Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSHR2017-00002 Hearing North Bay Historical Society SDP, CUP Relocate Sargent's Oyster House - SHR Reports - 9/18/2017 STATE O eF 9 J � 6 � J �2 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 September 18, 2017 22'2-0 " North Bay Historical Society Attn: Bonnie Knight PO Box 1313 Allyn, WA 98524 Re: Mason County Permit SHR2017-00002 North Bay Historical Society - Applicant SIMULTANEOUS FILING OF Approved Shoreline Substantial Development Permit(SDP) Approved Shoreline Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Dear Ms. Knight: On August 28, 2017, the Department of Ecology received the Mason County decisions on your permits to relocate the restored historic Sargent's Oyster House to an overwater location. The building will be used as a living aquaculture museum, education center, and to grow shellfish seed. Your approved SDP and CUP have been filed with Ecology. By law, Ecology must review SDPs& CUPs for compliance with: • The Shoreline Management Act(Chapter 90.58 RCW) • Ecology's SDP approval criteria(Chapter 173-27-150 WAC) • Ecology's CUP approval criteria(Chapter 173-27-170 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. After reviewing CUPS for compliance, Ecology must decide whether to approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove them. Our Decision on your CUP: Ecology approves your CUP, 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 these shoreline permits. North Bay Historical Society laa.4S 10Pl`d -P�7c September 18,2017 110Z Z Z d3a Page 2 of 2 What Happens Next? Before you begin activities authorized by this permit, the law requires you wait at least 21 days from the 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 appeal 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 about this letter, please contact Rick Mraz at(360) 407-6221. S' erely, Perry J Lund, Section Manager Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program By Certified Mail 917199 9991 7036 9326 9425 cc: Kell Rowen, Mason County ♦F ETATg 7584 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 call877-833-6341 September 18,2017 North Bay Historical Society Attn: Bonnie Knight PO Box 1313 Allyn,WA 98524 Re: Mason County Permit SHR2017-00002 North Bay Historical Society - Applicant SIMULTANEOUS FILING OF Approved Shoreline Substantial Development Permit(SDP) Approved Shoreline Conditional Use Permit(CUP) Dear Ms. Knight: On August 28,2017,the Department of Ecology received the Mason County decisions on your permits to relocate the restored historic Sargent's Oyster House to an overwater location. The building will be used as a living aquaculture museum,education center,and to grow shellfish seed. Your approved SDP and CUP have been filed with Ecology. By law,Ecology must review SDPs &CUPs for compliance with: • The Shoreline Management Act(Chapter 90.58 RCW) • Ecology's SDP approval criteria(Chapter 173-27-150 WAC) • Ecology's CUP approval criteria(Chapter 173-27-170 WAC) • The Mason County Local Shoreline Master Program. Local governments,after reviewing SDPs for compliance,are required to submit thetas to Ecology. Your approved SDP has been received by Ecology. After reviewing CUPS for compliance,Ecology must decide whether to approve,approve with conditions, or disapprove them. Our Decision on your CUP: Ecology approves your CUP,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 these shoreline permits. o I North Bay Historical Society September 18,2017 Page 2 of 2 What Happens Next? Before you begin activities authorized by this permit,the law requires you wait at least 21 days fiom the 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 htta://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 appeal 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 about this letter,please contact Rick Mraz at(360)407-6221. S' erely, Perry J Lund, Section Manager Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program By Certified Mail 917199 9991 7036 9326 9425 cc: Kell Rowen,Mason County MASON COUNTY Department of Community Services Planning Division 615 W Alder St Shelton, WA 98584 (360)427-9670 SHORELINE PERMIT Case No.: SHR2017-00002 STATUS: ISSUED Received: 6/15/2017 Issued: 8/25/2017 Expires: 8/25/2019 Tvr)e of Permit: Sub. Dev./Conditional Use Applicant: PORT OF ALLYN OYSTER HOUSE PROJECT PO BOX 1 ALLYN, WA 98524 Location of Project: FOLLOW ST RT 3 TO PORT OF ALLYN Within CASE INLET and/or its associated wetlands. The projectwill not be within shorelines of statewide significance. Shoreline Designation: Urban Parcel Number: 122205008001 Address: 18560 E STATE ROUTE 3 ALLYN Legal Description: ALLYN BLK: 8 LOTS 1-10; BLK: 9 LOTS 2-10 & BLK:10 LOTS 1-20 & VAC ALLEY & VAC GROSS Project Description: PROPOSED PROJECT INCLUDES THE DEMO OF DERELICT BOAT RAMP AND RESTORATION OF AN HISTORIC STRUCTURE WHICH WILL BE RESTORED AND REPURPOSED AS A LIVING MUSEUM AND EDUCATION CENTER CONDITIONS: This permit has been granted by Mason County persuant to the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 and nothing in this permit shall excuse the applicant from compliance with any other federal, state or local statutes, ordinances or regulations applicable to this project but not inconsistent with the Shoreline Management Act. (Chapter 90.58 RCW). This permit may be rescinded pursuant to RCW 90.58.140(7) in the event the permittee fails to comply with the terms and conditions hereof. SHR2017-00002 Paqe 1 of 1 .STA MASON COUNTY o P A o N DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT o N Z Planning Division z� T N Y 615 W Alder St, Shelton, WA 98584 1864 (360)427-9670 MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT August 25, 2017 PORT OF ALLYN OYSTER HOUSE PROJECT PO BOX 1 ALLYN WA 98524 Parcel Number(s): 122205008001 Expiration Date: 8/25/2019 12:00:OOA Date Issued: 8/25/2017 Case Number: MEP2017-00011 Project Description: MEP SUBMITTED: PROPOSED PROJECT INCLUDES THE DEMO OF DERELICT BOAT RAMP AND RESTORATION OF AN HISTORIC STRUCTURE WHICH WILL BE RESTORED AND REPURPOSED AS A LIVING MUSEUM AND EDUCATION CENTER The following critical areas are present on this property: Long-Term Commercial Forest XX FWHCA Ch. 17.10.060; Ch. 17.01.110; Mineral Resource Lands Frequently Flooded Areas Ch. 17.01.066; Ch. 17.01.090; Inholding Lands Landslide Hazard Areas Ch. 17.01.062; Ch. 17.01.100; Wetlands Seismic Hazard Areas Ch. 17.01.070; Ch. 17.01.102; Critical Aquifer Recharge Erosion Hazard Areas Ch. 17.01.080; Ch. 17.01.104. This permit, with conditions, is granted pursuant to the Mason County Resource Ordinance (Chapter 17.01 MCC.) Nothing in this permit shall excuse the applicant from compliance with any other federal, state, or local statutes, ordinances, or regulations applicable to this project. This permit may be rescinded if the permitee fails to complete the project as proposed or fails to comply with the standards of this ordinance. �A q I 2s � 2�; i Authorized Local Government Official Date 8/25/2017 Page 1 of 2 MEP2017-00011 MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT 8/25/2017 Case No.: MEP2017-00011 Conditions: No permit or exemption authorizing construction shall extend for a term of more than five years. If actual construction of a development for which a permit has been granted has not begun within two years after approval, the Review Authority, the Mason County Planning Department, shall review the Mason Environmental Permit(MEP)and upon showing good cause, may extend the initial two year period by one year. No permit shall be extended unless the applicant has requested such review and extension prior to the exporation date. Signature Date OWNER - REPRESENTATIVE - CONTRACTOR Print Name (Circle one to indicate) 8125/2017 Page 2 of 2 MEP2017-00011 Shoreline Management Act Permit Data Sheet and Transmittal Letter to WA DOE FROM: TO: Mason County Planning WA Department of Ecology 615 W. Alder Street SW Regional office Shelton, WA 98584 ATTN: Shoreline Permit Reviewer P.O. Box 47775 Olympia, WA 98504 Submittal Date: Date Received by GA: TYPE OF PERMIT: (indicate all that apply) Substantial Development ❑ Variance ❑ Other: Conditional Use ❑ Revision LOCAL GOVERNMENT DECISION: ❑ Approval Conditional Approval ❑ Denial Planner Name: Phone: ZC ��Z�1 . C1�o -1L) ,c: 3G 3 Notice of Application Date: A-\Ay ZG' Ilea Final Decision Date: � � Zl �-2e) i —I APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE (if primary contact): Name: IUCY�k RY,4 Name: Mailing Address: -PC i �� ( `�j Mailing/Addr1e_sss: lS SG S bzAVXe'r LV1 �i V-'l '3-M Phone: 25l1-6 ':Sc ` } U L", Lf Phone: ZS c 1 C; 1 2-- Email: Y \;���� 6� 0,6 l .(ru"W\ Email: W IMil-Z t O, 66- M&er- .cdwl PROPERTY OWNER: ❑ Same as Applicant Other: Te' - C4- act( O.Ln U PROPERTY LOCATION: (Section, Township, and Range to the nearest % % Section; Latitude and Longitude; and a street address where available) `F 7, C2 1„ iz/� Tax Parcel Number: t✓ C�% t Shoreline Designation:V V hC�.v1 Waterbody:(1a5. '-11A AjLA Shoreline of Statewide Significance? ❑ Yes )a No PROJECT DESCRIPTION:4e �U(c�� uv` 6 0 - fLQs t��'�t ��5 ',Cc4. �rju� 'cl` ✓- y Gvt. CVO✓uiw v' 6c '*UVA `Fri V �S fvtU 2 I` r.. �-G✓ J �� � ��� G� c lilt? � � ' S`/ C, �+1 W (:\Community Development\PAC-Permit Assistance Center\PLANNING\Trari ittal Cover Sheets\ShorelineTransmittalDOE 6/2016 MASON COUNTY • COMMUNITY SERVICES Building,Planning,Environmental Health,Community Health August 25, 2017 Notice of Decision for Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and Shoreline Conditional Use Permit SHR2017-00002 Notice is hereby given that North Bay Historical Society, who is the applicant for the above referenced permit, has been granted conditional approval for Shoreline Substantial Development and Shoreline Conditional Use Permits to relocate the restored historic Sargent's Oyster House to an over water location in Allyn, WA at 18560 E. State Route 3. The building will be used as a living aquaculture museum and education center and to grow shellfish seed. The application is approved subject to all of the conditions listed within the staff report and by the Hearing Examiner within the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Final Decision, dated 08/21/2017. This shoreline substantial development permit decision is final and subject to appeal to the Washington State Shoreline Hearings Board as governed by Chapter 90.58 RCW. The conditional use permit is subject to approval of the Washington State Department of Ecology. Appeal deadlines are short and procedures strictly construed. Anyone wishing to file an appeal of this decision should consult with an attorney to ensure that all procedural requirements are satisfied. Time Limit for Action. Per the Mason County Code Title 15 - Development Code - No permit authorizing construction shall extend for a term of more than five years. If actual construction of a development for which a permit has been granted has not begun within two years after the approval, the Hearing Examiner shall review the permit and upon a showing of good cause, may extend the initial two year period by permit for one year. Otherwise, the permit terminates; PROVIDED that no permit shall be extended unless the applicant has requested such review and extension before the Hearing Examiner PRIOR to the expiration date. Please contact Kell Rowen of the Mason County Department of Community Development at (360) 427-9670, ext. 365, with any questions on this issue. Shoreline Management Act Permit Data Sheet and Transmittal Letter to WA DOE FROM: Mason County Planning TO: 615 W. Alder Street WA State Attorney General- Ecology Division Shelton, WA 98584 P.O. Box 40100 Olympia, WA 98504 Submittal Date: Date Received by GA: TYPE OF PERMIT: (indicate all that apply) l Substantial Development ❑ Variance ❑ Other: 7 Conditional Use ❑ Revision LOCAL GOVERNMENT DECISION: Approval Conditional Approval ❑ Denial Planner Name: V 60 P C Vye v-\ Phone: - �(2-1 - A l �� k �lcCD Notice of Application Date: J t-1 e- -G." Final Decision Date: APPLICANT: 1 I REPRESENTATIVE (if primary contact): Name: ��;V����`�I t-t-tS�'�v►�' � �'C�c � Name: 3E Mailing Address: ,X 1 I Mailing Address: S tk`,t ve c cl U11 �j e J Phone: ?,uC I . 1 0�0� Phone: j 12 Email: e-,A, —��73�� c�G �(igvl Email: Wi kt vim. _ Re1te—(O. Si a'�Aw :Cc'lrv� PROPERTY OWNER: ❑ Same as Applicant ❑ Other: PROPERTY LOCATION: (Section, Township, and Range to the nearest Y4 % Section; Latitude and Longitude; and a street address where available) Tax Parcel Number: So C S-C,( Shoreline Designation: �k V Ira.►'1 Waterbody: C �1��� INr: �c��l Shoreline of Statewide Significance? ❑ Yes No PROJECT DESCRIPTION: f 16 C '�Glk , . - c� ce. i e 41► 4 use cv�' C" MI,IS u'ry1 ��uf vv� ,�,v��1� C,lv�� S�-��S � t e c� � ; ✓try' �Lu`S�� �r• "�., (:\Community Development\PAC-Permit Assistance Center\PLANNING\Transmitt over Sheets\ShorelineTransmittal-AG 6/2016 I BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR MASON COUNTY 2 4 RE: Sargent's Oyster House FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND FINAL DECISION 5 Shoreline Substantial Development/ 6 Conditional Use Permit 7 (SHR2017-00002) 8 INTRODUCTION 9 The applicant has applied for a shoreline substantial development permit and 10 shoreline conditional use permit to relocate the restored historic Sargent's Oyster House to an over water location in Allyn, WA at 18560 E. State Route 3. The > > building will be used as a living aquaculture museum and education center and to 12 grow shellfish seed. The permits are approved subject to conditions. 13 TESTIMONY 14 Kell Rowen, senior Mason County Planner, summarized the proposal. She explained 15 that staff used the MCC 8.52.170(d)(3) buffer reduction process instead of a resource 16 ordinance variance for reducing the buffers of the project. In response to examiner questions, Ms. Rowen stated that in the minutes of the North Bay Historical Society, 17 Ex. 19, it was noted that the State of Washington would consider the nomination of the Oyster House as a historic landmark on condition that it was placed over water. 18 As to the need for over water construction, the County held a preapplication meeting in May that was attended by a representative of the Washington State-Department of 19 Ecology ("DOE"). There was discussion of keeping the building upland. The issue 20 was fully vetted and the Department of Ecology agreed that over water placement was necessary. A biological evaluation was sent to reviewing agencies instead of a 21 habitat management plan as required by the Resource Ordinance because the biological evaluation contains all the information required of a habitat management 22 plan. The county always accepts a biological evaluation in lieu of a habitat management plan from developers when both are required because the biological 2' evaluation includes all required information. As of the date of the hearing, the 24 Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife ("WDFW") and DOE had not made any comments on the requested buffer reduction. 25 SSDP/CUP P. 1 Findings, Conclusions and Decision Bonnie Knight, President of North Bay Historic Society, noted that when the Society I learned that the Oyster House would be destroyed they contacted the State and found 2 out it could be put on the historic register. 13 agencies worked together on preserving the Oyster House. An agreement was signed whereas monies originally earmarked 3 for demolition of the Oyster House would instead be used to restore and preserve it. Restoration had to be done over land. WDFW paid to have the building moved for 4 restoration work. It's the last known building of its type on Puget Sound. From the 1960s through the 1980s the University of Washington brought their aquaculture 5 classes to the Oyster House. The Oyster House will be used for continued 6 aquaculture education. Much of the original furniture will be returned to its original location. Two oyster companies will bring in their oyster by barge and use a 7 cantilever system on the building to hoist the oysters into the building. To show how oysters were historically hoisted into the building, the building must be situated over 8 the water. It is hoped that the University of Washington will bring back students to see how the Oyster House was operated. The project should have a big impact on 9 Mason County as a whole. Grants have been acquired from the state for restoring the 10 building. 11 Bill Rehe, project consultant, worked with DOE and the Tribe and there were initial concerns regarding overwater construction. However, once the impacts and 12 mitigation were understood the agencies were on board with the project. Mr. Rehe also had about a dozen meetings with WDFW and worked out mitigation to that 13 agency's satisfaction as well. The buffer is currently disturbed with concrete and 14 gravel for a parking lot and boat ramp. The parking lot will remain in place so there's no opportunity for any planting mitigation at the project site. Instead the applicant 15 will add 6:1 plantings to another waterfront parcel owned by the Port, the Kayak boat launch down the road. The existing boat ramp at the project site will be removed as 16 part of the mitigation. Removal of the boat ramp will free up natural drift processes, 17 which is considered a major benefit by the Tribe, DOE and WDFW. Mr. Rehe also confirmed that biological evaluations are much more detailed than habitat 18 management plans, 100 pages verses 10-15 pages for habitat management plans. Mr. Rehe is a marine biologist, was a WDFW habitat biologist for about five years and is 19 an Allyn resident. In his opinion, the proposal will result in no net loss of ecological function. No aquatic vegetation will be affected by the proposal. 25 cubic yards of 20 habitat mix, good for surf smelt spawning, will be added to the project site to take 21 advantage of the restored drift cell and removal of boat ramp. Aquatic vegetation will grow in the restored area quickly. There's drift and macro-algae in the area but no 22 eelgrass or kelp. The boat ramp is large and its removal will enable the growth of a significant amount of new aquatic vegetation. Even without the 6:1 planting, the 23 proposal would clearly result in no net loss of ecological function due to removal of the boat ramp. The 6:1 replacement is just voluntary and is not required by 24 development standards or necessary to mitigate the proposal. 25 Judy Scott, Port of Allyn Commissioner, expressed her support for the project and stated it was good for the community. SSDP/CUP p.2 Findings, Conclusions and Decision I Barry Betsinger, citizen, testified he's a former oyster picker from the 1960s and was 2 very familiar with everyone who worked at Sargent's. He worked 500 feet down the bay from Sargent's. The project needs to be put over the water for oyster harvesting. Enabling direct boat access to the building reduced direct handling of the oysters, which was necessary to maintain quality. The addition of conveyor belts and other 4 devices would result in more broken oysters and loss of product. The Sargent building has significant historical value because oyster processing jobs were the only jobs available to young adults in Mason County in the 1960s. The oyster jobs, which 6 were hard work,taught a work ethic and how to work with people. 7 In closing, Bonnie Knight noted that the County has paid for historical research on the project and it was discovered that just about everyone in Allyn in the 1960s had 8 worked in the oyster business. Over $200,000 in goods and materials has been 9 donated for the project. 10 In response to questions, Ms. Rowen noted that surrounding uses are composed of the Port of Allyn Park, some residential uses and a launch ramp to the south. No water I I front homes would have their views impacted. There was an email comment, Ex. 17, that views from the park would be affected. But the impact overall is limited to a 12 small part of the visible shoreline. Mr. Rehe noted that the waterfront house to the north has a water view in the opposite direction and trees that have been put in place 13 to provide privacy from the park obscure the home's view of the project site. The 14 project itself will have 8-foot decking that will be accessible to the public, thereby providing for greater public access to shoreline views. 15 EXHIBITS 16 17 The nineteen exhibits identified on the "Case Index" prepared by staff were admitted into the record during the August 9,2017 hearing. 18 FINDINGS OF FACT 19 Proced u ral: 20 1. Applicant. The applicant is the North Bay Historical Society and the Port 21 of Allyn. 22 2. Hearing. A hearing on the applications was held on August 9, 2017 at 1:00 pm in the Mason County Commissioners Meeting Room. 23 Substantive: 24 25 3. Site/Project Description. The applicant has applied for a shoreline -✓ substantial development permit and shoreline conditional use permit to relocate the restored Sargent's Oyster House to an over water location in Allyn, WA at 18560 E. SSDP/CUP p. 3 Findings,Conclusions and Decision State Route 3, for use as a living aquaculture museum and education center and to 1 grow shellfish seed. The Sargent's Oyster House was removed from its original over water location to facilitate a shoreline restoration project by the South Puget Sound Salmon Enhancement Group and WDFW. This historic structure was placed on an upland site 4 at the Port of Allyn to be restored to its original configuration and repurposed as a "living" museum and education center. The North Bay Historical Society along with 5 other community partners are proposing to relocate the restored structure to another 6 over water location on Port property. 7 The restored Sargent's Oyster House will be used to create a museum and education center that will preserve the traditional commercial working waterfronts and pay 8 homage to the shellfish and maritime history of Allyn and Mason County including the time prior to European settlement. It will also be used by local shellfish 9 aquaculturists to store equipment, load and unload equipment from barges and to 10 grow and raise shellfish seed. The proposal will include some new and experimental forms of aquaculture, including seed growing systems using floating upwelling 1 I systems(FLUPSYs)and recirculation tanks. 12 The restored structure will be placed in the upper section of an existing dilapidated concrete boat ramp on the northern shoreline of the Port. The approximately 3,300 13 square feet concrete boat ramp will be removed as mitigation for installing the 14 approximately 1,200 square foot Sargent's Oyster House over water on piling (see concept rendering in Exhibit 9). 15 The project site consists of several parcels owned by the Port of Allyn located at the 16 north end of Case Inlet. Upland portions of the Port property are comprised of a Port 17 administrative building and public park, with gazebo, play structure, bathrooms, picnic areas and parking lot. Adjacent to the shoreline is a rock bulkhead and the 18 dilapidated concrete boat ramp (currently blocked from public use), a functioning boat ramp and float, large angular bulkhead and a public pier. The site of the proposal 19 is in the overwater location of the dilapidated boat ramp at the north end of the parking lot and property. 20 21 When complete and fully functional, the museum will give the public the ability to experience what life was like in an historic oyster processing facility. The museum 22 will also be used as an education center for kindergarten through college aged students. Students will be given the chance to learn hands-on about oyster biology 23 and ecology by raising native oysters in aquaria or recirculation tanks.A program like "Salmon in the Classroom" is being developed. 24 25 SSDP/CUP p.4 Findings, Conclusions and Decision 1 2 4. Characteristics of the Area. The area is located along the western shoreline of Case Inlet within the Allyn Urban Growth Area (UGA). Case Inlet is 3 dominated by recreational and residential properties. The land use directly to the north and south of the project site are residential. 4 5. Adverse Impacts. There are no significant adverse impacts associated with the proposal. Impacts are more specifically addressed as follows: 6 A. Navigation and Public Use. The proposal will not significantly interfere 7 with navigation and will enhance public use of the shoreline. The proposal will be close to a large public pier that extends significantly further waterward. The proposal 8 is basically in the shadow of the public pier and likely would have no impact on watercraft attempting to navigate close to the shoreline. There is also sufficient 9 distance between the proposal and pier to avoid any obstacles to watercraft that may I moor at the public pier. The proposal will enhance public use of the shoreline since its eight-foot decking will be publicly accessible and its interior uses are available to I I educate the public about historic aquaculture practices. 12 B. Aesthetics. As shown in an October 11, 2016 photograph appended to the biological evaluation, aesthetic impacts will be nominal. Adjoining to the south is a 13 very large public pier that will completely dwarf the scale of the proposal and hide it 14 from any south to north views from the south. Immediately to the north there is a line of trees that extends all the way to the shoreline that would block any view of the 15 proposal from uses landward of the shoreline. The photograph is consistent with testimony from the applicant, that the only potentially affected residential views are 16 already obstructed by trees. The elimination of the dilapidated boat ramp will overall 17 improve aesthetics by its replacement of the renovated Sargent House. Further, the Sargent House will have eight-foot public decking, giving park users enhanced access 18 to shoreline views. 19 C. Compatibility. There are no compatibility impacts since surrounding uses are separated by the public lands of the Port, trees along the north perimeter, and the 20 public pier. The proposed use is also of low intensity, with very minor noise and 21 aesthetic impacts. 22 D. Water Quality. Impacts to water quality are positive, since as noted in the staff report, the shellfish raised in aquaculture filters excess algae in water thereby 23 moderating algae production and mitigating oxygen depletion. No supplemental feeding with cultured algae or other additives will be used. The facility will comply 24 with the State of Washington water quality standards for turbidity (WAC 173-201A- 25 210). SSDP/CUP P. 5 Findings, Conclusions and Decision E. Noise. There will be no long-term increase in noise associated with the 1 proposal. The proposal would include some additional sources of noise associated 2 with boat trips to access the project site and water pumps to wash down the FLUPSYs.There will be no perceptible increase in noise in the surrounding area. 3 F. Fish and Habitat Impacts. The applicant has submitted a Biological 4 Evaluation as part of its application packet that considers the potential impacts from the proposed project to threatened and endangered species and their critical habitat, as 5 well as any potential effects from the proposal on essential fish habitat as defined 6 under the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act. The evaluation considered both short and long-term effects and concluded that the 7 proposal was not likely to adversely affect threatened or endangered species and their critical habitat (Exhibit 11). Overall, as testified by the applicant's marine biologist, 8 the proposal will not result in a net loss of ecological function and will in fact improve upon ecological function. This is primarily because the proposal involves 9 the removal of an existing boat ramp, which serves as a significant obstacle to natural 10 drift cell processes. Even though not necessary to maintain ecological function, the applicant is also adding 6:1 native plantings to the Port's Kayak boat launch as further 11 mitigation. 12 G. Light and Odor. The proposal will not result in excessive odor. The proposal does not include any additional lighting other than that used during 13 operating hours of the museum. 14 H. Well Head Protection Zone. Jeff Carey, Ex. 17, expressed concern that 15 the proposal may be located within a wellhead protection zone. A condition of approval recommended by staff and incorporated into this decision requires that the 16 applicant verify with the Mason County Department of Health that the proposal is 17 consistent with the requirements of any applicable well head protection zone. 18 6. Suitability of Site for Aquaculture. This area of Case Inlet is open to shellfish farming and harvest. 19 7. Economic Impact. The proposal strengthens the local economy by opening 20 a museum highlighting local industry in addition to growing seed. 21 8. Cumulative Impacts. As noted by the testimony of Ms. Knight, the proposal is 22 heavily supported by numerous public agencies because the Sargent Oyster House is the last over-water building of its kind in Puget Sound. No other requests for over- 23 water recreation centers have been made in Mason County at least since the 1990s, if ever. Consequently, it is reasonable to conclude that there is little likelihood of any 24 request for any similar facility in the foreseeable future. 25 SSDP/CUP p. 6 Findings, Conclusions and Decision CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1 2 Procedural: 3 1. Authority of Hearing Examiner. MCC 15.03.050(9) authorizes the Examiner to review and issue a final decision regarding shoreline substantial 4 development permit requests and shoreline conditional use permits. 5 Substantive: 6 2. General Review Criteria for Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. 7 The applicant is required to obtain a shoreline substantial development permit for any substantial development within the shoreline jurisdiction. MCC 15.09.055(a). 8 Applications for substantial development permits are subject to review by the Hearing Examiner. MCC 15.09.055(f). The MCC requires a decision on a substantial 9 development permit application to be based upon the Shoreline Master Program for 10 Mason County("MCSMP"), and the policies and procedures of Chapter 90.58 RCW, the Shoreline Management Act ("SMA"). MCC 15.09.055(f)(2)(C). A "substantial I 1 development" is any development of which the total cost for market value exceeds $6,416.00. WAC 173-27-040 (2)(a). As noted in the staff report and as self-evident 12 from the proposal, the fair market value of the proposed facilities exceeds this amount. This proposal is reviewed under the SMP Section for Aquaculture. In 1' addition, MCC 17.50.034 requires a conditional use permit for the proposal because it 14 is an unclassified use within the MCSMP. Applicable review criteria are quoted below and applied through corresponding conclusions of law. 15 Mason County Comprehensive Plan, Chapter IX (MCCP IX) Aquaculture 16 Policy No. 1: Potential locations for aquaculture practices are relatively restricted 17 due to specific biophysical requirements such as water quality, temperature, substrait, dissolved oxygen, and salinity. Priority should be given to uses in areas 18 having a high potential for such uses. 19 3. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 6, the project site is suited for aquaculture production. 20 21 MCCP IX,Aquaculture Policy No.2: The County should strengthen and diversify the local economy by encouraging aquaculture uses. 22 4. The proposal will benefit the local economy as determined in Finding of 23 Fact No. 7. 24 MCCP IX,Aquaculture Policy No.3: Shoreline and upland land development in 2_ productive aquaculture areas or those areas with a high potential for aquaculture -� uses should be reviewed for detrimental impacts on aquaculture. SSDP/CUP p. 7 Findings,Conclusions and Decision 5. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal will not.create any 1 significant adverse impacts,which includes adverse impacts to aquaculture. ` MCCP IX,Aquaculture Policy No.4: Recognition should be given to the possible detrimental impacts that aquacultural activities might have on the aesthetic quality of the shoreline area. 4 6. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal will not create any 5 significant adverse aesthetic impacts. 6 MCCP IX,Aquaculture Policy No.5: Structures or activities associated with 7 aquaculture should be located inland from shoreline areas unless clearly shoreline- dependent. 8 7. As concluded in Conclusion of Law No. 37, the proposal qualifies as 9 water-dependent and encroaches waterward to the minimum extent reasonably 10 necessary. I 1 MCCP Aquaculture Policy No.6: Aquacultural activities should be operated in a manner that allows navigational access to shoreline owners and commercial traffic. 12 8. The proposal has minimal impacts upon navigation as determined in 13 Finding of Fact No. 5. 14 MCCP Chapter IX,Aquaculture Policy No. 7: Flexibility to experiment with new 15 aquaculture techniques should be allowed. 16 9. The proposal involves FLUPSYs,which as identified in Finding of Fact No.3 is a 17 relatively new and experimental form of aquaculture. 18 MCCP Chapter IX, Aquaculture Policy No. 8: Proposed surface installations should be reviewed for conflicts with other uses in areas that are utilized for 19 moorage, recreational boating, sport fishing, commercial fishing, or commercial navigation. Such surface installations shall incorporate features to reduce use 20 conflicts. 21 10. For the reasons outlined in Finding of Fact No. 5, there are no 22 compatibility issues with the proposal, including conflict with moorage and boating. 23 MCCP Chapter IX, Aquaculture Policy No. 9: Maximum effort to protect water quality should be made in areas with high potential for aquaculture and current 24 aquaculture areas which have been identified as sensitive areas. 25 11. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal will not adversely affect water quality. SSDP/CUP p. 8 Findings, Conclusions and Decision I MCC 17.50.060, Aquaculture Use Regulation No. 1: Shoreline developments 2 adjacent to areas especially suitable for aquaculture shall practice strict pollution control procedures. 3 12. The proposal will not adversely affect water quality as determined in 4 Finding of Fact No. 5 and is conditioned to comply with numerous mitigation measures in the project's biological evaluation, which assures strict pollution control 5 procedures. 6 MCC 17.50.060, Aquaculture Use Regulation No. 2: Aquacultural practices shall 7 be located and conducted so as to provide reasonable navigational access to waterfront property owners and along the shoreline. 8 13. The proposal will not adversely affect navigation as determined in Finding 9 of Fact No. 5. 10 MCC 17.50.060, Aquaculture Use Regulation No. 3: Site preparation in the 11 vicinity of aquaculture operations shall not result in off-site erosion, siltation or other reductions in water quality. 12 14. The mitigation measures of the biological evaluation, imposed by this 13 decision include erosion control and water quality protection measures that will 14 prevent off—site erosion,siltation and adverse impacts to water quality. 15 MCC 17.50.060,Aquaculture Use Regulation No. 4: Aquacultural practices shall be located and conducted so as to provide reasonable navigational access to 16 waterfront property owners and along the shoreline. 17 15. The proposal will not interfere with navigation as determined in Finding 18 of Fact No. 5. 19 MCC 17.50.060,Aquaculture Use Regulation No.5:Aquacultural development shall not cause extensive erosion or accretion along adjacent shorelines. 20 21 16. The mitigation measures of the biological evaluation, imposed by this decision, include erosion control measures that will prevent erosion and accretion 22 along adjacent shorelines. 23 MCC 17.50.060, Aquaculture Use Regulation No. 6: Aquaculture structures and 24 activities that are not shoreline dependent shall be located to minimize the 25 detrimental impact to the shoreline. SSDP/CUP P. 9 Findings, Conclusions and Decision 17. As concluded in Conclusion of Law No. 37, the proposal is shoreline 1 dependent. 2 MCC 17.50.060,Aquaculture Use Regulation No. 7: The proposed aquaculture 3 processing plants shall provide adequate buffers to screen operations from adjacent residential uses. 4 18. As determined in the compatibility analysis of Finding of Fact No. 5, 5 adjoining residential uses are adequately buffered. 6 MCC 17.50.060, Aquaculture Use Regulation No. 8: Aquacultural structures and 7 fisheries enhancement activities shall, to the greatest extent feasible regarding the economic viability of the operation and protection of the environment, be located, 8 designed and operated so that native plant and animal populations and their respective habitats and the local ecological balance are maintained. Disease and 9 pest control may be authorized. 10 19. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal will not adversely 11 affect water quality and no other impacts to native plant and animal populations can be reasonably inferred from the record. 12 MCC 17.50.060, Aquaculture Use Regulation No. 10: Aquacultural structures 13 shall be placed in such a manner, and be suitably marked, so as to minimize 14 interference with navigation. 15 20. The proposal will not interfere with navigation as determined in Finding of Fact No. 5. 16 17 MCC 17.50.060, Aquaculture Use Regulation No. 11: Aquacultural development shall be designed and constructed to harmonize as far as possible with the local 18 shoreline environment and shall be maintained in a neat and orderly manner. 19 21. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal will not adversely affect any shoreline environmental resources, so it is considered to be designed and 20 built to harmonize with the shoreline environment. The staff report concludes that the 21 project will be maintained in a neat and orderly manner. Given the subjectivity of "neat and orderly,"it is determined that the requirement is met. 22 MCC 17.50.060, Aquaculture Use Regulation No. 12: The proposed aquacultural 23 development shall make adequate provisions to control nuisance factors such as excessive noise and odor and excessive lighting. 24 25 22. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal will not create any significant adverse noise, light or odor impacts. SSDP/CUP P. 10 Findings, Conclusions and Decision MCC 17.50.060,Aquaculture Use Regulation No. 13: Aquacultural discards shall 1 be disposed of in a manner that will not degrade associated uplands, wetlands, 2 shorelines or water environments. Discards shall not be disposed of in a manner which results in offensive odors or increases the vector population. 3 23. No feed is used in the aquaculture operation; therefore, little waste is 4 anticipated to be generated. The growing of seed does not result in the discarding of 5 shells or other by-products. 6 MCC 17.50.060,Aquaculture Use Regulation No. 14: Equipment, structures and materials shall not be abandoned in shoreline or wetland area. 7 24. As conditioned. 8 9 RCW 90.58.020(1): Recognize and protect the state-wide interest over local interest. 10 25. The policy is met since approval enhances shoreline access, education and shoreline enjoyment while also improving ecological function. 11 RCW 90.58.020(2): Preserve the natural character of the shoreline. 12 26. The policy is met since the proposal involves minimal change in character 13 to the shoreline. The removal of the existing boat ramp will enable the restoration of 14 natural drift cell processes. 15 RCW 90.58.020(3): Result in long-term over short-term benefit. 16 27. The policy is met since the proposal advances aquacultural production, 17 shoreline access and ecological function with no associated significant adverse environmental impacts. 18 RCW 90.58.020(4): Protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline. 19 28. The policy met because as determined in Finding of Fact No. 5 the 20 proposal will not adversely affect shoreline environmental resources. 21 22 Shoreline Conditional Use Permit 23 MCC 17.50.080(1): That the proposed use will be consistent with the policies of 24 RCW 90.58 and the policies of the master program; 25 29. This decision addresses all applicable policies of RCW 90.58 and the County's master program. As determined in this decision, the proposal is consistent with all applicable policies. SSDP/CUP P. 11 Findings,Conclusions and Decision 1 MCC 17.50.080(2): That the proposed use will not interfere with the normal public 2 use of the shorelines; 30. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5,the proposal will not significantly interfere with navigation or any public use of the shoreline. 4 MCC 17.50.080(3): That the proposed use of the site and design of the project will be compatible with other permitted uses within the area; 6 31. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal is compatible with 7 surrounding uses. 8 MCC 17.50.080(4): That the proposed use will cause no unreasonable adverse 9 effects to the shoreline environment in which it is to be located; 32. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal will not create any adverse impacts to the environment. II MCC 17.50.080(5): That the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect. 12 33. The criterion is met since the proposal will not create any significant 1' adverse impacts as determined in Finding of Fact No. 5. 14 MCC 17.50.080(6): Potential for cumulative impact of additional requests for like 15 actions in the area. 16 34. The proposal will not create any significant cumulative adverse impacts as 17 determined in Finding of Fact No. 8. 18 Additional Review Criteria 19 MMC 15.09.050 Type III review 20 (1) The development does not conflict with the comprehensive plan and meets the 21 requirements and intent of the Mason County Code, especially Titles 6, 8, and 16. 