HomeMy WebLinkAboutSHR2007-00024 Replacement Floats Hearing - SHR Letters / Memos - 1/25/2008 1
BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR MASON COUNTY
Phil Olbrechts,Hearing Examiner
3
RE: North Forty Transportation
4 LLC FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS
5 OF LAW AND FINAL DECISION
Shoreline Substantial Development
6 Permit Revision
(SHR2007-00024)
7
8 INTRODUCTION AA
9 00
l0 The applicant has requested a revision to the shoreline substagV %lopment
permit decision issued for North Forty Transportation LLC under �09!�00024.
11 The Examiner approves the revision. f�
12 A
EXHIBITS 01**X 2
13 ! -
14 See "Case Index" attached to Staff Report dated January 8, 2008.
15 FINDINGS OF FACT
16 Procedural:
17 1. Applicant. The applicant is North Forty Transportation LLC. The
18 applicant's agent and representative is Brian McGinnis.
19 2. Site Description/Proposal/Adverse Impacts. The Findings of Fact of the
final decision for the shoreline substantial development permit of this case
20 (SHR2007-00024) are adopted and incorporated by this reference as if set forth in
full. The changes proposed by the applicant are identified in Exhibits 2-4 of the staff
21 report for this revision. The revisions only slightly change the configuration of the
22 float/dock facility. The staff report states that the revision does not change the "float
coverage", which the Examiner understands to be the total square feet of the float
23 facility. The revision also does not change the number of boat slips and does not
change the location of the slips in a any manner that could conceivably increase
24 adverse environmental impacts. The primary issue of concern for the original
substantial development permit was an increase in boat traffic the project would
25 generate and the impacts on oyster beds created by this increase in traffic. The
modified design does not appear to have any impact on boat traffic. Given all these
{PA0674181.DOC;2/13009.090000/9000001
Union Marina Revision P. 1 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
factors, the modification will not create any appreciable change in adverse impacts,
1 environmental or otherwise.
3 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
4 Procedural:
5 1. Authority of Hearing Examiner. MCC 15.09.055(H) authorizes the
Examiner to approve revisions to shoreline substantial development permits. No
6 public hearing is required.
7
Substantive:
8
2. Permit Review Criteria: MCC 15.09.055(H)(c) authorizes approval of a
9 proposed revision if the revision "is determined to be within the scope and intent of
10 the original permit". As discussed in the Findings of Fact above, the proposed
revision creates no significant change in the scope or design of the proposal and
11 creates no increase in adverse impacts. There is no change in the number of boat
slips or float coverage and an immaterial change in location of the facility. Given the
12 insignificance of the revision, the Examiner finds the revision to be within the scope
and intent of the original permit as required by MCC 15.09.055(H). Given that the
13 impacts and scope of the project have not change with the revision, the Examiner also
14 adopts by reference Conclusion No. 55 of the original permit and concludes that the
project still complies with MCC 15.09.055(C).
15
DECISION
16
17 The revision, as proposed in Exhibits 3, is approved.
18 iG-
DATED this 3 day of January, 2008
19
70
21 Phil Olbrechts
Mason County Hearing Examiner
72
23
24
25
(PAO674181.DOC;2/13009.090000/900000)
Union Marina Revision p. 2 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1
BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR MASON COUNTY
Phil Olbrechts,Hearing Examiner
3
RE: North Forty Transportation
4 LLC FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS
5 OF LAW AND FINAL DECISION
Shoreline Substantial Development
6 and Special Use Permit
(SHR2007-00024)
7
8
INTRODUCTION
9
10 The applicant has requested a shoreline substantial development permit to replace and
upgrade the dock facilities of the Union Marina. The number of moorage slips and
11 the overall size of the marina will not increase under the application. The project is
approved but any increases in intensity of use created by the project may not trigger
12 any shellfish closures. Staff is directed to fomrulate a plan in consultation with the
applicant and the Washington State Department of Health that will ensure that the
13 proposed improvements will not trigger additional closures.
14
ORAL TESTIMONY
15
Brian McGinnis testified as applicant. He stated that the replacement of the dock had
16 become necessary as a result of a recent storm. He pointed out that the new dock
would be more environmentally compatible than the current dock due to the use of
17 metal pilings instead of creosote pilings and polyutherine floats and Styrofoam as
18 opposed to tires for floats.
19 Matt Mattayoshi spoke on behalf of the Economic Development Council of Mason
County. Mr. Mathews pointed out that the applicant has an excellent record for
20 professionalism, quality work, and environmentally sound construction. Mr.
21 Mathews stated that the project will support the County's tourism industry. He stated
that it is the only marina on the south shore.
77
Donald Gores stated he owns a commercial beach within two feet of the marina. He
23 stated that if the project goes forward that his beach will be closed. Mr. Gores also
stated that he had not been notified of the last permit for the marina for the fuel
24 facility at the marina.
25
Mark Toy testified on behalf of the Washington State Department of Health. He
pointed out that the proposal does not increase the size of the marina, but that it may
{PA0674181.DOC;1/13009.090000/900000)
Union Marina P. 1 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
i
increase the intensity of the use. He stated that right now there is a seasonal closure
1 for the shellfish harvesting of adjoining beaches due to the marina use. He stated that
2 DOH has a threshold of ten boats to determine whether a beach should be closed. He
stated that there are 30 slips on the marina and that on past empirical observations, the
3 marina did not increase beyond ten boats in the winter. He stated that due to the
increased and improved facilities, the marina use will probably exceed the ten-boat
4 threshold during the winter.
5 Toby Kevin stated he has used the marina the last three or four seasons. He asked
6 how far the closure zone extends. Mr. Toy responded that the closure zone would be
within the existing closure zone, which be believes to be 960 feet.
7
Mr. Toy explained that boat traffic adversely impacts shellfish due to sewage
8 discharges from the boats. He explained that petroleum discharges are not a problem
9 because they float and then disperse.
10 Russ Norris owns a shellfish operation. He stated that another marina had been
located in the area and that he had waited 17 years until 1990 for it to shut down so
11 that he would be allowed to harvest shellfish. He stated that the marina owners
should wait their turn (until the shellfish business is over) or pay for the loss of his
12 business. He also stated he received no notice of the last permit application for the
fuel facilities. He stated that a statement in the record that oysters could be moved
1J from the closure zone to another location for harvesting is inaccurate and that the
14 oysters could not be harvested. Mr. Norris also mentioned that 90% of the beaches
throughout the state are closed through the hot months and that it is nothing unique
15 for their area.
