-50-00011
Gig Harbor, WA 98335-7545
Hewitt, Charles W. & Jean M. P.O. Box 1842 12233-50-00041
Belfair,WA 98528-1842 12233-50-00042
JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 3 of 14
Si. List all wetlands on or adjacent to the project location. h[ el
None
5j. List all waterbodies (other than wetlands) on or adjacent to the project location. n(I
Rocky Bay
5k. Is any part of the project area within a 100-year floodplain? ffim
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know
51. Briefly describe the vegetation and habitat conditions on the property. h[ eipj
Residential use with lawn and residential landscaping. The bluff is non-native blackberries, ivy and scotch
broom. There is no vegetation at the shoreline due to the existing bulkhead.
f
5m. Describe how the property is currently used. h[ eipj
The property has a single family residence with a trail to the bulkhead at the shoreline. The tidelands is use for
shell fishing. The bulkhead provides recreational use at the shoreline. The stairs will provide access to the
shoreline. In the past access to the shoreline was available through the neighbor's property, but is no longer
available.
5n. Describe how the adjacent properties are currently used. h[ email
Properties to the east and west are single family residential uses, as well at the property to the north, on the
opposite side of SR 302.
5o. Describe the structures (above and below ground) on the property, including their purpose(s) and current
condition. h[ ell j
There is an existing house in good condition. A timber retaining wall was recently repair and is in good condition
also. The adjacent parcel on the north property line is owned by the applicant and has a residence and garage in
good condition.
5p. Provide driving directions from the closest highway to the project location, and attach a map. hL eP]
East on E. State Route 302 to the Pierce county line. The site is on the left, water side, of Rocky Bay.
JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 4 of 14
5i. List all wetlands on or adjacent to the project location. h[._ei
None
5j. List all waterbodies (other than wetlands) on or adjacent to the project location, h[ epi
Rocky Bay
5k. Is any part of the project area within a 100-year floodplain? h[@M
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know
51. Briefly describe the vegetation and habitat conditions on the property. el
Residential use with lawn and residential landscaping. The bluff is non-native blackberries, ivy and scotch
broom. There is no vegetation at the shoreline due to the existing bulkhead.
5m. Describe how the property is currently used. hei
The property has a single family residence with a trail to the bulkhead at the shoreline. The tidelands is use for
shell fishing. The bulkhead provides recreational use at the shoreline. The stairs will provide access to the
shoreline. In the past access to the shoreline was available through the neighbor's property, but is no longer i
available.
5n. Describe how the adjacent properties are currently used. LtLem
Properties to the east and west are single family residential uses, as well at the property to the north, on the
opposite side of SR 302.
I
5o. Describe the structures (above and below ground) on the property, including their purpose(s) and current
condition. hel
There is an existing house in good condition. A timber retaining wall was recently repair and is in good condition
also. The adjacent parcel on the north property line is owned by the applicant and has a residence and garage in
good condition.
5p. Provide driving directions from the closest highway to the project location, and attach a map. h[glIA
East on E. State Route 302 to the Pierce county line. The site is on the left, water side, of Rocky Bay.
JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 4 of 14
Part 6—Project Description
6a. Briefly summarize the overall project. You can provide more detail in 6b. h[ eel .)
Stairs were built without permit to provide access from the top of the existing bulkhead to the shoreline. The
Stair are pressure-treated lumber and rest on the bulkhead footing. Concrete blocks provide a step down from
The bulkhead footing to the shoreline.
61b. Describe the purpose of the project and why you want or need to perform it. hLelej
Because the previous access to the shoreline, which was through a neighboring property, is no longer available,
stairs were constructed to provide access from the existing 9-foot high concrete bulkhead to the shoreline.
I
6c. Indicate the project category. (Check all that apply) hC elPl
❑ Commercial Ef Residential ❑ 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
❑ Utility Line
❑ Channel Modification ❑ Fishway ❑ Raft
❑ Other:
JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 5 of 14
6e. Describe how you plan to construct each project element checked in 6d. Include specific construction
methods and equipment to be used. hel
• Identify where each element will occur in relation to the nearest waterbody.
• Indicate which activities are within the 100-year floodplain.
The stairway is connected to the outer wall of the existing concrete bulkhead and rests on the top of the existing
concrete footing. The wood in pressure treated. Several concrete blocks have been placed on the shoreline to
provide access from the top of the footing to the shoreline.
The lower portion of the stairs and the concrete blocks are located within the 100-year floodplain.
6f. What are the anticipated start and end dates for project construction?(MonthNear) [heldj
• 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;June 2015 End date: July 2015 ❑ See JARPA Attachment D
6g. Fair market value of the project, including materials, labor, machine rentals, etc. h( gl
$1,200.00
6h. Will any portion of the project receive federal funding? hel
• If yes,list each agency providing funds.
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know
Part 7—Wetlands: Impacts and Mitigation
❑ Check here if there are wetlands or wetland buffers on or adjacent to the project area.
(If there are none, skip to Part 8.) hLelpi
7a. Describe how the project has been designed to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to wetlands. hel
❑ Not applicable
7b. Will the project impact wetlands? h[ eld
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know
7c.Will the project impact wetland buffers? hl,gipd
JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 6 of 14
6e. Describe how you plan to construct each project element checked in 6d. Include specific construction
methods and equipment to be used. el
• Identify where each element will occur in relation to the nearest waterbody.
• Indicate which activities are within the 100-year flood plain,
The stairway is connected to the outer wall of the existing concrete bulkhead and rests on the top of the existing
concrete footing. The wood in pressure treated. Several concrete blocks have been placed on the shoreline to
provide access from the top of the footing to the shoreline.
The lower portion of the stairs and the concrete blocks are located within the 100-year floodplain.
6f. What are the anticipated start and end dates for project construction? (Monthlyear) heI
• 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:June 2015 End date: July 2015 ❑ See JARPA Attachment D
6g. Fair market value of the project, including materials, labor, machine rentals, etc. heel
$1,200.00
6h.Will any portion of the project receive federal funding? heI
• If yes, list each agency providing funds.
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know
Part 7—Wetlands: Impacts and Mitigation
❑ Check here if there are wetlands or wetland buffers on or adjacent to the project area.
(If there are none, skip to Part 8.) heI
7a. Describe how the project has been designed to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to wetlands, heI
❑ Not applicable
7b.Will the project impact wetlands? [h�elgl
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know
7c.Will the project impact wetland buffers? hel
JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 6 of 14
i
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know
7d. Has a wetland delineation report been prepared? h[ slat
I
• If Yes,submit the report,including data sheets,with the JARPA package.
❑ Yes ❑ No
7e. Have the wetlands been rated using the Western Washington or Eastern Washington Wetland Rating
System? hel
• If Yes,submit the wetland rating forms and figures with the JARPA package.
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know
7f. Have you prepared a mitigation plan to compensate for any adverse impacts to wetlands? hLeM
• 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 ❑ No ❑ Not applicable
7g. Summarize what the mitigation plan is meant to accomplish, and describe how a watershed approach was
used to design the plan. het
7h. Use the table below to list the type and rating of each wetland impacted, the extent and duration of the
I
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. he►
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
category2 Acres) acres
NA
'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 DARPA package.
'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)
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. het
JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 7 of 14
NA
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. hf ei
NA
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.) h[M
Check here if there are waterbodies on or adjacent to the project area. (if there are none, skip to Part 9.)
U. Describe how the project is designed to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to the aquatic environment.
h[ elp]
❑ Not applicable
The stairs are built on top of the existing concrete bulkhead footing and will not disturbed the shoreline. A few
concrete landscaping blocks are placed on the shoreline to provide a step down from the top of the footing to
the shoreline.
8b.Will your project impact a waterbody or the area around a waterbody? MN
Yes ❑ No
JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 8 of 14
NA
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. h( eplj
NA
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.) hf elal
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.
h[ eIA
❑ Not applicable
The stairs are built on top of the existing concrete bulkhead footing and will not disturbed the shoreline. A few
concrete landscaping blocks are placed on the shoreline to provide a step down from the top of the footing to
the shoreline.
81b.Will your project impact a waterbody or the area around a waterbody? hf eM
Yes ❑ No
JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 8 of 14
8c. Have you prepared a mitigation plan to compensate for the project's adverse impacts to non-wetland
waterbodies? hLelp�]
• 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.
Yes ❑ No ❑ Not applicable
A Habitat Management Plan was prepared by BioResources , LLC.
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. h[ elpj
An area located above the existing bulkhead will have the existing non-native vegetation removed and replaced
with 5 evergreen trees, five deciduous trees, and ten shrubs.
8e. Summarize impact(s) to each waterbody in the table below. hLeM
Activity (clear, Waterbody Impact Duration of Amount of material Area (sq. ft. or
dredge, fill, pile name' location impact' (cubic yards)to be linear ft.) of
drive, etc.) placed in or waterbody
removed from directly affected
waterbody
Construct Stairs Rocky Bay In Permanent 0 32 sq. ft.
Place concrete Rocky Bay In Permanent 0 6 sq. ft.
blocks
1 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, he
No fill material will be placed in the waterbody.
JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 9 of 14
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. h1 elal
No excavation will be performed in this waterbody.
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. MU
Agency Name Contact Name Phone Most Recent
Date of Contact
Mason County Rebecca Hersha 360-427-9670, ext 287 September 22, 2015
( )
91b. 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? help
• 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/303 d/.
Yes ❑ No
Dissolved oxygen, temperature and bacteria.
9c. What U.S. Geological Survey Hydrological Unit Code (HUC) is the project in? el
• Go to http://cfpub.epa.gov/surffiocate/�ilndex.cfMto help identdy the HUC.
Watershed number 17110018
9d. What Water Resource Inventory Area Number(WRIA#)is the project in? hLela]
• Go to http://www.ecy.wa.gov/services/ isg /maps/wriaAvria.htm to find the WRIA#.
Kitsap 15, map number 1570, listing number 6957, Case Inlet and Dana Passage.
JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 10 of 14
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. het
No excavation will be performed in this waterbody.
I
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, h( ell
Agency Name Contact Name Phone Most Recent
Date of Contact
Mason County Rebecca Hersha 360-427-9670, ext 287 September 22, 2015
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? h! eM
• 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/pro,grams/wg/303d/.
Yes ❑ No
Dissolved oxygen, temperature and bacteria.
9c. What U.S. Geological Survey Hydrological Unit Code (HUC) is the project in? h( eM
• Go to htto://cfpub.epa.gov/surfAoraie/index.cfm to help identify the HUC.
Watershed number 17110018
9d.What Water Resource Inventory Area Number(WRIA#) is the project in? hf pN
• Go to hftp://www.ecy.wa.gov/services/ciis/maps/wria/wria.htm to find the WRIA#.
Kitsap 15, map number 1570, listing number 6957, Case Inlet and Dana Passage.
JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 10 of 14
9e. Will the in-water construction work comply with the State of Washington water quality standards for
turbidity? h[ elpa
• Go to http://www ecy wa gov/programs/wq/swcis/criteria html for the standards.
gYes ❑ No ❑ Not applicable
9f. If the project is within the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act, what is the local shoreline
environment designation? h( eld
• If you don't know,contact the local planning department.
• For more information,go to:hftp://www.eg)Lwa.gov/programs/sea/smaAaws rules/173-26/211 designations.html.
❑ Rural gurban ❑ Natural ❑Aquatic ❑ Conservancy ❑ Other
9g.What is the Washington Department of Natural Resources Water Type? (helps
• Go to http://www dnr wa gov/BusinessPermits[Topics/ForestPracticesApplications/Pages/fp watedyping aspx for the Forest
Practices Water Typing System.
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? h[ M
• If No,provide the name of the manual your project is designed to meet.
Yes ❑ No
Name of manual:
9L Does the project site have known contaminated sediment? h I
• If Yes,please describe below.
❑ Yes No
9j. If you know what the property was used for in the past, describe below. hel
It has been residential and shell fishing for more than 50 years.
91k. Has a cultural resource (archaeological) survey been performed on the project area? hf M
• If Yes,attach It to your DARPA package.
❑ Yes No
I
I
JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 11 of 14
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. heel
Chinook salmon, Killer Whale, Rockfish.
I
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. hl_M
The Habitat Management Plan states that the project area is not critical habitat for bull trout, the streaked horned
lark, or the marbled murrelet.
The project is critical habitat for the chinook, killer whale, and the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin rockfish.
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 for Regulatory Innovation and Assistance at (800) 917-0043 or heIP a)ora.wa.gov.
• For a list of addresses to send your JARPA to, click on agency addresses for completed JARPA.
10a. Compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). (Check all that apply.) impel
• For more information about SEPA,go to www.ecy.wa.gov/pro-grams/sea/sepa/e-review.html.
OA copy of the SEPA determination or letter of exemption is included with this application.
❑A SEPA determination is pending with (lead agency). The expected decision date is
❑ I am applying for a Fish Habitat Enhancement Exemption. (Check the box below in 10b.) eAl
❑ 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 2012.2 - Page 12 of 14
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. hLpAl
Chinook salmon, Killer Whale, Rockfish.
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. h[ ell
The Habitat Management Plan states that the project area is not critical habitat for bull trout, the streaked horned
lark, or the marbled murrelet.
The project is critical habitat for the chinook, killer whale, and the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin rockfish.
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.aovlopas/.
• Governor's Office for Regulatory Innovation and Assistance at (800) 917-0043 or helpta'�.ora.wa.gov.
• For a list of addresses to send your JARPA to, click on agency addresses for completed JARPA.
10a. Compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). (Check all that apply.) hl m
• For more information about SEPA,go to www.ecy.wa,gov/programs/sea/sepa/e-review.htmi.
0A copy of the SEPA determination or letter of exemption is included with this application.
❑A SEPA determination is pending with (lead agency). The expected decision date is
❑ I am applying for a Fish Habitat Enhancement Exemption. (Check the box below in 10b.) h[ d
❑ 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 2012.2 , Page 12 of 14
10b. Indicate the permits you are applying for. (Check all that apply.) hem
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Local Government Shoreline per its:
fls �tve A ment Conditional Use ❑Variance
7n Shoreline Exemption Type (explain):
Other City/County permits:
❑ Floodplain Development Permit Critical Areas Ordinance
STATE GOVERNMENT
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife:
Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) ❑ Fish Habitat Enhancement Exemption—Attach Exemption Form
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:
q$150 check enclosed. Check#
Attach check made payable to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.
❑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:
❑ Private Aids to Navigation (for non-bridge projects)
JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 13 of 14
Part I I--Authorizing Signatures
Signatures are required before submitting the JARPA package. The JARPA package includes the JARPA form,
project plans, photos, etc. hel
11 a. Applicant Signature (required) h(_etp_j
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 author' a ant named in Part 3 of this application to act on my behalf in matters related to this
application.
By initiating here, 1 state that I h the authority to grant access to the propay. I also dive my consent to the
permitting agencies enter' e operty where the project is located to�ih ct tth�Aj tsite-site-or-.any work
related to the project. cal)
/a V;
Applicant Prix t d Na Me �— T Applicant Signature-,-) Date'-
11 b. Authorized Agent Signature h[ elul
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 all necessary permits have been issued.
V4\� /1 �' —1� A�L-
Authorized A ent Printed Name Authorized Agent Signature Date
11 c. Property Owner Signature (if not applicant) el ]
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 i
landowner.
Pr9 erty a ed Warne Property Owner Signature Date
(/ C
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
entry,shall be fined not more than$10,000 or imprisoned not more than 5 years or both.
If you require this document In another format,contact the Governor's Office for Regulatory Innovation and Assistance(ORIA)at(800)
917-0043. People with hearing loss can call 711 for Washington Relay Service. People with a speech disability can call(877) 833-6341.
ORIA publication number: ENV-019-09 rev.08/2013
JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 14 of 14
Fart 11—Authorizing Signatures
Signatures are required before submitting the JARPA package. The JARPA package includes the JARPA form,
project plans, photos, etc. h( eld i
11 a. Applicant Signature (required) h( eM
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 author' a ent named in Part 3 of this application to act on my behalf in matters related to this
application. !
By initialing here, I state that I qeo
the authority to grant access to the props y. I also_give my consent to the
permitting agencies enter' perty where the project is located to�irisp ct th - sr to ny work
related to the project. `
fa
Applicant Print d Name — 7— Applicant Signature - Date
11 b. Authorized Agent Signature
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 all necessary permits have been issued.
C r—/—f � h IA±- 22, 2Jr S
Authorized A ent Printed Name Authorized Agent Signature Date
11c. Property Owner Signature (if not applicant) h[ elf
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.
\ a �
Prq erly e ed Wame Property Owner Signature Date
1 B 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
entry, shall be fined not more than$10,000 or imprisoned not more than 5 years or both.
if you require this document In another format,contact the Governor's Office for Regulatory Innovation and Assistance(ORIA)at (800)
917-0043. People with hearing loss can call 711 for Washington Relay Service.People with a speech disability can call(877) 833-6341.
ORIA publication number: ENV-019-09 rev.08/2013
JARPA Revision 2012.2 Page 14 of 14
At��r men' 5
Th site SFR, bluff, existing bulkhead, and new shoreline access stairs.
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 23
r*e.
� e
2"' b
w
k t.
"'I� � + � .�: � � ,4 +�``� �.� � :tit '�`` _ `•,, '.�y� - ,��, -
L
"
� 4 e
Y
z
w
n �
r / e
�.e
„k
�.�r<' :r
ON_STAr, MASON COUNTY
�P5 C °� DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
o S° y= Planning Division
z o T �? 426 W Cedar St, Shelton, WA 98584
�oJ Y moo' (360)427-9670
1864
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
(WAC 197-11-340)
SEP2015-00067
Description of Proposal: SEPA DNS for (ATF) stairs to the beach (waterward of existing
concrete bulkhead and OHW) in Case Inlet (Puget Sound).
Pressure treated wood, 4 feet wide by 8 feet tall. Concrete
landscape blocks lead from the top of the bulkhead footing to the
beach. Mitigation for shoreline impacts include removing invasive
species with hand tools and planting five (5) native trees and ten
(10) native shrubs just landward of the bulkhead, on the west end.
Proponent: CHERYL ANCICH-SMITH
Location of Proposal: 5722 E STATE ROUTE 302 BELFAIR
Parcel Number: 122335090012
Legal Description: OLYMPIC SHORES LOT B OF SP 1039 PTN TR 2 S 33/93
Directions to Site: ST RT 3 TO ALLYN, R ON NORTH BAY RD, FOLLOW TO ST RT
302 TO SITE ADDRESS ON THE RIGHT SIDE
Lead Agency: Mason County
The Lead Agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant
adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required
under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed
Environmental Checklist and other information on file with the Lead Agency. This information is
available to the public upon request.
Please contact Rebecca Hersha at ext. 287 with any questions. This DNS is issued under WAC
197-11-340(2). The Lead Agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date shown
below, when the determination is final. Comments mu=6/2n/2OlD5r
itted to Dept. of Community
Development, P.O. Box 279, Shelton WA 98584 by Appeal of this determination
must be filed within a 14-day period following this final determination date, per Mason County
Code Chapter 15.11 peals.
9 1g 15
uthorized Local Government Official Date
WL
Rebecca Hersha -SEPA DNS
From: Rebecca Hersha
To: SEPA Saltwater Squaxin
Date: 9/18/2015 1:48 PM
Subject: SEPA DNS
Attachments: Ancich stairs site plan.pdf; Ancich stairs SEPA.pdf
Good Afternoon,
Please see the SEPA DNS and Checklist (and site plan) for a set of wooden stairs located on the water side of
the existing bulkhead on Case Inlet. The stairs are being reviewed after they were already constructed.
In addition to the SEPA, the project entails the following permits:
Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and Shoreline Exemption
Mason Environmental Permit and Habitat Management Plan
Building Permit
The SEPA comment period ends on 10/02/2015. Please let me know if you would like additional
information. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Ke6ecca Her'56, Planner
Mason County DCD
426 W. Cedar
jhelton, WA 98584
3 60-42 J-9 670 ext. 28 J
S026 l S - ocoU-ig
RECENED
SEP 0 12015
SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 426 W. CEDAR ST,
UPDATED 2014
Purpose of checklist.
Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your
proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization
or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental
impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal.
Instructions for applicants:
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please
answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult
with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use"not applicable" or
"does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown.
You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate
answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision-
making process.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of
time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal
or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your
answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant
adverse impact.
Instructions for Lead Agencies:
Please adjust the format of this template as needed. Additional information may be necessary to
evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse
impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to
make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is
responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents.
Use of checklist for nonproject proposals:
For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable
parts of sections A and B plus the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECTACTIONS (part Q. Please
completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words"project,""applicant," and "property or
site"should be read as"proposal,""proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead
agency may exclude(for non-projects) questions in Part B- Environmental Elements—that do not
contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal.
A. background
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable:
Anchich-Smith Stariway
2. Name of applicant:
Cheryl Anchich-Smith
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
10530 W.Edgewood Drive Contact: Craig Baldwin,WestSound Eng.
Sun City,AZ 85351 217 SW Wilkins Dr,Port Orchard,WA 98366
253-318-7488 360-876-3770
SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 1 of 11
4. Date checklist prepared: August 27,2015.
5. Agency requesting checklist: Mason County
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Summer 2015.
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or
connected with this proposal? If yes,explain. No.
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be
prepared, directly related to this proposal. A habitat plan has been prepared by
BioResources,LLC,dated August 20,2015.
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other
proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain.
No.
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known.
Shoreline Permit and building permit.
11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size
of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to
describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this
page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project
description.) Construct a wooden stairway from the top of the existing concrete
bulkhead to the top of the bulkhead footing.Also construct concrete block steps from
top of the footing to the shoreline.