22 35. The criterion is met. The shoreline policies addressed in this decision are part of the County's comprehensive plan. As determined in this decision, the proposal 23 is consistent with all those shoreline policies. There are no conflicts with any other comprehensive plan policies apparent from the record. The proposal has been 24 properly processed under SEPA. Subdivision regulations do not apply as no division 25 of land is proposed. Building code regulations and sanitary waste standards will be applied during building permit review. SSDP/CUP p. 12 Findings, Conclusions and Decision 36. Special Use Permit. A neighbor submitted materials, Ex. 19, suggesting 1 that a special use permit is required for the proposal because the proposal will be in the Public Facilities Overlay("PF") District and MMC 17.10.670 provides that "[a]1l development projects in the PF district shall require approval of a special use permit." However, the proposal is also located in the Public Open Space ("POS") District, where the proposal is permitted outright by MCC 17.10.720 as a community 4 recreation center. Reconciling these two conflicting provisions through principles of 5 statutory construction, it is concluded that no special use permit is required. 6 Before addressing the conflict between the PF and POS provisions, it is necessary to assess whether the proposal in fact qualifies as a "community recreation center" as 7 asserted in the staff report, since that designation is not apparent on its face. The term "community recreation center" is not directly defined by the MCC. MCC 17.06.010 8 provides that the terms used in Mason County development regulations are subject to the definitions of the Moskowitz, Harvey S. and Lindbloom, Carl G.; The New 9 Illustrated Book of Development Definitions. New Brunswick, NJ, Center for Urban 10 Policy Research, 1993. The treatise defines a community recreation center to include facilities used for recreational, social, educational and cultural activities. The 11 proposal will clearly be used for educational and cultural activities. Consequently, it qualifies as a community recreation center an is permitted outright in the POS zone 12 by MCC 17.10.720. 13 In reconciling the conflict between the special use permit requirements of the POS 14 and PF zones, the primary objective should be to ascertain and give effect to legislative intent. See Wash. State Dept. of Transportation v. City of Seattle, 182 15 Wash. App. 824, 837 (2016). In so doing, courts avoid a literal reading of a statute when doing so would result in unlikely, absurd, or strained consequences. See 16 Columbia Riverkeeper v. Port of Vancouver, 188 Wn.2d 421, 443 (2017). In this 17 case, construing the PF overlay district as requiring special use permits for all uses authorized in the underlying POS zoning district would lead to absurd and strained 18 consequences that is likely contrary to legislative intent. The authorized uses in the POS zone are relatively benign. The uses authorized by the PF district are capital 19 facilities such as sewage treatment plants that are comparably obnoxious. It makes little sense to require a special use permit for POS uses just because the PF overlay 20 district in addition authorizes comparably obnoxious public facilities. The public 21 facilities authorized by the PF overlay district do not need any protection from the benign authorized uses of the POS district — the need for a special use permit is 22 clearly the opposite, i.e. protecting the benign authorized uses of the POS district from the much more obnoxious uses of the PF district. Understood in this light, the 23 requirement for a special use permit imposed by MCC 17.10.670 only applies to the uses authorized by the PF district. 24 25 37.Resource Ordinance Buffer. The proposal is consistent with the County's resource ordinance buffer for Hood Canal because the proposal qualifies as water- dependent. SSDP/CUP p. 13 Findings,Conclusions and Decision MCC 8.52.170 impose a 100-foot fish and wildlife conservation buffer for saltwater I shorelines such as Hood Canal. However, MCC 8.52.170(d)(2)(B) allows water 2 dependent uses to encroach into this 100-foot buffer so long as "minimum necessary adjustments" are made to the buffer to provide for the use. "Water-dependent" is 3 defined by MCC 8.52.030 to mean "requiring the use of surface water that would be essential to fulfill the purpose of the proposed project." The purpose of the proposal 4 is to educate the public about historic aquaculture practices in Mason County. To be historically accurate, the building needs to be constructed overwater. The proposal 5 will be involved in live aquaculture practices to demonstrate how aquaculture was 6 historically done. Part of the operation involves hoisting oyster shells from barges and other watercraft that moor at the edge of the oyster house. Another part of the 7 historical aquaculture practice involved using the seawater directly below the building. Both functions are reliant upon an overwater facility. For the proposal to 8 accurately portray historical aquacultural practices, the facility must be over-water and therefore qualifies as water-dependent. Site plans show that the proposed oyster 9 house will be built directly over an existing rock bulkhead, which is presumably the 10 ordinary high water mark of the project site. As such, the encroachment of the proposed oyster house has been minimized as much as practicable (i.e. it doesn't I 1 extend any further waterward than it needs to), so the buffer reduction as proposed is authorized by MCC 8.52.170(d)(2)(B). 12 County staff also used the buffer reduction process authorized by MCC 13 8.52.170(d)(3) to justify the encroachment into the 100-foot buffer. Given that the 14 proposal meets the buffer reduction requirements of MCC 8.52.170(d)(2)(B), it is debatable whether it was necessary to also apply MCC 8.52.170(d)(3). Nonetheless, 15 the proposed encroachment also meets the requirements of MCC 8.52.170(d)(3). MCC 8.52.170(d)(3) authorizes a decrease in fish and wildlife conservation buffers 16 upon consultation with WDFW and the Squaxin Island Tribe and approval of a 17 habitat management plan that includes mitigation that provides for better protection than the required buffer. In this case staff approved the biological evaluation, which 18 staff found to exceed the requirements of a habitat management plan. The biological evaluation was sent to WDFW and the Squaxin Tribe for comment and no comment 19 was received (although the applicant had over a dozen meetings with WDFW and was able to work out mitigation to that agency's satisfaction). The applicant's marine 20 biologist was able to conclude that with the proposed mitigation, most notably the 21 removal of the existing boat ramp, the proposal would not result in any net loss of ecological function and would overall significantly increase ecological function by its 22 removal of the boat ramp obstacle to natural drift cell processes and 6:1 replantings. 23 (2) The development does not impact the public health, safety and welfare and is in the public interest. 24 25 38. The criterion is met. Since there are no adverse impacts associated with the proposal as determined in Finding of Fact No. 5,there will be no impact to public health safety and welfare. Since there are no impacts and the proposal advances SSDP/CUP p. 14 Findings, Conclusions and Decision public education, shoreline access and economic development, the proposal is in the I public interest. 2 (3) The development does not lower the level of service of transportation and/or 3 neighborhood park facilities below the minimum standards established within the comprehensive plan. If the development results in a level of service lower than those 4 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. To this section, "concurrent with the 6 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 7 improvements or strategies within six years of approval of the development. f. 8 39. The staff report notes that the proposal will not lower applicable level of service standards below adopted levels and there is nothing in the record to suggest to the contrary. 10 DECISION 11 The shoreline substantial development application and shoreline conditional use 12 permit comply with all applicable shoreline policies and use regulations as determined in the conclusions of law of this decision. The proposal is approved 13 subject to the following conditions: 14 1) Water quality is not to be degraded to the detriment of the aquatic 15 environment because of this project. Special precautionary measures to be taken to minimize risk of oil or other toxic materials from entering the water or 16 shoreline area. 17 2) Implement the 10 conservation measures as recommended in the Biological Evaluation on pp 26-27. 18 3) Provide verification from the State Department of Health that the location of the building is compatible with the existing on-site Group A water system well 19 head. 4) Equipment, structures and materials shall not be abandoned in shoreline or 20 wetland area. 21 Dated this 21 st day of August 2017. 22 23 Phi A.Olb=hts 24 Mason County Hearing Examiner 25 Appeal Right and Valuation Notices SSDP/CUP p. 15 Findings,Conclusions and Decision I This shoreline substantial development permit decision is final and subject to appeal to 2 the Washington State Shoreline Hearings Board as governed by Chapter 90.58 RCW. The conditional use permit is subject to approval of the Washington State Department 3 of Ecology. Appeal deadlines are short and procedures strictly construed. Anyone wishing to file an appeal of this decision should consult with an attorney to ensure that 4 all procedural requirements are satisfied. 5 Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes 6 notwithstanding any program of revaluation. 7 8 9 10 Il 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 SSDP/CUP p. 16 Findings, Conclusions and Decision HEX ATTENDANCE ROSTER - ecl �-? o17 (Date) NAME (Please Print) MAILING ADDRESS PHONE :::::FDOO YOU WISH i„ Q`^-Q TESTIFY? �7��fD•- -/��A�o�'l C�cwt� >U�/"lr^� p,'1Q�.{MA,s6✓� i�at,.nf , C�Y� �LL 7d S C 0 7 7 E � U '01C,' 'cal b( • CC YY� 3�(; " �7j-�G 2- 5 6 7 II 9 10 11 CASE INDEX Sargent Oyster Building Relocation Project SHR2017-00002 Exhibit Date Description 1 July 28, 2017 Staff Report 2 May 12, 2016 Pre-Application Notes (Planning) 3 March 14, 2016 SEPA Mitigated Determination of Non Significance 4 March 14, 2016 SEPA Checklist 5 April 29, 2016 JARPA 6 June 15, 2017 Shoreline Substantial Dev't Permit Application 7 June 15, 2017 Shoreline Conditional Use Permit Application 8 June 15, 2017 Mason Environmental Permit Application 9 Feb.25, 2016/April 1, 2017 Site Plans/Drawings 10 No Date Mitigation Planting Plan 11 June 2017 Biological Evaluation 12 June 27, 2017 Notice of SDP/CUP Application and Hearing 13 June 28, 2017 Mailing addresses within 300 feet 14 June 30, 2017 HMP 30-Day Review 15 July 2, 2017 Affidavit of Posting Notice 16 July 6 & 13, 2017 Public Notice publication 17 July 26, 2017 Email comments w/Attachments 18 July27, 2107 Email correspondence: staff and applicant agent 19 June 11, 2015 MC Historic Preservation Committee Minutes SHR2017-00002 July 28, 2017 EXHIBIT 1 TO: Mason County Hearing Examiner FROM: Planning staff, Kell Rowen; krowen@co.mason.wa.us; 360.427.9670 ext. 365 RE: Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and Shoreline Conditional Use Permit request by the North Bay Historical Society and the Port of Allyn to relocate the restored Historic Sargent's Oyster House in an over water location in Allyn, WA, for use as a museum,education center and to grow shellfish seed. Permit#SHR2017-00002. STAFF REPORT I. APPLICANT. The applicants are North Bay Historical Society and the Port of Allyn.The authorized representative is Bill Rehe. IL PROPERTY LOCATION. Port of Allyn property at 18560 E. State Route 3; Allyn, WA. III. LEGAL DESCRIPTION. NW corner of T 22 N, R 1 W,S 20 W.M. and encompasses the shoreline adjacent to Mason County Tax Parcel 12220-50-08001. IV. EVALUATION. PROPOSAL: The North Bay Historical Society, in cooperation with the Port of Allyn, is proposing to relocate a restored, historical building along the waterfront at the Port of Allyn to create a museum and education center. The Sargent's Oyster House was removed from its original over water location to facilitate a shoreline restoration project by the South Puget Sound Salmon Enhancement Group and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.This historic structure was placed on an upland site at the Port of Allyn to be restored to its original configuration and repurposed as a "living" museum and education center.The North Bay Historical Society along with other community partners is proposing to relocate the restored structure to another over water location on the Port property. The restored Sargent's Oyster House will be used to create a museum and education center that will preserve the traditional commercial working waterfronts and pay homage to the shellfish and maritime history of Allyn and Mason County including the time prior to European settlement. It will also be used by local shellfish aquaculturists to store equipment, load and unload equipment from barges and to grow and raise shellfish seed. The restored structure will be located in the upper section of the dilapidated concrete boat ramp on the northern shoreline of the Port.The approximately 3,300 square feet of concrete ramp will be removed as mitigation for installing the approximately 1,200 Page 1 SHR2017-00002 square foot Sargent's Oyster House over water on piling(see concept rendering in Exhibit 9). When complete and fully functional, the museum will give the public the ability to experience what life was like in an historic oyster processing facility.The museum will also be used as an education center for kindergarten through college aged students. Students will be given the chance to learn hands-on about oyster biology and ecology by raising native oysters in aquaria or recirculation tanks. A program similar to "Salmon in the Classroom" is being developed. A. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SITE AND AREA.The site consists of several parcels owned by the Port of Allyn located at the north end of Case Inlet. Upland portions of the Port property are comprised of Port Administrative Building and public park, with gazebo, play structure, bathrooms, picnic areas and parking lot. Adjacent to the shoreline is a rock bulkhead and an existing dilapidated concrete boat ramp (currently blocked from public use), a functioning boat ramp and float, large angular bulkhead and a public pier. The site of the proposal is in the overwater location of the dilapidated boat ramp at the north end of the parking lot and property. The area is located along the western shoreline of Case Inlet within the Allyn Urban Growth Area (UGA). Case Inlet is dominated by recreational and residential properties. The land use directly to the north and south of the project site are residential. B. ZONING:The adjacent upland parcel is zoned Public Open Space.This district allows community recreation centers, which by definition includes facilities used for recreational, social, educational and cultural activities(as defined in Moskowitz, Harvey S. and Lindbloom, Carl G.;The New Illustrated Book of Development Definitions. New Brunswick, NJ, Center for Urban Policy Research, 1993).The proposed use meets this definition and therefore does not require a Special Use Permit per the Public Facilities Overlay District.The area over the water is not zoned. C. SHORELINE DESIGNATION.The site is on an Urban Shoreline Environmental Designation. ` D. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION.The Comprehensive Plan designation is Allyn UGA and "waterbody". E. SEPA COMPLIANCE AND OTHER PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS.A Determination of Non Significance (DNS)was issued by the Port of Allyn on March 14, 2016. Public Notice procedures were followed in accordance with Sections 15.07.010 and 15.07.030 of Mason County Title 15. Notice of Public Hearing (Exhibit 12)for the Application was posted in the Mason-Shelton Journal on 07/06/2017 and 07/13/2017, at Building 1 of the Mason County Campus on 07/02/2017 and on-site on 07/02/2017. In addition, the Notice of Application was mailed to all property owners within 300' of the proposal on 06/28/2017.The Biological Evaluation (BE) (Exhibit 11)was sent to the Washington State Department of Fish &Wildlife and the Squaxin Island Tribe on 06/30/2017.A Public Comment letter was received as of the date of this report(Exhibit 17). Page 2 SHR2017-00002 F. OTHER PERMITS. The proposal received its Hydraulic Project Approval from the Washington State Dept of Fish &Wildlife on May 2, 2017. USACOE Section 10 approval is required. A Building Permit is required once all other permits are issued. Additional permitting from the Department of Ecology (discharge permit) and another HPA will be required for the shellfish seed growing portion of the proposal. .� V. ANALYSIS. Development Regulations(Zoning) The zoning designation is"Public Open Space" with a "Public Facility Overlay District"—Allyn Urban Growth Area. Community recreation center is a permitted use in the POS zone per the Mason County Code (MCC) 17.10.720 and therefore,the "Public Facility Overlay District" does not apply and no Special Use Permit is required. Resource Ordinance The saltwater shoreline is regulated under the County's Resource Ordinance in addition to the Shoreline Master Program. MCC 8.52.170 establishes a standard 100 foot buffer and prohibits development within the buffer with exceptions. MCC 8.52.170(d)(2)(B):Special Provision for Water-Dependent Uses on Existing Lots. Applications for development defined as water-dependent uses shall provide the standard one hundred foot buffer along as much of the shoreline as possible while making the minimum necessary adjustments to the buffer to provide for the water-dependent use, as determined by the director. Such development shall meet the requirements of other applicable regulations, including other resource ordinance sections and the Mason County Shoreline Master Program. This proposal is water dependent. The 66 year old structure was used for more than 40 years as a commercial oyster processing facility at an overwater location in North Bay near Coulter Creek outlet(just north of its new proposed location).The proposal to relocate the structure over water is critical for three reasons: 1. To create a "living" museum that will allow the public to experience what life was like in an historic oyster processing facility; 2. To allow local commercial and tribal aquaculture activity including the growing of shellfish seed using floating upwelling systems(FLUPSYs) and recirculation tanks; and 3. Consideration to be placed on the National and State Historic Registers.The building is included on the Mason County Historic Register as of August 2015 (Exhibit 19). MCC 8.52.170(d)(3): Provision for Decreasing Buffer. For major new development, Mason County may decrease the buffer after consultation with the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the (Squaxin Island) Tribe, after review and approval of a habitat management plan, and after a public hearing. Mitigation must be adequate to preserve or enhance the functions and values of the critical area. This means that a finding must be made that the net effect of the proposal equal or better than applying the standard buffers. If enhancement is part of the mitigation plan, then a greater level of enhancement is required to offset the time lost while the enhancement matures. County staff sent the Biological Evaluation (BE), in lieu of Habitat Management Plan (Exhibit 11) to the WDF&W and the Squaxin Island Tribe on June 30, 2017 (Exhibit 14). No comments Page 3 SHR2017-00002 received as of the date of this report.After review of the BE, staff concludes that the proposal to locate the structure over the water, on piling, after removal of a dilapidated concrete boat ramp will have a positive net effect on the environment including near shore habitat and better than that if located at an upland site at or greater than 100 feet from the shoreline. _Shoreline Master Program This proposal is reviewed under the Aquaculture and Conditional Use Sections of the Mason County Shoreline Master Program Policies and Use Regulations which are included within the Mason County Comprehensive Plan IX-2, Shoreline Management Program Policies and IX-3 Conditional Uses as well as Chapter 17.50 Mason County Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations, 17.50.060 Aquaculture and 17.50.080 Conditional Uses, as adopted. A Substantial Development Permit is required because the value of the proposal exceeds $6,416.00 (WAC 173-27-040 (2)(a) and a Conditional Use Permit is required because the use is an unspecified use per MCC 17.50.034. AQUACULTURE POLICIES: 1) Potential locations for aquaculture practices are relatively restricted due to specific biological requirements such as water quality,temperature, substrate, dissolved oxygen and salinity. Priority should be given to aquaculture uses in areas having a high potential for such uses. This area of Case Inlet is open to shellfish farming and harvest. 2) The County should strengthen and diversify the local economy by encouraging aquacultural uses. This policy explicitly encourages and supports the relocation of the historically significant Sargent's Oyster House to be reused as a museum, education center and shellfish seed growing facility. The proposal strengthens the local economy by opening a museum highlighting local industry in addition to growing seed. 3) Shoreline and upland development in productive aquaculture areas or those areas with a high potential for aquaculture uses should be reviewed for detrimental impacts on aquaculture. Not applicable. 4) Recognition should be given to the possible detrimental impacts that aquacultural activities might have on the aesthetic quality of the shoreline area. This policy is referring to "at grade"or "on the beach"activity that is typical of aquaculture and doesn't necessarily apply, however, the restored structure will be placed over the water on piling and will obstruct a certain amount of existing public view. There will still be a fair amount of open waterfront within the public park to afford views and the restored historic building will likely become a treasured waterfront view in and of itself both from the upland side and the waterside of the building. Page 4 SHR2017-00002 5) Structures or activities associated with aquaculture should be located inland from shoreline areas unless clearly water dependent. See Section V.ANALYSIS. Resource Ordinance regarding water dependence. 6) Aquacultural practices should be operated in a manner that allows navigational access to shoreline owners and commercial traffic. The proposal will not interfere with navigational access for shoreline owners or recreational/ commercial traffic. As mentioned above, the location of the building will occur over 1,200 square feet of waterfront and remove 3,300 square feet of concrete from the beach. 7) Flexibility to experiment with new aquaculture techniques should be allowed. This policy supports approval of the proposal, which is for a relatively new aquaculture technique in Washington State, to promote the growth and development of shellfish seed using FLUPSYs. Mason County's support for new aquaculture techniques is further aligned with the Department of Ecology's Guidelines for local government updates to their shoreline master programs. The Guidelines state that"technology associated with some forms of present-day aquaculture is still in its formative stages and experimental. SMP's should therefore recognize the necessity for some latitude in the development of this use as well as its potential impact on existing uses and naturalsystems. WAC173-26-241(3)(b)(i)(8). 8) Proposed surface installations should be reviewed for conflicts with other uses in areas that are utilized for moorage, recreational boating, sport fishing, commercial fishing or commercial navigation. Such surface installations should incorporate features to reduce use conflicts. See answer to Policy#6 above. The removal of the unused, dilapidated boat ramp will significantly reduce conflicts in navigation. 9) Maximum effort to protect water quality should be made in areas with high potential for aquaculture and current aquaculture areas which have been identified as sensitive areas. As the proposal is for new aquacultural use and will not adversely impact water quality, it is compliant with this policy. In fact, shellfish aquaculture is beneficial to water quality. Aquaculture provides a valuable benefit to Puget Sound through the ability of shellfish to filter excess algae in the water thereby moderating the algae production and mitigating oxygen depletion. AQUACULTURE USE REGULATIONS: 1) Shoreline developments adjacent to areas especially suitable for aquaculture shall practice strict pollution control procedures. The proposal will practice strict pollution control procedures. Shellfish are filter feeding organisms that consume naturally occurring microalgae, bacteria and organic debris directly from the water that will be circulated through the Sargent's Oyster House. No supplemental Page 5 SH R2017-00002 feeding with cultured algae or other additives will be used. The facility will comply with the State of Washington water quality standards for turbidity(WAC 173-201A-210). 2) Aquacultural practices shall be located and conducted so as to provide reasonable navigational access to waterfront property owners and along the shoreline. Placing the building on piling and removing the "at-grade"concrete boat ramp, will allow for greater navigational access to waterfront property owners in the area. 3) Aquaculture development shall not cause extensive erosion or accretion along adjacent shorelines. The proposal will not cause extensive erosion or accretion along adjacent shorelines. The proposal does not involve any upland development. Therefore, no erosion will occur as a result of clearing, construction or use. The removal of the concrete boat ramp will allow for more natural shoreline processes. 4) Aquaculture structures that are not shoreline dependent shall be located to minimize the detrimental impact on the shoreline. As discussed above, the relocation of the historic Sargent's Oyster House for use as a museum, education center and seed growing facility is shoreline dependent. The proposed FLUPSY(or similar seed growing apparatus)circulates saltwater from the on-site location to facilitate growth of shellfish seed. 5) Aquaculture structures and fisheries enhancement activities shall, to the greatest extent feasible with regard to the economic viability of the operation and protection of the environment, be located, designed and operated so that native plant and animal populations, their respective habitats and the local ecological balance are maintained. Disease and pest control may be authorized. The Biological Evaluation considers potential impacts from the proposed project to threatened and endangered species and their critical habitat from the installation and operation of the project, as well as any potential effects from the proposal on essential fish habitat as defined under the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act. This evaluation considered both short and long term effects of the facility and concluded that the proposal was not likely to adversely affect threatened or endangered species and their critical habitat. No eelgross, kelp or other vascular plants were identified within the project area. No upland vegetation or animal populations will be disturbed. The proposal includes the planting of native vegetation in an upland area adjacent to the shoreline (Exhibit 10). 6) Floating aquaculture structures shall not duly detract from the aesthetic qualities of the surrounding area. Not Applicable. 7) Aquacultural structures shall be placed in such a manner and be suitably marked so as to minimize interference with navigation. Page 6 -- SHR2017-00002 Interference with navigation is reduced with the placement of the building on piling in addition to the removal of 3,300 square feet of concrete boot ramp. 8) Aquaculture development shall be designed and constructed to harmonize as much as possible with the local shoreline environment and shall be maintained in a neat and orderly manner. The proposal would allow for natural hydrologic processes within the surrounding intertidal and subtidal environments. The proposed structures will be maintained in a neat and orderly manner. By removing the boat ramp and placing the oyster house on piling, the proposed project will provide a small net gain in forage species biological productivity. 9) Proposed aquacultural developments shall make adequate provisions to control nuisance factors such as excessive noise and odor and excessive lighting. The proposal will not cause excessive noise, odor or lighting. There will be no long-term increase in noise associated with the proposal. The proposal would include some additional sources of noise associated with boat trips to access the project site and water pumps to wash down the FLUPSYs. There will be no perceptible increase in noise in the surrounding area. The proposal will not result in excessive odor. The proposal does not include any additional lighting other than that used during operating hours of the museum. 10) Aquacultural discards shall be disposed of in a manner that will not degrade associated uplands, wetlands, shorelines, or water environments. Discards shall not be disposed of in a manner which results in offensive odors or increases the vector population. No feed is used in the aquaculture operation; therefore little waste is anticipated to be generated. The growing of seed does not result in the discarding of shells or other by-product. 11) Equipment, structures and materials shall not be abandoned in the shoreline or wetland area. Equipment, structures and materials will not be abandoned in the shoreline area. 12) Special precautionary measures shall be taken to minimize the risk of oil or other toxic materials from entering the water or shoreline area. Precautionary measures are subject to approval by the county environmental health specialist. No use of oil or other toxic materials is proposed. 17.50.080 Conditional Uses: A Conditional Use Permit is required per MCC 17.50.034 because the proposal is an unspecified use.The purpose of a Conditional Use Permit is to allow greater flexibility in varying the new application of the use regulations of the Master Program. Conditional Uses should also be granted in circumstances where denial of the permit would result in a thwarting of the policy enumerated in RCW 90.58. In authorizing a Conditional Use, special conditions may be attached Page 7 SHR2017-00002 to the permit by local government or the Department to prevent undesirable effects of the proposed use. 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 (See Exhibit 7): 1. Show that the proposed use will be consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58 and the Policies of the Master Program. The proposal is consistent with the general policies of the Shoreline Management Act, RCW 90.58, the Mason County Shoreline Master Program Title 17.50 and the Comprehensive Plan Title IX(SMP). The project has been designed and constructed in a manner to minimize damage to the ecology and environment of the shoreline area. 2. Show that the proposed use will not interfere with normal public use of the shoreline. The project site was selected in part because its location minimizes the chance that use conflicts will occur, including conflicts related to public use. The project site is a public park on property owned by the Port of Allyn. The proposed project and use of project will not interfere with the normal public use of public shorelines. The project is meant to increase the public's use of public land. The proposed project will not interfere with the public's use of the adjacent water or beach access. 3. Show that the proposed use of the site and design of the project will be compatible with other permitted uses in the area. The proposed use of the site and design of the project are compatible with other authorized uses within the area and with uses planned for the area under the comprehensive plan and shoreline master program. The Port of Allyn's shoreline properties have similar access structures and uses along the marine shoreline. 4. Show that the proposed use will cause no unreasonable adverse effects to the shoreline environment in which it is to be located. North Bay Historical Society has submitted a Biological Evaluation as part of its application packet that considers the potential impacts from the proposed project to threatened and endangered species and their critical habitat, as well as any potential effects from the proposal on essential fish habitat as defined under the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act. The evaluation considered both short and long term effects and concluded that the proposal was not likely to adversely affect threatened or endangered species and their critical habitat(Exhibit 11). 5. Show that the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect. The proposed project has been designed so that public interest will not suffer any substantial detrimental effect. The project and its use will not result in damage to the shoreline environment or the public's view or use of the water. 6. Cumulative Impacts. Page 8 — SHR2017-00002 In granting a Conditional Use Permit, Mason County is required to consider"the cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions in the area." Mason County Code (MCC) 17.50.080. The consideration is for additional requests for water dependent overwater structures. It is more than unlikely that a similar request to relocate an historic structure to another overwater location to be utilized as an aquacultural museum and education center paying homage to the shellfish and maritime history of Allyn and Mason County will occur along with the opportunity to remove 3,300 square feet of concrete located forward of the OHWM, therefore the cumulative impact does not exist. VI. CONCLUSION. The Hearing Examiner shall review 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 Title 6, 8 and 16. (2) Development does not impact the public health, safety and welfare and is in the public interest. (3) Development does not lower the level of service of transportation and/or neighborhood park facilities below the minimum standards established within the Comprehensive Plan. Staff has verified that the proposed development does in fact comply with the Mason County Code, including Title 6(Sanitary Code, enforcement only), 8(Environmental Policy)and 16 (Subdivisions.). The project is not subject to Title 6 or 16. The project meets the requirements of the MC Environmental Policy and the SEPA review was completed on March 14, 2016. The project will not lower the level of service of transportation and/or neighborhood park facilities below the minimum standards established within the Comprehensive Plan. The project will have no adverse impact upon health,safety and welfare. Because the proposal is consistent with all applicable policies and use regulations,staff recommends approval of the permit with the following conditions: CONDITIONS: 1) Water quality is not to be degraded to the detriment of the aquatic environment as a result of this project. Special precautionary measures to be taken to minimize risk of oil or other toxic materials from entering the water or shoreline area. 2) Implement the 10 conservation measures as recommended in the BE on pp 26-27. 3) Provide verification from the State Department of Health that the location of the building is compatible with the existing on-site Group A water system well head. VII. CHOICE OF ACTION: 1. Approval of Shoreline Substantial Development/Conditional Use Permit#SHR2017-00002. 2. Approve with conditions. 3. Deny permit (reapplication or resubmittal is permitted). 4. Remand for further proceedings and/or evidentiary hearing in accordance with section 15.09.090 of Title 15. Page 9 E)4k-61� 2- May 12, 2016 Bill Rehe Representing North Bay Historical Society 253.389.0712 rehe@leon-environmental.com RE: Planning Notes for PAR2016-00017: Sargents Oyster House Dear Mr. Rehe, The following notes will be kept in the parcel file #12220-50-08001 and in Tidemark under PAR2016-00017 (accessible using the web). Please let me know if changes are required or if you need additional information or clarification. These notes reflect the necessary permit applications and documents needed for the County's Planning Department to review the proposal to relocate the historic Sargents Oyster House from its original overwater location to a new overwater location on Port of Allyn Property. Once all applications and documents have been reviewed, the Planner will make a recommendation to approve or deny the proposal to the County's Hearing Examiner (this proposal requires both County Hearing Examiner and State Department of Ecology approval). PROJECT UNDERSTANDING The North Bay Historical Society has obtained the historic Sargent's Oyster House from its previous overwater location and is proposing to restore the structure for use as an aquaculture museum, education center and possible storage for aquaculture seed and relocate the structure to a new overwater location in Allyn on property owned by the Port of Allyn. The proponents believe the uniqueness of the historic structure and proposed uses make the proposal a water-dependent use. DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS/ZONING Current zoning is Public Open Space "POS" in the Allyn Urban Growth Area. This district allows community recreation centers, which by definition includes facilities used for recreational, social, educational and cultural activities. The proposed uses meet this definition. No special permits required. • Parking requirements: Please see Off Street Parking in the Allyn UGA Chapter 17.14 RESOURCE ORDINANCE The saltwater shoreline is regulated under the County's resource ordinance and requires a standard 100' buffer from the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) landward. Development within the buffer is prohibited with exceptions. Mason County Code (MCC) 8.52.170 (d) (2) (8): Special Provision for Water-Dependent Uses on Existing Lots. Applications for development defined as water-dependent uses shall provide the standard one hundred-foot buffer along as much of the shoreline as possible while making the minimum necessary adjustments to the buffer to provide for the water- dependent use, as determined by the director. Such development shall meet the requirements of other applicable regulations, including other resource ordinance sections and the Mason County Shoreline Master Program. Mason County Code 8.52.170 (d) (3): Provision for Decreasing Buffer. For major new development, Mason County may decrease the buffer after consultation with the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Squaxin Island Tribe, after review and approval of a habitat management plan, and after a public hearing. Mitigation must be adequate to preserve or enhance the functions and values of the critical area. This means that a finding must be made that the net effect of the proposal equal or better than applying the standard buffers. If enhancement is part of the mitigation plan, then a greater level of enhancement is required to offset the time lost while the enhancement matures. The proposal as discussed in the Pre-Application conference would meet the exceptions above and therefore would not require a Resource Ordinance Variance. Consultation with the Tribe and WDF&W is required. Permits and documentation include (see Public Hearing under Shoreline Master Program): • Mason Environmental Permit • Biological Evaluation (in lieu of Habitat Management Plan) and mitigation plan SEPA The proposal is not exempt from SEPA due to the inwater and overwater work. —SEPA EnViFenmental Ghee list DNS issued by the Port of Allyn on March 14, 2016 SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM Mason County's Shoreline Master Program includes regulatory chapters for a variety of uses but none that address the proposed use of a museum or education center. Therefore, the proposal is considered an "unspecified use" and requires a Conditional Use Permit. Since it is an unspecified use, the Master Program does not establish setbacks and would not be required to obtain a variance. The assumed valuation of the proposal exceeds the exemption level and will require a Substantial Development Permit. Both permit types require a public hearing with the County's Hearing Examiner. All permits, special provisions and associated documents will be reviewed at a single hearing. • Shoreline Substantial Development Permit • Shoreline Conditional Use Permit • Public Hearing with County's Hearing Examiner Special Note for Shoreline Conditional Use Permit: 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: • That the proposed use will be consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58 and the policies of the master program; •That the proposed use will not interfere with the normal public use of the shorelines; •That the proposed use of the site and design of the project will be compatible with other permitted uses within the area; •That the proposed use will cause no unreasonable adverse effects to the shoreline environment in which it is to be located; •That the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect. 