16 Mr. Toy confirmed that you cannot move oysters from a prohibited area; they can be
moved only from a restricted area. Mr. Toy also stated that it was unclear if the
17 closure zone would be affected if the shoreline permit for the fuel permit were issued
18 but not for the dock replacement.
19 Wendall Stroud, contractor for the project, stated that the marina will have a state-of-
the-art pump-out system designed to prevent sewage discharge. Since this would be
20 the only sewage system of this caliber on the south shore, the facility would improve
21 and reduce sewage discharge overall. He also pointed out that the dock would have
grating for light penetration, the decking was composite decking to prevent leaching
of treated materials, and the project was a substantial improvement from an
�y environmental standpoint over the existing deck.
23
Pam Kervius is a marina user. She questioned Mr. Toy on the basis for his opinion
24 that the beaches be closed.
25 Cindy Sund manages the marina. She testified that live-aboards are not allowed on
the marina.
{PA0674181.DOC;1/13009.090000/9000001
Union Marina p. 2 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1 Toby Kevin asked if there was sampling for fecal contaminants. Mr. Toy stated that
the major determination for a closure is based on a sanitary survey and that water
monitoring is just a check.
3
Dick Taylor testified on behalf of the Shelton Chamber of Commerce. He spoke in
4 favor of the applicants, pointing out that they have done good work for the
community.
6 Ryan Clayton, staff, testified that notice had been provided to the oyster growers for
the subject application. He stated that the recommendation for approval was based
7 upon the premise that use was not going to increase. If other information had come
in, his recommendation may have been different.
8
Brian McGinnis testified in closing that the size of the dock will not increase. The
9 dock will be reconfigured to handle waves. He stated that the dock is already
10 completely full and that there is a waiting list of twenty people to use it. In the winter
dock usage is 15 to 20 people. He stated that he does not see that the facility will get
11 any busier as a result of the proposal. He also stated that he has acquired approval of
a hydraulic permit from the Washington State Department of Wildlife. He stated he
12 did not know if the improvements would increase usage during the winter.
l 3 Marlen Flakus stated he uses the marina in the summer. In 1989 the County turned
14 down an application for constructing a pump house that would shut down shellfish
harvesting for a quarter mile. He stated that 90% of boaters do not use pump out
15 stations and that it will not be used much. He stated that the pump-out station should
not be installed.
16
Wendall Stroud, contractor for the project, stated that it is well recognized that the
1 pump-out stations are widely used. He stated if the facility is easy to use, as is
18 proposed, it will be used. The Examiner clarified that the pump-out station has
already been approved in the prior shoreline permit.
19
Mr. Toy testified that the addition of a pump-out station creates positive and negative
20 impacts on shellfish beds. He stated that the improved technology reduces spillage,
21 but that it also increases intensity.
22 Mr. Gores pointed out that when applicants attempted to reopen the Paradise Cove
Marina, which would have resulted in the closure of shellfish beaches, the County
23 Commissioners denied the permit application.
24 Kim Schaumberg testified that approval of the marina would improve water quality
25 overall by reducing the discharge of sewage. She also pointed out that the proposed
dock facility is a significant improvement over the current dock from an
environmental standpoint.
(PA0674181.DOC;1/13009.090000/900000)
Union Marina p. 3 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
I EXHIBITS
2 See "Case Index" attached to Staff Report, dated September 4, 2007, as those
3 documents entered into the record. In addition the following Exhibits have been
admitted into the record during the hearing:
4
Exhibit 10: Schaumburg Biological Evaluation dated June 11, 2007.
5 Exhibit 11: 9/13/07 e-mail from Toy to Clayton.
Exhibit 12 : Hydraulic permit approval.
6
7 FINDINGS OF FACT
8 Procedural:
9 1. Applicant. The applicant is North Forty Transportation LLC. The
applicant's agent and representative is Brian McGinnis.
10
11 2. Hearing. The Hearing Examiner conducted a hearing on the subject
application on September 10, 2007.
12
3. Site Description/Proposal. The applicant has requested a shoreline
13 substantial development permit to replace and upgrade the Union Marina. The
number of moorage slips and the overall size of the marina will not increase under the
14 application. The existing creosote pilings will be replaced with steel, and grating will
15 be incorporated into the decks to allow for passage of light.
16 Lot dimensions are approximately 250 feet wide and 120 feet deep, with a curved
shoreline at the northeast comer. Existing site improvements include a 50-foot by
17 120-foot, two-story mixed-use commercial building; a 1,440-square-foot mobile
home; two RV hook-up sites; a drive-through boat wash; a concrete bulkhead
1 stretching along the curved shoreline for approximately 350 feet; and a commercial
19 pier ramp and float that reaches over 100 feet from the Ordinary High Water Mark
(OHWM). Topography is flat. There is no vegetation other than some grassy
20 patches. Parking is currently allowed randomly in front of the bulkhead and the
building.
21
The proposal accompanies a prior shoreline substantial permit approval for a fuel
22 facility (SHR2007-00003). All references in this decision to the "fuel permit" or
23 similar verbiage is a reference to the decision of SHR2007-00003.
24 4. Characteristics of the Area. The area is the Union Rural Activity Center, a
center of small-scale commercial activity located along the south shore of Hood
25 Canal and S.R. 106. Existing surrounding land uses include the Country Store, Union
Bay Cafd, and a County-owned public boat launch. Significantly, a series of shellfish
beds adjoin the marina property.
(PA0674181.DOC;1/13009.090000/900000)
Union Marina p. 4 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1 5. Shoreline Master Program Designation.tion. The Shoreline Master Program
2 environmental designation for the site is Urban Commercial per SMP
17.50.074(1)(d). Hood Canal is a Shoreline of Statewide Significance.
6. Adverse Impacts of Proposed Use. There is no dispute that as a structure
4 the proposed marina replacement will reduce impacts to the shoreline environment.