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise
location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and
range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or
boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic
map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you
are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications
related to this checklist. The project is located at 5722 E.State Rout 302,Belfair,WA.
Follow SR 302 southeast to the county line.The project is on the right hand side along
the shoreline of Rocky Bay.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
a. General description of the site
(circle one): Flat, ollin hilly, steep slopes, mountainous,
other
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 100%.
SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 2 of 11
c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat,
muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any
agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in
removing any of these soils. The NRCS classifies these soils as Alderwood
gravelly sandy loam,6-15%.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so,
describe. None known.
e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of
any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill.
No grading is proposed for this project and no grading was required.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe.
No.
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project
construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? The concrete steps will cover
approximately 12 square feet which is less than 0.01%of the site.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any:
None proposed and none were required during the actual construction.
2. Air
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction,
operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and
give approximate quantities if known.
No emmisions other than typical residential activity.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so,
generally describe. No.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any:
None proposed.
3. Water
a. Surface Water:
1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including
year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe
type
and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into.
The project is located along the shoreline of Rocky Bay which is saltwater.
2)Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet)the described
waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes.
The stairway and steps are both located within 200 feet of the shoreline.
SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 3 of 11
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed
from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected.
Indicate the source of fill material. None.
4)Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. None.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan.
Yes,both the stairway and steps are located below the normal high water mark.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so,
describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
Preservatives may leach from the treated wood. Refer to the habitat plan.
b. Ground Water:
1)Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so,
give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities
withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No.
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or
other sources, if any(for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the
following chemicals. . . ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the
number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the
number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None.
c. Water runoff(including stormwater):
1) Describe the source of runoff(including storm water) and method of collection
and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow?
Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe.
This project will not impact water runoff.
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe.
No.
3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If
so, describe. No.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage
pattern impacts, if any: None.
4. Plants
a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site:
X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
X evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
X shrubs
X grass
SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 4 of 11
pasture
crop or grain
Orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops.
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other
X water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
other types of vegetation
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
Invasive species in the planting area. Refer to the Habitat Plan.
c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site.
None known.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance
vegetation on the site, if any: Native plants. Refer to the Habitat Plan.
e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site.
Blackberries, English ivy and scotch broom.
5. Animals
a. List any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known
to be on or near the site. Examples include:
birds: aw ro ea I on bird other:
mammals: bear, elk, be er, of
fish: bass, almo , trout, errin Ahellfis other
b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site.
Chinook,Killer Whate,Rockfish. Refer to the Habitat Plan.
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
Possible route for various marine life. Refer to the Habitat Plan.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
Plant native vegetation at the NW corner of the bulkhead per Habitat Plan.
e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site.
None known.
6. Energy and natural resources
a. What kinds of energy(electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet
the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating,
manufacturing, etc. None.
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties?
If so, generally describe. No.
SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 5 of 11
c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal?
List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any:
None known.
7. Environmental health
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk
of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal?
If so, describe. None known.
1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses.
None known.
2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development
and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines
located within the project area and in the vicinity.
None known.
3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced
during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating
life of the project.
None known.
4) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
None known.
5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
None proposed.
b. Noise
1)What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project(for example:
traffic, equipment, operation, other)? This project is not affected by traffic.
2)What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a
short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indi-
cate what hours noise would come from the site. None.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None.
8. Land and shoreline use
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?Will the proposal affect current
land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe.
Residential and shell fishing.No change is land use is proposed.
b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe.
How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to
other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated,
how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or
nonforest use? The owner has a shell fish farm on the adjacent tidelands.
1)Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal
business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides,
tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: No.
SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 6 of 11
c. Describe any structures on the site. Single family house,bulkhead,retaining walls.
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No.
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? RRS,Rural Residential 5 Acres
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Rural Residential
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site?
Urban Residential
h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify.
The Habitat Plan indicates it is critical habitat for Chinook,Orcas,Rockfish and for
spawning herring,sand lance and surf smelt.Refer to the Habitat Plan.
i Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None.
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None.
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None.
L. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land
uses and plans, if any:
The stairway was located on the footing and hidden by the bulkhead.
m. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with nearby agricultural and forest
lands of long-term commercial significance, if any:
The stairway was located on the bulkhead footing.
9. Housing
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, mid-
dle, or low-income housing. None.
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low-income housing. None.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None.
10. Aesthetics
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is
the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? S feet
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None.
11. Light and glare
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly
occur? None.
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views?
No.
SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 7 of 11
c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None.
12. Recreation
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
Rocky Bay provides informal recreational oppotunities.
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe.
No.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation
opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None.
13. Historic and cultural preservation
a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years
old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers located on or
near the site? If so, specifically describe. None known.
b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation?
This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts,
or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies
conducted at the site to identify such resources. None knowm.
c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources
on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of
archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc.
No disturbance of the area is require to construct or use this project.
d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance
to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required.
None.
14. Transportation
a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and
describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
State Route 302 is the only access to this site besides the water.
b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally
describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? No.
c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non-project proposal
have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? None.
SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 8 of 11
d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian,
bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe
(indicate whether public or private). No.
e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of)water, rail, or air
transportation? If so, generally describe. No.
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal?
If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would
be trucks (such as commercial and nonpassenger vehicles).What data or transportation
models were used to make these estimates? None.
g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and
forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. No.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None.
15. Public services
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection,
police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe.
No.
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. j
None.
16. Utilities
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site:
ec rici natural gas, ater use servic a hon sanitary sewer se tics stem
other
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service,
and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might
be needed. None proposed for this project.
C. Signature
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the
lead agency is relyin on the to make its decisio
Signature:
Name of signee Craig . Baldwin
Position and Agency/Organization WestSound Engineering, Inc.
Date Submitted: Aw, 2?, 20)�—
SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 9 of 11
ith:E
� tp
6
a• >'r
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
October 2,2015
Ms. Rebecca Hersha
Mason County
Department of Community Development
Planning Division
PO Box 279
Shelton, WA 98584
Dear Ms. Hersha:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the determination of nonsignificance for the
Ancich-Smith Stairway Project(SEP2015-00067) located at 5722 East SR 302 in Belfair as
proposed by Cheryl Ancich-Smith. The Department of Ecology(Ecology)reviewed the
environmental checklist and has the following comment(s):
SHORELANDS & ENVIRONMENTAL ASSISTANCE: Rick Mraz(360)407-6221
Please provide a site plan that includes the stairs with respect to the Mean Higher High Water
line. Shoreline permitting is related to this line.
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:15-4837)
cc: Rick Mraz, SEA
Cheryl Ancich-Smith(Proponent)
Craig Baldwin,WestSound Eng. (Contact)
�e0°N CO°�r� MASON COUNTY (360)427-9670 Shelton ext.352
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (360) 275-4467 Belfair ext. 352
BUILDING• PLANNING• FIRE MARSHAL (360)482-5269 Elma ext. 352
Mason County Bldg. III, 426 West Cedar Street
�xsa Shelton, WA 98584 www.co.mason.wa.us
MASON COUNTY
NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PUBLIC HEARING:
Notice is hereby given that Cheryl Ancich-Smith has filed a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit
(SHR2015-00008)with Mason County for the following:
Construction of a small set stairs leading from the top of the existing bulkhead to the bulkhead
footing.
Site Address: 5722 E State Route 302,Belfair, WA
The date of complete application is September Is', 2015. A SEPA Determination of Non-Significance
SEP2015-00067 was issued on 9/18/2015 (SEPA comment period ended on 10/2/2015).
A Public Hearing will be held by the Hearings Examiner on the proposed project on Wednesday,October
28th at or sometime after 1:00 PM within the Commissioners' Chamber in Bldg. I,411 North Fifth Street,
Shelton. If special accommodations are needed, contact Melissa Drewry, (360) 427-9670, ext 236.
The proposed Shoreline Conditional Use Permit is reviewed per the Bulkhead chapter of the Shoreline
Master Program(Mason County Code 17.50). Any person wishing to express their views or to be notified of
the action taken on the application should express their views or interest by the close of the public hearing on
October 28th, 2015. Please send comments to Mason County Department of Community Development,
ATTN: Rebecca Hersha,426 W Cedar, Shelton, WA 98584.
Please contact Rebecca Hersha of the Planning Department at(360)427-9670, ext. 287 or at the address
listed above with any questions or clarifications on this development and permit.
EXHIBIT # 10 page 1
MASON COUNTY (360)427-9670 Shelton ext. 352
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (360) 275 4467 Belfair ext. 352
4 BUILDING•PLANNING• FIRE MARSHAL (360)482-5269 Elma ext. 352
mason.wa.us
Mason County Bldg. III
426 West Cedar Street; Shelton,WA 98584
September 18, 2015
Squaxin Tribe Natural Resources Dept. WA Dept. of Fish&Wildlife
ATTN: Jeff Dickison ATTN: Joshua Benton
2952 SE Old Olympic Highway 450 Port Orchard Blvd, Suite 290
Shelton, WA 98584 Port Orchard, WA 98366
RE: Habitat Management Plan for FWHCA Mason Environmental Permit(MEP2015-00035)
Dear Mr.Dickison and Mr.Benton:
The enclosed Habitat Management Plan (FLIP)has been provided by the applicant to permit an
existing beach access structure(that was constructed without permits). Please review the enclosed
HMP and let me know if you have comments,question,or concerns about this plan. Our
ordinance allows for a 28-day comment period,therefore the closing date for comment is
October 16`h,2015.
Project Site: 5722 E St. Rt. 302, Belfair,WA. NE QTR of Section 33 in T22N,
R1 W, WM. Parcel 12233-50-90012.
Critical Area: Case Inlet/Puget Sound.
Applicant: Ancich-Smith, Cheryl.
HMP Author,Date: Kim Schaumburg(BioResources),August 20`h,2015.
Proposed Mitigation: Removing invasive species with hand tools and planting
five(5)native trees and ten(10)native shrubs just landward of the
bulkhead, on the west end.