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 contact Kell McAboy at 360.427.9670 ext. 365 for more information and to assist you in the planning application process. DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE RCW 197-11-970 Project Name: Sargent Oyster Building Restoration and Relocation Project Description of proposal: The Sargent Oyster Building was removed from its original location to facilitate a shoreline restoration project by the South Puget Sound Salmon Enhancement Group and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.This historic structure was removed and relocated to the Port of Allyn to be restored and repurposed as a"living" museum and education center.The North Bay Historical Society, along with other community partners, are proposing to restore this historical building to its original configuration and place it on Port of Allyn property. The restored Sargent Oyster Building will be used to create a museum and education center that will preserve the traditional commercial working waterfronts and pay homage to the shellfish and maritime history of Allyn and Mason County. The restored building will be located in the footprint of the dilapidated concrete boat ramp on the northern shoreline of the Port. The approximately 3300 square feet of concrete ramp will be removed as mitigation for installing the approximately 1200 square foot Sargent Oyster Building over water.When complete and fully functional, the museum will give the public the ability to experience what life was like in an historic oyster processing facility. The museum will also be used as an education center for kindergarten through college aged students. Students will be given the chance to learn hands-on about oyster biology and ecology by raising native oysters in aquaria or recirculation tanks.A program similar to"Salmon in the Classroom" is being developed. Proponent: North Bay Historical Society Location of proposal,including street address,if any:The project is proposed is located at 18560 E. State Route 3, Allyn,WA 98524.The tax parcel is 12220-50-08001. The site is located in Section 20,Township 22 North, Range 1 West W.M. Mason County,Washington. Lead agency: Port of Allyn The lead agency for this proposal has determined that the project does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment.An environmental impact statement(EIS)is not required under Revised Code of Washington(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. Additional project and/or State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)information is available upon request at the Port of Allyn's Administrative building, located at 18560 E. State Route 3,Allyn,WA 98524. Comments and Request for Reconsideration: This determination of nonsignificance(DNS)is issued under Chapter 197-11-340(2)Washington Administrative Code(WAC).All interested parties shall have 14 calendars days to comment on the proposed SEPA threshold determination. Only those who commented within the 14 day comment period shall have standing to file a Request for Reconsideration. Any challenge to a SEPA threshold determination shall be initiated by filing a Request for Reconsideration with the Responsible Official or designee no later than seven calendar days following the end of the 14 day comment period for the SEPA determination. The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days 18560 E.State Route 3,Allyn,WA 98524 0 Telephone(360)275-2430 from the start date of the comment period described below. Comments shall be submitted to the Port of Allyn, C/O LeAnn Dennis at 18560 E. State Route 3,Allyn,WA 98524. --- Comment[brl]:Is this the correct person? Responsible official: Lary Coppola Position/title: Executive Director Signature: Date: Comment Start Date: Comment End Date: Request for Reconsideration End Date: Threshold Determination-DNS Page 2 Port of Allyn ECEIVED Port 062 Of615 W. Aber Street Allyn Port of Allyn Port Commissioners: SEPA Determination Findings Report Jean Farmer Project Name: Sargent Oyster Building Restoration and Relocation Project Judy Scott Date: March 14, 2016 Scott Cooper Proponent: North Bay Historical Society Lary Coppola Executive Director Project location: The project is proposed is located at 18560 E. State Route 3, Allyn, WA 98524. The tax parcel is 12220-50-08001. The site is located in Section 20, Township 22 North, Range 1 West W.M. Mason County, Washington. Proposal: The Sargent Oyster Building was removed from its original location to facilitate a shoreline restoration project by the South Puget Sound Salmon Enhancement Port Facilities: Group and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. This historic structure was removed and relocated to the Port of Allyn to be restored and repurposed as a "living" Allyn Marina museum and education center. The North Bay Historical Society, along with other and Boat Launch community partners, are proposing to restore this historical building to its original North Shore Marina configuration and place it on Port of Allyn property. The restored Sargent Oyster Building and Boat Launch will be used to create a museum and education center that will preserve the traditional commercial working waterfronts and pay homage to the shellfish and maritime history of Allyn Waterfront Allyn and Mason County. Park The restored building will be located in the footprint of the dilapidated concrete boat Allyn Kayak Park ramp on the northern shoreline of the Port. The approximately 3300 square feet of concrete and Launch ramp will be removed as mitigation for installing the approximately 1200 square foot Port of Allyn Sargent Oyster Building over water. When complete and fully functional, the museum will Water Company give the public the ability to experience what life was like in an historic oyster processing facility. The museum will also be used as an education center for kindergarten through college aged students. Students will be given the chance to learn hands-on about oyster biology and ecology by raising native oysters in aquaria or recirculation tanks. A program similar to "Salmon in the Classroom" is being developed. 18560 E State Route 3 Permits required: The following permits/approvals will be required for this project: Po sox 1 Building Permit— Mason County Allyn, WA 98524 Shoreline Substantial Development Permit — Mason County Hydraulic Project Approval —Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 360-275-2430 Section 10 (Rivers and Harbors Act) — US Army Corps of Engineers info@portofallyn.com SEPA Findings: www.portofallyn.com Air: During the project, there will be a temporary increase in air emissions associated with © ® construction equipment. Emissions of PM2.5 are estimated at approximately 0.009 tons. Ultra low sulfur diesel will be used in construction equipment on this project and an anti- idling policy will be in place. Emissions will be required to meet Puget Sound Clean Air Agency opacity requirements. The PM2.5 emissions from this project have been evaluated and, as compared to the General Conformity de minimis levels for PM2.5 (100 tons per year), are insignificant and will not affect regional air quality. These potential emissions are compatible with the surrounding land uses. Emissions less than 25,000 annual metric tons of "greenhouse" gases are considered insignificant. The approximately 11.336 tons of gaseous CO2 emissions associated with this project are negligible. Noise: All regulatory noise levels shall be met. During construction there will be noise coming from likely a combination of 1 dump truck, 1 excavator, 1 bore/drill rig, 1 crane, 1 cement mixer and 1 front end loader, as well as noise generated from hand tools. Noise will be generated during construction associated with the project; however, that noise will be consistent with the surrounding industrial areas. The short-term, construction-related estimated level of noise would be over 90 decibels. This noise will occur during normal business hours during the day. There will be little noise associated with operations. SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 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: [hel For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B plus the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (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 IhLeM 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: hf elpl Sargent Oyster Building Restoration and Relocation Project 2. Name of applicant: hf elpl North Bay Historical Society 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: hf elpl PO Box 1313 Allyn, WA 98524 SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 1 of 16 Contact person: Bonnie Knight 360-801-1064 4. Date checklist prepared: hf elpl March 14, 2016 5. Agency requesting checklist: hf elpl Port of Allyn 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): hI elpl In water work: August 1-February 14 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. hf g.[ No 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. hf elpl JARPA, Plans, Biological Evaluation 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. ltgm Yes. WDFW HPA and Mason County Shoreline permits 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. hf elpl Shoreline permit, building permit, HPA 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.) hf elpl The Sargent Oyster Building was removed from its original location to facilitate a shoreline restoration project by the South Puget Sound Salmon Enhancement Group and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. This historic structure was removed and relocated to the Port of Allyn to be restored and repurposed as a "living" museum and education center. The North Bay Historical Society, along with other community partners, are proposing to restore this historical building to its original configuration and place it on Port of Allyn property. The restored Sargent Oyster Building will be used to create a museum and education center that will preserve the traditional commercial working waterfronts and pay homage to the shellfish and maritime history of Allyn and Mason County. The restored building will be located in the footprint of the dilapidated concrete boat ramp on the northern shoreline of the Port. The approximately 3300 square feet of concrete ramp will be removed as mitigation for installing the approximately 1200 square foot Sargent Oyster Building over water. When complete and fully functional,the museum will give the public the ability to experience what life was like in an historic oyster processing facility. The museum will also be used as an education center for kindergarten through college aged students. Students will be given the chance to learn SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 2 of 16 hands-on about oyster biology and ecology by raising native oysters in aquaria or recirculation tanks. A program similar to "Salmon in the Classroom" is being developed. 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. hel 18560 E. State Route 3, Allyn, WA 98524 Township 22N, Range 1W, Section 20, NE '/4 47.3846030/-122.8269800 B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS JLel 1. Earth 1hel a. General description of the site: hf elpl (circle one): Flat rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? h( elpl Beach is < 5%. Upland, behind bulkhead, is almost flat. 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. h McKenna gravelly loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. hf elpl The are signs of wave and wind erosion around the existing angular rock bulkhead. The area is listed by WA Department of Ecology as stable. 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. h� elpl This project includes two phases which potentially require filling, excavation and grading.The first phase is the removal of an existing concrete boat ramp for mitigation. This phase would include minor excavation to remove the boat ramp footings and on- bed concrete pad. Grading in the form of leveling out the beach after removing the SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 3 of 16 concrete boat ramp may be required to prevent holes that could trap fish. Filling would include the placement of"habitat mix" gravel above Mean Higher High Water(MHHW), as required by WDFW as mitigation for construction impacts. Amount and area of fill is unknown and will be dictated by WDFW. Excavation and grading could include up to approximately 3300 sq.ft., the area of the existing boat ramp. The second phase of the project is relocating the restored Sargent Oyster Building to the new location. The restored building will be supported by a pile support structure. There are two possible ways to install the pile supported structure. The first option is to drive piles with a vibratory pile drive. The second option is to excavate footings and pour footings. This method will require a maximum of 35 cubic yards. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. hel Minor erosion could occur as a result of removing the concrete boat ramp and excavating for the footings. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? hf elpl The project site is currently covered with approximately 3300 sq.ft. of impervious surface(concrete boat ramp).When complete, the project site will be covered with approximately 1200 sq. ft. of impervious surface (building). h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: hf elpl Erosion will be reduced or controlled by doing the work in the dry season and while the project site is not inundated by tidal waters. Best Management Practices (BMPs), such as covering disturbed areas with tarps or straw, will be used. 2. Air h( elpl 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. h Short term air emissions from a tug, excavator and front loader will occur during construction. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. hf elpl No. SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 4 of 16 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: hl jpl Low sulfur fuel will be used and no idling of equipment will be allowed. 3. Water [hel 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. hf elpl Yes, Saltwater(Puget Sound) 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. hf g Yes. The project requires in-water work while the project area is not inundated by tidal water. Equipment will operate within 25 feet of the existing boat ramp. 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. hf elpl The only fill being proposed is the unknown quantity of"habitat mix" gravel that WDFW may require. This material will be placed above MHHW. No dredging is proposed for this project. Excavation of a maximum of 35 cubic yards of material for the footings may occur. 4)Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. hf elpl Yes. The final project will require withdraw of saltwater for recirculation tanks and aquaria. The intake and discharge will meet the requirements of WDFW. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. h( elpl No. 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. hf elpl No waste. 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 SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 5 of 16 withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. hf elpl 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. hf elpl 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. hf elpl Runoff from the roof will be collected by downspouts and disposed of through a "rain garden". 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. hf elpl No. 3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. hf elpl No. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: hf elpl Project will use geotechnical fabric, mulch, straw or grass seed, as needed, post- construction 4. Plants [hel a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: hf elpl X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other X shrubs __X_grass pasture crop or grain Orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops. SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 6 of 16 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? hf elpl A strip of grass upland of the existing bulkhead may be removed during construction. c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. hel No threatened and endangered plant species are known to be on the project site. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: hf elpl e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. hf elpl None known 5. Animals hf elpl 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. hf elpl Examples include: birds: haw other: mammals: deer bear, elk, beaver, other: almon fish: bas ou errin ellfis other Surf smelt b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. hf elpl No threatened and endangered species are known to be on the project site. The following species can be found in the Puget Sound. There will be no effect on these species by the proposed work. Bocaccio rockfish (Sebastes paucispinis) — Endangered Bull trout(Salvelinus confluentus) -Threatened Canary rockfish (Sebastes pinniger) -Threatened Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) (Puget Sound) -Threatened Marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus) -Threatened Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) (Puget Sound DPS) -Threatened Southern resident killer whale (Orcinus orca )(Southern Resident DPS) - Endangered Yelloweye rockfish (Sebastes ruberrimus)—Threatened c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. hf elpl SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 7 of 16 Pacific flyway and migratory route for salmon d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: hf elpl The project will restore nearshore processes by removing a concrete boat ramp that is acting as a groin. "Habitat mix" gravel will be placed on the beach to improve surf smelt spawning. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. hf elpl None known 6. Energy and Natural Resources hf elpl 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. Jhel Electricity for pumps, lighting, and heat b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. hf elpl No. 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: hf elpl 7. Environmental Health hf elpl 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. JbpjpJ No known environmental health hazards. Water adjacent to the project site is on Ecology's 303d list for Dissolved Oxygen. 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. hf elpl No known contamination 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. hf elpl SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 8 of 16 None. 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. hel None. 4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. 1hel None. 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: hl gj None. b. Noise hf elpl 1)What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project(for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? hf elpl Noise from traffic(State Route 3), residential noise and boat 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. hel Short term: construction equipment noise Long term: None 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: hf elpl None 8. Land and Shoreline Use hel 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. hf elpl Urban (commercial).The proposed project will have no effect on the current land uses. 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? hf elpl No. 1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 9 of 16 business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: hf elpl No. c. Describe any structures on the site. hf elpl Upland structures include the Port Administration Office, public bathroom, parking, play structure, pump house and gazebo. Structure on or adjacent to the marine shoreline include the existing timber pier, angular rock bulkhead and concrete boat ramp. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? hf elpl Yes. Existing concrete boat ramp will be demolished. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? hf elpl Urban f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? hel Commercial g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? hf e Urban Commercial h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. hf elpl Potential critical areas that may occur near the project site include shellfish areas,surf smelt spawning areas,saltwater shoreline, estuarine wetland. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? h� e Varies j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? hf elpl None k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: hf elpl SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 10 of 16 N/A L. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: hf elpl The project is compatible with the existing and projected land uses and plans. m. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with,nearby agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: hf elpl N/A 9. Housing JLpjpJ a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, mid- dle, or low-income housing. hf elpl None b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. hel None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: hf elpl None 10. Aesthetics hf elpl a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? hf elpl The tallest height of the Sargent Oyster Building will be approximately 21.6 feet. The principal exterior building material will be wood, concrete shingles and asphalt shingles. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? hf elpl None. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: hel None. 11. Light and Glare hf elpl a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? hf elpl SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 11 of 16 Interior and external lights will be used as required. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? hf elpl No. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?lbpjpl None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: hf elpl Light near the water will be directed to reduce the attractive nuisance to fish and wildlife. 12. Recreation h( elpl a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? h[ el] Recreational boating, public beach access and public park. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. hf elpl No. It would improve recreational uses. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: hf elpl None. 13. Historic and cultural preservation hf jp 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. hf elpl The Sargent Oyster Building is an historic structure and is eligible for preservation registers. 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. hf elpl No. 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 SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 12 of 16 archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. hel There has been informal consultation with archeology & historic preservation. Also, there has been continuous occupation and development of the site for over 125 years. 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. hf elpl Will follow state recommendations for Inadvertent Discovery of Human Skeletal Remains on Non-Federal and Non-Tribal Land in the State of Washington (RCWs 68.60.645, 27.44.055, and 68.60.056) 14. Transportation h( elpl 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. hf elpl State Route 3 and Drum St. 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? h[ elpl Yes. There is a Mason County Transit bus stop and shelter located adjacent to the site. c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non-project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? h[ el] None. 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). hf g1l No. e. Will the project or proposal use(or occur in the immediate vicinity of)water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. hf elpl 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? hf elpl SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 13 of 16 The completed project is a public museum. It is estimated that the museum will attract 1000 annual visitors by 2019 and 7000 annual visitors by 2021. 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. Jt@jPJ No. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: hf elpl None. 15. Public Services h� elpl 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. hel No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. hf elpl None. 16. Utilities hf elpl a. Circle utilities current) vailable at the site: hel lectrici natural ga Ovate a use servic le ho , nita sew septic system, 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. hf elpl Electricity and water. C. Signature hel The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to maakk�e, its decision. Signature: Name of signee Bill Rehe Position and Agency/Organization Project biologist Date Submitted: 3/14/2016 SEPA Environmental checklist(WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 14 of 16 5 --------------------------------------- ,:... "°RECEIVED �" : Date received: s US Army Corps JUN 15 2017 WASHINGTON STATE of Engineers Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Agency referencc,d*i W Alder CtFeet Tax Parcel#(s): Application (JARPA) Form 1�2 USE BLACK OR BLUE INK TO ENTER ANSWERS IN THE WHITE SPACES BELOW. i ------------------------------------ Part 1—Project Identification 1. Project Name (A name for your project that you create. Examples: Smith's Dock or Seabrook Lane Development) Lbgm Sargent Oyster Building Restoration and Relocation Project Part 2—Applicant The person and/or organization responsible for the project. L r] 2a. Name (Last, First, Middle) Knight, Bonnie 2b. Organization (If applicable) North Bay Historical Society 2c. Mailing Address (Street or Po Box) PO Box 1313 2d. City, State, Zip Allyn, WA 98524 2e. Phone(1) 2f. Phone(2) 2 . Fax 2h. E-mail 360-801-1064 ( ) ( ) Bknight173@aol.com 'Additional forms may be required for the following permits: • If your project may qualify for Department of the Army authorization through a Regional General Permit(RGP),contact the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers for application information(206)764-3495. • If your project might affect species listed under the Endangered Species Act,you will need to fill out a Specific Project Information Form(SPIF)or prepare a Biological Evaluation. Forms can be found at http:llww✓.nws.usace.army.mil/PublicMenu/Menu.cfm?sitename=REG&Paaename=mainpage ESA • 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 http:ltwww.epermittin-g.wa.gov/site/alias resourcecenterharpa iarpa form/9984/iarpa form.aspx. For other help,contact the Govemor's Office of Regulatory Assistance at 1-800-917-0043 or help0ora.wa.gov. JARPA Revision 2012.1 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 application.) hel 3a. Name (Last, First, Middle) Rehe, William 3b. Organization (If applicable) 3c. Mailing Address (street or Po Box) 8305 Dogwood Lane NW 3d. City, State, Zip Gig Harbor, WA 98332 3e. Phone(1) 3f. Phone(2) 3 . Fax 3h. E-mail (253) 389-0712 ( ) ( ) william_rehe@yahoo.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. [help] ❑ 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) Port of Allyn 4c. Mailing Address (street or Po Box) PO Box 1 4d. City, State, Zip Allyn, WA 98524 4e. Phone(1) 4f. Phone(2) 4 . Fax 4h. E-mail (360) 275-2430 ( ) ( ) JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 2 of 14 Part 5—Project Location(s) Identifying information about the property or properties where the project will occur. ❑ 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.) [heir ❑ 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 5p.) [helpl 18560 E. State Route 3 5c. City, State, Zip(If the project is not in a city or town, provide the name of the nearest city or town.) heI Allyn, WA 98524 5d. County Egjpj Mason 5e. Provide the section, township, and range for the project location. [he_pJ 1/4 Section Section Township Range NW1/4 20 22N 01W 5f. Provide the latitude and longitude of the project location. • Example:47.03922 N lat. /-122.89142 W long. (Use decimal degrees- NAD 83) 47.3846030/-122.826980° 5g. List the tax parcel number(s)for the project location. [nei The local county assessor's office can provide this information. 12220-50-08001 5h. Contact information for all adjoining property owners. (If you need more space, use JARPA Attachment C.) [help] Name Mailing Address Tax Parcel #(if known) Taylor Unlimited INC 130 SE LYNCH RD 12220-14-80070 Shelton, WA 98584 OGREN, DENISE & MITCHELL PO BOX 662 12220-50-09001 ALLYN WA 98524 SEYMOUR, LAWRENCE & JILL 12416 CUNLIFFE RD SW 12220-50-11001 LLYN WA 98524 JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 3 of 14 5i. List all wetlands on or adjacent to the project location. nei According to the National Wetland Inventory, there are E2AB/USN adjacent to the project site. 5j. List all waterbodies (other than wetlands) on or adjacent to the project location. [help] Puget Sound 5k. Is any part of the project area within a 100-year floodplain? hel ® Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know --� 51. Briefly describe the vegetation and habitat conditions on the property. tf Upland vegetation consists mainly of shrubs and a few deciduous trees. The native shoreline has largely been replaced by landscaping species. According to Ecology's shoreline atlas, there is no known aquatic vegetation adjacent to the property. According to WDFW Forage Fish Spawning Map, surf smelt spawning has occurred on or adjacent to the project parcel. 5m. Describe how the property is currently used. [jei�] The property is currently used as a public port for the citizens of North Mason County. 5n. Describe how the adjacent properties are currently used. [`--' ] The neighboring properties are either vacant tidelands use for aquaculture or single family residences. 5o. Describe the structures (above and below ground) on the property, including their purpose(s) and current condition. L)ejEj Upland structures include the Port Administration Office, public bathroom, parking, play structure, pump house and gazebo. Structure on or adjacent to the marine shoreline include the existing timber pier, angular rock bulkhead and concrete boat ramp. 5p. Provide driving directions from the closest highway to the project location, and attach a map. i,ei _] From Shelton, Take WA-3 North for 18.3 miles Your destination is on the right JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 4 of 14 Part 6—Project Description 6a. Briefly summarize the overall project. You can provide more detail in 6b. hel The overall project goal is to relocate a restored, historical building at the Port of Allyn to create museum and education center. 6b. Describe the purpose of the project and why you want or need to perform it. [nelV] The Sargent Oyster Building was removed from its original location to facilitate a shoreline restoration project by the South Puget Sound Salmon Enhancement Group and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. This historic structure was removed and relocated to the Port of Allyn to be restored and repurposed as a "living" museum and education center. The North Bay Historical Society, along with other community partners, are proposing to restore this historical building to its original configuration and place it on Port of Allyn property. The restored Sargent Oyster Building will be used to create a museum and education center that will preserve the traditional commercial working waterfronts and pay homage to the shellfish and maritime history of Allyn and Mason County. The restored building will be located in the footprint of the dilapidated concrete boat ramp on the northern shoreline of the Port. The approximately 3300 square feet of concrete ramp will be removed as mitigation for installing the approximately 1200 square foot Sargent Oyster Building over water. When complete and fully functional, the museum will give the public the ability to experience what life was like in an historic oyster processing facility. The museum will also be used as an education center for kindergarten through college aged students. Students will be given the chance to learn hands-on about oyster biology and ecology by raising native oysters in aquaria or recirculation tanks. A program similar to "Salmon in the Classroom" is being developed. 6c. Indicate the project category. (check all that apply) [net ® Commercial ❑ 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: overwater structure/education center 6e. Describe how you plan to construct each project element checked in 6d. Include specific construction methods and equipment to be used. Lie! • Identify where each element will occur in relation to the nearest waterbody. • Indicate which activities are within the 100-year floodplain. JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 5 of 14 The project will occur in multiple stages. The Sargent Oyster Building is currently stored on the southwest corner of the Port parcel near the intersection of Drum St. and State Route 3. The historic structure will be restored and rebuilt where it is being stored. After the restoration is complete, the building will be transported to the waterfront. The existing concrete boat ramp will be broken up with an excavator and pieces removed with a frontend loader. Ramp debris will be placed in a dump truck and disposed of at an appropriate site. Small pieces of debris will be removed from the beach by hand. Depressions in the beach will be removed to prevent fish stranding. The restored building will be placed on a new pile supported structure. The original pile structure was built out of creosote treated wood. The new structure will be constructed out of environmentally friendlier material. The new piling will either be steel or concrete. The piling will be placed in the beach by boring holes while the area is not inundated by tidal water. The Sargent Oyster Building will be placed on the new structure using a crane. 6f. What are the anticipated start and end dates for project construction? (MonthNear) L,t--] • 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. Planned demolition would be demolished in 2017-2018 dependent upon funding and the building restoration completed and moved in 2018—again dependent on funding. Start date: Depends on funding and permitting End date: ❑ See JARPA Attachment D 6g. Fair market value of the project, including materials, labor, machine rentals, etc. hei j We are requesting $500,000 to complete the entire project and we have already spent or had donated around $100,000 (which includes the move) 6h. Will any portion of the project receive federal funding? hei j • 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.) 7a. Describe how the project has been designed to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to wetlands. hel ❑ Not applicable 71b. Will the project impact wetlands? [hel ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know 7c. Will the project impact wetland buffers? nel JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 6 of 14 ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Don't know 7d. Has a wetland delineation report been prepared? hel • 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? [heel • 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. neI 7h. Use the table below to list the type and rating of each wetland impacted, the extent and duration of the impact, and the type and amount of mitigation proposed. Or if you are submitting a mitigation plan with a similar table, you can state (below) where we can find this information in the plan. 1;�,; i Activity (fill, Wetland Wetland Impact Duration Proposed Wetland drain, excavate, Name' type and area (sq. of impact3 mitigation mitigation area flood, etc.) rating ft. or type (sq. ft. or category' Acres) acres) If no official name for the wetland exists, create a unique name(such as"Wetland V). The name should be consistent Wth other project documents,such as a wetland delineation report. 2 Ecology wetland category based on current Western Washington or Eastern Washington Wetland Rating System. Provide the wetland rating forms\Mth the JARPA 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: �For all filling activities identified in 7h, describe the source and nature of the fill material, the amount in cubic ds that will be used, and how and where it will be placed into the wetland. he!a JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 7 of 14 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. Lell 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.) riei ® 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. Le!hl ❑ Not applicable The project will occur during the authorized regulatory agency work windows. Work will occur when the project area is not inundated with tidal water. Environmentally friendlier material such as steel or concrete piles will be used in place of treated wood. Grated material will be used on all external decking. A WDFW trained biologist will inspect the beach for spawning forage fish before work starts, if required. 81b. Will your project impact a waterbody or the area around a waterbody? hei ® Yes ❑ No 8c. Have you prepared a mitigation plan to compensate for the project's adverse impacts to non-wetland waterbodies? rLe nl • 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 JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 8 of 14 No mitigation plan has been prepared, but mitigation is being proposed. The project will remove approximately 3300 square feet of concrete boat ramp for compensatory mitigation. "Habitat mix" gravel will be placed above Mean Higher High Water, as required by WDFW. 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. [hel The proposed mitigation is meant to achieve no net loss of habitat area or habitat function. 8e. Summarize impact(s) to each waterbody in the table below. hei Activity (clear, Waterbody Impact Duration of Amount of material Area (sq. ft. or dredge, fill, pile name' location2 irri (cubic yards) to be linear ft.) of drive, etc.) placed in or waterbody removed from directly affected waterbody Piling Puget Sound Adjacent Permanent 15 piling 3.14 sq.ft./pile 47.1 s .ft. Habitat mix Puget Sound In Permanent TBT TBT 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. 2Indicate 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. 3Indicate the days, months or years the waterbody wll 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. hel Habitat mix will come from an upland quarry and will be placed adjacent to the toe of the bulkhead. 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. L- x] JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 9 of 14 Approximately 15 holes will be bored for piling using a bore rig while the area is not inundated by tidal water. Material from the bore holes will be left on the beach if suitable material. Unsuitable material will be placed upland. Part 9—Additional Information Any additional information you can provide helps the reviewer(s) understand your project. Complete as much of this section as you can. It is ok if you cannot answer a question. 9a. If you have already worked with any government agencies on this project, list them below. hel Agency Name Contact Name Phone Most Recent Date of Contact WDFW Margie Bigelow (360) 427-2179 Ecology Rick Mraz (360) 407-6221 9b. Are any of the wetlands or waterbodies identified in Part 7 or Part 8 of this DARPA on the Washington Department of Ecology's 303(d) List? Lei. • If Yes, list the parameter(s)below. • If you don't know, use Washington Department of Ecology's Water Quality Assessment tools at: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/303d/. ® Yes ❑ No Dissolved oxygen 9c. What U.S. Geological Survey Hydrological Unit Code (HUC) is the project in? n( eM • Go to http://cfpub.epa.gov/surf/locate/index.cfm to help identify the HUC. 17110019 9d. What Water Resource Inventory Area Number (WRIA#) is the project in? hel • Go to http://www.ecy.wa.gov/services/.gis/maps/wria/wria.htm to find the WRIA#. 14 9e. Will the in-water construction work comply with the State of Washington water quality standards for turbidity? hel • Go to http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/swgs/criteria.htmi for the standards. JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 10 of 14 ® Yes ❑ No ❑ Not applicable 9f. If the project is within the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act, what is the local shoreline environment designation? Lgipj • If you don't know, contact the local planning department. • For more information, go to: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/sma/laws rules/173-26/211 designations.html. ❑ Rural ® Urban ❑ Natural ❑ Aquatic ❑ Conservancy ❑ Other 9g. What is the Washington Department of Natural Resources Water Type? hel • Go to http://www.dnr.wa.gov/BusinessPermits/Topics/ForestPracticesApplications/Pages/fp watertyping.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? [ !ra • If No, provide the name of the manual your project is designed to meet. ® Yes ❑ No Name of manual: Western Washington 9i. Does the project site have known contaminated sediment? [he!:Ll D • If Yes, please describe below. ❑ Yes ® No 9j. If you know what the property was used for in the past, describe below. n Port 9k. Has a cultural resource (archaeological) survey been performed on the project area? [helpa • If Yes, attach it to your JARPA package. ❑ Yes ® No 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. !2. JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 11 of 14 The following species can be found in the Puget Sound. No"affect" on these species by the proposed work is expected. Bocaccio rockfish (Sebastes paucispinis) — Endangered Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) -Threatened Canary rockfish (Sebastes pinniger) - Threatened Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) (Puget Sound) -Threatened 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. [help] According to WDFW's Priority Habitats and Species List Interactive Online Mapper, eelgrass meadows, estuarine/marine habitat, hardshell clams and surf smelt spawning occur within the vicinity of the project area. These habitats and species will not be impacted by the project activities. Part 10—SEPA Compliance and Permits Use the resources and checklist below to identify the permits you are applying for. • Online Project Questionnaire at http://apps.ecy.wa.gov/opas/. • Governor's Office of Regulatory Assistance at (800) 917-0043 or help(a-)ora.wa.gov. • For a list of addresses to send your JARPA to, click on agency addresses for completed JARPA. 10a. Compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). (check all that apply.) r ei • For more information about SEPA, go to www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/sepa/e-review.html. ❑ A copy of the SEPA determination or letter of exemption is included with this application. ® A SEPA determination is pending with Port of Allyn (lead agency). The expected decision date is ❑ I am applying for a Fish Habitat Enhancement Exemption. (Check the box below in 10b.) L'eip-1 ❑ 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. 