The construction design and materials will reduce the leaching of treated materials
5 and improve the passage of light through grating. The problem with the project,
6 according to the Washington State Department of Health ("DOH"), is that it will
increase intensity of use. According to Mark Toy, a DOH representative, the boat
7 usage of the marina in the winter is low enough to avoid the closure of adjoining
shellfish beds during that time of the year. DOH has a threshold of ten boats
8 (apparently moored at any one time) for triggering a beach closure. Mr. Toy testified
that the proposed improvements to the marina will probably increase usage beyond
9 ten boats in the winter and thereby expand the closure from just summers to year
10 round. The closure affects a shoreline area of approximate 900 or 960 (it was
difficult to decipher from the testimony) feet. Mr. McGinnis, applicant, testified that
11 the marina is already used by 15 to 20 boats during the winters, which would appear
to already exceed the ten-boat threshold enunciated by Mr. Toy. Mr. Toy indicated
12 that the current intensity of use was gauged by his predecessor from "empirical"
observations of what appears to be informal drive-by sightings or something of
13 similar rigor.
14
To complicate matters, the new fuel facility for the marina has already been
15 approved, and Mr. Toy could not testify whether this alone would already force the
year-round closure of surrounding shellfish beds. In short, the current marina may
16 already require the permanent closure of surrounding beaches under DOH
17 regulations. Even if the marina was currently operating at a level that allowed for
winter shellfish harvesting,the new fuel facility may increase usage enough to trigger
18 a year-round closure.
19 Given the background above, it is very difficult to determine if the proposal to replace
the marina will be responsible for adverse impacts on adjoining shell fish beds. Mr.
20 Toy's conclusion that the replacement of an existing dock facility with one of the
21 same size and number of slips will increase intensity is somewhat speculative. Mr.
Toy is an expert in aquatic resources and he is presumably not an expert on the
22 economics of marina operations. However, Mr. Toy does bring to bear the
experience of his department in such matters and the regulations that are derived from
23 national standards of shellfish protection. The DOH regulations are the best indicator
in the record of adverse impacts to adjoining shellfish beds. In order to avoid
24 violating those standards, this project will have to be conditioned upon operating at
25 levels below the closure threshold. How this is done is left up to the applicant and
what he can work out with DOH. At worst, the applicant would have to limit the
number of boats that use the marina to levels acceptable to DOH.
{PA0674181.DOC;1/13009.090000/900000}
Union Marina p. 5 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1
2 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
3 Procedural:
4 1. Authority of Hearing Examiner. MCC 15.03.050(10) authorizes the
Examiner to review and issue a final decision regarding shoreline substantial
5 development applications.
6 Substantive:
7
2. Permit Review Criteria: MCC 15.09.055(a) requires a substantial
8 development permit for any substantial development within the shoreline jurisdiction.
The proposed project requires a substantial development permit because it is within a
9 shoreline jurisdiction and the cost of the project exceeds $5,000. MCC 15.09.055(f)
10 requires that permit applications for substantial development permits be subject to
review by the Hearing Examiner. MCC 15.09.055(f)(2)(C) provides that the
11 Examiner shall base a decision on a substantial development permit application on the
Shoreline Master Program for Mason County and the policies and procedures of
12 Chapter 90.58 RCW (the Shoreline Management Act). Hood Canal is a Shoreline of
Statewide Significance. The Mason County Shoreline Master Program is codified as
13 Chapter 17.50 to the Mason County Code, and policies towards commercial
14 development and marinas are set forth in Chapter IX of the Mason County
Comprehensive Plan.
15
Mason County Comprehensive Plan Chapter IX-Marinas - Policies:
16
Marina Policy 1: Marinas and boat launching facilities should be located in areas
17 where parking and access to the facility can be accommodated without causing
18 adverse impacts upon adjacent properties or endanger public safety.
19 3. The proposed project will be located at an existing Marina, which has
been previously approved by Mason County for having adequate access and parking.
20 There is conflicting evidence on whether the improvements will increase the use of
the marina and hence vehicular access to it. Since the size of the marina and number
21 of slips will not increase as a result of the proposal and there is no evidence that
parking and access is insufficient, the Examiner will find that the proposal satisfies
yy the proposal above. For future reference, it would help significantly in making this
23 type of determination if staff could lend their own opinion on the adequacy of parking
and access.
24
25 Marina Policy 2: Proposals should be planned and developed where regional and
local evidence of substantial need exists.
(PA0674181.DOC;1/13009.090000/900000)
Union Marina p. 6 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
4. The testimony from members of the business community shows that the
1 project is an asset to the economic development of Mason County and a needed
facility on the south shore of Hood Canal. It also appears that the marina is the only
one of the south shore and hence serves a substantial need for moorage, fueling, and
3 sewage disposal.
4 Marina Policy 3: Shallow water embankments should not be considered for
5 overnight or long-term moorage facilities.
6 5. As shown in Figure 5 of the biological evaluation, the marina is not
located on a shallow water embankment..
7
Marina Policy 4: New construction should be aesthetically compatible with the
8 existing surroundings and not degrade existing views.
9 6. The proposed project will not increase the size of the marina dock facility
10 and the currently existing facilities are aesthetically degraded. The landward portions
of the site is already heavily developed and there is nothing to suggest that the
11 replacement of the aging marina dock facility with a better designed and more
aesthetic structure would be incompatible with the existing surroundings.
12
Marina Policy 5: Marinas and public launch ramps are preferred rather than the
13 development of individual docks and piers for private, non-commercial pleasure
14 craft.
15 7. The existing Marina and the proposed project are public-use facilities.
16 Marina Policy 6: In locating marinas, special plans should be made to protect the
17
fish, shellfish, and other biological resources that may be harmed by construction and
operation of the facility.
18
8. The marina has already been located; however, DOH believes the
19 improvements will increase intensity. The project is conditioned on providing that no
increases in intensity shall trigger additional DOH shellfish bed closures.
20
21 Shoreline Master Program 17.50.060 - Marinas - Use Regulations:
Marina Use Regulation 1: Marinas that provide overnight or long-term moorage
u� shall not be located in areas with commercial aquacultural harvest.
23
9. The marina has already been located since the proposal involves
24 improvements to an existing marina.
25 Marina Use Regulation 2: Marinas shall be compatible with the general aesthetic
quality of the shoreline area where they are located.