Other applications include a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and a SEPA Checklist. Thank you for
your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
Rebecca Hersha, Land Use Planner
Mason County Dept. of Community Development
Ph. (360)427-9670, ext. 287
E-mail rebeccah(@co.mason.wa.us
Enclosures
E p 2.o 15 -
Habitat Management Plan
Ancich-Smith Shoreline Access Stairs Violation
Rocky Bay, Mason County WA
For:
Cheryl Ancich-Smith
10530 West Edgewood Drive
Sun City, AZ 85351
Prepared by:
BioResources, LLC
Kim Schaumburg
Fisheries biologist, University of Washington, 1981
10112 Bay View Rd. KPN
Vaughn, WA, 98394
(253) 884-5776 or 225-2973
Email: kimberly035@centurytel.net
August 20, 2015
1 1
r
r
Table of Contents
1.0 Violation Action.............................................................................. 3
1.1 Background&Violation Development....................................... ............ 3
1.2 Violation Development Need&Objectives...............................................3
2.0 Mitigation....................................................................................... 4-5
2.1 Monitoring&Maintenance................................................................. 5
3.0 ESA Species and Habitat Information...................................................... 4-5
3.1 ESA Listed Species........................................................................... 5-11
4.0 Environmental Baseline Conditions........................................................ 11
4.1 Violation Project Vicinity................................................................... 11
4.2 Violation Project Site........................................................................ 11-12
5.0 Effects of the Action.......................................................................... 12
5.1 Direct Effects.................................................................................. 12-14
5.2 Indirect Effects................................................................................. 14
5.3 Cumulative Effects............................................................................ 14
6.0 Conclusion......................................................................................14
6.1 Take Analysis.................................................................................. 14-15
6.2 Determination of Effect...................................................................... 15
10.0 References...................................................................................... 16-18
Attachments
1. Project location.................................................................................. 19
2. Site plan....................................................................................... ... 20
3. Cross section and project area site view...................................................... 21
4. Site Photograph...................................................................................22
5. Site Photograph...................................................................................23
6. Site Photographs...................................................................................24
7. Site Photographs...................................................................................25
8. Site Photographs...................................................................................26
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 2
1.0 Violation Action
This Habitat Management Plan has been submitted on behalf of Cheryl Ancich-Smith at
the request of Mason County to remedy a civil violation for unpermitted shoreline
development on her Rocky Bay property. The unpermitted development consists of
shoreline access stairs that were installed on the footing of an existing concrete
bulkhead/patio. Proposed mitigation for the violation development is the installation of
native vegetation, landward of the bulkhead/patio.
1.1 Background & Violation Development
The violation project site is located in Mason County at 5722 East State Route 302,
Belfair, Washington(Attachment 1). The Mason County tax parcel number is 12233-50-
90012. The property is located in Section 33, Township 22N, and Range 01 W of the
Western Meridian. The latitude is 47.35852 N, and the longitude is 122.80188 West. The
violation project site is located on Rocky Bay in the Kitsap Water Resource Inventory
Area(WRIA 15) on a shoreline designated Urban Residential by the Shoreline Master
Program of Mason County. Rocky Bay is regulated under the Mason County Shoreline
Master Program and the Mason County Resource Ordinance as a Fish and Wildlife
Habitat Conservation Area.
The violation project site is located in a rural neighborhood on a shoreline lot, which
supports a single-family residence (SFR) located approximately 60 feet vertically and
245 feet horizontally from the shoreline of Rocky Bay, which(with Rocky Creek) is a
tributary of Case Inlet. There is an existing concrete bulkhead/patio that is approximately
(approx.) 100 feet(length)by ten feet(height)by 12 feet(width). The bulkhead/patio
extends waterward approx. 25 feet farther than both adjoining bulkheads.
The violation stair structure is constructed of pressure treated lumber,a composite
decking material (for the landing and handrails), and galvanized/aluminum hardware. The
stair structure is approx. 14 feet(length)by 10 feet(height)by 3.5 feet(width). It has
been affixed to the bulkhead's concrete footing, which is approx. 4.5 feet wide
(Attachments 2 thru 5).
1.2 Violation Development Need and Objectives
Previously, the applicant had no means of accessing the shoreline at the site, as the
existing bulkhead cannot be safely descended without stairs or a ladder; however, a
ladder is inherently unstable and would not have been a realistic, longterm method for
beach access. The recently installed stairs are affixed to the concrete bulkhead and
include hand rails (having been constructed as per the Mason County Code), making
them safe.
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 3
According to the applicant, her family had previously accessed the beach using the
neighboring property's stairs;unfortunately,the neighbor has rescinded that privilege.
Shoreline access is imperative,as the property's tidelands have been utilized for
commercial shellfish aquaculture in the recent past, and the applicant intends to resume
that business.
2.0 Mitigation
The violation project mitigation is the installation of native vegetation along the base of
the bluff slope at the site,just landward of the bulkhead/patio, at the west end
(Attachment 8). Currently, vegetation on the bluff slope consists primarily of non-native,
invasive species, including Himalayan blackberries (Rubus
armeniacus/discolor/procerus), English or Atlantic ivy(Hedera helix or hibernica), and
Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius). Scotch Broom is listed as Class B,while English and
Atlantic ivy and Himalayan blackberries are listed as Class C by the state's Noxious
Weed Control Board. All three species are particularly detrimental as they impede the
growth of larger vegetation and have poor root systems, making the slope vulnerable to
erosion.
The installation of native vegetation along the base of the bluff slope is expected to have
the following direct and indirect effects: 1)Native vegetation will provide a more stable
and diverse habitat for wildlife. 2)Native vegetation will provide leaf matter and insects
for aquatic life in Rocky Bay. 3)Native vegetation will more effectively intercept runoff
(from precipitation) and promote the infiltration of surface flows to groundwater,where it
is filtered and later(slowly)released through subsurface flows. Additional benefits of
this process (i.e. number 3)are increased slope stabilization, less turbidity and siltation in
Rocky Bay, and fewer dissolved organic and inorganic compounds(i.e. pollutants such as
nitrates, phosphates,heavy metals, etc.)entering Rocky Bay.
To mitigate for the violation project at the site,native vegetation will be planted along the
west end of the bluff slope base, immediately landward of the bulkhead/patio, where
there is currently no existing native vegetation. Plants will be installed that are native to
the Pacific Northwest and that tolerate full sunlight and drought conditions common to a
southeast facing slope that lacks shade. Prior to installing new plants, any Himalayan
blackberries, English(or Atlantic) ivy, or Scotch broom will be aggressively removed by
hand(with hand tools) or cut back from the planting area. Non-native vegetation in the
planting area will be removed at least twice a year as necessary. Due to the close
proximity of Rocky Bay, no herbicides,pesticides, or fertilizer will be used. Additional
native species may be added to the plant list if approved by Mason County.
One or two gallon potted or bare root vegetation will be installed during the fall, after the
onset of precipitation(i.e. not during drought conditions). Organic bark or other
appropriate organic mulch may be used to mulch the newly installed plants and minimize
runoff from topsoil. Plants will be installed randomly or in irregular patterns to mimic
natural conditions. An arborist or native plant specialist will provide planting guidelines,
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 4
1 '
on site, prior to installation,and the exact installation location of each plant will be at his
or her discretion.
The following native trees are proposed for installation: Shore pine (Pinus contorta) and
vine maple(Acer Circinaturm). At least five trees and both species will be planted.
The following native shrubs(and fern)are proposed for installation: Oceanspray
(Holodiscus discolor), Indian plum(Oemleria cerasiformis),hairy manzanita
(Arctostaphylos columbiana), Baldhip Rose (Rosa gymnocarpa),thimbleberry(Rubus
parviflorus), salal (Gaultheria shallon), sword fern(Polystichum munitum), and tall
Oregon-grape (Berberis aquifolium). At least ten shrubs with three different species will
be planted.
2.1 Monitoring and Maintenance
The property owners will monitor and water the native vegetation plantings as needed
during dry months, until the vegetation has become established. Any dead plants will be
replaced throughout the monitoring period. Any invasive, non-native vegetation will be
removed at least twice per year.
3.0 ESA Species and Habitat Information
In the project area,there are three species listed under the Endangered Species Act by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as threatened species. The bull trout(Salvelinus
confluentus), marbled murrelet(Brachyramphus marmoratus), and streaked horned lark
(Eremophila alpestris strigata) are listed as threatened and critical habitat has been
designated for these species. The project area is not critical habitat for any of these
species.
In the project area,there are nine species listed under the Endangered Species Act by the
National Marine Fisheries Service(NMFS) as either threatened or endangered. The
humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), Bocaccio (Sebastes paucispinis), and
leatherback turtle (Dermochelys coriacea)are listed as endangered, while the Puget
Sound Chinook salmon(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), Puget Sound steelhead
(Oncorhynchus mykiss), green sturgeon(Acipenser medirostris), canary rockfish
(Sebastes pinniger), yelloweye rockfish (Sebastes ruberrimus), and Southern Resident
killer whale (Orcinus orca) are listed as threatened. Critical habitat has been designated
for the Chinook salmon, Southern Resident killer whale, Puget Sound/Georgia Basin
rockfish(Sebastes paucispinis,pinniger, &ruberrimus), leatherback turtle, and green
sturgeon. Puget Sound is designated critical habitat for the chinook,the Southern
Resident killer whale, and Puget Sound/Georgia Basin rockfish. Critical habitat has been
proposed for the Puget Sound steelhead. The project area is critical habitat for the
Chinook,killer whale, and Puget Sound/Georgia Basin rockfish.
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 5
Additionally,the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife has designated and
mapped critical spawning habitat for herring, sand lance, and surf smelt. Map#127
indicates that the project area is a documented spawning beach for surf smelt.
Rocky Creek, a perennial fish-bearing stream, is located in the vicinity of the project
area, approx. 1.3 mi. northeast of the violation project site. A GIS map (WDFW 2015)
indicates the documented presence of the following salmonid species: Puget Sound
Chinook(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), Puget Sound coho salmon(Oncorhynchus
kisutch), Chum salmon(Oncorhynchus keta), and Puget Sound steelhead(Oncorhynchus
mykiss). It is expected that Puget Sound/Coastal cutthroat(Oncorhynchus clarki clarki)
also use the stream.
3.1 ESA Listed Species
BULL TROUT
On November 1, 1999,the Coastal-Puget Sound population was listed as threatened
under the Endangered Species Act. The Coastal-Puget Sound bull trout population
segment encompasses all Pacific coast drainages within Washington, including Puget
Sound. On September 23, 2005, the U.S. Fish& Wildlife Service designated critical
habitat for the bull trout,which in Washington State includes over 1,519 miles of streams
and 966 miles of near-shore marine shoreline(70 FR 56304).
Bull trout are members of the char subgroup of the salmon family and are native to the
Pacific Northwest and western Canada. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
indicates that the anadromous form of bull trout may exist in the Nisquallly River basin,
although there is no documented evidence confirming this. The most recent observation
was a capture of a 179 mm subadult in the lower Nisqually River in July 2004 (Ellings, in
litt. 2004). Critical habitat for the bull trout was designated in September of 2005, and it
includes 966 miles of marine shoreline in Washington State, much of it in Puget Sound
(70 FR 56304)and the Nisqually River, from its mouth,upstream 40.1 miles. The
shoreline at the violation project site has not been designated Critical Habitat. It is
possible but unlikely that the site may be utilized by foraging or migrating bull trout.
MARBLED MURRELET
In September of 1992, USFWS listed the marbled murrelet as threatened under the
Endangered Species Act. A small, diving seabird in the family Alcidae,the marbled
murrelet forages for small fish and invertebrates almost exclusively in nearshore marine
waters,while nesting inland in old-growth or mature conifer forests. Threats include loss
of habitat, predation,gill-net fishing operations, oil spills,marine pollution, and disease.