10b. Indicate the permits you are applying for. (check all that apply.) [re LOCAL GOVERNMENT Local Government Shoreline permits: ® Substantial Development ❑ Conditional Use ❑ Variance ❑ Shoreline Exemption Type (explain): Other city/county permits: JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 12 of 14 ❑ 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: ❑$150 check enclosed. (Check# ) Attach check made payable to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. ❑Charge to billing account under agreement with WDFW. (Agreement# ) ❑ My project is exempt from the application fee. (Check appropriate exemption) ❑ HPA processing is conducted by applicant-funded WDFW staff. (Agreement # ) ❑ Mineral prospecting and mining. ❑ Project occurs on farm and agricultural land. (Attach a copy of current land use classification recorded with the county auditor, or other proof of current land use.) ❑ Project is a modification of an existing HPA originally applied for, prior to July 10, 2012. (HPA# ) Washington Department of Natural Resources: ❑ Aquatic Use Authorization Complete JARPA Attachment E and submit a check for$25 payable to the Washington Department of Natural Resources. Do not send cash. Washington Department of Ecology: ❑ Section 401 Water Quality Certification FEDERAL GOVERNMENT United States Department of the Army permits (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers): ❑ Section 404 (discharges into waters of the U.S.) ® Section 10 (work in navigable waters) United States Coast Guard permits: ❑ General Bridge Act Permit ❑ Private Aids to Navigation (for non-bridge projects) JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 13 of 14 Part 11-Authorizing Signatures Signatures are required before submitting the DARPA, package. The JARPA package includes the DARPA form. project plans. photos, etc. ( - ,j 11 a. Applicant Signature (required) I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief. the information provided to this application is true, complete, and accurate I also certify that I have the authonty to carry out the proposed activities. and I agree to start work only after I have received all necessary permits I hereby authoxixe the agent named in Part 3 of this application to act on my behalf in matters related to this application By rndialmg here, I state that I have the authority to grant access to the property I aiso give my consent to the permitting agencies enttsrtt'tg the properly where the protect is located to inspect the project site or any work related to the project. -,t '� (rnrlial'� ii�.. �' I ` � A` r i I � `y'f --. .. j4�`�'i',�„t�y_ ' �• f ,- .1 r f � Appatcant Prntm Name 1 Piiralnt Signatur._.e Date 11 b. Authorized Agent Signature teielp_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 cant'out the proposed activities and I agree to start work only after all necessary permits have been issued. William G Rehe Jr (,� Q�f� 4/29/2016 Authorized Agent Printed Name Authorized Agent Sign re Date 11c. Property Owner Signature(if not applicant) tr��pa Not required if project is on exacting fights-of-way or easements I rnnspnt to the r%-rmittino agPnriPs, Pntpring the pmpPrty whP A the PfnjP.rt is Inrated to inR(}Pr.t the r*njPrt gitp or any worts. These inspections shall occur at reasonable times and. if practical, with proof notice to the landowner. Port of Allyn - Lawrence F. Coppola Executive Director April 29, 2016 Property O�rner P• -vied Narre flan ►gn r , �' Datr. 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 of Regulatory Assistance (ORA)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. ORA publication number: ENV-019-09 rev. 06-12 JARPA Revision 2012.1 Page 17 of 18 Gxkt b -I--- co MASON COUNTY RECEIVED COMMUNITY SERVICES JUN 15 2017 Building 8—615 W. Alder Street Shelton,WA 98584 615 W. Alder Street (360)427-9670—Ext. 352 SHORELINE PERMIT APPLICATION PERMIT NO. SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHORELINE VARIANCE* DATE RECEIVED LP-(5-2b I SHORELINE CONDITIONAL USE* 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: North Bay Historical Society ADDRESS: PO Box 1313 Allyn WA 98524 (street) (city) (state) (zip) TELEPHONE: 360-801-1064 (home) (business) AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE: Bill Rehe, Jr. ADDRESS: 8305 Dogwood Ln. NW (street) Gig Harbor, WA 98332 (city) (state) (zip) TELEPHONE: 253-389-0712 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: General location(include property address,water body and associated wetlands—identify the name of the shoreline): 18560 E. State Route 3,Allyn WA 98524 Case Inlet, Puget Sound 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: 47.3846030/-122.8269800 12220-50-08001 OWNERSHIP: Contract Applicant Owner Lessee Purchaser (Identify) Other X Owner: Port of Allyn PO Box 1 (street) Allyn WA 98524 (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): The Sargent Oyster Building was removed from its original location to facilitate a shoreline restoration project by the South Puget Sound Salmon Enhancement Group and the WDFW. This historic structure was removed and relorated to the Port of Allyn to be restored and repurposed as a "living' museum and education center. The North Bay Historical Society, along with other community partners, are proposing toAllyn property. The restored Sargent Oyster Building will be used to create a museum and education center that will preserve the traditional commercial working waterfronts and pay homage to the shellfish and maritime histoDi of Allyn and Mason County Use(identify current use of property with exist improvements: The current use of the property is a public park and Port offices. Upland structures include the Port Administration Office, public bathroom, parking, play structure, pump house and gazebo. Structure on or adjacent to the marine shoreline include the existing timber.pier, angular rock bulkhead and concrete boat ramp. Reason for requesting development: The historic structure was removed from its previous location because of a change of land ownership. e oyster house is being restored at an upland ocation, but must a ovate at an overwater location in order to be listed on the state and federal registar of historic buildings The oyster house will also be used as a museum, education facility and commercial aquaculture facility. ACKOW LEDGEMENT I hereby declare,to the best of my knowledge and belief,the forgoing information and all attached information is true and correct. (Applicant or authorized representative) (Date) ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Publication Cost Agreement Publication cost is the responsibility of the applicant.Final permit processing will not occur until advertising fees have been paid to the newspaper by the applicant.The Shelton-Mason County Journal will bill the applicant directly. I/WE understand that I/WE must sign and date the attached acknowledgment indicating and that I/WE understand that is MY/OUR responsibility. I/WE must submit the signed page as part of application in order for it to be considered as complete. Ou l 1'# 6-/5-17 a 0 0 e-<< S Co7-r Signs of Pr erty Owner Date Print Name CO)"I 1-1 i SS iU)`b:)z -f::O>2 �02T of fl t-�1,�f OR Signature of Applicant Date Print Name plwst, '9.1 �� N DI 1`` '^ '`d J a' :LCc�' �aC� e- LIST OF ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS' MAILING ADDRESSES WITHIN 300 FEET OF YOUR PROPERTY BOUNDARIES FOR PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION Addresses are to be obtained from the Mason County Assessor's Office, Bldg. 1, Second Floor. .5H Qz-o j-7 - Odao2. MASON COUNTY COMMUNITY SERVICES Building 8, 615 W. Alder Street Shelton, WA 98584 (360)427-9670 ext. 352 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. The proposed project is consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58. and the Master Program. The project will not interfere with the public's opportunity to enjoy the physical and aesthetic qualities of the shoreline. The project has been designed and constructed in a manner to minimize damage to the ecology and environment of the shoreline area. 2. Show that the proposed use will not interfere with the normal public use of the shoreline. The proposed project and use of project will not interfere with the normal public use of public shorelines. The project is meant to increase the public's use of public Iand.The proposed project will not interfere with the public's use of the adjacent water or beach access. 3. Show that the proposed use of the site and design of the project will be compatible with other permitted uses within the area. The proposed use of the site and design of the project are compatible with other authorized uses within the area and with uses planned for the area under the comprehensive plan and shoreline master program. The Port of Allyn's shorelinE properties have similar access structures and uses along the marine shoreline. 4. Show that the proposed use will cause no unreasonable adverse effects to the shoreline environment in which it is to be located. stc F->i 6 toe ,'C'CJ 5. Show that the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect. The proposed project has been designed so that public interest will not suffer any substantial detrimental effect. The project and its use,will not result in damage to the shoreline environment or the public's view or use of the water. 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( d correct. 67ro-PWow4r or authorized representative) (date) Page 2 of 2 MASON ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT($630 or$380 w/other permit) Mason County Permit Center Use: ❑ CONDITIONAL USE($1520) MEP AQ I -1 - 000 11 HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN REVIEW($445) Date Rcvd to - 1 J- ZOl MASON COUNTY RECEIVED DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT JUN 15 2017 615 W. Alder Street Mason County Resource Ordinance(Chapter 17.01 MCC) ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT APPLICATION The purpose of the Resource Ordinance is to protect Mason County's natural resource lands and critical areas and is under the authority of Chapters 36.32, 36.70A, 39.34,58.17, 76.09, 84.33, 84.34 and 90.58 RCW. PLEASE PRINT 1. PROPERTY OWNER Name: Port of Allyn Mailing Address: PO Box 1,Allyn, WA 98524 Work Phone: (360)275-2430 Email Address: info@portofallyn.com Home/Cell Phone: Fax#: If an agent is acting for the property owner during the permit process, complete 92. 2. AUTHORIZED AGENT Name: Bill Rehe, Jr. Mailing Address: 8305 Dogwood Ln. NW, Gig Harbor, WA 98332 Work Phone: 253-389-0712 Email Address: Bill@northforkenvironmental.com Home/Cell Phone: Fax# 3. PROJECT SITE Site Address: 18560 E. State Route 3, Allyn WA 98524 Parcel#: 12220-50-08001 - Legal Description: Directions to Site: From Shelton,Take WA-3 North for 18.3 miles. Project is on the right. Attach a site plan showing the following: Lot Dimensions,Flood Zones,Existing Structures,Fences, Water Lines,Driveways,Drainage Plans, Shorelines,Septic System,Topography,Proposed Improvements,Easements,North Arrow,and Scale. Also draw a separate topography diagram. 4. State which section requires permit: ❑ Long Term Commercial Forest,Chapter 17.10.060 ❑ Frequently Flooded Areas,Chapter 17.01.090 ❑ Mineral Resource Lands,Chapter 17.01.066 ❑ Landslide Hazard Area,Chapter 17.01.100 ❑ Aquifer Recharge Area,Chapter 17.01.080 ❑ Seismic Hazard Areas,Chapter 17.01.102 ❑ Erosion Hazard Area,Chapter 17.01.104 Ef Fish&Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas,Chapter ❑ In-Holding Lands,Chapter 17.01.062 17.01.110 ❑ Wetlands,Chapter 17.01.070 5. Identify current use of the property with existing improvements: The property is currently used by the Port of Allyn as a Park and public access site. The property includes a public pier, boat ramp, Administration Building, gazebo, bathroom play structure and parking area. 6. Identify and describe the proposed project, including the type of materials to be used,construction methods, principle dimensions, and other pertinent information(attach additional sheets,if needed): The proposed project includes the demolition of a derelict boat ramp and restoration of an historic structure. This historic structure was removed and relocated to the Port of Allyn to be restored and repurposed as a "living" museum and education center. 7. Describe why the action requiring this permit cannot be avoided. The historical oyster house needs to be placed in a location similar to its original location to be placed on the state and federal register of historic buildings. The structure will also be used for water dependant commercial aquacu ture. 8. Will there be an alteration of a wetland and/or wetland vegetation area(circle one)? Yes No 9. Identify any surface water on or adjacent to property (circle one): Saltwater Lake Stream Pond Wetland Drainage Ditch 10. Identify existing septic/sewer connection(circle one): If septic is located on project site, include records. Connected to Septic Connected to Community Septic No sewer connection required. 11. Identify existing water supply(circle one): I Public Wate'77pp'lyl Well 11. Type of Job(circle one): New Add Alteration Re air Demolition Other: Jj / 7 L}�`� �� �COTE- Print Name Signat re Date I;Comnnmity Developmalt\ ACWFAI page-1 of 2 Revised June 2010 ( _ (D Sargent Oyster Building Restoration and Relocation Pr0jeC Mason County, Washington 6 2 segonlpi Township Range o co / @ S _4 aU « . . 2/ § «" o � g� r . , 0 § QR \ \ ®� % ^ W0 Aauw .� . 2 ON � \ � 23 Q| k 4z� 4 Oyster Bqilding ` 02 . , ( e / %. . I } - / \ \ VICINITY MAP NT / �\ \ � § p ___� w d o . � k Q % 2 C1. 0 2 o U v Approx. Property Line 420' •„ 0`O F' ' 2 .,; rJ � U4 Gazebo MHHW=14.16' v, Y .fY r 1 EJ H _ 7; ro 4 5' 4 8' m Sargents Oyster Building � —_ Approx. 1200 sq.ft. 'C3 U o' Portcc of Allyn 1 w `, 11 W Admin Office o u c) 41 F+ O n N T .: .J (IJ iJ 4 F V W Pug Sound ° " w Play ' R Ground Gravel Parking \ & Driveway Existing Rock Retaining Bulkhead C Wall I` - G N ✓. O 0.1 Bathroom i n 160' li �° Approx. Property Line I w F a U N� Drum St. PLAN MAP ;,' r4' Y' "' 1"=30' 5 , f k r w Eli 6 Concept R G"GENrs OYSTER HWSE CIRCA 19SWs Nil concept a.nd.rte9 •','�' PROPOSED SARGENT'S OYSTER HOUSE MUSEUM Complabon Oats SitIIIII Foil 2018 21 ft. u: $ u, N 3 I I i o I r I c 0 3 u v � > c w a I U I - ---•- ---•-•- - - - m m Existing conditions $ Concrete sidewalk 1"=30' ao Sargent Oyster Building Restoration and Relocation Project PURPOSE:Relocation of historical REFERENCE: PROPOSED PROJECT:Relocate a restored, structure APPLICANT-North Bay Historical Society historical building at the Port of Allyn to LAT/LONG: 47.384603`N LOCATION:18560 E.State Route 3 create aquaculture facility,museum and -122.826980'W education center DATUM: MLLW=0.0 MHHW=14.16 IN:Puget Sound NEAR/AT:Allyn ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: COUNTY:Mason STATE:WA 1.Ogren/12220-50-09001 2.Seymour/12220-50-11001 FIGURE 1 DATE: April 1,2017 I- J Deck grating: 8 ft.wide, ._ 60%open space .ram Y 3 a� ! 72 20 ft. Oyster House w w > +' C �? m C c 40 ft. 0 U -------------------------------------- 18 ft. 0 41 U t i W i NLn U ell 0 Proposed conditions it)=30' Sargent Oyster Building Restoration and Relocation Project PURPOSE:Relocation of historical REFERENCE: PROPOSED PROJECT:Relocate a restored, structure APPLICANT:North Bay Historical Society historical building at the Port of Allyn to LAT/LONG: 47.384603"N create aquaculture facility,museum and -122.826980"W LOCATION:18560 E.State Route 3 education center DATUM: MLLW=0.0 MHHW=14.16 IN:Puget Sound NEAR/AT:Allyn ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: COUNTY:Mason STATE:WA 1.Ogren/12220-50-09001 2.Seymour/12220-50-11001 FIGURE 2 DATE: April 1,2017 122205044008 122205091531 122205044005 Q� 122205011020 122205045001 �Q �� 122205016010 J� 122205011020 122205044003 44/ 122205043001 122205042003 122201180071 122205013005 122205044001 122205012005 122205011007 122205042011 122205011005 122200060010 122205042001 122205056002 122205013001 122205011003 122205058010 122205058012 122205057006 122205058009 122205011001 122205058007 122201480070 a; 122205057003 122205058003 122205058011 122200060000 122205057002 122205008001 122205057001 122205058001 Jrlm 122205060009 ."' 122201460370 122205059009 ED/QVMS22205009001 122205007010 122200060010 122201480730 122205059006 122205007008 122205006009 122205059005 122205006910 122205007007 122205006909 122205006007 122201480743 122205059004 122205059003 122205007005 122205006906 J122205007003 122201380746 122205059001 O 122205006904 122205006003 122201480090 122202222222 122205006903 �Q 122205007001 y � 122205006001 122201380745 122205071008 122205006901 122205004008 Source E-sri. Digi4alGiobe, GeoE e. Ear4hstar Geographic CNES/ irbus DS, 122205005008 SD . USES. ero RID,IGi;,Candjt e GIS User Co unit AOX , . .. tµ ire " Ke r y -i f,IM. r+ •F� Nf 4 "�� Yo .rw • (�{• `� {'w�d�•� p� W•Ins c RECEIVED Quantity Symbol Common Scientific Size Spacing UN 15 2017 Name Name 6T5 W. Alder Street Trees 5 SP Shore pine Pinus contorta 1 gal. 10' O/C 10 HW Hooker Salax 1 gal. 10' O/C willow hookeriana or live stake Shrubs 5 RFC Red Ribes 1 gal. 5' O/C flowering sanguineum currant 5 OS Oceanspray Holodiscus 1 gal. 5' O/C discolor 15 SL Salal Gaultheria 3.5" 5' O/C shallon 5 SB Snowberry Symphoricarpos 1 gal. 5' O/C albus Ground Cover 10 DG Dunegrass I Elymus mollis Seed BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION Sargent Oyster Building Restoration and Relocation Project Prepared for North Bay Historical Society and the Port of Allyn June, 2017 BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION Sargent Oyster Building Restoration and Relocation Project Prepared for North Bay Historical Society PO Box 1313 Allyn, WA 98524 Prepared by North Fork Environmental 8305 Dogwood Lane NW Gig Harbor, WA 98332 June, 2017 Chapter 1. Introduction The Sargent Oyster Building was removed from its original location to facilitate a shoreline restoration project by the South Puget Sound Salmon Enhancement Group and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.This historic structure was removed and relocated to the Port of Allyn to be restored and repurposed as a"living" museum and education center. The North Bay Historical Society, along with other community partners, are proposing to restore this historical building to its original configuration and place it on Port of Allyn property. The restored Sargent Oyster Building will be used to create a museum and education center that will preserve the traditional commercial working waterfronts and pay homage to the shellfish and maritime history of Allyn and Mason County. It will also be used by local shellfish aquaculturists to store equipment, load and unload equipment from barges and potentially raise seed. The restored building will be located in the upper section of the dilapidated concrete boat ramp on the northern shoreline of the Port. The approximately 3300 square feet of concrete ramp will be removed as mitigation for installing the approximately 1200 square foot Sargent Oyster Building over water. When complete and fully functional, the museum will give the public the ability to experience what life was like in an historic oyster processing facility. The museum will also be used as an education center for kindergarten through college aged students. Students will be given the chance to learn hands-on about oyster biology and ecology by raising native oysters in aquaria or recirculation tanks.A program similar to"Salmon in the Classroom" is being developed. Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) requires all federal agencies to consult with the National Marine Fisheries Service(NMFS)and/or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service(USFWS) if they determine that any action they fund, authorize, or carry out may affect listed species or designated critical habitat.The purpose of this biological evaluation is to determine if the proposed project will have an effect on a listed species and if either informal or formal consultation with the Services is required.A summary of species addressed by this report and the effects determinations is included in Table 1. Chapter 2. Proposed Project Location The proposed project is located at 18560 E. State Route 3 in Allyn, Mason County, Washington. The subject property is situated in northwest corner of Township 22 North,Range 1 West, Section 20,W.M. and encompasses the shoreline adjacent to Mason County Tax Parcel 12220-50-08001. 1 Contents Chapter 1. Introduction...................................................................................1 Chapter 2.Proposed Project................................................................................1 Location....................................................................... ................. ProjectDescription.......................................................................:............2 Construction Techniques.............................................................................2 Construction Schedule..................................................................................3 ActionArea..............................................................................................3 Conservation Measures...............................................................................4 Chapter 3.Environmental Baseline........................................................................5 ExistingConditions...................................................................................5 Surrounding Land/Water Uses............... Shoreline Vegetation and Habitat Features................................................6 Aquatic Substrate and Vegetation..........................................................7 Water and Sediment Quality................................................................8 Species Information..................................................................................8 Chapter 4.Effects Determination.......................................................................11 Chapter 5. Essential Fish Habitat(EFH)Analysis....................................................24 Chapter 6.References......................................................................................27 Appendices............................................................. .........................3 l Appendix A-Existing Permits Appendix B-Authorized Work Windows Appendix C-Support Information Appendix D-ESA Species Information i R 598 • 8 r 169 Bremerton rien Uilliwaup fi IF it ipsk • 09 3 18 +' ff t tot 7 WL 51 at Figure 1.Vicinity map of project area. To access the site from Shelton,take WA-3 north for 18.3 miles.The project is located on the east (right) side of WA-3 adjacent to the Port of Allyn Administration Office. Project Description The Action Area consists of several Port of Allyn(Port) owned parcels located on Case Inlet. Upland portions of the Port property are comprised of Port Administrative Building and public park, with gazebo,play structure,bathrooms,picnic areas,and parking lot.Adjacent to the shoreline,is an existing derelict concrete boat ramp, functioning boat ramp and float, large angular bulkhead and public pier. The North Bay Historical Society, in cooperation with the Port, are proposing to relocate a restored, historical building along the waterfront at the Port of Allyn to create museum and education center. The restored building will be located in the upper section of the dilapidated concrete boat ramp on the northern shoreline of the Port. The approximately 3300 square feet of concrete ramp will be removed as mitigation for installing the approximately 1200 square foot Sargent Oyster Building over water. In addition to removing the dilapidated concrete boat ramp,the applicant is proposing removing an additional 200 sq. ft. of concrete and debris on the beach, place 25 cubic yards of beach nourishment material and provide shoreline riparian planting at the Port of Allyn's kayak launch. A State Environmental Protection Act (SEPA) Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) has been issues (Appendix A). Several permits and approvals are forthcoming from Mason County, including building permit, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit,Environmental Permit and Shoreline Conditional Use Permit. 2 Construction Techniques The purpose of this project is to relocate the former historical Sargent Oyster Building that was removed from its original location to facilitate a shoreline restoration project by the South Puget Sound Salmon Enhancement Group and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. This historic structure was removed and relocated to the Port of Allyn to be restored and repurposed as a "living" museum and education center. The North Bay Historical Society, along with other community partners,are currently restoring this historical building to its original configuration so it can be place on the Port of Allyn property.The restored Sargent Oyster Building will be used to create a museum and education center that will preserve the traditional commercial working waterfronts and pay homage to the shellfish and maritime history of Allyn and Mason County. When complete and fully functional, the museum will give the public the ability to experience what life was like in an historic oyster processing facility. The museum will also be used as an education center for kindergarten through college aged students,as it was in the past.Students will be given the chance to learn hands-on about oyster biology and ecology by raising native oysters in aquaria or recirculation tanks. A program similar to "Salmon in the Classroom" is being developed. The facility will also be used by local aquaculture businesses to store, load, and ready equipment used to grow oysters in Case Inlet. The project will occur in multiple stages. The Sargent Oyster Building is currently stored on the southwest corner of the Port parcel near the intersection of Drum St.and State Route 3.The historic structure is being restored and rebuilt where it is being stored. After the restoration is complete, the building will be transported to the waterfront. The existing concrete boat ramp will be broken up with an excavator and pieces removed with a frontend loader. Ramp debris will be placed in a dump truck and disposed of at an appropriate upland site. Small pieces of debris will be removed from the beach by hand. Depressions in the beach will be removed to prevent fish stranding. After the demolition is complete, approximately 25 cubic yards of beach nourishment material will be placed on the beach. The restored building will be placed on a new pile supported structure.The original pile structure was built out of creosote treated wood. The new structure will be constructed out of environmentally friendlier material.The new piling will either be steel or concrete.The piling will be placed in the beach by boring holes while the area is not inundated by tidal water.The Sargent Oyster Building will be placed on the new structure using a crane. Construction Schedule Construction activities will occur during daylight hours. Work below OHW will take place during the low tide period when the Action Area is not inundated.All work will be conducted between July 16 and February 14,within the prescribed work windows as determined by WDFW 3 and ACOE for juvenile salmonids, Chinook salmon, bull trout, and forage fish species (Figure 2 and Appendix B). Authorized Work Times Jar =ec ""ar An" May Jere J L,ly A J g Sect Oct No-, Dec JLivenile Salron`ds Sul Sme- Sard Laice Figure 2.Authorized work times (non-highlighted) based on WDFW WAC 220-660-330, Tidal Reference Area 3. Action Area The "Action Area" includes the location where the project will occur plus any additional areas where physical, chemical, or biological mechanisms may be directly or indirectly affected by project activities. The geographic limits of the Action Area were defined by considering the potential spatial extent of mechanisms that may lead to impacts on listed species. The Action Area evaluated includes the Action Area and surrounding habitats within Case Inlet, a radius of 0.25 mile from the site (Figure 3). The 0.25-mile radius was chosen after considering the potential impacts of the project and the particular species that may be affected.Impacts to water quality and aquatic habitat are expected to be temporary, local and unlikely to extend more than 0.25 miles from the construction area. Noise from construction activities will be similar to existing ambient levels and will not add to in-water noise. Other mechanisms with potential for impacts to ESA- listed species or critical habitat include temporary turbidity and suspension of sediments from the boat ramp demolition and piling installation.Turbidity is expected to be localized and temporary and should be mitigated by working during low tide and deploying a floating silt curtain,as needed. 4 N Y ' l Hin Figure 3.Aerial Photo showing Action Area (red)and Project Area. Conservation Measures In order to minimize impacts from construction activities, conservation measures will be implemented. Conservation measures for project mitigation include Best Management Practices (BMPs),avoidance measures, and seasonal restrictions.The contractor will be required to comply with Washington State Surface Water Quality Standards (Washington Administrative Code [WAC] 173-201-201A), Ecology's Dangerous Waste Regulation (WAC 173-303), General Occupation Health Standards (WAC 276-62), and all regulatory permit conditions, including the WDFW Hydraulic Project Approval. Specific conservation measures are as follows: • The project will be designed to meet criteria in the current,locally accepted version of Ecology's Stormwater Management Manual. • Construction activities will occur between July 16 and February 14 to avoid impacts to juvenile salmonids, Chinook salmon, bull trout,and forage fish species. • To reduce erosion, construction activities in the intertidal zone will be limited to low tide periods. • Floating silt curtain will be placed around the construction site prior to and removed following construction, as needed. 5 • All debris will be disposed of according to applicable regulations at an approved upland waste-disposal facility. • Material will be stockpiled in the upland. Chapter 3. Environmental Baseline Existing Conditions The proposed project is located in Case Inlet, which is connected to south central Puget Sound near the tip of Key Peninsula and Harstine Island. Case Inlet is a rural area in Mason and Pierce Counties, characterized by residential and recreational development. The Action Area lies within Water Resource Inventory Area 14(WRIA 14),Kennedy-Goldsborough. Historical aerial and site photos are included in Appendix C. No streams flow into the Action Area or project site.Although no salmonid spawning occurs at or adjacent to the Action Area, it is likely the area is used for foraging and migration.Nearby streams support runs of fall chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta), Coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch), steelhead Oncorhynchus mykiss), summer Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), and cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki) (WDFW 2017a). Coulter Creek is located 1.8 miles to the northeast and Sherwood Creek 0.5 miles to the south. According to WDFW Forage Fish Spawning Map (2017b) and Priority Habitat and Species (2017c)websites,surf smelt(Hypomesus pretiosus)were documented at and adjacent to the Action Area in 1994-95 (Appendix D1). Based on visual inspection of the beach, the substrate at the project site does not seems to currently support surf smelt spawning. Because the area has previously supported forage fish spawning, the WDFW prescribed forage fish windows for surf smelt will be followed. Case Inlet provides habitat for a variety of wildlife species common to south central Puget Sound. Benthic macrofauna include crab and bivalve species.Several bird species were observed adjacent to the Action Area. These bird species include Glaucous-winged Gulls (Larus glaucescens), Northwest Crow (Corvus caurinus), Belted Kingfisher (Ceryle alcyon) and Great Blue Heron (Ardea Herodias).No mammals were observed,but raccoon(Procyon lotor)tracts were observed on the beach. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife priority habitat and species maps identify eelgrass meadows within I/4 mile, estuarine intertidal wetlands, hardshell clams and surf smelt spawning area in and adjacent to the proposed project area. 6 Surrounding Land/Water Uses The project site and Action Area are located along the western shoreline of Case Inlet within the Allyn Urban Growth Area (UGA). Case Inlet is dominated by recreational and residential properties. The land use directly to the north and south of the project site are residential. The neighbor to the north has a concrete bulkhead and a single family residence within approximately 28 feet of the shoreline.The neighbors to the south of the park are approximately 100 feet landward of the unarmored shoreline. Shoreline Vegetation and Habitat Features The project site consists of an existing rock bulkhead and concrete boat ramp. The Washington Department of Ecology Shoreline Atlas(Appendix D2)identifies the project area and Action Area as stable,with no known landslide or erosion hazards. Vegetation above OWH has been modified.No intact native riparian communities are located with the Port of Allyn property.An existing bulkhead divides the intertidal and upland communities.A concrete path is located directly landward of the bulkhead. There is also a large gravel parking area. The vegetation in the park areas mainly consists of lawn, a few Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), red alder (Alnus rubra), big-leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), and sword ferns (Polystichum munitum). There were no observed habitat features, such as snags, downed logs or wetlands in the upland area. Aquatic Substrate and Vegetation The nearshore areas adjacent to the project site is predominantly pea-gravel and cobble substrate that transitions to mudflat. The Washington Department of Ecology Shoreline Atlas (Appendix D3) does not identify any known vegetation at or directly adjacent to the project site. There are indicates the presence of fringe (patchy) eelgrass to the south and fringe (patchy) salt marsh vegetation to the north. A few areas of rockweed (fucus Spp.)were observed attached to the boat ramp and rocks. Patches of pickleweed (Salicornia virginica) was observed to the south of the project, outside of the project area and work corridor. Small amounts drift algae (Ma. Spp) was also seen on the beach. There are two small pockets of vegetation located above OHW and the bulkhead. This area contained a mixture of a few salt tolerant plants, mixed in with invasive species. The native salt tolerant vegetation include a few blades of Dunegrass (Elymus mollis) and a few Sea Plantain (Plantago maritima). Invasive species included Field bindweed/morning (Convolvulus arvensis or Calystegia sepium), Japanese knotweed (Polygonum Spp.) and Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor). The native vegetation will be protected during construction,while the invasive species removed by hand. 7 The beach at and adjacent to the project site have been designated as spawning habitat for forage fish (WDFW 2017b). According to the WDFW Forage Fish Spawning Map, surf smelt eggs were documents near the existing boat ramp in 1994-95. Currently, the beach only has a small band of substrate sufficient for surf smelt spawning. Most of the beach is cobble. The area appears to be starved of spawning sized sand and gravels. The area is almost entirely armored and there are no feeder bluffs located up drift of the site. I would suspect that the current pier, and concrete boat ramp are disrupting the drift cell,further limiting the distribution of the limited spawning substrate. Water and Sediment Quality The marine water bodies in and adjacent to Action Area are currently included on Ecology's 303(d) list of impaired water quality for exceeding the state criteria for contamination(WDOE 2017).The Action Area is currently listed on Ecology's 303(d) list for dissolved oxygen (Appendix 134). Sediment at and adjacent to the Action Area have not been sampled or identified as containing detrimental substances. Species Information The following species list is based on data acquired from the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS 2017),National Marine Fisheries Service(NMFS2017),Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW 2017c), and Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR 2017) websites and publications(Appendix E).A number of species present in Western Washington and Mason County are listed as Federally Endangered or Threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). This section includes a discussion of listed species with the potential to be within the Action Area and possible impacts due to the proposed project activities. Several ESA-listed species from Appendix D are not found in or near the vicinity of the Action Area and will not be addressed in the Effects Determination chapter of this Biological Evaluation. The proposed project is surrounded by residential and recreational development and it is highly unlikely that particular plants and animals will be found in the vicinity of the Action Area. The ESA-listed species not affected(No Effect)by proposed project activities and project location and surrounding environmental conditions include: spotted owl; leatherback sea turtle; humpback whale; albatross; Grizzly Bear; Caribou; Lynx; Otter; Green Sturgeon; grey wolf; Spalding's Catchfly;Checker-mellow;Desert-parsley;water howellia;ladies'tresses;Lupine;Paintbrush and stickseed()WDFW 2008). 8 Table 1. Species Listed Under the Endangered Species Act and Found in the Vicinity of Action Area. Common Name Scientific Name Listing Status Critical Habitat Designated? Marbled Murrelet Brachyrhampus Threatened Yes* marmoratus Not in marine waters Bull Trout Salvelinus con uentus Threatened Yes Chinook Salmon Oncorhynchus Threatened Yes tshaw tscha Steelhead Trout Oncorhynchus m kiss Threatened Yes Bocaccio Rockfish Sebastes paucispiniss Endangered Yes Canary Rockfish Sebastes pinniger Threatened Yes Yellowe e Rockfish Sebastes ruberrimus Threatened Yes Killer Whale Orcinus orca Endangered Yes Marbled Murrelet Brachyrhampus marmoratus—Threatened, listed 1992 (57 FR 45328) Critical habitat designated May 1996(61 FR 26255) Marbled murrelets are members of the Alcidae family of seabirds. They are found from the Aleutian Islands, Alaska to central California. Marbled murrelets may winters as far south as southern California.In Washington,the highest densities of marbled murrelets are found along the coastal waters of the Olympic Peninsula. Murrelets nests and roosts in mature and old growth coastal forests. Nesting may occur from April to September (WDFW 1991). They mainly feed from 500 feet and 1.2 miles off shore in waters less than 100 feet deep.Preferred prey items include small fish like sand lance(Ammodytes hexapterus),Pacific herring(Clupea harengus pallasi)and surf smelt(Hypomesus pretiosus),and crustaceans.Critical habitat has been designated in Oregon and California, but no critical habitat has been designated in the Action Area or marine waters in Washington. Bull Trout Salvelinus confluentus—Threatened, listed 1999 (64 FR 58909) Critical habitat designated October 2010 (75 FR 63898) Bull trout occur in less than half of their historic range,with fragmented and isolated populations occurring throughout British Columbia, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and Montana. Bull trout exhibit a wide range of life history strategies including resident,fluvial,adfluvial,and anadramous (WDFW 2000).Anadramous life history forms migrate through large rivers to spawn in cold,clear tributaries. Spawning occurs from late August through November for Coastal and Puget Sound populations.Fry emerge from late winter to early spring.Marine waters and estuaries are used for growth and maturation. 9 Four distinct stocks of bull trout have been identified within the Southern Puget Sound.They are the Puyallup River,Puyallup/Carbon River,Puyallup/White and Nisqually River bull trout stocks. These stocks, although rare, are known to the nearshore habitat throughout the year. Based on the distance to known populations, it is unlikely but possible that bull trout may occur in the Action area.There is no known record of bull trout occurring in the Action Area. Puget Sound Chinook Salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha — Threatened, listed 1999 (64 FR 14308), reaffirmed June 2005 (70FR37160) Critical habitat designated September 2005 (70 FR 52630) Chinook salmon use the nearshore of Puget Sound for feeding, rearing and migration. Juvenile Chinook salmon use estuary areas for feeding,rearing and osmoregulating during spring,summer, and fall, depending on their life history strategy. Stream-type Chinook salmon spend limited time in estuaries,while ocean-type Chinook can spend may months feeding and growing there.Juvenile Chinook prefer estuary and marine habitats with adequate water quality, temperatures, food, and depth. In addition to these basic requirements, Chinook also require cover in the form of overhanging shoreline vegetation, woody material, and marine vegetation such as macroalgae or eelgrass.Case Inlet offers many of their basic and preferred requirements,therefore it is likely that juvenile Chinook may be found within the Action Area. Puget Sound Steelhead Oncorhynchus mykiss—Threatened, listed May 2007(72 FR 26722) Critical habitat designated September 2005 (78 FR 2726) Fifteen distinct population segments(DPS)of steelhead trout have been identified in Washington, Oregon and California. Within these DPSs, steelhead trout exhibit two reproductive ecotypes. Summer or winter ecotypes are based on the duration of spawning migration and state of sexual maturity at time of river entry. Stream in south central Puget Sound support winter runs of steelhead. Steelhead trout,like other salmonids,heavily utilized nearshore areas to complete their life history. After spawning in streams and rivers,juvenile steelhead migrate into estuary areas for growth and osmoregulation. Juveniles and adults use the nearshore area throughout the year for forage, migration and growth. It is likely that steelhead trout may utilize parts of Case Inlet and may be found within the Action Area. Bocaccio Rockfish Sebastes paucispiniss—Endangered, listed July 2010 (75 FR 22276) Critical habitat designated November 2014 (79 FR 68041) 10 Bocaccio rockfish distribution ranges from northern British Columbia to central Baja California. Spawning(hatching) occurs from December through April. The live larval young drift over large areas in the surface waters. Larval and juvenile Bocaccio may passively drift for several months before settling in deeper habitats. These fish were once quite common on steep walls of Puget Sound.However, due to declining numbers and increased rarity they were listed as endangered on April 28, 2010 (NMFS 2010a). Adults generally occupy water 50- 250 meters in depth over rocky outcroppings, boulder fields, and sloping walls and will school with both conspecifics and other species of rock fish. Juveniles are found in much shallower waters over rocky substrate with various understory kelps and/or sandy bottoms with eelgrass.Approximately one month after settling juveniles will start to school. Adults and large juveniles feed on small fish and squid, whereas larvae and small juveniles feed on copepods,krill, diatoms, dinoflagellates and various larvae(Love et. al 2002). Canary Rockfish Sebastes pinniger—Threatened, listed July 2010 (75 FR 22276) Critical habitat designated November 2014 (79 FR 68041) Canary rockfish are a long lived member of the scorpion fish family. Found from northern British Columbia to northern Baja California, they can live up to 80 years of age. In recent years, canary rockfish populations in Puget Sound have declined, leading to their listing as threatened on April 28, 2010(NMFS 2010a). Canary rockfish spawn in the winter, producing pelagic larvae and juveniles that remain in the upper water column for 34 months (Love et al. 2002).Juveniles settle in areas of shallow water (15 to 20 meters) around nearshore rocky reefs, where they may congregate for up to three years (Boehlert 1980, Sampson 1996)before moving into deeper water. Adults live at depths of 80-200 meters in areas with significant currents around high relief rock outcrops. Yelloweye Rockfish Sebastes ruberrimus—Threatened, listed July 2010 (75 FR 22276) Critical habitat designated November 2014 (79 FR 68041) Yelloweye rockfish, once a common species found from the eastern portions of the Aleutian Islands to Northern California.Like other members of the scorpion fish family,Yelloweye rockfish are extremely long-lived reaching ages of up 118 years. Due to declining numbers and increased rarity they were listed as threatened on April 28,2010(NMFS 2010a). Little is known about the larval stage of yelloweye rockfish,but it is most likely similar to the drift larval stages of bocaccio and canary rockfish.Young juveniles migrate to vertical walls with cloud sponges and anemones at depths greater than 15 meters. Adults and subadults occupy rocky areas with crevices, caves, and boulder where they feed on small fish, shrimp, crab, and lingcod eggs (Love et. al, 2002). 