{PA067418 LDOC;1/13009.090000/9000001
Union Marina p. 7 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1 10. As noted above, the proposed project includes improvements that will
enhance the general aesthetic quality of the existing Marina and shoreline.
3 Marina Use Regulation 3: Marinas and their accessory facilities shall be located,
designed, constructed and operated to minimize adverse effects on fish, shellfish,
4 wildlife and other biological resources, water quality, and existing geo-hydraulic
5 shoreline processes.
6 11. This is one of the criterion that places the greatest burden upon the
applicant. As determined in the Findings of Fact, the proposal has the potential for
7 operating at a level that unacceptably affects shellfish and water quality under DOH
regulations. The County Commissioners clearly had a serious concern over impacts
8 to shellfish operations, given the emphasis on shellfish operations throughout the
shoreline policies and use regulations on marinas. The measurement of unacceptable
9 impacts in this decision is the level of activity that increases the period of shellfish
10 closure currently in place for the closure zone'. The project will be conditioned on
operating below this threshold.
11
Marina Use Regulation 4: Marinas shall be located, designed, constructed and
12 operated so as to not substantially or unnecessarily interfere with the rights of
13 adjacent property owners, nor interfere with adjacent water uses.
14 12. The proposed project has the potential to limit shellfish harvesting of
adjacent property owners. Whether shellfish harvesting is a right is debatable, but the
15 project will be conditioned to avoid any further limitations on shellfish harvesting.
16 Marina Use Regulation 5: Parking and loading areas shall be located well away
17 from the immediate waters' edge and beaches, unless there is no other practical
location for parking. Perimeters of parking areas shall be landscaped to minimize
18 visual impacts to the shorelines, roadways and adjacent properties subject to
approval by Public Works and/or Department of Transportation. Permit application
19 shall identify the size, general type and location of landscaping. Design of parking
and loading areas shall ensure that surface runoff does not pollute adjacent waters or
20 cause soil or beach erosion. Design shall provide for storm water retention, shall
21 comply with the Mason County Parking Ordinance, and shall be reviewed by Mason
County Department of Public Works for compliance with all applicable County
Ordinances. Creation of parking areas by landfilling beyond OHW mark or in
yy biological wetlands is prohibited.
23
24
' Impacts created by the project that may make it more difficult to avoid closures
25 created by other conditions of the project may also be addressed in the operating plan
referenced in the conditions of approval.
(PA0674181.DOC;1/13009.090000/900000)
Union Marina p. 8 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
13. Parking has been addressed and mitigated in the shoreline application for
1 the fuel facilities as follows:
2 Parking stalls are located approximately 20-30 feet from the face of an
3 existing concrete bulkhead. A vegetative buffer is planned between
parking and the concrete bulkhead. Landscaping will include the use of
4 native shrubs and ground covers. The vegetative buffer that surrounds the
Marina is a Run-off treatment BMP, which will serve to intercept and
5 filter pollutants. No landfilling will occur as a result of the project.
6 Marina Use Regulation 6: Provisions shall be made to facilitate the orderly
7 circulation of vehicles and pedestrians in the vicinity of the marina.
8 14. The Marina access and parking area includes a hammerhead to facilitate
turnaround of larger vehicles and to expedite the departure of traffic from the site.
9 The proposal includes walking paths in appropriate areas to accommodate pedestrian
10 traffic.
11 Marina Use Regulation 7: Provisions shall be made to facilitate the orderly
launching, retrieval and storage of boats.
12
15. There is an existing boat launch on the west side of the facility operated by
13 the County and boat storage in the existing building on the site.
14
Marina Use Regulation 8: New marinas, or expansion of existing saltwater marinas
15 which provide moorage for more than ten boats, shall be required to be equipped
with easily accessible vessel pump-out and shall provide on-shore sewage and waste
16 disposal facilities. Each marina shall predominately display signs stating that
sanitary discharge of wastes is prohibited. Deviation from pump-out requirements on
17 saltwater shall require a Variance.
18
16. This was addressed in the fuel facility permit as follows:
19
A 1,200-gallon below ground sewage holding tank will be added to the
20 site to provide vessel pump-out service. Existing on-shore sewage and
21 waste disposal facilities will be upgraded. It shall be a condition of
approval that signs as required under the above use regulation shall be
22 displaced.
23 Marina Use Regulation 9: In sensitive areas, such as near certified shellfish
spawning areas, the applicant shall be required to demonstrate that the maximum
24 protection of shore features, water quality and existing uses will be provided.
25 17. As previously discussed, the project will be conditioned to operate at a
level below any triggers for additional shellfish closures under DOH regulations.
{PA0674181.DOC;1/13 009.090000/900000}
Union Marina P. 9 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1 Marina Use Regulation 10: Adequate illumination shall be required. Illumination
shall be designed and constructed to minimize off-site light and glare.
3 18. There is nothing in the record that indicates whether the new dock
facilities will include new light fixtures and whether staff has reviewed whether these
4 lights comply with the criterion above. The project will be conditioned on
5 compliance with the criterion above.
6 Marina Use Regulation 11: Physical and/or visual public access opportunities shall
be provided unless the proponent can demonstrate that such access is physically
7 unfeasible.
8 19. The existing Marina is open to and used by the public.
9 Marina Use Regulation 12: Restroom facilities shall be provided for public use.
10
20. Restroom facilities were required to be upgraded and made available for
11 public use as a condition of approval of the fuel facility shoreline permit.
12 Marina Use Regulation 13: Associated uses shall be limited to those found
necessary to marina operation or which provide visual or physical access to the
13 shoreline to substantial numbers of the public. Associated uses shall conform to the
14 regulations for those uses.
15 21. Nothing in the proposal includes an associated use that is not necessary to
marina operation.
16
17 Marina Use Regulation 14: Marina facilities shall project waterward the minimum
distance necessary to provide service to vessels, without creating a hazard to
18 navigation.
19 22• Staff indicate in the staff report that this is not applicable because it is an
existing dock. However, the proposal is to replace the dock and part of that proposal
20 involves reconfiguration of the dock. Consequently, the staff report should have
21 assessed whether the replacement and reconfiguration projects waterward the
minimum length necessary to provide service to vessels. The moorage slips appear to
be at least 25 feet from the shoreline, and it is unclear if this amount of separation
yy from the shoreline is absolutely necessary. However, there is nothing in the record to
23 suggest that the marina will serve as a hazard to navigation. The Examiner finds
compliance with the criterion above.