The USFWS assembled a team of scientists in October 2011 to investigate causes for the
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 6
continued decline in murrelet populations. The outcome of these discussions listed many
factors, chiefly loss of potential nesting habitat as the main reason for hindrance of
population recovery goals(WDFW 2012).
Potential nest trees are coniferous trees within 55 mi (88.5 km) of marine waters that
support at least one 4-inch(10.2-cm) diameter platform located at least 33 feet(10
meters)above the ground,with horizontal and vertical cover(USFWS 2012). If a tree or
forested area does not support these habitat features, it is"extremely unlikely"to support
a murrelet nest(USFWS 2012). Nest success is influenced by forest structure,the spatial
mix of habitat and non-habitat,human disturbance,prey availability, and marine foraging
conditions. Human disturbance can lead to higher predation levels by Steller's and gray
jays, crows,ravens, and other species that seek human-related foods and refuse at high-
use recreational areas(Peery et al. 2004, Marzluff and Neatherlin 2006).
Critical habitat for the marbled murrelet was designated in May of 1996, but it is not
located within close range of the project site in Case Inlet. Marbled murrelet may occur in
South Puget Sound(USFWS 2011).
STREAKED HORNED LARK
On October 3, 2013,the streaked horned lark was listed as a threatened species under the
Endangered Species Act. Horned larks are birds that utilize wide open spaces with no
trees and few or no shrubs. The streaked horned lark nests on the ground in sparsely
vegetated sites dominated by grasses and shrubs. Historically this type of habitat was
found in prairies in western Oregon and Washington, in dune habitats along the coast of
Washington, on the sandy beaches and spits along the Columbia and Willamette Rivers,
and in grasslands, estuaries, and sandy beaches in British Columbia(WDFW 2012). The
streaked horned lark has been extirpated throughout much of its range, including all of its
former range in British Columbia, Canada,the San Juan Islands, the northern Puget
lowlands,the Washington coast north of Grays Harbor,the Oregon coast, and the Rogue
and Umpqua Valleys in southwestern Oregon(USFWS 2014).
The current range of the streaked horned lark can be divided in to three regions: (1)the
Puget lowlands in Washington, (2)the Washington coast and lower Columbia River
islands (including dredge spoil deposition sites near the Columbia River in Portland,
Oregon), and(3)the Willamette Valley in Oregon (USFWS 2014). The largest known
populations of streaked horned larks breed in the southern Willamette Valley at the
Corvallis Municipal Airport and on the Fish and Wildlife Service's Willamette Valley
National Wildlife Refuge Complex (USFWS 2014).
The violation project site appears to possess minimal suitable habitat for the streaked
horned lark;therefore it is unlikely that the bird will be found in the vicinity of the
violation project site.
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 7
t
HUMPBACK WHALE
In 1973, humpback whales were designated as endangered under the Endangered Species
Act. Exploitation of humpback whales from commercial whaling, which continued until
1966, left their numbers severely depleted. A North Pacific stock is known to occur
seasonally off the Washington Coast(Calambokidis et al. 2000, 2001). Humpbacks
occasionally venture into Puget Sound; however, since their favorite prey is krill, a
pelagic zooplankton, it is doubtful that Case Inlet would be a prime feeding area.
Presently, there is no designated critical habitat for the humpback whale. It is unlikely
that the humpback whale will be found in the vicinity of the violation project site.
LEA THERBACK TURTLE
The Leatherback is listed as endangered throughout its range (Federal Register,June 2,
1970). There are no nesting sites in Washington State,though leatherbacks have been
reported feeding as far north as British Columbia(NMFS 1998). There is no critical
habitat for the species in Washington State. The most pelagic of sea turtles, it is unlikely
that leatherbacks will be found in the vicinity of the violation project site.
PUGET SOUNDIGEORGIA BASIN ROCKFISH DPS
In 2010,the NMFS listed the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin DPS (distinct population
segment) of bocaccio (rockfish) as endangered, and canary rockfish and yelloweye
rockfish as threatened(NOAA 2014). In August of 2013,NMFS proposed designation of
critical habitat for the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin rockfish DPS. On November 13,
2013,NMFS finalized critical habitat for the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin rockfish distinct
population segment(DPS). The proposed critical habitat includes specific shoreline and
deepwater areas of Puget Sound.
When bocaccio and canary rockfish reach sizes of 1 to 3.5 inches (3 to 9 centimeters) or 3
to 6 months old,they settle into shallow, intertidal,nearshore waters in rocky, cobble and
sand substrates with or without kelp (Love et al., 1991; Love et al., 2002). This habitat
feature offers a beneficial mix of warmer temperatures, food, and refuge from predators
(Love et al., 1991). Unlike bocaccio and canary rockfish,juvenile yelloweye rockfish are
not typically found in intertidal waters(Love et al. 1991; Studebaker et al. 2009),but are
most frequently observed in waters deeper than 98 feet(30 meters)near the upper depth
range of adults (Yamanaka et al., 2006).
Rockfish are iteroparous (i.e.,have multiple reproductive cycles during their lifetime) and
are typically long-lived(Love et al., 2002). Puget Sound rockfish are long-lived species
with Yelloweye rockfish living more than 100 years, canary rockfish 60 to 75 years, and
bocaccio over 50 years. Depth is generally the most important determinant in the
distribution of many rockfish species of the Pacific coast(Chen, 1971; Williams and
Ralston, 2002; Anderson and Yoklavich, 2007;Young et al., 2010). Adult yelloweye
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 8
rockfish, canary rockfish, and bocaccio generally occupy habitats from approximately 30
to 425 m(90 ft to 1,394 ft) (Orr et al., 2000; Love et al., 2002). Adult yelloweye
rockfish, canary rockfish, and bocaccio prefer habitats within and adjacent to areas that
are highly rugose (rough). These are benthic habitats with moderate to extreme steepness;
complex bathymetry; and/or substrates consisting of fractured bedrock, rock, and
boulder-cobble complexes(Yoklavich et al., 2000; Love et al., 2002; Wang, 2005;
Anderson and Yoklavich, 2007). In Puget Sound, adult yelloweye rockfish, canary
rockfish, and bocaccio have been documented in areas with non-rocky substrates such as
sand, mud, and other unconsolidated sediments(Haw and Buckley, 1971; Washington,
1977; Miller and Borton, 1980).
Currently,NOAA Fisheries reports that there is insufficient information regarding the
habitat requirements of larval yelloweye rockfish, canary rockfish, and bocaccio to
determine which features are essential for conservation, and they have not designated
specific critical habitat for this life-stage. Critical habitat at the project site for juvenile
canary rockfish and bocaccio occurs from the shoreline from extreme high water out to a
depth no greater than 30 in(98 ft)relative to mean lower low water. It is possible that
juvenile bocaccio and canary rockfish may be found in the vicinity of the violation
project site.
CHINOOK SALMON ESU
The Puget Sound Chinook salmon ESU (Evolutionarily Significant Unit) was listed as
threatened under the Endangered Species Act by NOAA Fisheries in March of 1999
(64FR 14308). The majority of Chinook salmon in the Puget Sound area exhibit an
ocean-type life history and migrate to the ocean within their first year. Factors contributing
to the Chinook's decline include widespread migratory blockages and degradation of
freshwater and marine habitat,with many upper watersheds affected by poor forestry
practices and the mid- and lower-watersheds affected by agriculture and urbanization.
Commercial and recreational fishing are also partly responsible for the decline in native
Chinook abundance,along with predation by non-native species, marine mammal or bird
predation in areas of dwindling salmon run-size, competition from hatchery fish, and
natural environmental conditions such as floods and droughts that reduce already limited
spawning, rearing, and migration habitat.
Critical Habitat includes all near-shore marine areas of the Strait of Georgia, Puget
Sound,Hood Canal, and the Strait of Juan de Fuca(to the western end of the Elwha River
delta)from the line of extreme high tide out to a depth of 30 meters (70 FR 52688).
Critical Habitat along the nearshore area of the violation project site reveals foraging and
migration habitat. The nearest documented presence of Chinook salmon is in Rocky
Creek(1.0 mi.). It is expected that foraging or migrating Chinook salmon may be found
in the vicinity of the violation project site.
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 9
PUGET SOUND STEELHEAD DPS
On May 7, 2007,the National Marine Fisheries Service listed the Puget Sound Steelhead
DPS as Threatened under the Endangered Species Act. The steelhead has the most
complex life history of any Pacific salmon. Steelhead usually spend two to four years in
their home stream before heading to marine waters, and are known as a rainbow trout if
they remain in freshwater. Steelhead remain in saltwater for approximately three years,
then return to their home stream to spawn. Iteroparous, they are capable of spawning
more than once, and some will spawn a second or third time before dying. Habitat
utilization by steelhead in the Puget Sound area has been dramatically affected by large
dams and other manmade barriers in a number of drainages, including the Nooksack,
Skagit, White,Nisqually, Skokomish, and Elwha river basins (USFWS 2013).
While there is presently no designated critical habitat for the Puget Sound steelhead DPS
(distinct population segment),proposed critical habitat will designate approximately
1,880 stream miles (3,026 km)within the geographical area presently occupied by the
Puget Sound steelhead DPS (78 FR 2725). The nearest documented presence of Puget
Sound steelhead is in Rocky Creek(1.0 mi.). It is expected that Puget Sound steelhead
may be found in the vicinity of the violation project site.
GREEN STURGEON DPS
On April 7`h,2006, the National Marine Fisheries Service listed the Southern DPS of the
North American green sturgeon as a threatened species under the Endangered Species
Act. The green sturgeon, which is native to the Pacific Ocean, can reach 7 feet(210 cm)
in length and weigh up to 350 pounds(154 kg). Bottom feeders,they are an ancient fish
that has a cartilaginous skeleton and large bony plates instead of scales. The ecology and
life history of green sturgeon have received little study,evidently because of the
generally low abundance, limited spawning distribution, and low commercial and sport
fishing value of the species(Moyle 2002).
Critical Habitat for the green sturgeon, which was designated on October 9t'of 2009,
does not include Puget Sound. Designated critical habitat in coastal marine waters along
Washington State include the Strait of Juan de Fuca, Willapa Bay, and Grays Harbor. The
extent to which Southern DPS sturgeon use Puget Sound is unknown(NMFS 2002). It is
possible that Southern DPS green sturgeon may be found in the vicinity of the violation
project site.
KILLER WHALE
Orcinus orca is the largest member of the dolphin family. Their life span in the wild is
between 30 and 50 years. Males average 23 feet in length and weigh 7 to 10 tons.
Females average 21 feet and 4 to 6 tons. They are found in all oceans of the world,but
are most common in the Arctic and Antarctic or on the west coast of Canada and the
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 10
United States. Orcas are highly social and travel in pods that usually consist of 5 to 30
adult and juvenile whales. Pods are led by females.