11 Killer Whale,Southern Resident Orcinus orca—Endangered, listed November 2005 (70 FR 69903) Critical habitat designated November 2006 (71 FR 69054) Killer Whales are found in open oceans and coastal waters. Southern resident Killer Whales may be found spring through fall in Strait of Juan de Fuca, Strait of Georgia and Puget Sound. Movements into the Puget Sound usually coincide with migration of salmonids into the region (NMFS 2008b). The Puget Sound contains designated habitat for southern resident Killer Whale. The proposed project actions are occurring in tidal elevation too shallow for Killer Whales,but at least the outer limits of the Action Area are at a depth that may allow access. Chapter 4. Effects Determination Federally listed Threatened and Endangered species that may occur in the project Action Area include Marbled Murrelet, Bull Trout, Puget Sound Chinook Salmon, Puget Sound Steelhead, Bocaccio Rockfish, Canary Rockfish, Yelloweye Rockfish and Killer Whale. The project Action Area includes designated critical habitat for Chinook salmon,steelhead trout,rockfish(nearshore) and limited Killer Whale habitat. A summary of the effect determinations for the proposed project activities on each species is presented in Table 2.Potential direct effects include behavior disturbance from construction noise and water quality impacts due to increased turbidity from removing the existing concrete boat ramp and beach debris and installing the oyster house piling. These effects will be minimized by the conservation measures listed in Chapter 2. The direct effects are considered localized to the immediate project vicinity,temporary and short term in duration,and offset by the habitat benefits associated with the project reestablishment and enhancements. There are several Threatened or Endangered species in Washington and Puget Sound that are unlikely to be effected by project activities. Two of those species, Humpback Whales and Leatherback sea turtles are unlikely to be found in the Case Inlet.Humpback whales,usually found in open coastal waters, do not usually occur within Case Inlet. Historically, Humpback Whales sightings in Case Inlet are extremely rare and have been in deeper water near Harstine Island. Leatherback Sea Turtles are occasionally seen along the Washington coast, rarely further south than the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Leatherback Sea Turtles have not been seen in Case Inlet. Due to their unlikely presents, the rarity of the species and the anticipated short and temporary impacts associated with the project,the proposed actions will have No Effects on Humpback Whales or Leatherback Sea Turtles. 12 Table 2. Species listed as Threatened or Endangered under the Endangered Species Act and determination of effects from project activities. Common Name Scientific Name Effects on Listed Effect on Designated Species Critical Habitat Marbled Murrelet Brachyrhampus May Affect,but is Not No Effect on marmoratus Likely to Adversely designated critical Affect habitat* Bull Trout Salvelinus May Affect,but is Not No Effect on confluentus Likely to Adversely designated critical Affect habitat Chinook Salmon Oncorhynchus May Affect,but is Not May Affect,but is Not tshawytscha Likely to Adversely Likely to Adversely Affect Affect Steelhead Trout Oncorhynchus mykiss May Affect,but is Not May Affect,but is Not Likely to Adversely Likely to Adversely Affect Affect Bocaccio Rockfish Sebastes paucispiniss May Affect,but is Not May Affect,but is Not Likely to Adversely Likely to Adversely Affect Affect Canary Rockfish Sebastes pinniger May Affect,but is Not May Affect,but is Not Likely to Adversely Likely to Adversely Affect Affect Yelloweye Rockfish Sebastes ruberrimus May Affect,but is Not May Affect,but is Not Likely to Adversely Likely to Adversely Affect Affect Killer Whale Orcinus orca May Affect,but is Not May Affect,but is Not Likely to Adversely Likely to Adversely Affect Affect Marbled Murrelet Occurrence in the Project Area Marine observations of murrelets during the nesting season are believed to correspond to the presence of large blocks of suitable nesting habitat inland.There are no suitable nesting areas in close proximity to the Action Area. Similarly,no designated critical habitat(i.e.terrestrial nesting habitat) is located in or along the shores of Puget Sound or Case Inlet. Designated critical habitat does not include marine foraging habitat. Marbled murrelet sightings are rare in the central and southern Puget Sound. Historically, limited sighting were made in King County and they have been absent from Kitsap and Island Counties (Seattle Audubon 2015).The nearest nesting areas to the Case Inlet are located east in the Cascade Mountains east of Lake Stevens and north of Sultan(approximately 34 records)and approximately 13 35 miles west in Olympic Mountains,west of Port Hadlock and Port Townsend(approximately 15 records) (WDFW 2008). Effects of the Action Potential effects of the proposed oyster house project on marbled murrelets primarily include disturbance and temporary increased turbidity during demolishing of the boat ramp and removal of beach debris and the installation of piling. This may inhibit foraging or result in temporarily reduced food availability and reduced visibility/detectability of prey. Noise from construction equipment and temporary increases in turbidity during excavation will likely cause prey fish to avoid the immediate area of the proposed project. Consequently, in the unlikely event that a marbled murrelet was present within the immediate vicinity of the Action Area, they would be expected to temporarily avoid the immediate area and forage elsewhere until construction activities are completed. The addition of the construction noise in the localized area of Case Inlet does not appreciably add to disturbance noise for marbled murrelets,particularly since the area already has moderate levels of noise.Any construction noise will be short-term and confined to the project site or Action Area. No underwater noise should be produced,since the work will be performed in the dry at low tides. Any terrestrial noise will blend in to the ambient background noise or be buffered by Case Inlet before it can disturb locations outside of the Action Area. In the unlike event that marbled murrelets are in the area,they would temporarily avoid the Action Area. Determination of Effect The proposed oyster house project activities will not result in any long-term degradation of habitat or other significant adverse effects on marbled murrelets. Short-term effects such as noise disturbance and reduced prey availability will either not occur because of conservation measures or will be very small in magnitude, as discussed above. Temporary disturbance to foraging activities are expected to be insignificant and discountable. The survival or reproductive success of marbled murrelets in the project vicinity would not be affected. Therefore, the proposed demolition and construction activities May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect on marbled murrelet. The proposed project will have No Effect on designated critical habitat for marbled murrelet since none is present in the vicinity of the Action Area. Bull Trout— Coastal/Puget Sound Distinct Population Segment Occurrence in the Project Area The current distribution of bull trout within Puget Sound marine waters is not well understood. They have been documented to occur from the Canadian border to at least the Nisqually River delta, but no record of historical bull trout presence in the project site or Action Area is known to exist. Bull trout migrate throughout the inner bays and nearshore of Puget Sound from Possession Sound, to the Nisqually Delta (WDFW 1998). Bull trout are typically found in snowmelt- 14 dominated streams like the Puyallup and Nisqually Rivers that maintain cold water temperatures year-round in headwater reaches(WDFW,2002). The Puyallup River supports a small population of anadramous bull trout.Adult or sub-adults from this population may occasionally use the shoreline near the Action Area when feeding on outmigrating juvenile Chinook(Chan 2012). Although adult or juvenile bull trout may be present in nearshore waters year round, the likelihood of encountering bull trout at the project site and Action Area during the construction work window is relatively low. Effects of the Action Proposed project activities are likely to cause temporary and localized increases in turbidity. Although bull trout are unlikely to be in the Action Area, potential foraging habitat may be temporarily unavailable because of localized turbidity. Prey items important to bull trout are not likely to be affected by project activities.Like bull trout,the prey items, such as Chinook salmon, will temporarily avoid the Action Area. In-water noise will not be increased by project activities. Noises produced by construction equipment will be terrestrial and similar to surrounding rural noise levels. Conservation measures described in Chapter 2, particularly avoidance of the juvenile salmon migration period, are expected to prevent adverse short-term effects to bull trout during project activities.The temporary loss of the benthic organisms during the construction of the oyster house is expected to have a negligible effect on long-term habitat quality within the Action Area.No loss of forage fish communities will occur as the work will be performed during the authorized forage fish work window or after a forage fish spawning survey. Overall, the effects of the proposed action would be insignificant and discountable due to the temporary duration of the proposed project actions and the implementation of the proposed conservation measures to minimize the potential for bull trout to be within the Action Area. Critical Habitat The following primary constituent elements (PCEs) were given for bull trout in the Federal Register(October 18, 2010) in the re-designation of critical habitat. (1) Springs, seeps, groundwater sources, and subsurface water connectivity(hyporheic flows) to contribute to water quality and quantity and provide thermal refugia. Springs, seeps, and groundwater sources are not located within or near the Action Area or Action Area. (2) Migration habitats with minimal physical, biological, or water quality impediments between spawning, rearing, overwintering, and freshwater and marine foraging habitats, including but not limited to permanent,partial, intermittent,or seasonal barriers. 15 The proposed action may have a temporary effect on migrating salmonids,primarily in the form of temporary elevation of turbidity and noise levels, which are considered to be insignificant. No permanent barriers to migration would result from construction activities. In fact, the removal of the current concrete boat ramp should have a net positive result by reducing the amount of bed coverage in the area and removing a structure that is acting as a partial groin. (3) An abundant food base, including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, aquatic macroinvertebrates, and forage fish. Other than temporary disruption of benthic and epibenthic food sources, the oyster house project would have an insignificant effect on the food base in Case Inlet. Long-term, the reestablished intertidal habitat will add complexity to the shoreline and provide more opportunities for prey items. (4) Complex river, stream, lake, reservoir, and marine shoreline aquatic environments, and processes that establish and maintain these aquatic environments,with features such as large wood, side channels, pools, undercut banks and unembedded substrates, to provide a variety of depths, gradients,velocities,and structure. The oyster house project is occurring in a developed marine shoreline aquatic environment. The majority of the shoreline is bulkheaded or armored shoreline. The proposed project will remove approximately 3300 square feet of intertidal and shallow subtidal habitat that is currently unavailable to aquatic organisms. . (5) Water temperatures ranging from 2 to 15 °C (36 to 59 °F), with adequate thermal refugia available for temperatures that exceed the upper end of this range. Specific temperatures within this range will depend on bull trout life-history stage and form; geography; elevation; diurnal and seasonal variation; shading, such as that provided by riparian habitat; streamflow; and local groundwater influence. The majority of the south central Puget Sound, including Case Inlet, is moderately stratified compared to most other Puget Sound basins because no major river systems flow into this area. Although surface temperatures in the Case Inlet can reach 14-150C in summer, the temperatures of subsurface waters generally range from 10-130C in summer and 8-101C in winter (WDOE 1999). The oyster house project will not alter or increase water temperature beyond the current average temperatures. (6)In spawning and rearing areas, substrate of sufficient amount, size,and composition to ensure success of egg and embryo overwinter survival,fry emergence,and young-of-the-year and juvenile survival. A minimal amount of fine sediment, generally ranging in size from silt to coarse sand, embedded in larger substrates, is characteristic of these conditions. The size and amounts of fine sediment suitable to bull trout will likely vary from system to system. Case Inlet and the Action Area are not utilized by bull trout for spawning or rearing; this PCE would not be affected by the proposed project. 16 (7)A natural hydrograph, including peak, high, low, and base flows within historic and seasonal ranges or, if flows are controlled,minimal flow departure from a natural hydrograph. The proposed oyster house project would not alter the hydrograph or tidal exchange beyond the existing conditions. Replacing the existing boat ramp with the pile supported oyster house should improve existing conditions. This PCE would be improved by the proposed project. (8) Sufficient water quality and quantity such that normal reproduction, growth, and survival are not inhibited. The proposed oyster house project would not alter the quantity of water in the Action Area. The proposed project would have a temporary, insignificant effect on turbidity. (9)Sufficiently low levels of occurrence of nonnative predatory(e.g.,lake trout,walleye,northern pike, smallmouth bass); interbreeding(e.g.,brook trout); or competing(e.g.,brown trout) species that, if present,are adequately temporally and spatially isolated from bull trout. The presence of such predatory, interbreeding,or competing species would not occur in the Action Area. Predation by marine aquatic species would not be affected by the proposed oyster house project. Predation by terrestrial species, mainly avian species will be avoided by using anti- perching bird spikes or other devices. In summary, the Action Area may serve as migratory or feeding habitat for Coastal/Puget Sound bull trout heading to or from the Puyallup or Nisqually Rivers. As in most of the Puget Sound nearshore locations, the PCEs in the action area have been significantly altered and are not likely to be use by bull trout. Construction activities may result in temporary impacts to substrates and water quality. As discussed in previous paragraphs, these impacts are minor, temporary, and discountable, and do not interfere with movements or feeding of bull trout. Determination of Effect For the reasons described above, no significant cumulative, interrelated or interdependent effects on bull trout are expected from the proposed oyster house project or activities. Overall, due to the low likelihood of an individual bull trout being within the Action Area, the effects of the proposed action on Coastal/Puget Sound bull trout would be insignificant and discountable. Therefore, the proposed oyster house project activities May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect Coastal/Puget Sound bull trout and will have No Effect on designated critical habitat. Puget Sound Chinook Salmon Occurrence in Project Area Chinook salmon in Case Inlet utilize the shoreline for migration and feeding. Adults enter Case Inlet from mid-June through the fall. Chinook salmon may be present or migrating through south 17 central Puget Sound and the marine waters adjacent to the Action Area from mid-May through October. Outmigrating juvenile Chinook salmon could potentially use the waters in and around the Action Area from March until mid-July. As with much of the Puget Sound nearshore,the habitat in the Action Area has been significantly altered. Spawning opportunities for Chinook salmon do not occur in the Action Area.No rivers or streams occur within the project site or Action Area. Carr Inlet and the Action Area serves as rearing, feeding and migratory habitat for Puget Sound Chinook. Chinook salmon migrating up the shoreline could find refuge from strong shoreline currents and feeding opportunities.Ocean-type Chinook utilize estuaries and nearshore areas more extensively for rearing than stream-type juveniles (Healey 1991). Both life history strategies of juveniles Chinook could move into marine waters in and around the Action Area to feed on drifting insects and small nektonic organisms(calanoid copepods,crab larvae,larval and juvenile fish,and euphausiids) (Simenstad et al. 1982;Healey 1991). Effects of the Action The proposed project will not result in long-term, permanent impacts to Puget Sound Chinook salmon.Scheduling construction to occur during approved work windows and during periods when the tide is below the work area will minimize impacts to salmon. Construction activities that will occur below OHW will likely have short-term impacts on salmonids that may be present in the Action Area during that time. However, project impacts are likely to be insignificant because of their localized and temporary nature and the existing impacted environmental conditions of the site(i.e., existing bulkhead).These impacts will be minimized by conservation measures included in the Chapter 2. The reestablishment of intertidal habitat will improve local habitat conditions long term. Critical Habitat Critical habitat, as defined in the ESA, identifies specific areas that have the physical and biological features that are essential to the conservation of a listed species, and that may require special management consideration or protection. Designated critical habitat for Puget Sound Chinook salmon includes all naturally spawned populations from rivers and streams flowing into Puget Sound. Critical habitat is designated for areas containing the physical and biological habitat features, or primary constituent elements (PCEs) essential for the conservation of the species or that require special management consideration.PCEs include sites that are essential to supporting one or more life stages of the evolutionarily significant unit (ESU) and that contain physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the ESU. Specific sites and features designated for Puget Sound Chinook salmon include: 1. Freshwater spawning sites with water quantity, water quality, and substrate conditions that support spawning incubation and larval development. 18 The Action Area does not contain freshwater spawning sites; this PCE would not be affected by the proposed project. 2. Freshwater rearing sites with water quantity and floodplain connectivity to form and maintain physical habitat conditions and support juvenile growth and mobility; water quality, natural cover, and forage that support juvenile development. The Action Area does not contain freshwater rearing sites; this PCE would not be affected by the proposed project. 3. Freshwater migration corridors free of obstruction, with water quantity, water quality, and natural cover conditions that support juvenile and adult mobility and survival. The Action Area does not contain freshwater migration corridors; this PCE would not be affected by the proposed project. 4. Estuarine areas free of obstruction, with water quantity, water quality, and salinity conditions supporting juvenile and adult physiological transitions between fresh and salt water, as well as natural cover and forage supporting juvenile and adult survival and growth. The Action Area does not contain estuarine areas; this PCE would not be affected by the proposed project. 5. Nearshore marine areas free of obstruction, with water quantity, water quality, natural cover,and forage supporting survival and growth. The proposed oyster house project will not increase obstructions or alter water quantity, quality or forage of water in Case Inlet or the Action Area permanently. The Action Area is currently impacted by a bulkhead and concrete boat ramp that extends below OHW. These obstructions will be reduced by removing the concrete boat ramp and placing the oyster house on piling. Overall, the project will increase water quantity and forage by removing fill from 3300 square feet of intertidal habitat. 6.Offshore marine areas with water-quality conditions and forage supporting survival and growth. The Action Area does not contain offshore marine areas and will not degrade water quality conditions or forage; this PCE would not be affected by the proposed project. Determination of Effect Adult,sub-adult,and juvenile Chinook salmon utilize the nearshore of the Puget Sound for at least some stage of their life history. Therefore, the proposed oyster house project may affect the 19 threatened Puget Sound Chinook salmon. However, any Chinook salmon present would experience negligible effects from the proposed oyster house. In the long run, reestablished intertidal habitat will increase the amount and quality of available habitat in Case Inlet and the Action Area. Conservation measures including avoiding construction activities during the migration period of juvenile Chinook salmon and other salmonids and deployment of a silt curtain, as needed, would prevent adverse short-term effects to Chinook salmon during construction of the oyster house project.The construction work will occur during prescribed ACOE and WDFW"work windows" when Chinook salmon are less likely to be present in the Action Area. The temporary loss of the benthic communities in the project areas would have only a negligible effect on Chinook salmon habitat. For the reasons described above,no significant cumulative, interrelated or interdependent effects on Puget Sound Chinook salmon are expected from the proposed oyster house project Overall,the effects of the proposed action on Puget Sound Chinook salmon would be insignificant and discountable. Therefore, the proposed oyster house project activities May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect Puget Sound Chinook salmon. Similarly, the proposed oyster house project activities May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect designated critical habitat for Puget Sound Chinook salmon. Puget Sound Steelhead Occurrence in the project area Winter populations of steelhead trout have been documented in Sherwood and Coulter Creeks (WDFW 2017a). They typically enter freshwater from December through mid-March and spawn from early February to early April(WDFW,2002).Juveniles outmigrate from mid-March through mid-July. Adults and juvenile steelhead trout most likely use the Action Area for migration and limited rearing and feeding.Although no record of steelhead use exists for the Action Area, it is probable that small numbers of individuals may enter the area. Effects of Action Potential direct and indirect effects to Puget Sound steelhead from the project are similar to Puget Sound Chinook salmon. Although the impacts of terrestrial noise and temporary turbidity would be short-term and localized, there is still the potential to affect steelhead trout. Potential impacts of the project action include physiological responses such as elevated stress levels due to noise, gill injury due to temporary exposure to increased turbidity levels,and behavioral responses, such as reduced feeding opportunities and avoiding the work area. 20 The substrate in the Action Area contain gravel and cobble, therefore suspended material is expected to settle out quickly. To further reduce the potential impacts of turbidity, a floating silt curtain will be secured around the project site, as needed. Working during the approved work window should minimize impacts and disturbances to steelhead trout in the Action Area. Since steelhead typically utilize deeper marine water habitats they would likely be present in low numbers or would not be present at the project site or Action Area. This project will not result in long-term, permanent impacts to Puget Sound steelhead. These temporary impacts will be minimized by conservation measures included working when juvenile steelhead trout are less likely to be in the area and using floating silt curtain to minimize the effects of turbidity.There would be longer-term enhancements of water quantity and habitat by increasing the amount of intertidal habitat.Therefore impacts are expected to be minimal and discountable. Critical Habitat The following primary constituent elements (PCEs) were given for steelhead trout in the Federal Register(September 5, 2005) in the designation of critical habitat: (1) Freshwater spawning sites with water quantity and quality conditions and substrate supporting spawning, incubation and larval development; The Action Area does not contain freshwater spawning sites;this PCE would not be affected by the proposed project. (2) Freshwater rearing sites with: (i) Water quantity and floodplain connectivity to form and maintain physical habitat conditions and support juvenile growth and mobility; (ii) Water quality and forage supporting juvenile development;and(iii)Natural cover such as shade, submerged and overhanging large wood, log jams and beaver dams, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels,and undercut banks. The Action Area does not contain freshwater rearing sites; this PCE would not be affected by the proposed project. (3) Freshwater migration corridors free of obstruction and excessive predation with water quantity and quality conditions and natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels, and undercut banks supporting juvenile and adult mobility and survival; The Action Area does not contain freshwater migration corridors; this PCE would not be affected by the proposed project. (4) Estuarine areas free of obstruction and excessive predation with: (i) Water quality, water quantity, and salinity conditions supporting juvenile and adult physiological transitions between fresh- and saltwater; (ii) Natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood, aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, side channels; and 21 (iii) Juvenile and adult forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation. Action Area does not contain estuarine areas; this PCE would not be affected by the proposed project. (5) Nearshore marine areas free of obstruction and excessive predation with: (i) Water quality and quantity conditions and forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation; and (ii) Natural cover such as submerged and overhanging large wood,aquatic vegetation, large rocks and boulders, and side channels. The proposed oyster house project will not increase obstructions or alter water quantity, quality or reduce natural cover in Case Inlet or the Action Area. The Action Area is currently impacted by a bulkhead and concrete boat ramp that extends below OHW. The current obstruction will be removing the concrete boat ramp and building the oyster house on piling. Overall, the project will increase water quantity and forage by removing bed and overwater coverage from 3300 square feet of intertidal and shallow subtidal habitat. Natural cover will not be effected or altered by the project. (6) Offshore marine areas with water quality conditions and forage, including aquatic invertebrates and fishes, supporting growth and maturation. The Action Area does not contain offshore marine areas and will not degrade water quality conditions or forage; this PCE would not be affected by the proposed project. Determination of Effect The project will be conducted within the appropriate fish windows to reduce the potential for Steelhead to be in the vicinity of the project during construction. The alteration of fish habitat will have a net beneficial effect on this species due to intertidal and shallow subtidal habitat reestablishment being proposed. Other impacts to the Action Area are either temporary in nature or should not affect aquatic species. Due to the reduced presence of steelhead, the timing of the proposed project actions, and the localized and temporary nature of the turbidity, the proposed project actions May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect Puget Sound steelhead or steelhead Critical Habitat. Bocaccio Rockfish Effects of Action It is very unlikely that any adult Bocaccio rockfish would be present in the project area as they tend to inhabit deeper water with rocky substrate. Bocaccios have not been documented in the Puget Sound since 2001 (NMFS 2008a). Historically, they were seen as bycatch in the south central Puget Sound near Point Defiance and Tacoma Narrows(Palsson et al 2009). The substrate in the Action Area is gravel and cobble in the nearshore with mud in the lower elevations of the Action 22 Area. Based on the water depths in the Action Area and the lack of suitable habitat, it is extremely unlikely that adult Bocaccio rockfish would be present. Although juveniles are present in shallower water, they are also associated with rocky areas with kelp cover and sandy areas with eelgrass beds. The probability of the larval stage or juvenile bocaccio to be present at the Action Area is very low. Determination of Effect Due to the lack of rockfish habitat, distance from deeper waters habitats and the fact that the work will occur when the area is not inundated by tidal water, the proposed action May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect this species or critical habitat. Canary Rockfish Effects of Action Canary rockfish are distributed throughout the Puget Sound although their numbers are greater in the north Puget Sound and San Juan Island (Miller and Borton 1980). In the south central Puget Sound, recreation catch records document a local population near the Tacoma Narrows. Adult canary rockfish are unlikely to be encountered in Action Area, as it lacks deep water, proper substrate, and high relief habitat. Juvenile canary rockfish recruitment and rearing is unlikely to occur as it lacks hard rocky substrate. Determination of Effect There is limited potential for occurrence of rockfish within the project site or Action Area. Drift larval and small juvenile canary rockfish may potentially be present in Puget Sound waters during the summer months. Project effects to larval canary rockfish are highly unlikely. Construction activity impacts to canary rockfish are minimal as the work will occur in the dry at low tide. Due to the lack of canary rockfish habitat and the lack of impacts to habitat, the proposed project May Affect,but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect canary rockfish DPS or critical habitat. Yelloweye Rockfish Effects of Action Yelloweye rockfish are somewhat rare in the south central Puget Sound (NMFS 2008). They are encountered more frequently in the north Puget Sound and Hood Canal(Miller and Borton 1980). It is very unlikely that adult yelloweye rockfish will be present in the project site or Action Area as they inhabit deep water with rocky substrate that provides refuge space and feeding opportunities. This type of habitat is not present within the project site or Action Area. Juvenile yelloweye rock fish are also not likely to be found near the Action Area as they prefer shallow areas with rocky substrate (NMFS 2008a). Drift larval may be present in the Action Area but 23 would likely not be effected by project actions because they will occur when the work corridor is not inundated by tidal water. Determination of Effect Due to the lack of presence of yelloweye rockfish and yelloweye rockfish habitat in the project area and the proposed conservation measures and BMWs the proposed action May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect this species or its critical habitat. Southern Resident Killer Whales Effects of the Action It is highly unlikely that a Southern Resident Killer Whales would enter the Action Area because the shallow depth likely limits their presence. Killer Whales tend to require open water with no restrictions (NOAA 2006). Also, during the proposed project work window, Southern Resident Killer Whales are typically not present in the Case Inlet as they tend to prefer open water habitats with feeding opportunities during the summer months. Critical Habitat Southern Resident Killer Whales prefer deeper water in the Puget Sound where they can follow their primary salmonid source of prey(Jensen, 2006). Critical habitat has been designated for the Southern Resident Killer Whales and is defined as, all marine waters of Puget Sound deeper than 20 feet relative to a contiguous shoreline delimited by the line of extreme high water (71 FR 69054).Critical habitat includes nearshore and offshore marine areas of the Puget Sound,including Case Inlet. Although it is highly unlikely that the Southern Resident Killer Whales will be in the Action Area during construction,some life stage of their prey is likely to be present. The PCEs for Southern Residents Killer Whales include the following:(1)Water quality to support growth and development;(2)Prey species of sufficient quantity,quality and availability to support individual growth, reproduction and development, as well as overall population growth; and (3) Passage conditions to allow for migration,resting,and foraging. The Action Area partially occurs in a defined critical habitat.Although all of the work will occur above 0 foot elevation (MLLW) and when the work area in not inundated by tidal waters, temporary, short term impacts in the form of turbidity may occur in area of the adjacent nearshore areas 20 feet deep or deeper.The proposed project will not affect PCE 1 or 2,but may temporarily effect prey items (salmonids) included in PCE 2. As discussed in previous sections, impacts to prey species, such as Chinook and other salmonids, will be discountable with the use of conservation measures and BMPs. Effects to Southern Residents Killer Whales critical habitat are not anticipated. Determination of Effect 24 Southern Resident Killer Whales may be present within Case Inlet and the Action Area during project activities. The proposed project actions may affect Southern Resident Killer Whales because work will be conducted below MHHW when the work area is not tidally inundated,there will be habitat alterations associated with the project and water turbidity may be temporarily increased during project activities. The project is not likely to adversely affect Southern Residential Killer Whales because project actions will occur outside of the defined nearshore critical area, habitat alteration (reestablishment of intertidal habitat) will benefit salmonid prey species,water quality impacts that may occur are temporary and should not affect aquatic species and work will stop if a Southern Residential Killer Whale is observed within the Action Area. Although the outer limits of the Action Area is located in nearshore critical habitat,the proposed project may affect but is not likely to adversely affect designated critical habitat for Southern Resident Killer Whales because habitat at the Action Area or within the Action Area generally does not provide suitable habitat for Killer Whales.The project actions will not negatively affect water quality to support growth and development,should improve local habitat conditions for prey species, and will not obstruct migration corridors,resting or foraging conditions. Chapter 5. Essential Fish Habitat Analysis The Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996(Public Law 104-267)amended the Magnuson-Stevens Act to require Federal agencies to consult with National Marine Fisheries Service(NMFS) on projects that may adversely affect"Essential Fish Habitat"(EFH). The Pacific States Fishery Management Council amended the Pacific Groundfish Fishery Management Plan and the Coastal Pelagic Species Management Plan (1998) to designate waters and substrate necessary for spawning, breeding, feeding, and growth of commercially important fish species. The objective of this EFH assessment is to notify NOAA Fisheries of the project and potential effects and determine whether the proposed actions"may adversely affect"designated EFH for relevant commercially, federally managed fish species within the proposed Action Area. The analysis also includes conservation measures proposed to avoid, minimize,and offset potential adverse effects to designated EFH. The marine extent of salmon, groundfish,and coastal pelagic EFH includes those waters from the nearshore and tidal submerged environments within Washington, Oregon, and California state territorial waters out to the exclusive economic zone (370.4 km) offshore between the Canadian border to the north and the Mexican border to the south. There are seven composite EFHs: estuarine; rocky shelf; non-rocky shelf; canyon; continental shelf/basin; neritic and oceanic habitats. Relevant assessment of EFH at the proposed Action Area includes intertidal estuarine habitat.The proposed oyster house and intertidal/shallow subtidal habitat reestablishment includes the removal of 3300 square feet of bed and overwater coverage, 200 square feet of beach debris removal and riparian planting. The oyster house will be placed on steel or concrete pilings to prevent impacts to the drift cell. 25 The oyster house project may temporarily reduce benthic organism populations that are prey species for various groundfish and juvenile pelagic fishes that utilize intertidal estuarine EFH. Benthic and epibenthic prey species will be temporarily displaced, but are expected to recover quickly after construction activities are completed.Both the disturbed and the reestablished habitat invertebrate communities are expected to recover quickly, and result in a net gain of biological productivity. Similarly, forage species, such as surf smelt, sand lance, and squid could also be temporarily impacted by elevated temporary turbidity.However,the impact is expected to be small or none existent, because of the gain in intertidal estuarine habitat. Currently, the existing boat ramp is eliminating forage species habitat.By removing the boat ramp and placing the oyster house on piling, the proposed project will provide a small net gain in forage species biological productivity. In order to conserve intertidal estuarine EFH and reduce potential effects on associated species, the proposed oyster house project would incorporate the following conservation me_ ads: • Project activities shall be limited to the removal of the existing concrete boat ramp,placing the restored oyster house on piling and reestablish 3300 square feet of intertidal and shallow subtidal habitat. • Work below the ordinary high water line shall not occur from February 14 through July 15 of any year for the protection of migrating juvenile salmonids. • Project activities below OHW/MHHW shall not occur when the project area,including the work corridor is inundated by tidal waters. • Use of equipment on the beach shall be held to a minimum, confined to a single access point, and limited to a 25-foot work corridor waterward of the existing boat ramp. • No stockpiling of material will occur below the ordinary high water line. • All trenches, depressions, or holes created in the beach area shall be backfilled prior to inundation by tidal waters.If trenches excavated for base rocks need to remain open during construction, fish shall be prevented from entering such trenches. • All waste material such as construction debris,silt,excess dirt or overburden resulting from this project shall be deposited above the limits of flood water in an approved upland disposal site. • All manmade debris on the beach shall be removed and disposed of upland such that it does not enter waters of the state. This includes the pre-existing pieces of concrete and rusty steel. 