24
25 Marina Use Regulation 15: Marina and launching facilities shall be located to
minimize the need for initial and maintenance dredging, filling, beach feeding and
other channel maintenance activities.
{PA0674181.DOC;1/13009.090000/900000}
Union Marina P. 10 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1 23. Staff indicate in the staff report that no dredging will be necessary to
2 maintain the project. Given that there is nothing in the record to contradict the staff's
determination on this matter, the Examiner will find compliance with the criterion
3 above.
4 Marina Use Regulation 16: Expansion of existing marinas shall be required to meet
5 the standards set forth for new development.
6 24. The staff report indicates that staff have determined that the marina
complies with applicable development standards. The Examiner finds compliance
7 with the criterion above.
8 Mason County Comprehensive Plan Chapter IX - Commercial Development -
Policies:
9
10 Commercial Development Policy 1: Commercial development on shorelines should
be encouraged to provide physical and/or visual access to the shoreline, and other
11 opportunities for the public to enjoy the shoreline.
12 25. The replacement of the dock facilities as proposed will facilitate and
13 enhance physical and aesthetic access to the shoreline.
14 Commercial Development Policy 2: Multiple use concepts, which include open
space and recreation, should be encouraged in commercial developments.
15
26. The Marina provides recreational opportunities, including boating and
16 kayaking.
17 Commercial Development Policy 3: Commercial development should be
18 aesthetically compatible with the surrounding area. Structures should not
significantly impact views from upland properties, public roadways or from the
19 water.
20 27. Again, as noted above, the proposed project is aesthetically compatible
21 with the surrounding area and should not impact the existing view.
22 Commercial Development Policy 4: The location of commercial developments
along shorelines should ensure the protection of natural areas or systems identified
23 as having geological, ecological, biological, or cultural significance.
24 28. Again, the proposed project constitutes improvements to an existing
25 marina. The impacts to shellfish have already been addressed.
(PA0674181.DOC;1/13009.090000/900000)
Union Marina P. 11 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
Commercial Development Policy 5: Commercial developments should be
1 encouraged to be located inland from the shoreline area unless they are dependent on
2 a shoreline location. Commercial developments should be discouraged over-water or
in marshes, bogs, swamps and jloodplains.
3
29. The marina dock facilities are inherently dependent on being on a
4 shoreline location.
5 Commercial Development Policy 6: New commercial development in shorelines
6 should be encouraged to locate in those areas with existing commercial development
that will minimize sprawl and the inefficient use of shoreline areas.
7
30. The dock facilities will replace existing dock facilities that are
proposed P g
8 connected to a developed marina site.
9 Commercial Development Policy 7: Parking facilities should be placed inland,
10 away from the immediate water's edge and recreational beaches.
11 31. As noted in the fuel facility shoreline permit, the proposed parking is
inland and will have a vegetative buffer planted between it and the existing concrete
12 bulkhead. The adjacent beaches are not"recreational beaches"as the term is intended
13 in the above policy.
14 Commercial Development Policy 8: Commercial development should be designed
and located to minimize impacts of noise and/or light generated by the development
15 upon adjacent properties. Commercial developments, which generate significant
noise impacts, should be discouraged.
16
32. According to staff in the staff report, the proposal is not expected to
1 increase noise at the marina. The project is conditined to mitigate noise impacts.
18
Shoreline Master Program 17.50.060 - Commercial Development - Use
19 Regulations:
20 Commercial Development Use Regulation 1: The County shall utilize the following
21 information in its review of commercial development proposals:
Nature of the activiU:
23 33. The Union Marina is an existing facility. The replacement of the dock
facilities has the potential to adversely impact adjoining shellfish beds by increasing
24 intensity of use,but this impact is addressed by the conditions of approval.
25 Nced for shore ontage;
{PA0674181.DOC;1/13009.090000/900000}
Union Marina p. 12 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
34. The marina's dock facilities are water-dependent uses.
1
2 Special considerations for enhancing, the relationship of the activity to the shoreline;
3 35. The proposed dock facilities are designed for better compatibility with the
environmental resources of the shoreline. Resulting increases in intensity may harm
4 adjoining shellfish beds, but this is addressed in the conditions of approval.
5 Provisions for public visual or physical access to the shoreline;
6 36. As noted above, the existing public view of the shoreline will not be
7 affected by the proposed project. The marina is and will continue to operate as a
public facility.
8
Provisions to ensure that the development will not cause severe adverse
9 environmental impacts;
10
37. As noted previously, the project will be conditioned to avoid significant
11 impacts to adjoining shellfish beds.
12 Provisions to mitigatey significant noise impacts;
13 38. According to staff in the staff report, the proposal will not create any
14 significant noise impacts.
15 Provisions to mitigate light lare impacts.
16 39. The project is conditioned to minimize light impacts.
17 Commercial Development Use Regulation 2: Commercial development may be
18 permitted on the shoreline in the following descending order of priority: water
dependent, water related and water oriented. Non-water related, nonwater dependent
19 and non-water oriented developments in an urban and rural environment may be
permitted by Substantial Development Permit when the parcel of land to be developed
20 is a minimum of 100 feet from OHWM and is located on the upland side of a public
21 roadway, railroad right of way or government controlled property.
22 40. As noted above, a marina is water dependent and, therefore, priority use is
appropriate.
23
Commercial Development Use Regulation 3: Parking and loading areas shall be
24 located well away from the immediate waters' edge and beaches, unless there is no
25 other practical location for parking. Perimeters of parking areas shall be landscaped
to minimize visual impacts to the shorelines, roadways and adjacent properties
subject to approval by Public Works and/or Department of Transportation. Permit
{PA0674181.DOC;1/13009.090000/900000)
Union Marina p. 13 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
application shall identify the size, general type and location of landscaping. Design of
1 parking and loading areas shall ensure that surface runoff does not pollute adjacent
2 waters or cause soil or beach erosion. Design shall provide for storm water retention.