On November 29, 2006,NOAA Fisheries designated critical habitat for the Southern
Resident Pod distinct population segment(DPS). South Puget Sound has been designated
as critical habitat. Marine waters less than 20 feet deep, relative to extreme high water,
are not critical habitat. In the spring of 2015 a small pod of transient killer whales visited
Case Inlet, but the Southern Resident pod is seldom seen in the vicinity of the violation
project site.
4.0 Environmental Baseline Conditions
4.1 Violation Project Vicinity
The environmental baseline represents the existing set of conditions,to which the effects
of the proposed action are then added. The environmental baseline is defined as"the past
and present impacts of all Federal, state, and private actions and other human activities in
the action area,the anticipated impacts of all proposed Federal projects in the action area
that have already undergone formal or informal section 7 consultation, and the impact of
state or private actions which are contemporaneous with the consultation process" (50
CFR 402.02). The project area is in Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 15, on
Rocky Bay in Pierce County.The project area supports a rural shoreline neighborhood on
the Key Peninsula, a lightly populated, sixteen mile long, key shaped peninsula in South
Puget Sound.Neighboring parcels to the east and west support single-family residences
on large lots. State Route 302 fronts the property to the north. Bulkhead coverage in the
area is between greater than 50%(Pentec 2003).
The majority of the fresh and marine waterbodies in WRIA 15 suffer from water quality
issues. Case Inlet is listed on the state's 2008 Water Quality 303(d)-5 list of impaired
waterbodies for the following parameters: fecal coliform, dissolved oxygen(low), and
PCBs. It can be assumed that,besides shoreline hard-armoring,the existing
environmental conditions in the area have been degraded by inorganic pollutants, as well
as organic pollutants, deforestation, shellfish aquaculture, and other anthropogenic
changes that accompany urbanization. Commercial shellfish aquaculture located approx.
0.5 mi. southeast of the violation project site is blanketing a spit in Rocky Bay with thick
black netting.
4.2 Violation Project Site
A field investigation was conducted on July 15'h of 2015. The violation project area was
surveyed visually on foot during a minus low tide (-1.9). The site supports an existing
SFR located approx. 245 feet from the shoreline of Rocky Bay/Case Inlet. There is an
unpaved switchback trail that leads to a concrete patio that is located on top of the
existing concrete bulkhead. The concrete bulkhead/patio protrudes approx. 25 feet farther
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 11
waterward than an adjacent piling bulkhead to the east and a concrete bulkhead to the
west. The patio is approx. 12 feet wide. Puget Sound gumweed and pickleweed were
observed growing on the east end, in substrate from the bluff toe (Attachment 7). The
shoreline access stairs were constructed at the west end of the bulkhead, on the
bulkhead's toe (Attachments 4& 5). As previously noted, in the past the applicant and
her family had accessed the beach using the neighboring property's stairs; unfortunately,
the neighboring property's owner recently rescinded that privilege. The shoreline access
stairs are constructed of pressure treated lumber with a composite (decking) landing and
handrails, and galvanized or aluminum hardware. Approximately ten concrete pavers
have been used to create steps from the concrete footing at the base of the stairs to the
beach.
The slope of the beach is shallow(Attachment 6). The substrate consists of shell hash,
sand, pea gravel, and gravel in the upper littoral zone, and sand, gravel, and cobble in the
mid-littoral,which gives way to sand, silt, and organic muck in the lower littoral zone.
The following macroalgae species were observed: pickleweed (Salicornia sp.). sea lettuce
(Ova sp.), gracilaria(gracilaria sp.),rock weed(Fucus distichus), short sea lettuce
(Prasiloa sp.), and sea moss (Endocladia muricata).
Invertebrete species observed at the site include the following: sand dollar(Dendraster
excentricus),red rock crab(Cancer productus), barnacle (Balanus glandula), Pacific
oyster(Crassostrea gigas),mussel (Mytilus sp.), and various bi-valve shells.
The following native plant species were observed: Douglas-fir(Pseudotsuga menziesii),
madrona(Arbutus menziesh),red alder(alnus rubra), and Puget Sound gumweed
(Grindelia integrifolia).
The following non-native, invasive plant species were observed: English or Atlantic ivy
(Hedera spp.), Himalayan blackberry(Rubus armeniacus/discolor/procerus),and Scotch
broom(Cytisus scoparius).
5.0 Effects of the Action
5.1 Direct Effects
Direct effects are the immediate effects of the project on the listed species and their
habitats (FWS &NMFS 1998). The direct effect to the project site was the construction
of shoreline access stairs in a marine area that is Critical Habitat for twelve previously
discussed ESA listed species.Direct effects to the shoreline along Rocky Bay/Case Inlet
include the following:
1) The loss of intertidal benthic habitat from the concrete paver steps. 2) Shading from
the stairs and landing. 3) Contamination from the leaching of wood preservatives.
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 12
1)Some benthic aquatic invertebrates at the violation site have been impacted by the
concrete paver steps,which could have resulted in reduced feeding opportunities for
juvenile salmonids or rockfish. However,the footprint of the steps is minimal
(approx. four to six square feet). Additionally, it is expected that the steps will
eventually be colonized by periphyton, sessile invertebrates, etc., which may result in
increased feeding opportunities for juvenile salmonids or rockfish.
2) A common direct effect of overwater structures is shading. Overwater structures also
create a light/dark boundary that may give piscivorous species an advantage over
their prey. However,there is little empirical evidence to support this conclusion.
Simenstad et al. (1999)found no studies attributing predation mortality to overwater
structures. In another study, sea perch and pile perch were found to be the most
abundant fish under docks(Ratte 1985).Neither species are potential predators of
juvenile salmon or rockfish.
Shade can also affect migrating salmonids. Schools of out-migrating chinook have
been observed swimming around piers,presumably because of the change in light
level and/or presence of predators (Tabor and Piaskowski 2001). Tabor and
Piaskowski also found that larger juvenile chinook avoided overwater structures both
at night and during the day. Other studies suggest that juvenile salmonids may utilize
docks for protective cover. Roni and Weitkamp(1996) found that juvenile chum were
likely passing under the Manchester Naval Fuel Pier, while Taylor and Willey(1997)
documented that juvenile salmon appeared to migrate through Pier 66 on the Seattle
waterfront using a fish passage opening,the shoreline, and the edges of dock
structures. While the effects of shade on migrating juvenile salmonids is unclear,
there is no empirical evidence of mortality. The significance of predation to migrating
populations has never been empirically assessed(Simenstad et al. 1999). No studies
have examined mortality due to predation much less that mortality is attributable to
overwater structures(Nightingale & Simenstad 2001).
As previously noted,the violation stair structure is located on the footing of the
existing concrete bulkhead. Both the bulkhead and the stair structure are exposed to
marine waters during higher tides for several hours each day/night, so it is expected
that the lower half of the stair structure will eventually be colonized by intertidal
sessile invertebrates,which may attract fish or other mobile aquatic life. The stair
structure is integrated into an existing structure, so it is doubtful that the stairs are
affecting migrating juvenile salmonids, as shade from the structure is expected to be
confined to the concrete footing directly beneath the stairs or slightly eastward.
Therefore, shade created by the violation stairs is expected to have a negligible
impact.
3) The leaching of wood preservatives is the most common contaminant-related issue
with pier, ramp, and floats or other shoreline structures constructed with pressure
treated lumber. Laboratory studies by Weis et al. (1991, 1992)have shown that
leaching decreases by about 50%daily once the wood is immersed in seawater. It is
unknown whether pressure treated lumber used in the violation project underwent
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 13
one or more USACE's recommended BMPs to minimize leaching of contaminants
into the water.
Recent work on contaminant leaching from ACZA includes a 2004 study of arsenic,
copper, and zinc concentrations in sediment,water, and shellfish near four
ACZA-treated wood structures on the Olympic Peninsula. In this study,there were
insignificant increases in arsenic, copper, and zinc in sediment and water at three out
of four sampling sites and minimal uptake by shellfish(Brooks 2004). Do to the
violation stair structure's small size (and the use of a composite decking material for
the landing and handrails), it is unlikely that leaching from treated wood will have a
noticeable impact on marine life at the violation project site.
5.2 Indirect Effects
Indirect effects are those effects that are caused by or will result from the proposed action
and are later in time, but are still reasonably certain to occur(50 CFR 402.02). Possible
indirect effects from the violation project include: 1) The creation of reef-like habitat as
invertebrate and macro-algae colonize the violation stair structure.
1) It is expected that the violation stair structure will be colonized by intertidal
invertebrate species that will provide food resources for a variety of species that may
constitute prey for juvenile salmonids and other aquatic life in the area.
5.3 Cumulative Effects
Cumulative effects are defined as "those effects of future state or private activities, not
involving Federal activities,that are reasonably certain to occur within the action area of
the action subject to consultation"(50 CFR 402.02). Cumulative impacts are difficult to
access. Continued growth and urbanization is likely to detrimentally impact fish and
wildlife resources. Global warming could raise the water level of Puget Sound, leaving
many waterfront properties underwater. Global warming could also result in warmer
water temperatures,to the detriment of species such as bull trout. Additionally,over-
fishing may deplete stocks of salmon, even as restoration of habitat in the watershed
furthers their likelihood of survival.
6.0 Conclusion
6.1 Take Analysis
Section 9 of the ESA prohibits take of endangered or threatened species, "take" being
defined in Section 3 as to harass,harm,pursue, hunt, shoot, wound,trap, capture, or
collect listed species, or attempt to engage in any such conduct. "Harm"is further defined
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 14
as a significant habitat modification or degradation that actually kills or injures listed
species by"significantly impairing behavioral patterns such as breeding, spawning,
rearing, migrating, feeding, and sheltering" (50 CFR 222.102). "Harass" is further
defined as an intentional or negligent act which creates the likelihood of injury to wildlife
by annoying it to such an extent as to significantly disrupt normal behavior patterns
which include, but are not limited to,breeding, feeding, or sheltering(50 CFR 17.3). In
regards to the violation project, it is extremely unlikely that any "take"has or will occur.
The proposed mitigation will further insure the likelihood that no "take"will occur.
6.2 Determination of Effect
A determination of May affect, not likely to adversely affect is the appropriate conclusion
when effects on the species or their critical habitat are expected to be beneficial,
discountable, or insignificant. After reviewing the appropriate data and survey
information, I have concluded that the violation project has had/will have an insignificant
impact on the previously discussed Endangered or Threatened species. In my most honest
and professional opinion, while the violation project may have/may impact individual
Endangered or Threatened species in the project area, it is not likely to adversely affect or
jeopardize the continued existence of those species or their designated Critical Habitat.
The determination of effect for each of the listed species is:
1. Puget Sound chinook and their designated Critical Habitat May affect, not likely
to adversely affect.