26 • Intertidal wetland vascular plants shall not be adversely impacted due to project activities (e.g., barge shall not ground, equipment shall not operate, and other activities shall not occur in intertidal wetland vascular plants). • Project activities shall be conducted to minimize siltation of the beach area and bed. The project shall not degrade water quality to the detriment of fish life. The combination of the proposed conservation measures detailed above and the temporary and localized effect of project activities reduces the effects on Essential Fish Habitat to the point that the effects will be insignificant and discountable,and thus the proposed oyster house project May Affect,but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect Essential Fish Habitat. Chapter 6. References 57 FR 4532845337. 50 CFR Part 17. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Threatened Status for the Washington, Oregon and California Population of Marbled Murrelet. Federal Register USFW, Vol. 57,No. 191. 1992. 61 FR 26255-26320. 50 CFR Part 17. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Designation of Critical Habitat for the Marbled Murrelet; Final Rule. Federal Register, Vol. 62, No. 102. 1996 64 FR 14308-14328. 50 CFR Parts 223 and 224.Endangered and Threatened Species;Threatened Status for Three Chinook Salmon Evolutionarily Significant Units (ESUs) in Washington and Oregon, and Endangered Status for One Chinook Salmon ESU in Washington. Federal Register, Vol. 64,No. 56. 1999. 64 FR 58909-58933. 50 CFR Part 17. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Threatened Status for Bull Trout in the Coterminous United States. Federal Register,Vol. 64,No. 210. 1999. 70 FR 52630-52853.50 CFR Part 223 and 224.Endangered and Threatened Species:Final Listing Determinations for 16 ESUs of West Coast Salmon, and Final 4(d) Protective Regulations for Threatened Salmonid ESUs. Federal Register,Vol. 70,No. 123. 2005. 70 FR 37160-37204. 50 CFR Part 226. Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for 12 Evolutionary Significant Units of West Coast Salmon and Steelhead in Washington, Oregon and Idaho. Federal Register,Vol. 70,No. 170. 2005. 70 FR 69903-69070. 50 CFR Part 224.Endangered and Threatened Species; Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants;Determination of Threatened Status for Southern Resident Killer Whale. Federal Register,Vol. 70,No.222.2006. 27 71 FR 69054-69070. 50 CFR Part 226. Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for Southern Resident Killer Whale.Federal Register,Vol.71,No.229.November 29,2006. 72 FR 26722. 50 CFR Part 223.Endangered and Threatened Species: Final Listing Determination for Puget Sound Steelhead. Federal Register,Vol. 72,No. 92. 2007. 75 FR 22276-22290.2010.Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants:Threatened Status for the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin Distinct Population Segments of Yelloweye and Canary Rockfish and Endangered Status for the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin Distinct Population Segment of Bocaccio Rockfish. NMFS, NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce. Federal Register, Vol. 75, No. 81. April 28,2010. 75 FR 63898-64070. 50 CFR Part 17. Endangered and Threatened and Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Bull Trout. Federal Register, Vol. 70,No. 185. 2005. Boehlert,G.W. 1980. Size composition,age composition,and growth of canary rockfish, Sebastes pinniger, and splitnose rockfish, S. diploproa, from the 1977 rockfish survey. Mar. Fish. Rev. 42:57-63. Calambokidis,J. and G. Steiger.(1990). Sightings and Movement of Humpback Whales in Puget Sound, Washington.Northwestern Naturalist 71:45-49. Autumn 1990. Healey,M.C. 1991. Life history of Chinook salmon(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha).Pp. 311-294. Kerwin,J. 1999. Salmon Habitat Limiting Factors Report for the Puyallup River Basin(Water Resource Inventory Area 10). Washington Conservation Commission,Olympia, WA. Love, M.S., Yoklavick, and L. Thorsteinson. 2002. The Rockfishes of the Northeast Pacific. University of California Press 405. Miller, B.S. and S.F. Borton. 1980. Geographic Distribution of Puget Sound Fishes: Maps and Data Source Sheets. Volume 2. Family Percichthyidae (Temperate Basses) 32.1 through Family Hexigrammidae(Greenlings) 54.6. National Oceananic and Atmospheric Administration(NOAA).2006. Draft recovery plan:eastern and western distinct population segments.National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. National Marine Fisheries Service(NMFS).2008a.Preliminary scientific conclusion of the review status of 5 species of rockfish: bocaccio (Sebastes paucispinis), canary rockfish (Sebastes pinniger), yelloweye rockfish (Sebastes ruberrimus), greenstriped rockfish (Sebastes elongatus), and redstriped rockfish (Sebastes proriger) in Puget Sound, Washington. NMFS Northwest Fisheries Science Center. Seattle, Washington.December 2008. 28 National Marine Fisheries Services(NMFS). 2008b. Recovery Plan for Southern Resident Killer Whales (Orcinus orca). National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest Region, Seattle, Washington. NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 2014. Species Lists.Available at: hLtp://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.goy/Trotected species/s eU cies list/species lists html Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC). 1998. Essential Fish Habitat Coastal Pelagic Species. Modified from Coastal Pelagics Species Fisheries Management Plan. Pacific Fishery Management Council.Portland, Oregon. Palsson, W.A., T. Tsou, G.G. Bargmann, R.M. Buckley, J.E. West,M.L. Mills,Y.W. Cheng, and R.E. Pacunski. 2009. The Biology and Assessment of Rockfishes in Puget Sound. Washington Department Fish and Wildlife. September 2009. Simenstad, C.A., K.L. Fresh, E.O. Salo. 1982. The Role of Puget Sound and Washington Coastal Estuaries in the Life History of Pacific Salmon:an Unappreciated Function.In V.S.Kennedy(ed.). Estuarine Comparisons. Pp. 343-364. Academic Press,New York,NY. Seattle Audubon. Sound To Sage: Breeding Bird Atlas of Island, King, Kitsap, and Kittitas Counties, Washington Data accessed from website:www.soundtosa e.org Sampson, D.B. 1996. Stock status of canary rockfish off Oregon and Washington in 1996. Appendix C. In: Status of the Pacific Coast groundfish fishery through 1996 and recommended biological catches for 1997:stock assessment and fishery evaluation.Pacific Fishery Management Council,Portland,OR. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service (USDA-USFWS). 2015. Official Species List. Consultation Tracking Number 01EWFW00-2016-SLI-0008. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 1991. Management Recommendations for Washington's Priority Habitats and Species.May 1991. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 1998. Washington State salmon stock inventory, Bull Trout/Dolly Varden.Olympia, Washington. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2002. Salmonid stock inventory 2002. http://wdfw.wa.gov/fish/sasi/ Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife(WDFW).March 19,2008.Habitat and Species Map and PHS Polygon Report. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Program,Olympia, WA. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2017a. Data accessed from website: www.wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/salmonscgpe/index.html 29 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife(WDFW). 2017b.Priority Habitat and Species List. Olympia, Washington. 177 pp. Washington Department of Ecology(WDOE). 1999.Data from Marine Water Quality Monitoring Program. Washington Department of Ecology(WDOE). 2017. Washington State Coastal Atlas. Data accessed from website:https://fortress.wa. og v/ecy/coastalatlas/ Washington State Department of Natural Resources(DNR).2017. Washington Natural Heritage Information System List of Known Occurrences of Rare Plants in Washington.Available at: http://wwwl.dnr.wa. og v/nhp/refdesk/lists/plantsxco/mason.html 30 Appendix A — Existing Permits/Authorizations Appendix A.1 —Port of Allyn SEPA Determination Port Allyn Of DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE RCW 197-11-970 Port Commissioners: Jean Farmer Project Name: Sargent Oyster Building Restoration and Relocation Project Judy Scott Description of proposal: Scott Cooper The Sargent Oyster Building was removed from its original location to facilitate a Lary Coppola shoreline restoration project by the South Puget Sound Salmon Enhancement Executive Director Group and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. This historic structure was removed and relocated to the Port of Allyn to be restored and repurposed as a "living" museum and education center. The North Bay Historical Society, along with other community partners, are proposing to restore this historical building to its original configuration and place it on Port of Allyn property. The restored Sargent Oyster Building will be used to create a museum and education center that will Port Facilities: preserve the traditional commercial working waterfronts and pay homage to the Allyn Marina shellfish and maritime history of Allyn and Mason County. ' Boat Launch The restored building will be located in the footprint of the dilapidated concrete North Shore Marina boat ramp on the northern shoreline of the Port. The approximately 3300 square and Boat Launch feet of concrete ramp will be removed as mitigation for installing the approximately Allyn Waterfront 1200 square foot Sargent Oyster Building over water. When complete and fully Park functional, the museum will give the public the ability to experience what life was Allyn Kayak Park like in an historic oyster processing facility. The museum will also be used as an and Launch education center for kindergarten through college aged students. Students will be given the chance to learn hands-on about oyster biology and ecology by raising Port of Allyn native oysters in aquaria or recirculation tanks. A program similar to "Salmon in the Water Company Classroom" is being developed. Proponent: North Bay Historical Society Location of proposal, including street address, if any: The project is proposed is 18560 E State Route 3 located at 18560 E. State Route 3, Allyn, WA 98524. The tax parcel is 12220-50- PO Box 1 08001. The site is located in Section 20, Township 22 North, Range 1 West W.M. Allyn,WA 98524 Mason County, Washington. 360-275-2430 Lead Agency: Port of Allyn info@portofallyn.com www.portofallyn.com The lead agency for this proposal has determined that the project does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under Revised Code of Washington (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. Additional project and/or State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) information is available upon request at the Port of Allyn's Administrative building, located at 18560 E. State Route 3, Allyn, WA 98524. Comments and Request for Reconsideration: This determination of nonsignificance (DNS) is issued under Chapter 197-11-340(2) Washington Administrative Code (WAC). All interested parties shall have 14 calendars days to comment on the proposed SEPA threshold determination. Only those who commented within the 14 day comment period shall have standing to file a Request for Reconsideration. Any challenge to a SEPA threshold determination shall be initiated by filing a Request for Reconsideration with the Responsible Official or designee no later than seven calendar days following the end of the 14 day comment period for the SEPA determination. The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the start date of the comment period described below. Comments shall be submitted to the Port of Allyn, C/O LeAnn Dennis at (in person) 18560 E. State Route 3, (mail) PO Box 1, Allyn, WA 98524. Responsible official: Lary Coppola Position/title: Executive Director Signature: Date:3/21/16 Comment Start D e: 3/31/ Comment End Date: 4/14/16 Request for Reconsideration End Date: Appendix A.2 —Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Hydraulic ProjectApproval Washington Department of Fish&Wildlife HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL PO Box 43234 Olympia,WA 98504-3234 FISH-dWEDLIFE (360)902-2200 Issued Date: May 02, 2017 Permit Number: 2017-6-168+01 Project End Date: December 31, 2020 FPA/Public Notice Number: N/A Application ID: 8165 PERMITTEE AUTHORIZED AGENT OR CONTRACTOR North Bay Historical Society ATTENTION: Bonnie Knight William Rehe PO Box 1313 8305 Dogwood Ln NW Allyn, WA 98524 Gig Harbor, WA 98332-6724 Project Name: Sargent Oyster Building Restoration and Relocation Project Project Description: The overall project goal is to relocate and restored an historical building to the Port of Allyn. Once restored, the building will be used to create an aquaculture museum and education center. In addition to being a museum, the restored Sargent's Oyster Building will be used by local aquaculture businesses for sorting and incubating oysters and clams, storing equipment, and transferring equipment, materials, seed, and personnel from the building to barges or work skiffs. PROVISIONS 1. TIMING LIMITATION: To protect fish and shellfish habitats at the job site, work below the ordinary high water line must occur from July 15 and February 15 of any year. Due to the lengthy spawning period for surf smelt in this portion of Puget Sound work will also be allowed from April 1 through December 31 and January 1 through June 30 of any year if a biologist approved by the Department of Fish and Wildlife does not detect surf smelt eggs during a beach survey. Work must begin within seventy-two hours of survey and you must complete the work within two weeks of the survey. The biologist must follow the department-approved intertidal forage fish spawning protocol and use the standard department data sheets when conducting forage fish spawning beach surveys. A list of certified biologists, the approved protocol and data sheets are available on the department's web site http://wdfw.wa.gov/licensing/hpa/technical_assistance.html . The biologist must submit the completed, data sheets to the department within seventy-two hours of completing the survey to WDFW by e-mail at HPAapplications@dfw.wa.gov; mail to Post Office Box 43234, Olympia, Washington 98504-3234; or fax to (360) 902- 2946. In addition, the biologist must preserve the winnowed portion of the sediment samples and retain them for a minimum of four weeks. The sediment samples must be provided to WDFW staff upon request. 2.APPROVED PLANS: Work must be accomplished per plans and specifications submitted with the application and approved by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, entitled JARPA, dated July 6, 2016, except as modified by this Hydraulic Project Approval. You must have a copy of these plans available on site during all phases of the project proposal. 3. PRE-AND POST-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION: You, your agent, or contractor must contact the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife by e-mail at HPAapplications@dfw.wa.gov; mail to Post Office Box 43234, Olympia, Washington 98504-3234; or fax to(360) 902-2946 at least three business days before starting work, and again within seven days after completing the work. The notification must include the permittee's name, project location, starting date for work or date the work was completed, and the permit number. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife may conduct inspections during and after construction; however,the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife will notify you or your agent before conducting the inspection. 4. FISH KILL/WATER QUALITY PROBLEM NOTIFICATION: If a fish kill occurs or fish are observed in distress at the job site, immediately stop all activities causing harm. Immediately notify the Washington Department of Fish and Page 1 of 6 Washington Department of Fish&Wildlife HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL PO Box43234 Dq-[ Olympia,WA 98504-3234 F ff.d RLDLITE (360)902-2200 Issued Date: May 02, 2017 Permit Number: 2017-6-168+01 Project End Date: December 31, 2020 FPA/Public Notice Number: N/A Application ID: 8165 Wildlife of the problem. If the likely cause of the fish kill or fish distress is related to water quality, also notify the Washington Military Department Emergency Management Division at 1-800-258-5990.Activities related to the fish kill or fish distress must not resume until the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife gives approval. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife may require additional measures to mitigate impacts. 5. Advanced mitigation will be provided by removing the entire concrete boat ramp before the Oyster House is relocated. BOAT RAMP REMOVAL 6. Remove the existing concrete boat ramp, approximately 3300 square feet, from the beach and deposit in an upland area above the limits of extreme high tidal water. 7. Remove an additional 10 foot by 20 foot area of concrete rubble and angular rock from the beach. 8. Keep the use of equipment on the beach to a minimum, confined to a single access point, and limited to a 25-foot work corridor on either side of the ramp. Construction material must not touch the beach outside beach outside this work corridor. 9. Prior to tidal inundation, backfill all trenches, depressions, or holes created during construction waterward of the ordinary high water line. 10. Reshape beach area depressions created during project activities to preproject beach level upon project completion. 11. Prevent contaminants from the project, such as petroleum products, hydraulic fluid, fresh concrete, sediments, sediment-laden water, chemicals, or any other toxic or harmful materials, from entering or leaching into waters of the state. 12. Sand and gravel placed on the beach should be appropriately sized to provide forage fish spawning substrate following the provisions below: a. For surf smelt spawning beaches, material placed must be in compliance with the following specifications: Sieve Size Percent passing by weight 5/8-inch 100 3/8-inch 90-100 1/1 6-inch 40-50 1/100-inch (.25mm) 0-5 b. Spread the material along the entire length of the bulkhead waterward for a distance of 9 lineal feet to a uniform depth of 6 inches. c. Use clean, round gravel, not crushed or angular rock. d. The mix must not contain fine silt or clay type soils. e. The sand and gravel mix must be placed within 72 hours following bulkhead construction. CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS 13. All reconstruction on the building will be conducted upland to prevent any spill or contamination of waters of the state. Any asbestos, lead paint or other hazardous material will be removed as part of this reconstruction. 14. Do not use wood treated with oil-type preservative (creosote, pentachlorophenol) in any hydraulic project. Wood treated with waterborne preservative chemicals (ACZA,ACQ) may be used if the Western Wood Preservers Institute has approved the waterborne chemical for use in the aquatic environment. The manufacturer must follow the Western Wood Preservers Institute guidelines and the best management practices to minimize the preservative migrating from treated wood into aquatic environments. To minimize leaching, wood treated with a preservative by someone other than a manufacturer must follow the field treating guidelines. These guidelines and best management practices are available at www.wwpinstitute.org. 15. The structure must include functional grating. The grating material's open area must be at least sixty percent. Grating installed perpendicular to the length of the deck must be evenly spaced along the length of the deck and cover Page 2 of 6 Washington Department of Fish&Wildlife HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL PO Box43234 Olympia,WA 98504-3234 HSH.d WHALIFE (360)902-2200 Issued Date: May 02, 2017 Permit Number: 2017-6-168+01 Project End Date: December 31, 2020 FPA/Public Notice Number: N/A Application ID: 8165 at least fifty percent of the deck area. 16. Remove all trash and unauthorized fill in the project area, including concrete blocks or pieces, bricks, asphalt, metal, treated wood, glass, floating debris, and paper, that is waterward of the ordinary high water line and deposit upland. 17. Remove all debris or deleterious material resulting from construction from the beach area or bed and prevent from entering waters of the state. 18. Do not burn wood, trash, waste, or other deleterious materials waterward of the ordinary high water line. PILE REMOVAL, DRIVING 19. As specified in the approved plans, the pilings must be either concrete or steel. 20. Do not use wood treated with oil-type preservative (creosote, pentachlorophenol) in any hydraulic project. Wood treated with waterborne preservative chemicals(ACZA, ACQ) may be used if approved by the Western Wood Preservers Institute for use in the aquatic environment.Any use of treated wood in the aquatic environment must follow guidelines and best management practices available at www.wwpinstitute.org. 21. Incorporate features, such as steel, plastic or rubber collars, fendering or other systems to prevent or minimize the abrasion of the treated wood by floats, ramps or vessels. Do not use rubber tires for the fender system. 22. Attach rubbing strips made of ultra high molecular weight(UHMW)type plastic, or high density polyethylene (HDPE)type plastic to the replacement fender system. Do not use rubber tires for the fender system. 23. Fit all pilings with devices to prevent perching by fish-eating birds. 24. The use of both a vibratory and/or an impact hammer is authorized for piling installation under this Hydraulic Project Approval, however a vibratory driver is preferred. 25. Use appropriate sound attenuation when driving or proofing steel piling with an impact hammer. a. For driving or proofing steel piling, 10 inches in diameter or less, install a 6 inch thick wood block, plastic or rubber between the piling and the impact hammer during impact pile driving operations or install a pile sleeve or bubble curtain around the piling during impact pile driving operations that distributes air bubbles around 100% of the perimeter of the piling over the full depth of the water column. b. For driving or proofing steel piling greater than 10 inches in diameter, install a bubble curtain around the pile during piling impact driving operations that distributes air bubbles around 100% of the perimeter of the piling over the full depth of the water column. 26. To avoid attracting fish to artificial light at night, limit impact pile driving to daylight hours whenever feasible. 27. Do not use treated wood for the decking of the structure. Use treated wood for structural elements is authorized. Treated wood structural elements subject to abrasion by vessels,floats, or other objects must incorporate design features such as rub strips to minimize abrasion of the wood. LOCATION#1: Site Name: Port of Allyn 18560 E. State Route 3, Allyn, WA 98524 WORK START: July 15, 2017 WORK END: December 31, 2020 WRIA Waterbody_ Tributary to: 14- Kennedy-Goldsborough Wria 14 Marine 1/4 SEC: Section: Township: Range: Latitude: Longitude: Count): Page 3 of 6 Washington Department of Fish &Wildlife HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL PO Box43234 y...E, Olympia,WA 98504-3234 RS&a 4RDLIFE (360)902-2200 Issued Date: May 02, 2017 Permit Number: 2017-6-168+01 Project End Date: December 31, 2020 FPA/Public Notice Number: N/A Application ID: 8165 NW 1/4 20 22 N 01 W 47.384603 -122.826980 Mason Location#1 Driving Directions From Shelton, Take WA-3 North for 18.3 miles Your destination is on the right APPLY TO ALL HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVALS This Hydraulic Project Approval pertains only to those requirements of the Washington State Hydraulic Code, specifically Chapter 77.55 RCW. Additional authorization from other public agencies may be necessary for this project. The person(s)to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued is responsible for applying for and obtaining any additional authorization from other public agencies (local, state and/or federal)that may be necessary for this project. This Hydraulic Project Approval shall be available on the job site at all times and all its provisions followed by the person (s)to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued and operator(s) performing the work. This Hydraulic Project Approval does not authorize trespass. The person(s)to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued and operator(s) performing the work may be held liable for any loss or damage to fish life or fish habitat that results from failure to comply with the provisions of this Hydraulic Project Approval. Failure to comply with the provisions of this Hydraulic Project Approval could result in a civil penalty of up to one hundred dollars per day and/or a gross misdemeanor charge, possibly punishable by fine and/or imprisonment. All Hydraulic Project Approvals issued under RCW 77.55.021 are subject to additional restrictions, conditions, or revocation if the Department of Fish and Wildlife determines that changed conditions require such action. The person(s) to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued has the right to appeal those decisions. Procedures for filing appeals are listed below. Page 4 of 6 Washington Department of Fish&Wildlife HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL PO Box 43234 RLDL/FF. Ym OI ia,WA 98504-3234 FTSHae R'IL P (360)902-2200 Issued Date: May 02, 2017 Permit Number: 2017-6-168+01 Project End Date: December 31, 2020 FPA/Public Notice Number: N/A Application ID: 8165 MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO THIS HPA: You may request approval of minor modifications to the required work timing or to the plans and specifications approved in this HPA unless this is a General HPA. If this is a General HPA you must use the Major Modification process described below. Any approved minor modification will require issuance of a letter documenting the approval. A minor modification to the required work timing means any change to the work start or end dates of the current work season to enable project or work phase completion. Minor modifications will be approved only if spawning or incubating fish are not present within the vicinity of the project. You may request subsequent minor modifications to the required work timing. A minor modification of the plans and specifications means any changes in the materials, characteristics or construction of your project that does not alter the project's impact to fish life or habitat and does not require a change in the provisions of the HPA to mitigate the impacts of the modification. Minor modifications do not require you to pay additional application fees or be issued a new HPA. If you originally applied for your HPA through the online Aquatic Protection Permitting System (APPS), you may request a minor modification through APPS. A link to APPS is at http://wdfw.wa.gov/licensing/hpa/. If you did not use APPS you must submit a written request that clearly indicates you are seeking a minor modification to an existing HPA. Written requests must include the name of the applicant, the name of the authorized agent if one is acting for the applicant, the APP ID number of the HPA, the date issued, the permitting biologist, the requested changes to the HPA, the reason for the requested change, the date of the request, and the requestor's signature. Send by mail to: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, PO Box 43234, Olympia, Washington 98504-3234, or by email to HPAapplications@dfw.wa.gov. Do not include payment with your request. You should allow up to 45 days for the department to process your request. MAJOR MODIFICATIONS TO THIS HPA: You may request approval of major modifications to any aspect of your HPA. Any approved change other than a minor modification to your HPA will require issuance of a new HPA. If you paid an application fee for your original HPA you must pay an additional$150 for the major modification. If you did not pay an application fee for the original HPA, no fee is required for a change to it. If you originally applied for your HPA through the online Aquatic Protection Permitting System (APPS), you may request a major modification through APPS. A link to APPS is at http://wdfw.wa.gov/licensing/hpa/. If you did not use APPS you must submit a written request that clearly indicates you are requesting a major modification to an existing HPA. Written requests must include the name of the applicant, the name of the authorized agent if one is acting for the applicant, the APP ID number of the HPA, the date issued, the permitting biologist, the requested changes to the HPA,the reason for the requested change, the date of the request, payment if the original application was subject to an application fee, and the requestor's signature. Send your written request and payment, if applicable, by mail to: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, PO Box 43234, Olympia, Washington 98504-3234. You may email your request for a major modification to HPAapplications@dfw.wa.gov, but must send a check or money order for payment by surface mail. You should allow up to 45 days for the department to process your request. APPEALS INFORMATION If you wish to appeal the issuance, denial, conditioning, or modification of a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA), Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) recommends that you first contact the department employee who issued or denied the HPA to discuss your concerns. Such a discussion may resolve your concerns without the need for further appeal action. If you proceed with an appeal, you may request an informal or formal appeal. WDFW encourages you to take advantage of the informal appeal process before initiating a formal appeal. The informal appeal process includes a review by department management of the HPA or denial and often resolves issues faster and with less legal complexity than the formal appeal process. If the informal appeal process does not resolve your concerns, you may advance your appeal to the formal process. You may contact the HPA Appeals Coordinator at(360) 902-2534 for more information. Page 5 of 6 Washington Department of 011� Fish&Wildlife HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL PO Box43234 ate"Dvhm�f Olympia,WA 98504-3234 FEW w RLDLIM (360)902-2200 Issued Date: May 02, 2017 Permit Number: 2017-6-168+01 Project End Date: December 31, 2020 FPA/Public Notice Number: N/A Application ID: 8165 A. INFORMAL APPEALS: WAC 220-660-460 is the rule describing how to request an informal appeal of WDFW actions taken under Chapter 77.55 RCW. Please refer to that rule for complete informal appeal procedures. The following information summarizes that rule. A person who is aggrieved by the issuance,denial, conditioning, or modification of an HPA may request an informal appeal of that action. You must send your request to WDFW by mail to the HPA Appeals Coordinator, Department of Fish and Wildlife, Habitat Program, 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, Washington 98501-1091; e-mail to HPAapplications@dfw.wa.gov; fax to(360)902-2946; or hand-delivery to the Natural Resources Building, 1111 Washington St SE, Habitat Program, Fifth floor. WDFW must receive your request within 30 days from the date you receive notice of the decision. If you agree, and you applied for the HPA, resolution of the appeal may be facilitated through an informal conference with the WDFW employee responsible for the decision and a supervisor. If a resolution is not reached through the informal conference, or you are not the person who applied for the HPA, the HPA Appeals Coordinator or designee will conduct an informal hearing and recommend a decision to the Director or designee. If you are not satisfied with the results of the informal appeal, you may file a request for a formal appeal. B. FORMAL APPEALS: WAC 220-660-470 is the rule describing how to request a formal appeal of WDFW actions taken under Chapter 77.55 RCW. Please refer to that rule for complete formal appeal procedures. The following information summarizes that rule. A person who is aggrieved by the issuance, denial, conditioning, or modification of an HPA may request a formal appeal of that action. You must send your request for a formal appeal to the clerk of the Pollution Control Hearings Boards and serve a copy on WDFW within 30 days from the date you receive notice of the decision. You may serve WDFW by mail to the HPA Appeals Coordinator, Department of Fish and Wildlife, Habitat Program, 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, Washington 98501-1091; e-mail to HPAapplications@dfw.wa.gov; fax to(360) 902-2946; or hand-delivery to the Natural Resources Building, 1111 Washington St SE, Habitat Program, Fifth floor. The time period for requesting a formal appeal is suspended during consideration of a timely informal appeal. If there has been an informal appeal, you may request a formal appeal within 30 days from the date you receive the Director's or designee's written decision in response to the informal appeal. C. FAILURE TO APPEAL WITHIN THE REQUIRED TIME PERIODS: If there is no timely request for an appeal, the WDFW action shall be final and unappealable. Habitat Biologist Margaret.Bigelow@dfw.wa.gov 1'1 � U ut for Director Margie Bigelow 360-427-2179 WDFW Page 6 of 6 Appendices B — Authorized Work Windows Appendix B.1—Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Approved Work Window for Fish Protection in Marine Waters WAC 220-660-330 Prohibited work times in saltwater areas. Work waterward of the ordinary high water line shall be prohibited or conditioned for the following times and areas. These timing restrictions shall be applied to projects in the following saltwater areas except when allowed under subsection(6)of this section or WAC 220-110-285(Single family residence bulkheads in saltwater areas). (1)The prohibited times and areas for protection of migrating juvenile salmonids,surf smelt, and Pacific herring spawning beds are listed in the following table: PROHIBITED TIMES JUVENILE SALMONID MIGRATION TIDAL FEEDING AND REFERENCE SURF SMELT HERRING AREA REARING AREAS SPAWNING SPAWNING BEDS BEDS 1 March 15 - June 14 — January 15 - March 31 2 March 15 - June 14 July 1 - March 31 January 15 - March 31 3 March 15 - June 14 October 1 - April 30 January 15 - March 31 4 March 15 - June 14 October 1 -April 14 January 15 - April 14 5 March 15 - June 14 September 1 - March 31 January 15 -April 30 in all areas except Eagle Harbor and Sinclair Inlet Year round in Eagle Harbor and Sinclair Inlet 6 March 15 - June 14 — — 7 March 15 - June 14 Year round February 1 - April 14 8 March 15 - June 14 Year round February 1 - April 14 9 March 15 - June 14 Year round February 1 - April 14 south of a line running due west from Governor's point February 1 - June 14 north of a line running due west from Governor's point 10 March 15 - June 14 Sept. 15 - October 31 in January 15 -April 30 Kilisut Harbor October 15 - January 14 in Dungeness Bay May 1 -August 31 in Twin Rivers and Deep Creek Year round in San Juan Islands 11 March 15 - June 14 September 15 - March 1 January 15 - March 31 12 March 15 - June 14 — February 15 - April 14 13 March 15 - June 14 October 15 - January 31 January 15 - April 14 14 March 1 - June 14 — — 15 March 1 - June 14 — — 16 March 1 - June 14 — — 17 March 1 - June 14 — February 1 - March 14 (2)Tidal Reference Areas 1 through 17; October 15 through March 1 for projects in or adjacent to Pacific sand lance spawning beds. (3)Tidal Reference Areas 1 through 17; December 15 through March 31 for projects in or adjacent to rock sole spawning beds. (4)Tidal Reference Areas 1 through 17; May 15 through October 14 for projects in or adjacent to lingcod settlement and nursery areas. (5)Additional timing restrictions may apply for protection of other important species of fish or shellfish or if necessary to protect fish life at a particular site. (6)If the surf smelt spawning season for the project location is six months or longer,work may be permitted if it commences within forty-eight hours after the location is inspected by a department representative or biologist acceptable to the department and it is determined that no spawning is occurring or has recently occurred.The project may be further conditioned to require completion within a particular time. [Statutory Authority:RCVV 75.08.080.94-23-058(Order 94-160),§220-110-271,filed 11/14/94,effective 12/15/94.1 Appendix B.2—US Army Corps ofEngineers Approved Work Window for Fish Protection for All Marine/Estuarine APPROVED WORK WINDOWS FOR FISH PROTECTION FOR ALL MARINE/ESTUARINE AREAS excluding THE MOUTH OF THE COLUMBIA RIVER(BAKER BAY) BY TIDAL REFERENCE AREA 28 July 2015 (1) The general work window is given by Tidal Reference Area. Figure 2 is a map of the tidal reference areas. (2) For marine/estuarine areas in the mouth of the Columbia River(Baker Bay)refer to Columbia River watercourse approved work windows in Table 2. (3) The work windows are given by tidal reference area and species. a. Bull trout: For Coastal/Puget Sound bull trout, refer to bull trout work window. b. Salmon: For Puget Sound chinook salmon,Hood Canal chum salmon,or Ozette Lake chinook salmon, refer to the"salmon"restriction for the appropriate Tidal Reference Area. c. Forage species: If forage fish are present in the project area,then the work window is for that species applies. (4) It is likely that several work windows may apply for a specific project. The work windows must be combined.The approved work window will be the common days between all approved work windows. For example, if the project is in Hammersley Inlet in Tidal Reference Area 1 and Pacific Sand Lance are present,the work windows would be: Salmon Work Window July 2—March 2 Bull Trout Work Window July 16—February 15 Pacific Sand Lance March 2—October 14 Taking the days that the approved work windows have in common,the time the project could be constructed is July 16—October 14. (5) For forage fish work windows that state "closed year round". Work may occur if the restriction is released for a short period of time(typically two weeks)after the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife(WDFW)Habitat Biologist has confirmed that not forage fish are spawning on the beach. (6) To determine whether your project lies within areas for work windows for"forage species," contact the Corps. (7) Work within two hundred feet landward of the State's ordinary high water line in waters of the U.S. listed as"submit application"or"closed"is not authorized by the Washington State 21 Department of Fish and Wildlife(WDFW). Site review and a specific written authorization (and State HPA)are required for these waters. (8) These"approved work windows"are based on best available information as of the date of the Services' concurrence with this informal consultation.They may be amended or deleted in the future as new information is obtained. The Corps will use the most current version of these windows when the authorizing projects for which conformance with the ESA is in part based on the windows in this programmatic consultation. 22 TABLE D-3: APPROVED WORK WINDOWS FOR ALL MARINE/ESTUARINE AREAS Excluding THE MOUTH OF THE COLUMBIA RIVER(BAKER BAY) TIDAL REFERENCE AREA SALMON BULL TROUT FORAGE SPECIES WORK WINDOW WORK WINDOW WORK WINDOWS Tidal Reference Area 1 (Shelton): July 2—March 2 July 16—February 15 Surf Smelt ------ All saltwater areas in Oakland Bay and Pacific Herring April 1—January 14 Ilammersley inlet westerly of a line projected Pacific Sand Lance March 2—October 14 from Hungerford Point to Arcadia Tidal Reference Area 2(Olympia): July 2—March 2 July 16—February 15 Surf Smelt April 1 —June 30 All saltwater areas between a line projected Pacific Herring April 1 —January 14 from Hungerford Point to Arcadia and a line Pacific Sand Lance March 2—October 14 projected from Johnson Point to Devil's Head. This includes Totten, Eld, Budd, Case and Henderson Inlets,and Pickering Passage. Tidal Reference Area 3(South Puget Sound): July 2—March 2 July 16—February 15 Surf Smelt May 1 —September 30 All saltwater areas easterly and northerly of a Pacific Herring April 1 —January 14 line projected from Johnson Point to Devil's Pacific Sand Lance March 2—October 14 Head and southerly of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge. Tidal Reference Area 4(Tacoma): July 2—March 2 July 16—February 15 Surf Smelt April 15—September 30 All saltwater areas northerly of the Tacoma Pacific Herring April 15—January 14 Narrows Bridge and southerly of a line Commencement Bay Pacific Sand Lance March 2—October 14 projected true west and true east across Puget only: Sound from the northern tip of Vashon Aug. 16—March 15 Island. 23 TABLE D-3: APPROVED WORK WINDOWS FOR ALL MARINE/ESTUARINE AREAS Excluding THE MOUTH OF THE COLUMBIA RIVER(BAKER BAY) TIDAL REFERENCE AREA SALMON BULL TROUT FORAGE SPECIES WORK WINDOW WORK WINDOW WORK WINDOWS Tidal Reference Area 5(Seattle): July 2—March 2 July 16—February 15* Surf Smelt April 1 —August 31 All saltwater areas northerly of a line - Eagle Harbor Year round projected true west and true east across Puget *Applies to the Duwamish - Sinclair Inlet Year round Sound from the northern tip of Vashon Island Waterways upstream to and southerly of a line projected true east Duwamish River RM 0 Pacific Herring May 1 —January 14 from Point Jefferson at 471 45'N.latitude (approx. the southern tip Pacific Sand Lance March 2—October 14 across Puget Sound. This area includes Port D Harbor Island Duwamish River RM 0 Orchard,Port Madison,and Dyes and upstream to the Upper Sinclair Inlets. Turning Basin the work window is October 1-February 15 Tidal Reference Area 6(Edmonds): July 2—March 2 July 16—February 15 Surf Smelt ------ All saltwater areas northerly of a line Pacific Herring ------ projected true east from Point Jefferson at Pacific Sand Lance March 2—October 14 470 45'N.latitude across Puget Sound and southerly of a line projected true east from Possession Point to Chenault Beach and from Foulweather Bluff to Double Bluff. Tidal Reference Area 7(Everett): July 2—March 2 July 16—February 15 Surf Smelt Year Round All saltwater areas northerly of a line Pacific Herring April 15—January 31 projected true east from Possession Point to Pacific Sand Lance March 2—October 14 Chenault Beach,easterly of a line projected 51 true from East Point to Lowell Point,and southerly of the Stanwood to Camano Island Highway. This area includes Port Gardner, Port Susan,and parts of Possession Sound and Saratoga Passage. 