Parking plans shall be reviewed by Mason County Department of Public Works for
3 compliance with all applicable County Ordinances. Creation of parking areas by
landfilling beyond Ordinary High Water Mark or in biological wetlands is prohibited.
4
41. As noted previous and discussed at greater length in the fuel shoreline
5 permit, the parking has been designed to comply with the requirements of the
6 criterion above.
7 Commercial Development Use Regulation 4: Those portions of a commercial
development, which are not water dependent, are prohibited over the water.
8
9 42. The proposal is entirely water dependent.
10 Commercial Development Use Regulation 5: Water supply and waste facilities
shall comply with the strictest established guidelines, standards and regulations.
11
43. The proposal does not include water supply or waste facilities.
12
Commercial Development Use Regulation 6: New commercial developments shall
13 be located adjacent to existing commercial developments whenever possible.
14
44. As noted previously, the proposed project is at the existing Union Marina,
15 which is located in the Rural Activity Center of Union. Surrounding land uses are
commercial and recreation.
16
Commercial Development Use Regulation 7: New or expanded structures shall not
1 extend more than 35 feet in height above average grade level.
18
45. It does not appear that any part of the proposed facilities will be over 35
19 feet in height, but the project will be conditioned on this requirement since the record
does not identify the height of the proposed structures.
20
21 Commercial Development Use Regulation 8: Commercial developments adjacent
to aquaculture operations shall practice strict pollution control procedures.
22
46. As previously discussed several times, the project will be conditioned to
23 operate at a level that does not adversely affect adjacent aquaculture operations.
24 Commercial Development Use Regulation 9: Commercial developments shall be
25 located and designed to minimize noise impacts on adjacent properties.
47. As noted above,the project is not expected to increase noise at the marina.
{PA0674181.DOC;1/13009.090000/900000}
Union Marina p. 14 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
I RCW 90.58.020: This policy (Shoreline Management Act policy) is designed to
2 insure the development of these shorelines (of the state) in a manner which, while
allowing for limited reduction of rights of the public in the navigable waters, will
3 promote and enhance the public interest. This policy contemplates protecting against
adverse effects to the public health, the land and its vegetation and wildlife, and the
4 waters of the state and their aquatic life, while protecting generally public rights of
5 navigation and corollary rights incidental thereto.
6 48. The proposed project should help increase the rights of the public in
surrounding navigable waters by improving the functionality of the marina for public
7 use. Design features and mitigation measures minimize adverse impact on the
environment.
8
9 RCW 90.58.020(1): Recognize and protect the state-wide interest over local interest.
10 49. As noted above, the project will improve the marina for public use, which
will increase opportunity for the general public to enjoy Hood Canal.
11
RCW 90.58.020(2): Preserve the natural character of the shoreline.
12
50. As a replacement project, it is not of a magnitude that will affect the
13 existing natural character of the shoreline.
14
RCW 90.58.020(3): Result in long-term over short-term benefit.
15
51. As noted above, the project will improve the marina for public use and
16 increase its longevity, which will increase opportunity for the public to enjoy Hood
Canal. Better public access and facilities to Hood Canal should, in the long-term,
1 decrease demand for private PRFs resulting in responsible development of the
18 shoreline.
19 RCW 90.58.020(4): Protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline.
20 52. The project will be conditioned upon mitigating impacts to adjoining
21 shellfish beds. As designed and proposed, the project has no other discernable
adverse impacts on the resources and ecology of the shoreline.
22
RCW 90.58.020(5): Increase public access to publicly owned areas of the
23 shorelines.
24 53. As noted above, the project will improve the marina for public use, which
25 should increase opportunity for the public to access and enjoy publicly owned areas
of the shorelines.
{PA0674181.DOC;1/13009.090000/9000001
Union Marina p. 15 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
�l
RCW 90.58.020(6): Increase recreational opportunities for the public in the
1 shoreline.
2 54. As noted above, the project will improve the marina for public use. This
should increase recreational opportunity for the public by improving service and
access to the shorelines.
4
MCC 15.09.055(C): Required Review: The Hearing Examiner shall review
5 proposed development according to the following criteria:
6 1. The development does not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and meets
7 the requirements and intent of the Mason County Code, especially Title 6, 8, and 16.
8 2. Development does not impact the public health, safety and welfare and is
9 in the public interest.
1 3. Development does not lower the level of service of transportation and/or
neighborhood park facilities below the minimum standards established within the
11 Comprehensive Plan.
12 55. Staff conclude in the staff report that the project will not lower the LOS
below required levels for parks and transportation facilities. As conditioned, the
13 project will not impact public health, safety and welfare. Staff concluded in the staff
14 report that the project complies with all applicable County regulations.
15 DECISION
16 1. The project may not increase marina useage to any level of intensity that results in
17 additional2 closures of adjoining shellfish beds. Staff shall work out an operating
plan with the applicant and DOH that meets these objectives. Compliance with this
18 plan shall be considered a condition of approval of this shoreline permit. The
operating plan shall be bounded by the constitutional limitation that only the adverse
19 impacts created by the project can be regulated by this permit -- the plan cannot
regulate pre-existing impacts. It is recognized this condition may make the proposed
20 improvements a "poison pill" for the economic development of the marina facilities.
21 It is, of course, up to the applicant to determine whether it is feasible to continue with
the project given this condition. The Examiner will retain jurisdiction at the pleasure
of the parties to resolve any disputes or provide clarification on the contents of the
operating plan.
23
2. Any new lighting associated with the proposal shall minimize off-site light and
24 glare as determined by staff.
25
2 "Additional" refers to closures in addition to the summer closures that are already
imposed within the surrounding closure zone.
{PA0674181.DOC;1/13009.090000/900000}
Union Marina p. 16 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1 3. No part of the proposed construction shall extend more than 35 feet in height
2 above average grade level.