2. Puget Sound Steelhead--May affect, not likely to adversely affect.
3. Leatherback turtle and their designated Critical Habitat No effect.
4. Humpback whale—No effect.
5. Southern Resident Killer whale and their designated Critical Habitat---No effect.
6. Bull trout and their designated Critical Habitat No effect.
7. Marble murrelet and their designated Critical Habitat No effect.
8. Green Sturgeon and their designated Critical Habitat No effect.
9. Puget Sound Rockfish May effect, not likely to adversely affect.
10. Streaked horned lark and their designated Critical Habitat No effect.
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 15
7.0 References
Literature
Federal Register Nol. 71,No. 229/November 29, 2006/Rules and Regulations
Federal Register/77 FR 14062/March 8, 2012/Proposed Rules
Federal Register Nol. 78,No. 192/October 3, 2013/Rules and Regulations
Federal Register/78 FR 2725/January 14, 2013/Proposed Rules
Federal Register/78 FR 47635/August 6, 2013/Proposed Rules
Federal RegisterNol. 70,No. 170/September 2, 2005/Rules and Regulations
Federal RegisterNol. 70, No.185 /September 26, 2005/Rules and Regulations
Federal Register/Vol. 71, No. 176/Tuesday, September 12, 2006/Proposed Rules
Federal Register/Vol. 75,No. 200/October 18,2010/Rules and Regulations
Google Earth. 2013. Aerial Imagery. Internet report: https://www.google.com/earth/
The Environmental Protection Agency and the Washington Department of Natural
Resources. 2009. Marine Debris Fact Sheet: Creosote Treated Wood. Internet report.
http://water.epa.gov/type/oceb/marinedebris/upload/marine_debris_factsht_creosote-
treating_wood.pdf
Jones& Stokes Associates, Anchor Environmental, L.L.C.,R2 Resource Consultants.
2006. Overwater Structures and Non-Structural Piling White Paper. WDFW Publications,
Olympia, WA.
Kelty, R.A. and S. Bliven. 2003. Environmental and Aesthetic Impacts of Small Docks
and Piers, Workshop Report: Developing a Science-Based Decision Support Tool for
Small Dock Management, Phase 1: Status of the Science.NOAA Coastal Ocean Program
Decision Analysis Series No.22. National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science, Silver
Spring, MD. 69 pp.
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 16
Leigh, Michael. 1996. Grow your own native landscape: a guide to identifying,
propagating, and landscaping with Western Washington native plants. Washington State
University Cooperative Extension/Thurston County, Olympia, WA.
National Geographic. 2002. Field Guide to the Birds of North America. National
Geographic Society, Washington, D.C. pg. 226,244, 250, &320.
National Marine Fisheries Service. 2011. Programmatic EFH Consultation for Overwater
Structures. Internet report:
http•//www westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/publications/habitat/essential fish habitat/santa
rosa ow structure programmatic 10 11 2011v.ndf
National Marine Fisheries Service. 2014. Distribution of Threatened and Endangered
Species. Internet report: http://www.nwr.noaa.gov
Nightingale, B. and C. Simenstad. 2001. Overwater Structures: Marine Issues.
Washington Departments of Fish and Wildlife, Ecology, and Transportation. Olympia,
Washington. 177 p.
NOAA. 2014. Endangered and Threatened Marine Species. Internet report:
b=://www.mnfs.noaa.izov/t)r/Mecies/esa/
Pentec Environmental. 2003. Key Peninsula, Gig Harbor, and Islands Watershed
Nearshore Salmon Habitat Assessment. Final Report. Pierce County Public Works and
Utilities,Environmental Services, and Water Programs. University Place, WA.
Poston, T. 2001. Treated Wood Issues Associated with Overwater Structures in Marine
and Freshwater Environments. Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.
USDA Forest Service. 2006. English Ivy. Internet report:
http://www.na.fs.fed.us/ffit)/invasive-plants/weeds/en lig sh-ivy.pdf
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2011. Species Profile, Marbled Murrelet. Internet report:
http•//www.fws.g_ov/arcata/es/birds/mm/m murrelet.html
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2012. Guidance for Identifying Marbled Murrelet Nest
Trees in Washington State. Internet report:
http//www.wsdot.wa.aov/NR/rdonlyres/2D97D3 D8-D448-43 A7-8249-
E2319095 C 8 C2/0/MAMUhabitatF W S.pdf
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2012. Marbled Murrelet Nesting Season and Analytical
Framework for Section 7 Consultation in Washington. Internet report:
httl2://www.wsdot.wa.govNR/rdonIMes/F3847D4F-BFIC-476C-8E9D-
A45A715B624C/O/CoverLtrNestingSeason.pdf
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 17
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.2014. Species fact sheet, Streaked Horned Lark,
Eremophila alpestris strigata. Internet report:
http//www fws gov/wafwo/species/Fact%20sheets/streakedhomedlarkfmal.pdf
Washington State Department of Ecology. 2008. 2008 Water Quality 303(d)-5 List:
Kitsap Water Resource Inventory Area(WRIA) 15. Internet report:
http•//www ecy.wa.gov/services/ ig s/maps/wria/303d/wl6-303d.pdf
Washington State Department of Natural Resources. 2014. FPARS ARCIMS mapping
application. Internet report: http://fortress.wa.gov/dnr/appI/fears/viewer.htm
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008. Priority Habitat and Species List.
Olympia, Washington. 177 pp.
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2012. Annual Report: Marbled Murrelet.
Internet report.
http•//wdfw wa.gov/conservation/endan eg red/species/marbled murrelet.pdf
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2012. Annual Report: Streaked Horned
Lark. Internet report:
b=://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/endangered/species/streaked horned lark.pdf
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2014. SalmonScape. Internet report:
http://at)ps.wdfw.wa.gov/salmonscgpe/
Washington State Department of Transportation. 2014. BA Preparation for
Transportation Projects—Advanced Training Manual—Version 4-02-2014. Internet
report: http•//www wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/AlF85352-90EO-457B-9A8C-
B5103E097FAE10BA manualpart2.pdf
Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board. 2010.Noxious weed list. Internet
report: http://www.nwcb.wa.gov/nwcb nox.htm
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 18
Attachment 1
The vicinity map.
1
Much-Smith Property N^
1f36Ih=-" .-t
106th-St Ct--
Cfn:x 'S03ti P 1G&}:7X i,.:C'OEO!".CA 34D'Svi0�e fi_a]Ik.. A�.',?. 5!PSE�
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 19
Attachment 2
Site Plan.
1�1Qpppp s t\VICiN7TY hLaP
xl
GAL OESCRFTI
.u�rw�r?crernwcrcrn
I r:nomin. x,i
1 � .w.rw-ncrtrn:ncrrne
krwc'I Of' 1 LT �"MQ N'artE-uawe ..
a-,MCT4 2OF IT TH rtlm
'=G fIN T-e 7F1E Le.'Pl
I 1
I
I 1 tl
I _ -
_ ---- / ITC T1 7C'
�,,... - I 2ff SCwiE
1
' .4 ::y.�';;�'-� ':\'� �:• PROPERTY LINE NO
' "C MY LIES A2lA;f]
Nl.^t7011'S RLE mWegS1
soar { 1 TAX PARCEL Nt1A8
AE' ! ,vz;+w�rs
I I
ANCICHSMITH RETAINING WALL
i0 SII[PI AN
CiB CHERY_MCIClfSMITH
6CC�rnv�q + s X—FAR xuM
� �.J� 'MMR
SST SrA� AIU
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 20
Attachment 3
Cross section & project area site view.
PL
ftJ jrt�it; �t '{
f
{
� a
1 '
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 21
Attachment 4
The violation development: new shoreline access stairs on the footing of the site's
existing concrete bulkhead with concrete paver steps.
iW
i.
? - -W -
f.
t
yr
M fit.
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 22
At�� 'Qs men' 5
Th site SFR, bluff, existing bulkhead, and new shoreline access stairs.
a .
.ti y
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 23
Attachment 6
The shoreline at the site, looking south toward Treasure (aka Reach) and Stretch Islands.
_. _.
- - x
s
r s
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 24
Attachment 7
Puget Sound gumweed and pickleweed growing landward of the concrete patio area on
east end of the bulkhead.
r
,elP, yr`
ze.
a
,r ti PRIMP,
s
-iI
¢ J
r
1
r�
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 25
Attachment 8
The mitigation planting area, landward of the bulkhead/patio's west end.
y •:`:m �s�,rr 'tom �..,.
F 7. ti'ra
« e -
v,-
Y e
e
Ancich-Smith Habitat Management Plan 26
EXHIBIT #11
10/26/2015 Addendum to 10/16/2015 Staff Report(SHR 2015-00008)
To Address Type II Review Criteria(MCC 15.09.050.c)
Staffs findings are in italic font.
(c) Required Review. The hearing examiner shall review a proposed development according to
the following criteria:
(1) The development does not conflict with the comprehensive plan and meets the
requirements and intent of the Mason County Code, especially Titles 6, 8, and 16.
Title 6(Sanitary Code)—not applicable
Title 8(SEPA and Critical Areas Ordinance)—yes, SEPA processed a HMP and MEP
submitted and processed. 28 day review period for tribe and WDFW ended October
16rn
Title 16(Plats and Subdivisions)—not applicable.
(2) The development does not impact the public health, safety and welfare and is in the
public interest.
Because the development is very small, located on an existing concrete footing, and
mitigated for with riparian buffer enhancement, Staff feels that the proposal will not
impact the public health, safety, and welfare and is in the public interest.
(3) The development does not lower the level of service of transportation and/or
neighborhood park facilities below the minimum standards established within the
comprehensive plan. If the development results in a level of service lower than those
set forth in the comprehensive plan,the development may be approved if
improvements or strategies to raise the level of service above the minimum standard
are made concurrent with the development. For the purpose of this section,
"concurrent with the development" is defined as the required improvements or
strategies in place at the time of occupancy, or a financial commitment is in place to
complete the improvements or strategies within six years of approval of the
development.
The development will not lower the level of service of transportation or neighborhood
park facilities.
Sincerely,
Rebecca Hersha
AI
G $
W1P
n
O
�y'L 1889�y
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
PO Box 47775 • Olympia, Washington 98504-7775 • (360) 407-6300
RECEIVED
December 4, 2015 DEC 1 u 2015
Please
FILE
RW MCCD - PLANNING
Cheryl Ancich Smith To: ire/ e
10530 W Edgewood Drive
Sun City, AZ 85351
Re: Mason County Local Permit SHR2015 t1o"
Cheryl Ancich Smith- Applicant
Filed Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (SDP) & Approved Shoreline
Conditional Use Permit
Dear Ms. Ancich-Smith:
On November 19, 2015, the Department of Ecology (Ecology) received the Mason County
decision on your Shoreline Substantial Development& Conditional Use Permits for construction
(after the fact) of a small set of stairs leading from the top of the existing bulkhead to the
bulkhead footing within shoreline jurisdiction of Puget Sound.
By law, local governments must review all SDPs for compliance with:
• The Shoreline Management Act (Chapter 90.58 RCW)
• Ecology's Substantial Development Permit approval criteria(Chapter 173-27-150 WAC)
• The Mason County Local Shoreline Master Program.