24 TABLE D-3: APPROVED WORK WINDOWS FOR ALL MARINE/ESTUARINE AREAS Excluding THE MOUTH OF THE COLUMBIA RIVER(BAKER BAY) TIDAL REFERENCE AREA SALMON BULL TROUT FORAGE SPECIES WORK WINDOW WORK WINDOW WORK WINDOWS Tidal Reference Area 8(Yokeko Point): July 2—March 2 July 16—February 15 Surf Smelt Year Round All saltwater area westerly and northerly of a Pacific Herring April 15—January 31 line projected 5°true from East Point to Pacific Sand Lance March 2—October 14 Lowell Point,north of the Stanwood to Camano Island Highway,and easterly and southerly of Deception Pass Bridge and the Swinomish Channel Bridge on State Highway 536. This area includes Holmes Harbor, Saratoga Passage,Skagit Bay,Similk Bay, and most of the Swinomish Channel. Tidal Reference Area 9(Blaine): July 2—March 2 July 16—February 15 Surf Smelt Year Round All saltwater area in Skagit County and Pacific Herring Whatcom County that lies northerly of the - South of a line running Swinomish Channel Bridge on State Highway due west from Governor's April 15—January 31 536 and westerly and northerly of Deception point Pass Bridge. - North of a line running June 15—January 31 due west from Governor's point Pacific Sand Lance March 2—October 14 Tidal Reference Area 10(Port Townsend): July 16—March 1 July 16—February 15 Surf Smelt All saltwater area of Puget Sound north of a - Kilisut Harbor November 1 —September 14 line projected from Tala Point to Foulweather - Dungeness Bay January 15—October 14 Bluff,and except all waters defined in Tidal - Twin Rivers September 1 —April 30 Reference Areas 1 through 9. Area 10 - Deep Creek September 1—April 30 includes waters of the San Juan Islands, - San Juan Islands Year round Admiralty Inlet,the Strait of Juan de Fuca, and associated bays and inlets. Pacific Herring May I —January 14 Pacific Sand Lance March 2—October 14 25 TABLE D-3: APPROVED WORK WINDOWS FOR ALL MARINE/ESTUARINE AREAS Excluding THE MOUTH OF THE COLUMBIA RIVER(BAKER BAY) TIDAL REFERENCE AREA SALMON BULL TROUT FORAGE SPECIES WORK WINDOW WORK WINDOW WORK WINDOWS Tidal Reference Area I 1 (Union): July 16—March 1 July 16—February 15 Surf Smelt March 2—September 14 All saltwater area of Hood Canal southerly Pacific Herring April 1 —January 14 and easterly of a line projected from Pacific Sand Lance March 2—October 14 Lilliwaup Bay to Dewatto Bay. Tidal Reference Area 12(Seabeck): July 16—March 1 July 16—February 15 Surf Smelt ------ All saltwater areas of Hood Canal northerly Pacific Herring April 15—February 14 of a line projected from Lilliwaup Bay to Pacific Sand Lance March 2—October 14 Dewatto Bay and southerly of a line projected true east from Hazel Point. This area includes Dabob Bay and Quilcene Bay. Tidal Reference Area 13(Bangor): July 16—March I July 16—February 15 Surf Smelt February 1—October 14 All saltwater area of Hood Canal northerly of a Pacific Herring April 15—January 14 line projected true east from Hazel Point and Pacific Sand Lance March 2—October 14 south of a line projected from Tala Point to Foulweather Bluff. This area includes Port Gamble Tidal Reference Area 14(Ocean Beaches): June 15—February 28 July 16—February 15 Surf Smelt ------ All saltwater area between Cape Flattery and Pacific Herring ------ the Oregon border at the mouth of the Pacific Sand Lance March 2-October 14 Columbia River,excluding Grays Harbor and Willapa Bay. Tidal Reference Area 15(Westport): June 15—February 28 July 16—February 15 Surf Smelt ------ All saltwater area in Grays Harbor easterly Pacific Herring April 1—January 31 of a line projected from the outermost end of Pacific Sand Lance March 2—October 14 the north jetty to the outermost end of the south jetty,and westerly of 123'59'W. longitude. 26 TABLE D-3: APPROVED WORK WINDOWS FOR ALL MARINE/ESTUARINE AREAS Excluding THE MOUTH OF THE COLUMBIA RIVER(BAKER BAY) TIDAL REFERENCE AREA SALMON BULL TROUT FORAGE SPECIES WORK WINDOW WORK WINDOW WORK WINDOWS Tidal Reference Area 16(Aberdeen): June 15—February 28 July 16—February 15 Surf Smelt ------ All saltwater area in Grays Harbor easterly of Pacific Herring ------ 123°59'W.longitude and westerly of the Pacific Sand Lance March 2—October 14 Union Pacific railroad bridge across the Chehalis River. Tidal Reference Area 17(Willapa Bay): June 15—February 28 July 16—February 15 Surf Smelt ------ All saltwater area in Willapa Bay easterly of Pacific Herring March 15—January 31 a line projected from Leadbetter Point to Pacific Sand Lance March 2—October 14 Cape Shoalwater Light. 27 Appendices C — Aerial and Site Photos y , jr }_ -� a' =�..t ��,. .'°:•� -,�''� �c.i`' � r �1, „if�. � �41t.., i 7:�'V .... r. �;.4• -. '.. •R` a_"�' � �•. y y x �ei. _"'�,� — ® j . Jb ` r73�A;• .��� � �.r� b� fK i 1 l S M ko IP At 17 r 4iA r � r Ecology, 2016 r: «40- 1 :+ 1 � 1 A r •. y� IR 1 1r) a Typical pile supporting boat ram -16 - Tr', ♦' L� '` '` `, ,' K �t :,r `� ' i �l 46 jr �`►- a . if NN *mil 2�� �• ...v� +♦�« 1; w �,1� � `• ~ i.� + �! �� i i1 e a ��-: °'K`'"„ •, �'{.1 -�� yf�- � •'4,� .'��„r� ',, ��roll„ ,�` ♦ � A f+ ` T Concrete debris to be removed Y`bx LocalApr 29, 2017 1:59:05 • • no GPS A no fix • no fix Field bindweed, to be removed s -45.30 -30 �w 4 w Dunegrass, to remain and be protected `) f / Y Local Time: Apr 29,2 y Lat, Lon. no GPS fix Alt: no fix CAP. no fix . _ e ` 1 ♦S .��A•.,�^ice �.� 1 ti ".air•• � 4 • � { �^'u l�p '� .'Wry lielilir Local Time: Apr 29, 2017 1:53:11 PM �- - . w Lat,,Lon: no GPS fi AlA CEP, no fix -30' +5' -15' 2.90 -10.3° --- 0 0° � w 321 ° NW _ ,. � A ali Y r' c � R,♦ a, +Air d i �' 'ice. •,, ..0 � .� — ,_• �, i.. w, .:,. ,. - _ � ..._+.. • w;;'. a ter. - ' ,. - - .r. - .( ■� III � �-~ ' � a - f'S ♦ . d W .f _ J 4 1 �."Tar '. •� - er Al r. v, . y 84 a _ _.- �,,, - � at" � ,yam. ,..• �,+'^ _ �:. , s� ,s..- �4 r J - ��.►.�j,..1 .rrr`• ��`�'"r f vPi v- M '.�a�r � '. :~ V � � ' e,y,.."•! � •Ln - • r m r w • W As imp t s� • ..� _. r!� ,• .,. ....• , '.,-'. .. .. y+r� �- ,•ram. m. •... .. ,t z.q�.:wY , - .. ,.. r ' , r f' s - ' •�� :• • ------------------------------ e g a , e a� _...at .► Lw w .arrwwk �s ..� e r � s t r low iFl f ° m.:... ;. Mum. , v ` f W all t, .�- . q ,Ir '� j ►! t r a 6 � t j 1. ....rw ii� 1t �r~ . . t , t A_. TA +i f s m a a qr > • 4 . .s Appendices D — Biological Information Appendix D.1—Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Forage Fish Map .. 1 f R I`' f•� K ry� t t+ " �Of ' 3A�1k a • ,A a f • � r4 Will i ••,,,..r '�._�•� 1 lam .►'"' •�� {.,�� •��`a' Lake Anderson ...., , �- esri Appendix D.2 — Washington Department of Ecology Coastal Atlas - Stability OEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY •- '�State a!4!a>hingwn Legend: FJ Slope stability f) X Stable Intermediate*40 1 Modified C,7 Unstable Unstable(old slide) Unstable(recent slide) r ,�,• ,fit ra tP , Add snap data Change transparency rnr IO°`o , x 0 300 600ft �'r Appendix D.3 —Washington Department of Ecology Coastal Atlas — Shoreline Vegetation OEPARth1E N7 or ECOLQGY • State of Warh�ngmn • Legend: n Eelgrass 0 X A � Basemap � e,.r• Fringe(continuous) Fringe(patchy) 4W Bed(continuous) r, -'Bed(patchy) O Dunegrass 0 X V Fringe(continuous) Fringe(patchy) O'Bed(continuous) 1,,Bed(patchy) • Surfgrass 0 X v Fringe(continuous) (patchy)Fringe q O Kelp 0 X Fringe(continuous) ti Fringe(patchy) r Salt marsh 0 X v 102 Add map data Change transparency .. • _ jfl��n ; y ��x- 0 300 600ft • ,y�i Appendix DA — Washington Department of Ecology 303d List Map EStifig'De...r •,tw - -'� " `ter. } �� � •�• ,' Q 1 40 Lakeland Vrllage Golf Course `. .• r Port of Allyn r Inlet ti C. E Lakeland D+'. ♦K`t �`" ec m C, to ��.: r' � �I.,, � �• .i ,��` 3'�rt ter' '� -� 1 1 1 Appendices E — ESA Species Information Appendix E.1 — US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Threatened and Endangered Species List, 2017 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service ECOS Environmental Conservation Online System Conserving the Nature of America 1. ECOS 2. Species Reports 3. Species occurrence by state 4. Listed species believed to or known to occur in Washington Listed species believed to or known to occurin Washington Notes: • As of02/13/2015 the data in this report has been updated to use a different set of information. Results are based on where the species is believed to or known to occur. The FWS feels utilizing this data set is a better representation of species occurrence. Note:there may be other federally listed species that are not currently known or expected to occur in this state but are covered by the ESA wherever they are found; Thus if new surveys detected them in this state they are still covered by the ESA. The FWS is using the best information available on this date to generate this list. • This report shows listed species or populations believed to or known to occur in Washington • This list does not include experimental populations and similarity of appearance listings. • This list includes species or populations under the sole jurisdiction of the National Marine Fisheries Service. • Click on the highlighted scientific names below to view a Species Profile for each listing. Listed species—47 listings Animals —36 listings Status Species/Listing Name E Albatross, short-tailed Wherever found (Phoebastria(Diomedea) albatrus) T Bear, grizzly U.S.A., conterminous (lower 48)States, except where listed as an experimental population (Ursus arctos horribilis) T Butterfly, Oregon silverspot Wherever found (Speveria zerene higpolyta) E Caribou, woodland Selkirk Mountain population (Rangifer tarandus caribou) E Checkerspot, Taylor's (=whulge) Wherever found (Euphvdrvas editha tavlori� Status Species/Listing Name T Cuckoo, yellow-billed Western U.S. DPS (Coccyzus americanus) T Deer, Columbian white-tailed Columbia River DPS (Odocoileus virginianus leucurus) T Frog, Oregon spotted Wherever found (Rana pretiosa) T Horned lark, streaked Wherever found (Eremophila alpestris striQata) T Lynx, Canada Contiguous U.S.DPS (Lynx canadensis) T Murrelet, marbled U.S.A. (CA, OR, WA) (Brachyramphus marmoratusl T Owl, northern spotted Wherever found (Strix occidentalis caurina) T Plover, western snowy Pacific Coast population DPS-U.S.A. (CA, OR, WA), Mexico (within 50 miles of Pacific coast) (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus) T Pocket gopher, Olympia Wherever found (Thomomvs mazama pu ete�nsis) T Pocket gopher, Roy Prairie Wherever found (Thomomvs mazamaglacialis) T Pocket gopher, Tenino Wherever found (Thomomvs mazama tumuh� T Pocket gopher, Yelm Wherever found (Thomomvs mazama yelmensis) E Rabbit, Columbia Basin Pygmy Columbia Basin DPS (Brachylagus idahoensis) T Salmon, Chinook Lower Columbia River ESU (Oncorhynchus (=Salmo) tshawytscha) T Salmon, Chinook Puget Sound ESU (Oncorhynchus (=Salmo) tshawytscha) T Salmon, Chinook Snake River fall-run ESU(Oncorhynchus (=Salmo) tshawytscha) T Salmon, Chinook Snake River spring/summer-run ESU (Oncorhvnchus (=Salmo) tshawytscha) E Salmon, Chinook Upper Columbia spring-run ESU (Oncorhynchus (=Salmo) tshawytscha) T Salmon, chum Columbia River ESU (Oncorhynchus keta) T Salmon, chum Hood Canal summer-run ESU (Oncorhynchus keta) T Salmon, sockeye Ozette Lake ESU (Oncorhynchus (=Salmo) nerka) E Salmon, sockeye Snake River ESU (Oncorhynchus (=Salmo) nerka) E Sea turtle, leatherback Wherever found (Dermochelys coriacea) T Steelhead Lower Columbia River DPS (Oncorhynchus (=Salmo) mykissl T Steelhead Puget Sound DPS (Oncorhynchus (=Salmo)mvkiss) T Steelhead Snake River Basin DPS (Oncorhynchus (=Salmo) mvkiss) T Steelhead Upper Columbia River DPS (Oncorhynchus (=Salmo) mvkiss) T Steelhead Upper Willamette River DPS (Oncorhynchus (—Salmo) mvkiss) T Trout, bull U.S.A., conterminous, lower 48 states (Salvelinus confluentus) E Whale, killer Southern Resident DPS (Orcinus orca) WoIC gray U.S.A.: All of AL, AR, CA, CO,CT, DE, FL, GA, IA, IN, IL, KS,KY,LA, E MA, MD, ME, MI, MO,MS,NC,ND,NE, NH,NJ,NV,NY,OH, OK,PA, RI, SC,SD, TN,TX, VA, VT, WI, and WV; and portions of AZ, NM,OR, UT, and WA. Mexico. (Canis lupus) Plants — 11 listings Status Species/Listing Name T Bladderpod, White Bluffs (Phvsaria dou lasii ssp. tuplashensis) T Buckwheat, Umtanum Desert (Eriogonum codiuml T Catchfly, Spalding's (Silene spaldingii T Checker-mallow, Nelson's (Sidalcea nelsoniana) E Checkermallow, Wenatchee Mountains (Sidalcea oregana var. Galva) E Desert-parsley, Bradshaw's (Lomatium bradshawii1 T Howellia, water (Howellia aquatilis) T Ladies'-tresses, Ute (Spiranthes diluvialis) T Lupine, Kincaid's (Lupinus sulphureus ssp. kincaidit) T paintbrush, golden (Castilleia levisectal E Stickseed, showy ()jackelia venusta) Appendix E.2 — National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Threatened and Endangered Species List, 2017 t ® NOAA Status of ESA Listings FISHERIES & Critical Habitat Designations Canada tates for - - »� - c Bellingham c West Coast Salmon & Steelhead .O�Seattle Spokane WASHINGTON Evolutionarily Significant Unit/ ESA Date of ESA Date of CH Olympia Distinct Population Segment Status Listing Designation Hood Canal Summer-run Chum Salmon T 3/25/1999 9/2/2005. r Ozette Lake Sockeye Salmon T 3/25/1999 9/2/2005 Portland` Puget Sound Chinook Salmon T- 3/24/1999 9/2/2005 Puget Sound Steelhead T 5/11/2007 2/24/2016 *Salem Middle Columbia River Steelhead T 3/ /2009 1/55/2006 9/2/2005 Snake River Fall-run Chinook Salmon T 4/22/1992 12/28/1993 Um� Snake River Spring/Summer-run Chinook c % *Boise D A H O T 4/22/1992 10/25/1999 Salmon Coos OREGON Snake River Sockeye Salmon E 11/20/1991 12/28/1993 Bay 8/18/1997 Snake River Steelhead T 9/2/2005 1/5/2006 „u Upper Columbia River Spring-run Chinook E 3/24/1999 9/2/2005 Salmon Medfor Upper Columbia River Steelhead T 8/18/1997 9/2/2005 1/5/2005 �tnntat Recovery Domain Columbia River Chum Salmon T 3/25/1999 9/2/2005 EUr6ka Puget Sound Lower Columbia River Chinook Salmon T 3/24/1999 9/2/2005 Redding Interior Columbia Lower Columbia River Coho Salmon T 6/28/200S 2/24/2016 Willamette/Lower Columbia and Lower Columbia River Steelhead T 3/19/1998 ^ Interior Columbia Overlap 1/5/2005 9/2/2005 Willamette/Lower Columbia Upper Willamette River Chinook Salmon T 3/24/1999 9/2/2005 3/25/1999 Oregon Coast Upper Willamette RiverZelhead T 1 1/5/2006 9/2/2005 Southern OR/Northern CA Coast So.OR/No.CA Coast and Oregon Coast Recovery Domain �\Sacramento North-Central CA Coast Overlap 10regon Coast Coho Salmon T 1 2/11/2008 1 2/1112008 North-Central California Coast '� .I• Southern Oregon/Northam California Coast Recovery Domain .� North-Central California Coast fps and Central Valle Overlap Southern OR/Northern CA Coasts Coho San Francisco - Y p T 1 5/6/1997 5/5/1999 Salmon lt. Central Valley South-Central/Southern CA Coast North-Central California Coast Recovery Domain Santa Cruz California Coastal Chinook Salmon T 9/16/1999 9/2/2005 Fresno 10/31/1996(T) Jo!; Central California Coast Coho Salmon E 6/28/2005(E) 5/5/1999 41212012(RE) Central California Coast Steelhead T 8/18/1997 9/2/2005 CALIFO RN IA 1/5/2006 Northern California Steelhead T 6!7/2000 9/2/2005 1/5/2006 Central Valley Recovery Domain California Central Valley Steelhead T 3/19/1998 9/2/2005 1/5/2006 Santa Barbara Central Valley Spring-run Chinook Salmon T 9/16/1999 9/2/2005 Los Angele Sacramento River Winter-run Chinook E 11/5/1990(T) 6/16/1993 Salmon 1/4/1994(E) S� South-Central/Southern California Coast Recovery Domain Q eJ Sta s South-Central California Coast Steelhead T 1/5/2005 8/18/1997 9/2/2005 �} ited San Diego --. Met Co 8/18/1997 Southem Califomia Steelhead E 5/1/2002(RE) 9/2/2005 1/5/2006 0 Miles 200 ESA=Endangered Species Act CH=Critical Habitat RE=Range Exteraion Updated July 2016 E=Endangered,T=Threatened, Critical Habitat Rules Cited • 2/24/2016(81 FR 9252) Final Critical Habitat Designation for Puget Sound Steelhead and Lower Columbia River Coho Salmon • 2/11/2008(73 FR 7816) Final Critical Habitat Designation for Oregon Coast Coho Salmon • 9/2/2005 (70 FR 52630) Final Critical Habitat Designation for 12 ESU's of Salmon and Steelhead in WA,OR,and ID • 9/2/2005(70 FR 52488) Final Critical Habitat Designation for 7 ESU's of Salmon and Steelhead in CA • 10/25/1999(64 FR 57399) Revised Critical Habitat Designation for Snake River Spring/Summer-run Chinook Salmon • 5/5/1999(64 FR 24049) Final Critical Habitat Designation for Central CA Coast and Southern OR/Northern CA Coast Coho Salmon • 12/28/1993 (58 FR 68543) Final Critical Habitat Designation for Snake River Chinook and Sockeye Salmon • 6/16/1993 (58 FR 33212) Final Critical Habitat Designation for Sacramento River Winter-run Chinook Salmon ESA Listing Rules Cited • 4/2/2012(77 FR 19552) Final Range Extension for Endangered Central California Coast Coho Salmon • 2/11/2008(73 FR 7816) Final ESA Listing for Oregon Coast Coho Salmon • 5/11/2007 (72 FR 26722) Final ESA Listing for Puget Sound Steelhead • 1/5/2006(71 FR 5248) Final Listing Determinations for 10 Distinct Population Segments of West Coast Steelhead • 6/28/2005(70 FR 37160) Final ESA Listing for 16 ESU's of West Coast Salmon • 5/1/2002(67 FR 21586) Range Extension for Endangered Steelhead in Southern California • 6/7/2000(65 FR 36074) Final ESA Listing for Northern California Steelhead • 9/16/1999(64 FR 50394) Final ESA Listing for Two Chinook Salmon ESUs in California • 3/25/1999(64 FR 14508) Final ESA Listing for Hood River Canal Summer-run and Columbia River Chum Salmon • 3/25/1999(64 FR 14517) Final ESA Listing for Middle Columbia River and Upper Willamette River Steelhead • 3/25/1999 (64 FR 14528) Final ESA Listing for Ozette Lake Sockeye Salmon • 3/24/1999(64 FR 14308) Final ESA Listing for 4 ESU's of Chinook Salmon • 3/19/1998(63 FR 13347) Final ESA Listing for Lower Columbia River and Central Valley Steelhead • 8/18/1997(62 FR 43937) Final ESA Listing for 5 ESU's of Steelhead • 5/6/1997 (62 FR 24588) Final ESA Listing for Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast Coho Salmon • 10/31/1996(61 FR 56138) Final ESA Listing for Central California Coast Coho Salmon • 1/4/1994(59 FR 222) Final ESA Listing for Sacramento River Winter-run Chinook Salmon • 4/22/1992(57 FR 14653) Final ESA Listing for Snake River Spring/summer-run and Snake River Fall Chinook Salmon • 11/20/1991(56 FR 58619) Final ESA Listing for Snake River Sockeye Salmon • 11/5/1990(55 FR 46515) Final ESA Listing for Sacramento River Winter-run Chinook Salmon _ Northwest Fish Distribution (StreamNet) Streamnet Fish Distribution Marine Critical Habitat for Puget Sound Chinook Salmon (NMFS, 2005) M Chinook Salmott Crucial Ncv stiorc Habitat(NMFS.200% -o N�4 r { a R =�ys I' • t r� 0 0.020.040.060.08 mi � � US DOC i NOAA NOS NOAA Office of Response&Restoration Coastal Response Research Center I Ermtontnental Response Management Application r .,0,� Email Comments:orr.erma@noaa.gov (c)2007-2015 University of New Hampshire Pacific Northwest Northwest Fish Distribution (StreamNet) Streamnet Fish Distribution Habitat Areas of Particular Concern . r Essential Fish Habitat - Habitat Areas of Particular Concern r - # ",cy"'d tN Dae o1�°y1 1' z3 1' 0 0.020.040.OGOA,,� mi Al' A US DOC NOAA NOS NOAA Office of Response&Restoration Coastal Response Research Center ERMAI Environmental Response Management Application ,�tEmail Comments:orr.erma@noaa.gov (c)2007-2015 University of New Hampshire Pacific Northwest INorthwest Fish Distribution (StreamNet) T '',,/ Streamnet Fish Distribution �NOAA NMFS Critical Habitat k ,. Final Nearshore Rockfish Critical Habitat (NMFS, 2014) Final Nears hore Rockfish Critical Habitat tNMFS, 213 1-1 'i r A +t Tk:ito: t 111,_1 r '?:23:23 0 0.020.040.060,08 mi ��1`�\ US DOC I NOAA I NOS I NOAA Office of Response&Restoration Coastal Response Research Center Environmental Response Management Application -6 Email Comments:orr.erma@noaa.gov (c)2007-2015 University of New Hampshire ERMAI Pacific Northwest Northwest Fish Distribution (StreamNet) Streamnet Fish Distribution Southern Resident Killer Whale Critical Habitat (NMFS, 2006) f A . '�!!'�Area 2-Summer Core Area(Haro Strait h San Juan Islands) Area 2-Puget Sound Area 3-Stsart of Juan d2 Fuca t a� J w y t N �.020.040.06Q ,- ,08 mi US DOC I NOAA i NOS NOAA Office of Response&Restoration Coastal Response Research Center ERMAI- Environmental Response Management Application Email Comments:orr.erma@noaa.gov (c)2007-2015 University of New Hampshire 4 Pacific Northwest �*, Northwest Fish Distribution (StreamNet) Fish .,� Streamnet Fish Distribution NOAA NIVIFS Critical Habitat Steelhead Traut Critical Habitat (NMFS, r1,t Steelhead Critical Habitat w F I Y a d. MIRE 0 0.020,040A60.08 mi US DOC NOAA NOS I NOAA Office of Response&Restoration Coastal Response Research Center I Environmental Response Management Application d Pacific Northwest Email Comments:orr.erma@noaa.gov (c)2007-2015 University of New Hampshire Appendix E.3 — Washington Department of Natural Resources — Natural Heritage List for Mason County, 2017 +. ;�514.1 NG,-O Washington Natural Heritage Rare Plants and Nonvasculars O - A u Mason County 3 April2017 ��`►vaYua�'` Page 1 of 1 State Federal Scientific Name Common Name Status Status Historical Botrvchium ascendens triangular-lobed moonwort S Carex obtusata obtuse sedge S Carex pauciflora few-flowered sedge S Carex scirpoidea ssp. scirpoidea Canadian single-spike sedge S Chrlrsolepis chrysophylla var. chrysophylla golden chinquapin S Claylonia multiscapa ssp. pacifica Pacific lanceleaved springbeaLIN' T Cochlearia groenlandica scurvygrass S Erigeron aliceae Alice's fleabane S Githopsis speculanoides common bluecup S Hedysarum occidentale western hedysarum S H Heterotheca oregona Oregon goldenaster S H Lobelia dortmanna water lobelia T Ophioglossum pusilium Adders-tongue T Pamassia palustris var. neogaea northern grass-of-pamassus S Pellaea breweri Brewers cliffbrake S Potamogeton obtusifolius blunt-leaf pondweed S Usnea longissima beard lichen S Woodwardia fimbriata giant chain fern S Appendix EA—Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitat and Species, 2017 WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE PRIORITY HABITATS AND SPECIES REPORT mr SOURCE DATASET: PHSPlusPublic Query ID: P151217141316 REPORT DATE: 12/17/2015 2.13 Common Name Site Name Priority Area Accuracy Federal Status Sensitive Data Source Entity Scientific Name Source Dataset Occurrence Type State Status Resolution Geometry Type Source Record More Information(URL) PHS Listing Status Notes Source Date Mgmt Recommendations Eelgrass Meadows ALLYN Aquatic Habitat 1/4 mile(Quarter N/A N WA Dept.of Fish and Wildlife PHSREGION N/A N/A AS MAPPED Polygons 912860 http://wdfw.wa. PHS LISTED Estuarine and Marine N/A Aquatic Habitat NA N/A N US Fish and Wildlife Service NWIWetlands Aquatic habitat N/A AS MAPPED Polygons http://www.ecy.wa. PHS Listed Hardshell Clam Not Given Presence NA N/A N WDFW Shellfish—Summary Presence N/A AS MAPPED Polygons N/A PHS Listed Surf Smelt Station Number:7 Breeding Area NA N/A N WDFW Hypomesus pretiosus Forage_Fish_Survey Breeding area N/A AS MAPPED Lines 8426 March 15, 1994 PHS Listed Species Surf Smelt Station Number:36 Breeding Area NA N/A N WDFW Hypomesus pretiosus Forage_Fish_Survey Breeding area N/A AS MAPPED Lines 8261 March 01, 1995 PHS Listed Species Surf Smelt Station Number:30 Breeding Area NA N/A N WDFW Hypomesus pretiosus Forage_Fish_Survey Breeding area N/A AS MAPPED Lines 8542 December 28, 1993 PHS Listed Species Surf Smelt Station Number:37 Breeding Area NA N/A N WDFW Hypomesus pretiosus Forage_Fish_Survey Breeding area N/A AS MAPPED Lines 8262 March 01, 1995 PHS Listed Species 12/17/2015 2.13 1 Common Name Site Name Priority Area Accuracy Federal Status Sensitive Data Source Entity Scientific Name Source Dataset Occurrence Type State Status Resolution Source Record More Information(URL) PHS Listing Status Geometry Type Notes Source Date Mgmt Recommendations DISCLAIMER. This report includes information that the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife(WDFW)maintains in a central computer database. It is not an attempt to provide you with an official agency response as to the impacts of your project on fish and wildlife. This information only documents the location of fish and wildlife resources to the best of our knowledge. It is not a complete inventory and it is important to note that fish and wildlife resources may occur in areas not currently known to WDFW biologists,or in areas for which comprehensive surveys have not been conducted. Site specific surveys are frequently necesssary to rule out the presence of priority resources. Locations of fish and wildlife resources are subject to vraition caused by disturbance,changes in season and weather,and other factors. WDFW does not recommend using reports more than six months old. 12/17/2015 2.13 2 AO Pik f, r4l • � r r �� ;,,� Fes,•�` .t� •„ 41 �• { fit.. � � -•-•��. tom... �,tff y`ate �'• '- `�• '► r. I • WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FisH&WILDLIFE Salmonswipe HELP FAQ WDFW SalmonScape Map Controls Layers Legend Active(21) �:Tool s SVV Paradise' A Fish Passane El Fish Passage Facilities KITSAP El Facilities 161 Fish Distribution Fish Distribution I, 0 Spring Chinook Streams IF.r/ 0 Summer Chinook Streams rr b z 0 Fall Chinook Streams 3 *Coho streams 0 summer Chum streams OFall Chum Streams 0 Winter Chum Streams 0 Winter Steelhead Streams 0 Summer Steelhead llyn OSockeye Streams 'k Rd "'A 3,�;, 0 Pink Salmon �Even Year) Streams 0 Pink Salmon (odd Year) Streams 0 Bull Trout 0 Kokanee 0 All SalmonScape Species 'Z'7�' ESA Listina Units z r_1 EIESA Listing Units Hydrograph Hydrography N RvcAy Rao T- 2.1 0 0.5 1111i Boundaries 0Township &Range Bureau ofl-and ��anaqement, Esn, HERE, Garmin, I Intpir... . ......................... WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH WILDLIFE SalmonScape Map Controls as ( SIC'-= V ;I= ��j ....._._.__..._._�_ — o _ _ _ Layers Legend Active(2) I' Tools �' ' V Paradise— I r Fish Passage _ I J ❑Fish Passage Facilities ❑Facilities L<_- I Fish Distribution©Fish Distribution/OSpring Chinook StreamsO Summer Chinook Streams s y O Fall Chinook StreamsO Coho StreamsO Summer Chum Streams ' atrr Street KP*Fall Chum StreamsO Winter Chum StreamsO Winter Steelhead Streams IlNrn0Summer Steelhead �� I�OSockeye Streams I �kRaO Pink Salmon (Even Year) StreamsO Pink Salmon (Odd Year) Streams I a O Bull Trout C,NO(, O Kokanee O All SalmonScape Species ✓ r ESA Listing Units z i : ❑ESA Listing Units R UM c Hydrography J- ❑Hydrography l Rocky Day Boundaries o o.s 1111i / - - � f El Township &Range v Bureau of Land Manaclement, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P, Inter_ fi — -- WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH WILDLIFE Sal�m�pe HELP FAQ WDFW Hv� SalmonScape Map Controls LaI �I (� ���(�A� Layers Legend Active(2) Tools 4u P't-, . n ri r Fish Passaae - ❑Fish Passage I Facilities - t ❑Facilities Fish Distribution I R Z Fish Distribution► O Spring Chinook Streams _ ad O Summer Chinook Streams - m z a *Fall Chinook Streams v f3 13 Y OCoho Streams O Summer Chum Streams - 144th Street Kr N OFatl Chum Streams l� O Winter Chum Streams w u ;U O Winter Steelhead Streams OSummer Steelhead a��yn icu ( OSockeye Streams OPink Salmon (Even Year) Streams OPink Salmon (Odd Year) Streams O Bull Trout r C,�d�on O Kokanee O All SalmonScape Species a 0. Y ESA Listing Units I c z ❑ESA Listing Units { �}VIM a. N Hydrography ❑HydrograPhY porky Boundaries o o.s In,l L ❑Township &Range Bureau of Land Management, Esri, HERE, Garmin. INCREMENT P, Inter... WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH&WILDLIFE Ssl�n�pe HELP FAQ RD- -- SalmonSicape Map Controls ..J 40)l�- —, *� t I )I— ^ I Layers Legend Acdw(2) ij Tools w' Vic E z SAS P.uadn� � l Fish Passage I ❑Fish Passage l Facilities Kf'f, P ❑Facilities 1v. Fish Distribution - ❑'Fish Distribution) O Spring Chinook Streams _ Rp O Summer Chinook Streams - rr t O Fall Chinook Streams OCoho Streams t �r .t *Summer Chum Streams a 1a4thStreetKr N OFall Chum Streams `r O winter Chum Streams — 0 Winter Steelhead Streams A O Summer Steelhead I lti n ti� O Sockeye Streams '" "i'y F: NA 3o?ern O Pink Salmon (Even Year) Streams x _ (D Pink Salmon (Odd Year) Streams O Bull Trout Qr I �,dVO� 0Kokanee OAII SalmonScape Species x ESA Listing Units i z ❑ESA Listing Units ` �y;IM a. Hydrographv 2, ❑Hydrography r.,, af,Rm, Boundaries o o.s Imt / ❑To.,;nship &Range v Bureau of Land Manaqement, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P, Inter... SalmonSicape Map Controls Layers Legend Active(2) Tools _ 1 r �N.'Parsdia Fish Passage - ❑Fish Passage Facilities - 1 �' r. KITSAP El Facilities . . Fish Distribution y OFish Distribution► O Spring Chinook Streams - an K O Summer Chinook Streams z OFall Chinook Streams x ' 13 Y �; � . O Coho Streams ' C` I a' O Summer Chum Streams ti 144th Street Kp N O Fall Chum Streams O Winter Chum Streams A�4 *Winter Steelhead Streams OSummer Steelhead Allyn OSockeye Streams i �' �kR,7 O Pink Salmon (Even Year) Streams I YO Pink Salmon (Odd Year) Streams O Bull Trout ��¢O KokaneeO All SalmonScape Species ` ,� YESA Listing Units❑ESA Listing UnitsEt:av H/drography R M ElHydrography R-k�R„y Boundaries 0 0.5 LLni❑Township&Range v Bureau of Land Management, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P, Inter.,. 4CQ1 MASON COUNTY COMMUNITY SERVICES Building,Planning,Environmental Health,Community Health June 27,2017 Notice of Application and Notice of Public Hearing Notice is hereby given that North Bay Historical Society and the Port of Allyn,who are the applicants for the following proposal, has filed an application for Shoreline Substantial Development and Shoreline Conditional Use Permits. The request for Permits is to relocate the restored historic Sargent Oyster House to the Port of Allyn and create an overwater museum and education center.The restored building is proposed to be located in the footprint of the dilapidated concrete boat ramp on the northern shoreline of the Port. Approximately 3,300 square feet of concrete ramp will be removed as mitigation for installing the approximately 1,200 square foot building over water. The Project is occurring at the Port of Allyn in Allyn, WA Date of complete application:June 26, 2017 The proposed development is reviewed under the applicable chapters of the Shoreline Master Program. The proposal requires approval from both the County's Hearing Examiner and the WA State Department of Ecology. A SEPA(State Environmental Policy Act)determination of non-significance (DNS)was made by the Port of Allyn on March 14, 2016. Any person desiring to express their view or to be notified of the action taken on the application should come to the public hearing on August 9, 2017or mail comments to Kell Rowen, Senior Planner, Mason County Department of Community Services, 615 W.Alder St.; Shelton,WA 98584 A PUBLIC HEARING will be held on August 9,2017 at 1:00 p.m. by the Mason County Hearing Examiner on the proposed project in the County Commissioners Chambers, Bldg. I,411 N. 5th Street, Shelton, WA. Written and oral testimony will be accepted up to the close of the hearing. Please contact Kell Rowen of the Mason County Department of Community Development at(360)427- 9670, ext. 365, with any questions on this development and requests. A decision on these applications will be made within 120 days of the date of the complete application. 64 13 Name Mailing address City State Zip ALLYN COMM.CHURCH ORGANIZATION PO BOX 1245 Allyn WA 98524 BALKEMA ET AL, CAROLYN PO BOX 75033 Seattle WA 98175 BETSINGER,VICKI PO BOX 314 Allyn WA 98524 BISKEBORN, NICKOLAS A PO BOX 21 Allyn WA 98524 FLOYD ET AL, DEREK ANDREW P O BOX 241 Allyn WA 98524 GOFF,ARLU 2008 152ND ST E Tacoma WA 98445 GRIFFEY TRS, DOROTHY A PO BOX 3S Allyn WA 98524 GRIFFEY, DELMER G & BARBARA J PO BOX 3 Allyn WA 98524 HICKS ET UX, MARVIN L 4806 83 STREET SW Lakewood WA 98499 KNIGHT, RICHARD A& BONNIE J P 0 BOX 84 Allyn WA 98524 MASON COUNTY 411 N 5th St Shelton Wa 98584 McCOLM, CHERYL LEE 9127 EDGEWATER DR SW Lakewood WA 98499 MCGIBBON, ERNEST&SHIRLEY PO BOX 902 Allyn WA 98524 MORRELL TRUSTEE,JULIA PO BOX 5158 Kent WA 98064 OGREN, DENISE & MITCHELL P 0 BOX 662 Allyn WA 98524 PETERSON, RANDY 1160 ENCINITAS CT Grover Beach CA 93433 PROGESSIVE MANAGEMENT INC PO BOX 222 Bremerton WA 98337 SEYMOUR, LAWRENCE A&JILL C PO BOX 1153 Allyn WA 98524 STATE OF WASHINGTON 600 Capital Way N Olympia WA 98501 STATE OF WASHINGTON P 0 BOX 47440 Olympia WA 98504 STORMO, DELBERT G & BARBARA PO BOX 73 Allyn WA 98524 TAYLOR UNITED INC 130 SE LYNCH RD Shelton WA 98584 THREE B'S PROPERTIES LLC 3411 W LAWTON ST Seattle WA 98199 WANG,WEN-SITYAN &SHU-CHIN 7203 79TH AVE SE MERCER ISLAND WA 98040 Page 1 of 1 Kell Rowen - HMP 30-day review: Sargent Oyster House From: Kell Rowen To: Bigelow, Margie; jdickison@squaxin.us Date: 6/30/2017 3:49 PM Subject: HMP 30-day review: Sargent Oyster House CC: bill@northforkenvironmental.com Attachments: Sargent Oyster Building BE.pdf; Notice of Application.docx Hi Jeff and Margie, Please get me comments, if any, prior to August 9, 2017, which is the date of the public hearing for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and Shoreline Conditional Use Permit to move the historic Sargent Oyster House to an overwater location (North Bay) at the Port of Allyn, in Allyn, WA. SEPA DNS was issued by the Port of Allyn in 2016.The HPA was issued on May 2, 2017. Thanks, and Happy 4th! Sincerely, Kell Rowen (formerly McAboy) Senior Planner krowen@co.mason.wa.us 360.427.9670 ext. 365 file:///C:/Users/kmcaboy/AppData/Local/Temp/XPgrpwise/5956731 EMasonmai110013567... 7/27/2017 AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE STATE OF WASHINGTON J ) ss: COUNTY OF MASON ) RE: (Parcel#or Address of Site): ` 2 2 "4%O —5JC) _©2;vy I, Kell Rowen, Planner for Mason County, do hereby certify that I have posted copies of the attached: On this day of 2011 in conspicuous places as follows: o One at The Site o One at The Mason County Building One's Public Bulletin Board 411 N 51h St-Shelt n WA o One at �cN �' low e� In witness iwhereof, the party has signed this Affidavit of Posting Notice this day of 1 V� . 20�_. Signed by Kell Rowen Mason County Community Services Department 615 W. Alder St-Shelton, WA 98584 Subscribed and sworn before me this i day of 20 ,4,wrt;y,that signed this document. P,►t}EL BISC,4% NOTq�y �+ ARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, •r _ T _ •; Val C J I Printed Name of Notary: -P S�'%�`•�:�'i�o��p•• ` residing at: �166 C-1 � � � � �"",,,, SHV4G '� My Commission Expires: / �2 y ������IIIINN��, itEx_ Oct , PUBLIC NOTICE — ---- — --- NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND NOTICE Notice is hereby given that North Bay His- OF PUBLIC HEARING torical Society and the Port of Allyn,who are the Notice is hereby given that North Bay His- applicants for the following proposal, has filed torical Society and the Port of Allyn,who are the an application for Shoreline Substantial Devel- applicants for the following proposal, has filed opment and Shoreline Conditional Use Permits. an application for Shoreline Substantial Devel- The request for Permits is to relocate the re- opment and Shoreline Conditional Use Permits. stored historic Sargent Oyster House to the Port The request for Permits is to relocate the re- of Allyn and create an overwater museum and stored historic Sargent Oyster House to the Port education center. The restored building is pro- of Allyn and create an overwater museum and posed to be located in the footprint of the dilapi- education center. The restored building is pro- dated concrete boat ramp on the northern shore- posed to be located in the footprint of the diiapi- line of the Port. Approximately 3,300 square feet dated concrete boat ramp on the northern shore- of concrete ramp will be removed as mitigation line of the Port. Approximately 3,300 square feet for installing the approximately 1,200 square of concrete ramp will be removed as mitigation foot building over water.The Project is occurring for installing the approximately 1,200 square at the Port of Allyn in Allyn, WA. Date of com- foot building over water.The Project is occurring plete application: June 26, 2017. The proposed at the Port of Allyn in Allyn, WA. Date of com- development is reviewed under the applicable plete application: June 26, 2017. The proposed chapters of the Shoreline Master Program. The development is reviewed under the applicable proposal requires approval from both the Coun- chapters of the Shoreline Master Program. The ty's Hearing Examiner and the WA State Depart- proposal requires approval from both the Coun- ment of Ecology. A SEPA (State Environmental ty's Hearing Examiner and the WA State Depart- Policy Act) determination of non-significance ment of Ecology. A SEPA (State Environmental (DNS) was made by the Port of Allyn on March Policy Act) determination of non-significance 14, 2016. Any person desiring to express their (DNS) was made by the Port of Allyn on March view or to be notified of the action taken on the 14, 2016. Any person desiring to express their application should come to the public hearing on view or to be notified of the action taken on the August 9,2017or mail comments to Kell Rowen, application should come to the public hearing on Senior Planner, Mason County Department of August 9,2017or mail comments to Kell Rowen, Community Services,615 W. Alder St.;Shelton, Senior Planner, Mason County Department of WA 9858 A PUBLIC HEARING will be held on Community Services, 615 W. Alder St.; Shelton, August 9,2017 at 1:00 p.m.by the Mason County WA 9858 A PUBLIC HEARING will be held on Hearing Examiner on the proposed project in the August 9,2017 at 1:00 p.m.by the Mason County County Commissioners Chambers, Bldg. I, 411 Hearing Examiner on the proposed project in the N. 5th Street, Shelton,WA.Written and oral tes- County Commissioners Chambers, Bldg. I, 411 timony will be accepted up to the close of the N.5th Street, Shelton,WA. Written and oral tes- hearing.Please contact Kell Rowen of the Mason timony will be accepted up to the close of the County Department of Community Development hearing.Please contact Kell Rowen of the Mason at (360) 427-9670, ext. 365, with any questions County Department of Community Development on this development and requests.A decision on at (360) 427-9670, ext. 365, with any questions these applications will be made within 120 days on this development and requests.A decision on of the date of the complete application. these applications will be made within 120 days 9602 July 6, 13 2t of the date of the complete application. 9602 July 6, 13 2t I 1 Page 1 of 1 Kell Rowen - Public Hearing for North Bay Historical Society and the Port of Allyn 6 From: Jeff Carey<jcarey5876@gmail.com> To: Kell<krowen@co.mason.wa.us> Date: 7/26/2017 4:28 PM Subject: Public Hearing for North Bay Historical Society and the Port of Allyn Attachments: Page 4 from land-use-element-071017.pdf; Pagesl4-15from Allyn_Zoning_Code_080918wrk-2b.pdf; PortsWellsite setback2016a-2.pdf; Comments to Hearing20170809A.pdf Hi there Kell. Attached are several documents in reference to this review. 1) My comments related to this project. 2) Page 4 of the Mason County land use element. 3) Pages 14 & 15 related to the zoning code for this zoning within Allyn. 4) An Aerial photo/map showing the the wellhead setback and its relation to this project. Thanks Jeff Carey phn 360-275-02780 file:///C:/Users/kmcaboy/AppData/Local/Temp/XPgrpwise/5978C341 Masonmai11001356... 7/27/2017 Jeff Carey P.O. Box 480 : ALLYN, WASHINGTON 98524 Phn: (360)275-0780 or Cell: (360)731-5683 July 20, 2017 Comments regarding the permit application to relocate the restored historic Sargent Oyster House to the Port of Allyn waterfront: 1) 1 am not against the relocating & restoration of the Sargent Oyster house to the Port of Allyn and creating a museum and education center. Although I think the Port's funds could be better spent elsewhere. 2) My issue with this project/permit is to the location this is planned to occur at. 3) The following are my concerns/ issues with the location. a) Within 100 feet of a public group "A" water source. County rules for wellhead protection areas are to create a 100 ft. radius sanitation zone around a wellhead. b) As I understand the project to this point, the placement of the museum is within this 100ft radius. See enclosed aerial map for locations and distances. c) Mason Count's 2017 Comprehensive Plan, which is currently being revised for 2017, has to following objective or goal on Page 4 third paragraph the land Use Element. See highlight enclosed page 4. d) The zoning of the area is public open space. How does this application support the Allyn UGA zoning title 17.10.600. See enclose two pages of zoning regulations for public open space. e) The Port of Allyn 10 to 12 years ago had a plan to take this area at the north end of the parking lot, to the west of the propose museum and to replant it with grass. This would help parking encroaching within sanitation zone around a wellhead and less impervious surface. 4) In summary, my thought is to move the museum to the north side of the existing wood dock. a) More foot traffic around the dock. b) Better access to utilities. c) Immediate adjacent access to a public road. d) Less parking conflicts with public & private events being held at the park. e) Probably less cost. Please contact me with any questions. Email me at jcarey5876Ca-gmail.com or use the phone numbers listed above. Thanks for the opportunity to comment, /01�-- Jeff Carey Page 1 of 1 Comments to Hearing20170809A :. • t • i4 Y • �"�`, *'� " �. �� �. _ • few"*�x M . AL � '¢_ 100ftRadlus }a Existing �u Distance lines Concrete �formW Ilh ad Structure vt co ku e r IP or FAA tall. VAL !Proposed FALULocation of ,� �.. Museum •Ra-x ..'