3 DATED this day of May, 2012
4
5
Phil Olbrechts
6 Mason County Hearing Examiner
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
i
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
{PA0674181.DOC;1/13009.090000/900000)
Union Marina p. 17 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
SHR2007-00024 - 1 - Exhibit 1
Mason County
Department of Planning
Building I * 411 N. 5th Street * P.O. Box 279
Shelton,Washington 98584
September 4, 2007
TO: Mason County Hearing Examiner
FROM: Planning Staff—Ryan Crater; 360.427.9670 Ext 577; ryanc@co.mason.wa.us
RE: Mason County Shoreline Substantial Development Permit(SHR2007-00024)
STAFF REPORT
I. Introduction. This report evaluates an application for a Shoreline Substantial
Development permit(SDP) at the existing Union Marina located on the south shore of
Hood Canal in Union, WA. The float replacement project is part two of a two-part project
aimed at upgrading an existing marina(SHR2007-00003). The first portion of the project
was for adding a fueling station and a pump-out service for marine craft in the southern
portion of Hood Canal. The second half of the project is to upgrade/replace the existing
marina's floats to provide a safer environment for the public. Staff is recommending
approval.
If. Applicants: North Forty Transportation LLC
III. Agent: Brian McGinnis
IV. Date of Complete Application: July 5, 2007
V. Site address and Project Location: South Shore of Hood Canal
5101 E. SR 106; Union, WA 98592. Parcel#32232-50-01001
VI. Evaluations.
A. Characteristics of the area. The area is in the Union Rural Activity Center, a center
of small-scale commercial activity located along the south shore of Hood Canal and
S.R. 106. Existing surrounding land uses include the Country Store, Union Bay Cafe
and a County owned public boat launch.
B. Characteristic of the site. Lot dimensions are approximately 250' wide and 120' deep,
with a curved shoreline at the north east corner. Existing site improvements include a
50' by 120' two-story mixed-use commercial building,two RV hook-up sites, a drive
through boat wash, concrete bulkhead stretching along the curved shoreline for
approximately 350 feet, and a commercial pier ramp and float that reaches over 100'
from the Ordinary High Water Mark(OHWM). Topography is flat. There is no
SHR2007-00024 -2- Exhibit 1
vegetation other than some grassy patches. Parking is currently allowed randomly in
front of the bulkhead and building.
C. Comprehensive Plan Desi ng ation. The Mason County Comprehensive Plan
designation for the site is Rural Activity Center.
D. Shoreline Master Program Designation.tion. The Shoreline Master Program
environmental designation for the site is Urban Commercial per SMP 17.50.074 1.d.
Hood Canal is a Shoreline of Statewide Significance.
E. Zoning. The parcel is zoned Rural Commercial 3 (RC-3).
VII. SEPA Compliance and other public notice requirements. The proposal was reviewed
under SEPA, SEP2007-00081. A DNS was issued on 8/10/2007 (Exhibit 2). A Notice of
Shoreline Management Permit,Notice of Public Hearing, SHR2007-00024 (Exhibit 3)
was issued on 7/12/07,mailed on 7/12/07,posted on 7/12/2007 (Exhibit 4)and published
on 7/12/2007 & 7/19/2007 (Exhibit 5). Comments were received from the Washington
State Department of Ecology(Exhibit 6) and from Don Gores and William McKesson
(Exhibit 7).
VIII. Other Permits/Reports. Mason County Building Permit.
IX. Analysis. A Comprehensive Plan Review: Type III review for permit applications require
that the Hearing Examiner evaluate the proposal for consistency with the County's
Development Code, adopted plans and regulations. The Hearing Examiner shall review
the proposal 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. The development does not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and
meets all the requirements and intent of the Mason County Code.
2) The development does not impact the public health, safety and welfare and is
in the public interest. The development proposal will not impact the public
health, safety or welfare and is in the public interest. Existing Marina
infrastructure will be replaced with environmentally friendly materials.
3) The development does not lower the level of service of transportation and/or
neighborhood park facilities below the minimum standards established within
the Comprehensive Plan. The development proposal will not lower the LOS
for transportation and increases the LOS for park/recreational facilities.
This proposal requires a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit per the Mason
County Development Code section 15.09.055 A.I. This SDP proposal is reviewed under
the Mason County Comprehensive Plan, Chapter IX. Shoreline Management Program,
including Shorelines of Statewide Significance and the Mason County Code, Shoreline
Master Program(SMP) Chapters 17.50.060 Use Regulations. Marinas and Commercial
Development.
SHR2007-00024 -3 - Exhibit 1
Mason County Comprehensive Plan Chapter IX
SHORELINE MANANGEMENT PROGRAM
IX-1 THE SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
Shorelines of Statewide Significance.
The Shorelines Management Act of 1971 has designated the following shoreline areas of
Mason County as shorelines of statewide significance:
1 Hood Canal
2 Lake Cushman
3 Skokomish River
The Act further states, concerning shorelines of statewide significance: "The
Legislature declares that the interest of all of the people shall be paramount in the
management of shorelines of statewide significance."The department, in adopting
guidelines for shorelines of statewide significance, shall give preference to uses in the
following order of preference which:
1 Recognize and protect the statewide interest over local interest;
2 Preserve the natural character of the shoreline;
3 Result in long term over short-term benefit;
4 Protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline;
5 Increase public access to publicly owned areas of the shoreline;
6 Increase recreational opportunities for the public in the shoreline;
7 Provide for any other element as defined in RCW 90.58.100 deemed appropriate or
necessary.
The proposals meets the above criteria, especially number 6, and should therefore
receive a preference as an existing use.
In the implementation of this policy the public's opportunity to enjoy the physical and
aesthetic qualities of the natural shorelines of the state be preserved to the greatest extent
possible consistent with the overall best interest of the state and the people generally. To
this end uses shall be preferred which are consistent with control of pollution and
prevention of damage to the natural environment or are unique to or dependent upon use
of the state's shoreline. Alterations of the natural condition of the shorelines of the state
in those limited instances when authorized, shall be given priority for...commercial
developments which are particularly dependent on their location on or use of the
shorelines of the state...
The proposal to replace the floats will enhance public access to state shorelines. The
Union Marina is directly dependent upon the use of the state's shoreline and shall be
given priority as a use.
SHR2007-00024 -4- Exhibit 1
IX-2 SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM POLICIES
Marinas
Definition
A commercial moorage with or without dry storage facility for over ten pleasure or
commercial craft excluding canoes,kayaks and rowboats. Goods or services related to
boating may be sold commercially. Uses associated with marinas shall conform to the
regulations for these uses.
Policies
1. Marinas and boat launching facilities should be located in areas where parking and access
to the facility can be accommodated without causing adverse impacts upon adjacent
properties or endanger public safety.