Local governments, after reviewing SDPs for compliance, are required to submit them to
Ecology. Your approved SDP has been received by Ecology.
By law, Ecology must review Conditional Use Permits for compliance with:
• The Shoreline Management Act(Chapter 90.58 RCW)
• Ecology's Conditional Use Permit approval criteria(Chapter 173-27-160 WAC)
• The Mason County Local Shoreline Master Program.
After reviewing Conditional Use Permits for compliance, Ecology must decide whether to
approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove them.
Our Decision:
Ecology approves your Conditional Use Permit, provided your project complies with the
conditions required by Mason County. Please note, however, that other federal, state, and
local permits may be required in addition to this shoreline permit.
What Happens Next?
Before you begin activities authorized by this permit,the law requires you to wait at least 21
days from date of this letter, which is the "date of filing." This waiting period allows anyone
(including you) who disagrees with any aspect of this permit to appeal the decision to the state
Shorelines Hearings Board. You must wait for the conclusion of an appeal before you can begin
the activities authorized by this permit. ....,,.,
We recommend contacting the Shorelines Hearings Board at (360) 664-9160 before beginning
permit activities to ensure that no appeal has been filed. Information on appeals is also posted at
http://www.eluho.wa.gov/Decision/Search Cases. Select "Shorelines Hearings Board" from the
drop down menu labeled 'Board" and enter "Search." The most current appeal will appear on
top.
if you want to appeal this decision;you can find appeai instructions (Chapter 461-08 WAC) at
the Shorelines Hearings Board website above. They are also posted on the website of the
Washington State Legislature at: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac.
If you have any questions, please contact Rick Mraz at(360) 407-6221.
Sin -
Pe Lund, Unit Mana r
horelands and Environment Assistance Program
By certified mail 7012 2920 0000 1182 2212
cc: Rebecca Hersha, Mason County
LIMITED SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY
OF
CHERYL A.NCICH-SMITH
1. Designation. The undersigned (the "Principal") designates GLEN
PETER PSZCZOLA as her Attorney-in-Fact for the Principal, hereunder,
for the limited purposes and duration set forth below, in and of acting on
her behalf for the limited matter set forth here below.
2. Effectiveness. This Power of Attorney shall become immediately
effective upon its execution by Principal Cheryl Anchich-Smith.
3. Powers. The Attorney-in-Fact shall have all of the powers of
Principal, including speaking authority, and may act in her stead as fully as
if she herself was so present and so acting, in the matter of the application
and prosecution of permit(s), development, correspondence to and with
neighbors, Mason County officials, surveyors, engineers, and all persons
and parties involved in the permitting of a beach stairway and retaining
wall, on the subject real property, as described hereunder.
4. Real Property. The real property herein, over which Principal
grants Attorney-in-Fact the above Powers, is described as: Mason County
Parcel Number 12233-50-90012, commonly known as "5772 State Route
302, Belfair, WA 98528. The Legal Description of the subject property,
Attachment "A" hereto, is fully incorporated by reference, hereby.
5. Duration. This Limited Special Power of Attorney shall terminate
under its own terms no later than six (6) months from the date of its
execution, unless terminated by action of Principal.
5. Termination. This Limited Special Power of Attorney may be
terminated by (a) the Principal by written notice to the attorney-in-fact and,
if this power of attorney has been recorded, by recording the written
instrument of revocation in the office of the recorder or auditor of the place
where the power was recorded; (b) a Guardian of the estate of the Principal
upon actual knowledge or receipt of written notice by the attorney-in-fact.
6. Accounting. The Attorney-in-Fact shall account for all the actions
taken by the Attorney-in-Fact for or on behalf of Principal.
7. Reliance. Any pers 7cting without negligence and in good faith in
Page I of 2. Initials: Date: _•
reasonable reliance on this power of attorney shall not incur any liability
thereby. Any action so taken, unless otherwise invalid or unenforceable,
shall be binding on the heirs and personal representatives of the Principal.
Dated:----�' -- — -------------
Principal CHERYL ANCIC SMITH_---''��
State of Vv s��` )
' ) ss.
County of Pierce )
tea.rtco�-
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that CHERYL
ANCICH-SMITH is the person who appeared before me, and said person
acknowledged that she signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be
her free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the
instrument.
GIVEN under ly hand and official seal on
------------------
SANDRA HERNANDEZ
T- tary public in and for the State ( _; r,.- Notary PoW-state ArWM
�f{ � i MMICOPA COUNTY,f "ZOV-)Q W COMMission Expires
residing at: L_ ' z c� oecemcerz7,2o,s
Commission expires: 4-71.-11L.�'_----
F
Page 2 of 2. Ini Date:
ONE_CALLS ESHO NASINDICAT ANCICH-SMITH RETAINING WALL
BURIED UTILITIES ARE SHOWN AS INDICATED ON RECORD MAPS FURNISHED BY OTHERS AND �] E HIGHLANDER DR
VERIFIED WHERE POSSIBLE BY THE ACCURACY
LOCATEDFHOIN THE FIELD.OR
THE FINLLOCATIO A PORTION OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST, W.M.
ASSUMES NO LIABILITY FOR THE ACCURACY OF THOSE RECORDS,OR FOR THE FINAL LOCATION OF
EXISTING UTILITIES IN AREAS CRITICAL TO DESIGN.
MASON COUNTY, WASHINGTON
SITE PLAN
I I NORTH BAY
' RECEIVED
I I
I EXISTING
1. 5 TREE MINIMUM-SHORE PINE(PINUS CONTORTA) HOUSE I SR 302
2. 5 TREE MINIMUM-VINE MAPLE(ACER CIRCINATURM) , SEP 0 1 2015 I l v J
I O�
3. SHRUBS-10 SHRUBS WITH 3 OF THE FOLLOWING SPECIES: I 426 W. CEDAR ST- I I I I o_
• OCEANSPRAY(HOLODISCUS DISCOLOR)
• INDIAN PLUM(OEMLERIA CERASIFORMIS)
• ROCKY BAY
HAIRY MANZANITA(ARCTOSTAPHYLOS COLUMBIANA)
• BALDHIP ROSE(ROSA GYMNOCARPA) ) LAWN
SITE
• THIMBLESERRY(RUBUS PARVIFLORUS)
I �N
• SALAL(GAULTHERIA SHALLON)
I!9 3 VICINITY MAP
• SWORD FERN(POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM) I SCALE:1'=1000'@ 22"N34"
• TALL OREGON-GRAPE(BERBERIS AOUIFOLIUM)
I RETAINING
WALL
31 ti
NOTE:REFER TO THE HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN PREPARED BY BIORESOURCES,LLC,DATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
AUGUST 20,2015. I ALL THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT ONE(1),SECTION THIRTY-THREE,TOWNSHIP TWENTY-TWO
rn (22)NORTH,RANGE ONE(1)WEST,W.M.,PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
ALL THAT PORTION OF THE WEST 100 FEET OF THE EAST 200 FEET OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT
I 1,MEASURED ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY NO.148,AS THE SAME IS
NOW CONSTRUCTED AND IN USE OVER AND ACROSS SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1,WHICH LIES SOUTH
1 NATIVE VEGETATION SCHEDULE I OF SAID STATE HIGHWAY NO.14B.EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE NORTH 110 FEET,AS MEASURED
�I ALONG THE EAST LINE THEREOF;SAID LAND BEING ALSO KNOWN AND DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF
( I LAWN I TRACT NO.2 OF THE UNRECORDED PLAT OF OLYMPIC SHORE.
SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF MASON,STATE OF WASHINGTON.
I I I
I I
( I WOOD
RETAINING
WALL
I
�-40 I
WOOD STAIRS EL=14.1 LEGEND:
rr CONCRETE DEOK EL=14.7 I DIRT NATIVE VEGETATION I O FOUND REBAR Wf CAP
16 I1 �, AND BLACK BERRIES
1 t O FOUND PKNAIL WI ID WASHER
14
F -- I APPLICANTS PARCEL LINES
12 _— I —N— —— NEIGHBORING PARCELS
10 6.1' L• IGH A 11. I I EXISTING CONCRETE
NATIVE VEGETATION
i I AND BLACK BERRIES
8 — I
r -- C CR PLANT
6 INATI VEGETATION , I 0' 1®
4 CON R FOO NG L=6.0 I i 20'SCALE
C OCK
2
CH E=4.5 I STEPS(TYP)
O I I NATIVE VEGETATION
AND BLACK BERRIES
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 I �'
EL 14.7 \A
R
EL 14.4
eg EL14.7 ..I...�; 4' y .�_ • PROPERTY LINE NOTE:
PROPERTY LINES ARE BASED ON RECORD OF SURVEYS RECORDED UNDER
� ——— � .';�•'• .. ., .• AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBERS 1994450 AND 2040249.
EL 5.7
�� � EL 14.8
CONCRETE •I EL 5.9 TAX PARCEL NUMBER: SITE ADDRESS:
BLOCK I
STEPS I A I 1223350-90012 5722 E.STATE WA ROUTE 302
BELFAU8528
2 SECTION A
7 SCALE: H:1"=20'
5 MONUMENT REMOVAL PERMIT PROCESS DESIGNED BY CTB `G T ABglo TITLE ANCICH-SMITH RETAINING WALL 1wWWestSound
y NO SURVEY MONUMENT SHALL BE REMOVED OR DESTROYED(THE PHYSICAL DISTURBANCE OR Engineering I n C
t COVERING OF A MONUMENT SUCH THAT THE SURVEY POINT IS NO LONGER VISIBLE OR READILY _ 2 SITE PLAN 1
ACCESSIBLE)BEFORE A PERMIT IS OBTAINED FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES NAMMSY TJB ENGINEERING,PLANNING AND SURVEYING
(ONR),WAC 332-120-030(2)STATES"IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THOSE PERFORMING
CONSTRUCTION WORK OR OTHER ACTIVITY(INCLUDING ROAD AND STREET RESURFACING 27 D5D �,A• CLIENT 217 S.W.Wilkins Drive Port Orchard,Wa.98366
PROJECTS)TO ADEQUATELY SEARCH THE RECORDS AND THE PHYSICAL AREA OF THE PROPOSED CIEONED BY CTB gyp`" CHERYL ANCICHSMITH Phone(360)876-3770 Fax(360)876-0439
CONSTRUCTION WORK OR OTHER ACTIVITY FOR THE PURPOSE OF LOCATING AND REFERENCING TONAL 5722 E.STATE ROUTE 302 E-mail:wse@wserigineedng.com htl /N/ww.wsen ineehn com
ANY KNOWN OR EXISTING SURVEY MONUMENTS."CONSTRUCTION SHALL NOT COMMENCE UNTIL SEC 33 TWN 22N R 1W
S WAC OUTLINED IN CHAPTER 332-1201S COMPLIED WITH. BELFAIR,WA98528 P 9 9
SCALE 1"=20� REV. DESCRIPTION DATE BY DALE SEALED 08.18-2015 JOB No. 2421 SHT OF 1 SHTS