�aF���K Y v v Attachment A 17.10.600 "PF" - PUBLIC FACILITIES OVERLAY DISTRICT Sections: 17.10.610 Purpose: This district is intended for the accommodation of needed public facilities within Allyn in accordance with the Allyn Urban Growth Area Plan. Support facilities for infrastructure, utilities and similar capital facilities would be allowed in this district. 17.10.620 Uses allowed subject to approval of a Special Use Permit per the MCC: Public and semi-public essential facilities necessary to the public convenience including: 1. Airports. 2. Government buildings. 3. Educational institutions. 4. Hospitals, clinics, and sanitariums (excluding animal hospitals and clinics). 5. Correctional institutions. 6. Water delivery systems 7. Sewer and wastewater treatment and facilities 8. Stormwater treatment and facilities 9. Public and private utilities as supported by the Allyn Subarea Plan 17.10.630 Bulk and Dimension standards: To be determined through approval of a Special Use Permit. 17.10.640 Additional Development and Design criteria: 1. There shall be a demonstrated need for the use within the community, which shall not be contrary to public interest. 2. The use shall be consistent with the goals and polices of the Allyn Urban Growth Area Plan. 3. The approval body shall find that the use as proposed will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare or to private or public improvements and infrastructure. 4. There shall be adequate attenuation of noise, smoke, odors, traffic and unsightly construction or storage. 5. There shall be adequate landscaping, yard setbacks and fencing to mitigate the impacts on adjacent properties and uses. 6. Modifications to bulk and dimension standards must be based on a demonstrated need for the function of the use. 17.10.650 Off-street Parking: Project specific as required by conditions of the Special Use Permit. 17.10.660 Signs: Project specific as required by conditions of the Special Use Permit. 17.10.670 Development approval: All development and projects in the PF district shall require approval of a Special Use Permit with concurrent Site Plan or Binding Site Plan approval consistent with the MCC. Adopted Allyn Zoning 6.12.doc Page 14 Attachment A 17.10.700 "POS" - PUBLIC OPEN SPACE Sections: 17.10.710 Purpose: The "POS" district is intended to provide areas for essential public uses and facilities necessary to the public convenience, and in particular to provide for public park, recreational, and open space. Since certain special property uses have intrinsic characteristics relating to their function or operation which may necessitate buildings or structures associated with the special property use to exceed predictable height, bulk, and dimensional or other development standards, those exceeding established standards are reviewed through a special use permit process. 17.10.720 Permitted uses: Parks, playgrounds, community recreation centers and open space 17.10.730 Accessory uses: Accessory uses are allowed in conjunction with permitted uses and those uses approved through a Special Use Permit 1. Restroom, shower and changing rooms 2. Storage required for supplies Et equipment 3. Other Property uses which have intrinsic characteristics relating to the function or operation 17.10.740 Uses allowed subject to approval of a Special Use Permit: Public and semi- public essential facilities necessary to the public convenience including: 1. Bus stations and transit facilities 2. Buildings or structures associated with the special property use, which exceed predictable height, bulk, dimensional, or other development standards Adopted Allyn Zoning 6.12.doc Page 15 I. INTRODUCTION Washington State's Growth Management Act(RCW 36.70A) is a series of state statutes that were first adopted in 1990,that require growing cities and counties to develop a Comprehensive Plan that will help ensure municipal services and infrastructure are planned in a way that support projected population and housing growth while maintaining the quality of life Washington is known for. It is primarily codified under Chapter 36.70A RCW,although it has been amended and added to in several other parts of the RCW. The Land Use Element of a Comprehensive Plan is the central document required by the Growth Management Act that directs land use patterns and guides land use decisions within Mason County.This element provides the basis for the Housing, Parks, Transportation, Utility, Transportation, Economic Development, and Capital Facility Plans because it identifies the proposed distribution of land uses and addresses other concerns such as the protection of groundwater quality and quantity, drainage, flooding, and storm water run-off and potential mitigation measures. The Growth Management Act specifies: "A land use element designating the proposed general distribution and general location and extent of the uses of land, where appropriate, for agriculture, timber production, housing, commerce, industry, recreation, open spaces, general aviation airports, public utilities, public facilities, and other land uses. The land use element shall include population densities, building intensities, and estimates of future population growth. The land use element shall provide for protection of the quality and quantity of groundwater used for public water supplies. Wherever possible,the land use element should consider utilizing urban planning approaches that promote physical activity. Where applicable, the land use element shall review drainage, flooding, and storm water run-off in the area and nearby jurisdictions and provide guidance for corrective actions to mitigate or cleanse those discharges that pollute waters of the state, including Puget Sound or waters entering Puget Sound." The Land Use Element of Mason County's Comprehensive Plan identifies the existing land use conditions throughout Mason County, projects the land requirements to the year 2036 to meet projected population growth, and determines how that growth should be most cost effectively accommodated. It is organized into the following four sections: • INTRODUCTION: The Growth Management Act—the reason for the Land Use Element • POPULATION: The twenty(20)year projected population growth the County will accommodate • EXISTING LAND USE: The buildable lands analysis and existing zoning and demographics for the Urban Growth Areas and Rural Mason County • FUTURE LAND USE PLAN: The population growth distribution throughout the County and plan for protection of critical areas, natural resource lands, historic and cultural resources, and more. Appendix A contains a series of maps referenced throughout the Comprehensive Plan. Revised Draft Revised DRAFT LAND USE ELEMENT 6_29_17.docx Page q of 36 7/10/zoi7 Kell Rowen - Re: Fwd: Public Hearing for North Bay Historical Society and the Port of Allyn From: William Rehe <william_rehe@yahoo.com> To: Kell Rowen <krowen@co.mason.wa.us>, "bill@northforkenvironmental.com" <b... Date: 7/27/2017 12:24 PM Subject: Re: Fwd: Public Hearing for North Bay Historical Society and the Port of Allyn Good afternoon Kell, Thank you for your email. I appreciate you sharing Mr. Carey's email and concern. I know that Mr. Carey is an active and valuable member of the Allyn community. I did a little research into the well setback issue. The wellhead buffer is meant to prevent pollution to the well from prohibited uses and activities (MCC 8.52.120.3)or require an environmental permit for activities that may generate pollutants (MCC 8.5.120.4). Our proposed uses and activities do not fall under either category. I called the Mason County Department of Health and left a message for their well specialist. I also called the Washington Department of Health. I spoke to a Corina Hyes (360-236-3114). She stated that the final decision is the responsibility of the county, but did supply some useful information. I explained the project and the Port of Allyn's well. The well is approximately 150 feet deep and taps into a confined aquifer. I also described the current uses within the 100 foot wellhead buffer. Most of the 100 foot wellhead buffer is disturbed by current or previous land use. Ms. Hyes said she had little concern for the project because it is down gradient from the wellhead, the museum will be over saltwater and there will be no storage of potential pollutants. Basically, our project will not generate or use any potential pollutant or have a way for a potential pollutant to enter the well. As always, thanks for your assistance with this project, Bill On Thursday, July 27, 2017 9:43 AM, Kell Rowen <krowen@co.mason.wa.us>wrote: Hi Bill, I am just starting on my staff report this morning. It is due tomorrow COB. I received these comments and attachments from a local resident. Although the Special Use Permit question raised is not valid (the use is allowed outright under the zoning, and the "overlay" zone does not apply), there is the question about the 100 foot well protection area. See the attached map. Let me know if this is something you're already aware of or if I need to contact the DOH regional engineer for Group A water systems to determine what sort of mitigation will be required. Also, since I tend to do everything last minute...are you around today and/or tomorrow if I have additional questions in my review? THANKS!! Sincerely, Kell Rowen Senior Planner krowen(o)co.mason.wa.us 360.427.9670 ext. 365 file:///C:/Users/kmcaboy/AppData/Local/Temp/XPgrpwise/5979DB 8BMasonmail 10013 56... 7/27/2017 Page 2 of 2 >>> Jeff Carey <jcarey5876@gmail.com> 7/26/2017 4:28 PM >>> > Hi there Kell. Attached are several documents in reference to this review. 1) My comments related to this project. 2) Page 4 of the Mason County land use element. 3) Pages 14 & 15 related to the zoning code for this zoning within Allyn. 4) An Aerial photo/map showing the the wellhead setback and its relation to this project. Thanks Jeff Carey phn 360-275-02780 file:///C:/Users/kmcaboy/AppData/Local/Temp/XPgrpwise/5979DB8BMasonmai11001356... 7/27/2017 E--X kA Minutes Mason County Historic Preservation Commission June 11, 2015 Mason County Commissioners Chambers 411 N 5" Street Shelton, WA 98584 Members Present: Rick Calvin, Stephanie Neil, Steve Rose,David Corliss,Leslie "Butch"Carter,Jamie Bariekman, and Marty Harrell County Staff: Michael MacSems and Melissa Drewry I. Call to Order: Roll Call-The meeting was called to order at 2:00 pm and roll call was conducted. Review and approve minutes from May 14"Meeting-Mr. Calvin asked for a minor change attributed to him on page 4 regarding the Heritage Grant cycle. No other corrections were made. Mr. Corliss made a motion to accept the minutes as amended. Motion seconded by Ms Harrell,motion carries. Correspondence-Mr. MacSems reported that the Mason County Historical Society newsletter as well as the Washington Historic Historical Society magazine Columbia. A letter was also received from Chris Moore,Executive Director of the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation supporting the addition of the Sargent Oyster House to Mason County Historic Registry.He also received a phone call from Ed Huber asking about becoming a member of the HPC. II. New Business Announcements-None Sargent Oyster House Historic Registry Public Hearing-At 2:05 PM,Mr. Calvin suspended the MCHPC meeting and opened the public hearing. He explained the format of the hearing and criteria to those present. Judy Scott, a commissioner from the Port of Allyn began by presenting a 7 minute YouTube video titled Opening up Sargent's Oyster House. After the video, Ms Scott discussed the history of how the Oyster House was saved from demolition and sold to the Port of Allyn. She also addressed the historical importance of the structure to the North Bay area. She went on to say that moving the structure to its temporary location cost the Department of Fish and Wildlife,and the Salmon Enhancement Group$65,000. Ms Scott added that there is a hope to place the house back over the water once restoration is done, ideally within the next 3 years. She finished her presentation by adding that the community is in support of the restoration and believes that adding the Sargent Oyster House to the historical registry would bring more attention to it. This attention could, in turn,help their fund raising attempts. Bonnie Knight, President of the North Bay Historical Society, spoke about the journey of the oyster house, and how it was originally supposed to be destroyed. She discussed the concern of the house sitting on a temporary spot versus its final location saying it should be not be an issue for the registry. Ms Knight talked about the fund raising and said that there are various grants and donors showing interest. She added that the total amount to restore the house is close to a half million dollars. Adding the structure to the Mason County Historic Registry, she believes,will assist in getting these grants approved.Ms Knight presented some handout materials for the commission,including a copy of the Memorandum of Agreement Among the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers, The Washington State Historic :reservation Officer,South Puget Sound Salmon Enhancement Group,Washington Dept. of Fish&Wildlife, and The Port of Allyn. She also presented a petition signed by local residents in favor of adding the oyster house to the County Historic Registry. A letter was also received from Chris Moore, Executive Director of the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation supporting the listing. At this time there was no other public comment and Mr. Calvin read the potential applicable citations from the Criteria for Determining Designation in the Register from Mason County Code 17.40.050 which states: Criteria for Determining Designation in the Register.Any building, structure, site, object, or district may be designated for inclusion in the Mason County historic register if it is significantly associated with the history, architecture, archaeology, engineering or cultural heritage of the community; if it has integrity;is at least fifty years old, or is of lesser age and has exceptional importance; and if it falls in at least two of the following categories:... Ms Neil stated that she believes the oyster house does fall within the required categories. Mr. Calvin reiterated that within the requirements, the structure must fall within two categories. Currently the oyster house looks to fall in to three. Mr. Calvin and Greg Griffith from the Washington State Department of Archaeology& Historic Preservation(DAHP)discussed the details of the house, and Mr. Calvin asked if the non-permanent location is a hindrance to the possibility of adding the house to the historic register. Mr. Griffith said that the structure would not be considered at temporary location by an organization such as DAHP,but would be considered once it was placed at its permanent spot. He added that the relocation issue should not be the ending topic,but that it does need to be looked at. Mr.Griffith stated that the house has great historical value to the area and that it is important to remember that. Mr. MacSems said he received a letter from Chris Moore at the Washington State Trust for Historic Preservation in favor of adding the oyster house to the historic register. Ms Knight also gave him a petition with community signatures in favor of the addition of the Sargent Oyster House to the Historic Registry. Ms.Neil made a motion to recommend to the Mason County Board of Commissioners that the Sargent Oyster House be added to the Mason County Historic Register as a building based on the following criteria within the code: • (1)Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of national, state or local history; • (2)Embodies the distinctive architectural characteristics of a type,period, style, or method of design or construction,or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; • (4)Exemplifies or reflects special elements of the Mason County's cultural, special, economic,political,aesthetic,engineering or architectural history; Motion seconded by Mr. Rose. All in favor,motion is carried unanimously. At 3:12 PM Mr. Calvin closed the Sargent Oyster House Historic Registry Public Hearing and reopened the MCHPC meeting. W Anniversary debriefing-The members felt that all went well despite the low attendance. Cultural Resources Debriefing-Mr.Rose commented that it was his first time at the summit,and he learned a lot.Mr. Calvin said he thought it was a great seminar and that he was able to take a lot away from it. He stated that the seminar actually gave him an idea to reach out to other historical societies in the area to perhaps get together for a round table discussion. The other members agreed that would be a good idea for the future. 2016 Budget Discussion/Financial Statement-Mr. MacSems passed out the current financial statement and discussed the fact that the County does their budget in July. The commission then discussed the budget for the end of 2015. It was agreed that for 2016 the HPC needs to be more conservative. The following budget was recommended: • Anticipated income-$16,000 Anticipated Expenses: • Heritage Grant-$20,000 • Historic Surveys-$2,000 • Advertising-$1,000 • Postage- $100 • Travel-$500 • Miscellaneous-$2,000 • Printing-$500 • Registration-$1,500 • DCD Staff Time-$10,000 • City of Shelton Revenue Share-$2,000 Grand total=$39,600 Mr. Carter made a motion to forward the proposed budget for 2016 to Kathy Chaussee to present to Barbara Adkins,Director of DCD, to add to her budget to present to the County Commissioners. Motion seconded by Ms. Harrell,motion passed. Other-Mr. Corliss presented a receipt to be reimbursed for$10.86 for a poster. Mr. Rose made a motion to reimburse Mr. Corliss for$10.86. Motion seconded by Mr. Bariekman, motion passed. Old Business Allyn Days Preparation-Mr. Rose said everything is ready. The fee has already been paid,the spot is reserved, and they just need to go set up when the time comes. Summer 2015 Heritage Grant Update-Mr. MacSems reported there were no updates and that there is currently one application. Ms Neil asked when the due date for applications was and Mr. MacSems advised it is June 30, 2015. Matlock Historical Survey Update and Invoice Approval-Ms Neil passed out updated copies of the survey along with some maps and tables with some site information. After a discussion about the hand outs,Ms Neil said that though she's disappointed they don't have an official draft in hand,she is very happy with the data she has been given thus far and is excited to see the final product. Mr. Bariekman asked if there had been any explanation as to why no draft was done. Ms Neil said she received an e-mail on June 2nd saying that they are currently reorganizing the formatting. The deadline for the entire project is July 31, 2015. She said that she will let SWCA know that the HPC is concerned that there is sufficient time to advertise for the final public meeting. Mr. Calvin said he would be happy to put out fliers in and around Matlock to have more attendance. Mr. Corliss said he would be out in Matlock at the beginning of July and also offered to post notification. Ms Neil presented the current invoice for$7,262.40.Mr. MacSems asked how much would be remaining after this billing. Ms Neil said there is only about$1,000.00 remaining. Ms Neil made a motion to pay the invoice in the amount of$7262.40. Motion seconded by Ms Harrell,motion passed. Mr.MacSems noted,and the commission concurred,that given the small balance of the contract amount,that this would be the last advance payment. Website Update-The members showed concern with the dark background on the MCHPC website. They stated that because of the dark lettering on the background it was very difficult to read. Mr. Bariekman said that was an easy fix. The members voiced appreciation to Mr. Bariekman for the updated photos in the "Meet the Members" section of the website. This started a conversation about revising Mr. Bariekman's work to include the two ex officio member from the local tribes. Mr. Calvin suggested having Mr. MacSems contact them on behalf of the HPC to see how they would like to be included in the Meet the Members section. . Mr. Bariekman said they could either submit a photo,or he could go to them and take the photo. Mr. MacSems added that other solution may be possible if the ex officio members prefer not to use photos. Comprehensive Plan Update-The next Planning Advisory Commission meeting to discuss the Comprehensive Plan Update is scheduled for July 6. Mr. Calvin said he could be present. Other-Mr. Calvin presented a draft of the thank you letter for Kathy Chaussee.After reading it,the HPC did suggest one minor edit. The members agreed it would be best to send the letter to Barbara Adkins instead of to Ms Chaussee directly. III. Other Commission Discussion Financial Statement-Moved up to 2016 Budget Discussion IV. Next Meeting Date July 9, 2015 V. Adiournment At 4:36 PM Mr. Bariekman made a motion to adjourn. Motion seconded by Ms. Harrell,motion passed. JNsa �clvc�d % " 15t- � xf-,r, Z Washington Department of Fish &Wildlife HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL PO Box 43234 a: •,;y„ :,R<=. Olympia, WA 98504-3234 FISH_d REDLO (360)902-2200 Issued Date: May 02, 2017 Permit Number: 2017-6-168+01 rXECEI V CD Project End Date: December 31, 2020 FPA/Public Notice Number: N/A JUN 15 2017 Application ID: 8165 Alder street PERMITTEE AUTHORIZED AGENT OR CONTRACTOR North Bay Historical Society ATTENTION: Bonnie Knight William Rehe PO Box 1313 8305 Dogwood Ln NW Allyn, WA 98524 Gig Harbor, WA 98332-6724 Project Name: Sargent Oyster Building Restoration and Relocation Project Project Description: The overall project goal is to relocate and restored an historical building to the Port of Allyn. Once restored, the building will be used to create an aquaculture museum and education center. In addition to being a museum, the restored Sargent's Oyster Building will be used by local aquaculture businesses for sorting and incubating oysters and clams, storing equipment, and transferring equipment, materials, seed, and personnel from the building to barges or work skiffs. PROVISIONS 1. TIMING LIMITATION: To protect fish and shellfish habitats at the job site, work below the ordinary high water line must occur from July 15 and February 15 of any year. Due to the lengthy spawning period for surf smelt in this portion of Puget Sound work will also be allowed from April 1 through December 31 and January 1 through June 30 of any year if a biologist approved by the Department of Fish and Wildlife does not detect surf smelt eggs during a beach survey. Work must begin within seventy-two hours of survey and you must complete the work within two weeks of the survey. The biologist must follow the department-approved intertidal forage fish spawning protocol and use the standard department data sheets when conducting forage fish spawning beach surveys. A list of certified biologists, the approved protocol and data sheets are available on the department's web site http://wdfw.wa.gov/licensing/hpa/technical_assistance.htmi . The biologist must submit the completed, data sheets to the department within seventy-two hours of completing the survey to WDFW by e-mail at HPAapplications@dfw.wa.gov; mail to Post Office Box 43234, Olympia, Washington 98504-3234, or fax to (360) 902- 2946. In addition, the biologist must preserve the winnowed portion of the sediment samples and retain them for a minimum of four weeks. The sediment samples must be provided to WDFW staff upon request. 2. APPROVED PLANS: Work must be accomplished per plans and specifications submitted with the application and approved by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, entitled JARPA, dated July 6, 2016, except as modified by this Hydraulic Project Approval. You must have a copy of these plans available on site during all phases of the project proposal. 3. PRE-AND POST-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION: You, your agent, or contractor must contact the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife by e-mail at HPAappli cation s@dfw.wa.gov; mail to Post Office Box 43234, Olympia, Washington 98504-3234; or fax to (360) 902-2946 at least three business days before starting work, and again within seven days after completing the work. The notification must include the permittee's name, project location, starting date for work or date the work was completed, and the permit number. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife may conduct inspections during and after construction; however, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife will notify you or your agent before conducting the inspection. 4. FISH KILL/WATER QUALITY PROBLEM NOTIFICATION: If a fish kill occurs or fish are observed in distress at the job site, immediately stop all activities causing harm. Immediately notify the Washington Department of Fish and Page 1 of 6 Washington Department of Fish &Wildlife HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL PO Box43234 NJ.",,of Olympia, WA 98504-3234 FISII w WILDLIFE (360)902-2200 Issued Date: May 02, 2017 Permit Number: 2017-6-168+01 Project End Date: December 31, 2020 FPA/Public Notice Number: N/A Application ID: 8165 Wildlife of the problem. If the likely cause of the fish kill or fish distress is related to water quality, also notify the Washington Military Department Emergency Management Division at 1-800-258-5990. Activities related to the fish kill or fish distress must not resume until the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife gives approval. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife may require additional measures to mitigate impacts. 5. Advanced mitigation will be provided by removing the entire concrete boat ramp before the Oyster House is relocated. BOAT RAMP REMOVAL 6. Remove the existing concrete boat ramp, approximately 3300 square feet, from the beach and deposit in an upland area above the limits of extreme high tidal water. 7. Remove an additional 10 foot by 20 foot area of concrete rubble and angular rock from the beach. 8. Keep the use of equipment on the beach to a minimum, confined to a single access point, and limited to a 25-foot work corridor on either side of the ramp. Construction material must not touch the beach outside beach outside this work corridor. 9. Prior to tidal inundation, backfill all trenches, depressions, or holes created during construction waterward of the ordinary high water line. 10. Reshape beach area depressions created during project activities to preproject beach level upon project completion. 11. Prevent contaminants from the project, such as petroleum products, hydraulic fluid, fresh concrete, sediments, sediment-laden water, chemicals, or any other toxic or harmful materials, from entering or leaching into waters of the state. 12. Sand and gravel placed on the beach should be appropriately sized to provide forage fish spawning substrate following the provisions below: a. For surf smelt spawning beaches, material placed must be in compliance with the following specifications: Sieve Size Percent passing by weight 5/8-inch 100 3/8-inch 90-100 1/16-inch 40-50 1/100-inch (.25mm) 0-5 b. Spread the material along the entire length of the bulkhead waterward for a distance of 9 lineal feet to a uniform depth of 6 inches. c. Use clean, round gravel, not crushed or angular rock. d. The mix must not contain fine silt or clay type soils. e. The sand and gravel mix must be placed within 72 hours following bulkhead construction. CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS 13. All reconstruction on the building will be conducted upland to prevent any spill or contamination of waters of the state. Any asbestos, lead paint or other hazardous material will be removed as part of this reconstruction. 14. Do not use wood treated with oil-type preservative (creosote, pentachlorophenol) in any hydraulic project. Wood treated with waterborne preservative chemicals(ACZA, ACQ) may be used if the Western Wood Preservers Institute has approved the waterborne chemical for use in the aquatic environment. The manufacturer must follow the Western Wood Preservers Institute guidelines and the best management practices to minimize the preservative migrating from treated wood into aquatic environments. To minimize leaching, wood treated with a preservative by someone other than a manufacturer must follow the field treating guidelines. These guidelines and best management practices are available at www.wwpinstitute.org. 15. The structure must include functional grating. The grating material's open area must be at least sixty percent. Grating installed perpendicular to the length of the deck must be evenly spaced along the length of the deck and cover Page 2 of 6 Washington Department of Fish &Wildlife HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL PO Box43234 Olympia, WA 98504-3234 RSH.w WILDLIFE (360)902-2200 Issued Date: May 02, 2017 Permit Number: 2017-6-168+01 Project End Date: December 31, 2020 FPA/Public Notice Number: N/A Application ID: 8165 at least fifty percent of the deck area. 16. Remove all trash and unauthorized fill in the project area, including concrete blocks or pieces, bricks, asphalt, metal, treated wood, glass, floating debris, and paper, that is waterward of the ordinary high water line and deposit upland. 17. Remove all debris or deleterious material resulting from construction from the beach area or bed and prevent from entering waters of the state. 18. Do not burn wood, trash, waste, or other deleterious materials waterward of the ordinary high water line. PILE REMOVAL, DRIVING 19. As specified in the approved plans, the pilings must be either concrete or steel. 20. Do not use wood treated with oil-type preservative (creosote, pentachlorophenol) in any hydraulic project. Wood treated with waterborne preservative chemicals (ACZA, ACQ) may be used if approved by the Western Wood Preservers Institute for use in the aquatic environment. Any use of treated wood in the aquatic environment must follow guidelines and best management practices available at www.wwpinstitute.org. 21. Incorporate features, such as steel, plastic or rubber collars, fendering or other systems to prevent or minimize the abrasion of the treated wood by floats, ramps or vessels. Do not use rubber tires for the fender system. 22. Attach rubbing strips made of ultra high molecular weight (UHMW)type plastic, or high density polyethylene (HDPE) type plastic to the replacement fender system. Do not use rubber tires for the fender system. 23. Fit all pilings with devices to prevent perching by fish-eating birds. 24. The use of both a vibratory and/or an impact hammer is authorized for piling installation under this Hydraulic Project Approval, however a vibratory driver is preferred. 25. Use appropriate sound attenuation when driving or proofing steel piling with an impact hammer. a. For driving or proofing steel piling, 10 inches in diameter or less, install a 6 inch thick wood block, plastic or rubber between the piling and the impact hammer during impact pile driving operations or install a pile sleeve or bubble curtain around the piling during impact pile driving operations that distributes air bubbles around 100% of the perimeter of the piling over the full depth of the water column. b. For driving or proofing steel piling greater than 10 inches in diameter, install a bubble curtain around the pile during piling impact driving operations that distributes air bubbles around 100% of the perimeter of the piling over the full depth of the water column. 26. To avoid attracting fish to artificial light at night, limit impact pile driving to daylight hours whenever feasible. 27. Do not use treated wood for the decking of the structure. Use treated wood for structural elements is authorized. Treated wood structural elements subject to abrasion by vessels, floats, or other objects must incorporate design features such as rub strips to minimize abrasion of the wood. LOCATION #1: Site Name: Port of Allyn 18560 E. State Route 3, Allyn, WA 98524 WORK START: July 15, 2017 WORK END: December 31, 2020 WRIA Waterbody: Tributary to: 14 -Kennedy -Goldsborough Wria 14 Marine 1/4 SE ection: Township: Ranae: Latitude: on itud County: Page 3 of 6 Washington Department of Fish&Wildlife HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL PO Box43234 Olympia, WA 98504-3234 KNI.w WILDLIFE (360)902-2200 Issued Date: May 02, 2017 Permit Number: 2017-6-168+01 Project End Date: December 31, 2020 FPA/Public Notice Number: N/A Application ID: 8165 NW 1/4 20 22 N 01 W 47.384603 -122.826980 Mason Location#1 Driving Directions From Shelton, Take WA-3 North for 18.3 miles Your destination is on the right APPLY TO ALL HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVALS This Hydraulic Project Approval pertains only to those requirements of the Washington State Hydraulic Code, specifically Chapter 77.55 RCW. Additional authorization from other public agencies may be necessary for this project. The person(s)to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued is responsible for applying for and obtaining any additional authorization from other public agencies (local, state and/or federal)that may be necessary for this project. This Hydraulic Project Approval shall be available on the job site at all times and all its provisions followed by the person (s)to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued and operator(s)performing the work. This Hydraulic Project Approval does not authorize trespass. The person(s)to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued and operator(s)performing the work may be held liable for any loss or damage to fish life or fish habitat that results from failure to comply with the provisions of this Hydraulic Project Approval. Failure to comply with the provisions of this Hydraulic Project Approval could result in a civil penalty of up to one hundred dollars per day and/or a gross misdemeanor charge, possibly punishable by fine and/or imprisonment. All Hydraulic Project Approvals issued under RCW 77.55.021 are subject to additional restrictions, conditions, or revocation if the Department of Fish and Wildlife determines that changed conditions require such action. The person(s) to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued has the right to appeal those decisions. Procedures for filing appeals are listed below. Page 4 of 6 R Washington Department of Fish &Wildlife HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL PO Box 43234 Olympia, WA 98504-3234 RSH�RWMIT (360)902-2200 Issued Date: May 02, 2017 Permit Number: 2017-6-168+01 Project End Date: December 31, 2020 FPA/Public Notice Number: N/A Application ID: 8165 MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO THIS HPA: You may request approval of minor modifications to the required work timing or to the plans and specifications approved in this HPA unless this is a General HPA. If this is a General HPA you must use the Major Modification process described below. Any approved minor modification will require issuance of a letter documenting the approval. A minor modification to the required work timing means any change to the work start or end dates of the current work season to enable project or work phase completion. Minor modifications will be approved only if spawning or incubating fish are not present within the vicinity of the project. You may request subsequent minor modifications to the required work timing. A minor modification of the plans and specifications means any changes in the materials, characteristics or construction of your project that does not alter the project's impact to fish life or habitat and does not require a change in the provisions of the HPA to mitigate the impacts of the modification. Minor modifications do not require you to pay additional application fees or be issued a new HPA. If you originally applied for your HPA through the online Aquatic Protection Permitting System (APPS), you may request a minor modification through APPS. A link to APPS is at http://wdfw.wa.gov/licensing/hpa/. If you did not use APPS you must submit a written request that clearly indicates you are seeking a minor modification to an existing HPA. Written requests must include the name of the applicant, the name of the authorized agent if one is acting for the applicant, the APP ID number of the HPA, the date issued, the permitting biologist, the requested changes to the HPA, the reason for the requested change, the date of the request, and the requestor's signature. Send by mail to: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, PO Box 43234, Olympia, Washington 98504-3234, or by email to HPAapplications@dfw.wa.gov. Do not include payment with your request. You should allow up to 45 days for the department to process your request. MAJOR MODIFICATIONS TO THIS HPA: You may request approval of major modifications to any aspect of your HPA. Any approved change other than a minor modification to your HPA will require issuance of a new HPA. If you paid an application fee for your original HPA you must pay an additional $150 for the major modification. If you did not pay an application fee for the original HPA, no fee is required for a change to it. If you originally applied for your HPA through the online Aquatic Protection Permitting System (APPS), you may request a major modification through APPS. A link to APPS is at http://wdfw.wa.gov/licensing/hpa/. If you did not use APPS you must submit a written request that clearly indicates you are requesting a major modification to an existing HPA. Written requests must include the name of the applicant, the name of the authorized agent if one is acting for the applicant, the APP ID number of the HPA, the date issued, the permitting biologist, the requested changes to the HPA, the reason for the requested change, the date of the request, payment if the original application was subject to an application fee, and the requestor's signature. Send your written request and payment, if applicable, by mail to: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, PO Box 43234, Olympia, Washington 98504-3234. You may email your request for a major modification to HPAapplications@dfw.wa.gov, but must send a check or money order for payment by surface mail. You should allow up to 45 days for the department to process your request. APPEALS INFORMATION If you wish to appeal the issuance, denial, conditioning, or modification of a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA), Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) recommends that you first contact the department employee who issued or denied the HPA to discuss your concerns. Such a discussion may resolve your concerns without the need for further appeal action. If you proceed with an appeal, you may request an informal or formal appeal. WDFW encourages you to take advantage of the informal appeal process before initiating a formal appeal. The informal appeal process includes a review by department management of the HPA or denial and often resolves issues faster and with less legal complexity than the formal appeal process. If the informal appeal process does not resolve your concerns, you may advance your appeal to the formal process. You may contact the HPA Appeals Coordinator at (360) 902-2534 for more information. Page 5 of 6 Washington Department of Fish &Wildlife HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL PO Box43234 FiRl a 4 IITLDLIFE Olympia, WA 98504-3234 (360)902-2200 Issued Date: May 02, 2017 Permit Number: 2017-6-168+01 Project End Date: December 31, 2020 FPA/Public Notice Number: N/A Application ID: 8165 A. INFORMAL APPEALS: WAC 220-660-460 is the rule describing how to request an informal appeal of WDFW actions taken under Chapter 77.55 RCW. Please refer to that rule for complete informal appeal procedures. The following information summarizes that rule. A person who is aggrieved by the issuance, denial, conditioning, or modification of an HPA may request an informal appeal of that action. You must send your request to WDFW by mail to the HPA Appeals Coordinator, Department of Fish and Wildlife, Habitat Program, 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, Washington 98501-1091; e-mail to HPAapplications@dfw.wa.gov; fax to(360) 902-2946; or hand-delivery to the Natural Resources Building, 1111 Washington St SE, Habitat Program, Fifth floor. WDFW must receive your request within 30 days from the date you receive notice of the decision. If you agree, and you applied for the HPA, resolution of the appeal may be facilitated through an informal conference with the WDFW employee responsible for the decision and a supervisor. If a resolution is not reached through the informal conference, or you are not the person who applied for the HPA, the HPA Appeals Coordinator or designee will conduct an informal hearing and recommend a decision to the Director or designee. If you are not satisfied with the results of the informal appeal, you may file a request for a formal appeal. B. FORMAL APPEALS: WAC 220-660-470 is the rule describing how to request a formal appeal of WDFW actions taken under Chapter 77.55 RCW. Please refer to that rule for complete formal appeal procedures. The following information summarizes that rule. A person who is aggrieved by the issuance, denial, conditioning, or modification of an HPA may request a formal appeal of that action. You must send your request for a formal appeal to the Berk of the Pollution Control Hearings Boards and serve a copy on WDFW within 30 days from the date you receive notice of the decision. You may serve WDFW by mail to the HPA Appeals Coordinator, Department of Fish and Wildlife, Habitat Program, 600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, Washington 98501-1091; e-mail to HPAapplications@dfw.wa.gov;fax to (360)902-2946; or hand-delivery to the Natural Resources Building, 1111 Washington St SE, Habitat Program, Fifth floor. The time period for requesting a formal appeal is suspended during consideration of a timely informal appeal. If there has been an informal appeal, you may request a formal appeal within 30 days from the date you receive the Director's or designee's written decision in response to the informal appeal. C. FAILURE TO APPEAL WITHIN THE REQUIRED TIME PERIODS: If there is no timely request for an appeal, the WDFW action shall be final and unappealable. Habitat Biologist Margaret.Bigelow@dfw.wa.gov i'?''� ,�.juyz�c•ul for Director � J Margie Bigelow 360-427-2179 WDFW Page 6 of 6