The proposed project will be located at an existing Marina, which will provide parking
and access without causing adverse impacts or endanger public safety.
2. Proposals should be planned and developed where regional and local evidence of
substantial need exists.
Existing Marina
3. Shallow water embankments should not be considered for overnight or long-term
moorage facilities.
Not applicable.
4. New construction should be aesthetically compatible with the existing surroundings and
not degrade existing views.
Proposed project will not degrade existing views. Upgrades associated with the proposal
will replace existing dock floats that are esthetically degraded and in need of repair. The
dock float replacements/reconfiguring will improve public access, safety, and public
viewing opportunities.
5. Marinas and public boat ramps are preferred rather than the development of individual
docks and piers for private,non-commercial pleasure craft.
The existing Marina and the proposed project are public-use facilities.
6. In locating marinas, special plans should be made to protect the fish, shellfish, and other
biological resources that may be harmed by construction and operation of the facility.
Existing Marina, not applicable.
SHR2007-00024 -5- Exhibit 1
7. Special attention should be given to the design and development of operational
procedures for fuel handling and storage in order to minimize accidental spillage and
provide satisfactory means for handling those spills that do occur.
Addressed in SHR2007-00003.
Commercial Development
Definition
Uses and facilities that are involved in wholesale or retail trade or business activities.
Water dependent commercial uses are those commercial activities that cannot exist in
other than a waterfront location and are dependent on the water by reason of the intrinsic
nature of its operation.
Policies
1. Commercial development on shorelines should be encouraged to provide physical and/or
visual access to the shoreline, and other opportunities for the public to enjoy the
shoreline.
The addition of new floats and the reconfiguration of said floats would afford the general
public enhanced recreational opportunities and access to Hood Canal.
2. Multiple use concepts, which include open space and recreation, should be encouraged in
commercial developments.
The Marina provides recreational opportunities, including boating and kayaking.
3. Commercial development should be aesthetically compatible with the surrounding area.
Structures should not significantly impact views from upland properties,public roadways
or from the water.
The proposed project will not impact the existing view.
4. The location of commercial developments along shorelines should ensure the protection
of natural areas or systems identified as having geological, ecological, biological, or
cultural significance.
The proposed project will be located at an existing commercial development known as
the Union Marina.
5. Commercial developments should be encouraged to be located inland from the shoreline
area unless they are dependent on a shoreline location. Commercial developments should
be discouraged over-water or in marshes,bogs, swamps and floodplains.
The Marina is dependent on a shoreline location.
SHR2007-00024 -6- Exhibit 1
6. New commercial development in shorelines should be encouraged to locate in those areas
with existing commercial development that will minimize sprawl and the inefficient use
of shoreline areas.
The proposed project is at a Marina, which is in the Rural Activity Center of Union.
7. Parking facilities should be placed inland, away from the immediate water's edge and
recreational beaches.
Parking is located in an existing parking lot landward of the proposed project. The
adjacent beaches are not utilized for recreational use.
8. Commercial development should be designed and located to minimize impacts of noise
and/or light generated by the development upon adjacent properties. Commercial
developments,which generate significant noise impacts, should be discouraged.
The proposed project will not increase the current level of light and noise associated with
the already established marina.
Title 17.50 Zoning—Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations.
17.50.060 Use Regulations.
Marinas
1. Marinas that provide overnight or long-term moorage shall not be located in areas with
commercial aquacultural harvest.
Existing Marina, not applicable.
2. Marinas shall be compatible with the general aesthetic quality of the shoreline area where
they are located.
Proposed project will enhance the general aesthetic quality of the existing Marina and
shoreline.
3. Marinas and their accessory facilities shall be located, designed, constructed, and
operated to minimize adverse effects on fish, shellfish,wildlife and other biological
resources, water quality, and existing geo-hydraulic shoreline processes.
As proposed.
4. Marinas shall be located, designed, constructed, and operated so as to not substantially or
unnecessarily interfere with the rights of adjacent property owners,nor interfere with
adjacent water uses.
SHR2007-00024 -7- Exhibit 1
Existing Marina.
I believe it is important to consider that the adjacent property owners are not the only
shellfish growers in the South Hood Canal area likely to be effected by the project.
The Mason County Shoreline Management Plan ("MCSMP') also states that Marinas
shall be compatible with the general aesthetic quality of the shoreline area where they
are located. The MCSMP environmental designation for the site is Urban Commercial
and the parcel is zoned Rural Commercial 3. "ilea public marina and fueling facility
is a permitted and compatible use for the site, it is questionable whether or not
aquaculture is appropriate. Hood Canal has approximately 1,277,760 feet of shoreline,
the majority of which is suitable for commercial shellfish aquaculture. There are very
few marinas on Hood Canal. The MCSMP states that Marinas and public launch ramps
are preferred rather than the development of individual docks and piers for private, non-
commercial pleasure craft. Marinas concentrate boat usage into a small area where fuel
spillage can be dealt with more effectively (and with proper equipment). The MCSMP
further states that Hood Canal is a designated Shoreline of Statewide Significance. As
per 17.50.071, "...To this end uses shall be preferred which are consistent with control of
pollution and prevention of damage to the natural environment or are unique to or
dependent upon use of the state's shoreline. Alterations of the natural condition of the
shorelines of the state in those limited instances when authorized, shall be given priority
for single family residences,ports, shoreline recreational uses including but not limited
to parks, marinas,piers, and other improvements facilitating public access to shorelines
of the state, industrial and commercial developments which are particularly dependent
on their location on or use of the shoreline of the state and other development that will
provide an opportunity for substantial numbers of people to enjoy the shorelines of the
state. "
The site was recently closed for oyster harvest by the Washington State Department of
Health ("WSDH') after the FDA advised people not to eat oysters harvested on the
southern tip of Hood Canal. The closure was caused by the vibrio parahaemolyticus
bacteria, which is not associated with pollution (WSDH 2007), but rather, warmer water
temperatures. Since the Hood Canal Marina plans to offer fuel or pump out services
during late spring and summer months, when the weather is warmer and boat usage is
higher, the project will not effect adjacent property owners'harvesting of shellfish
(which is already compromised by the above-mentioned environmental conditions
unrelated to the marina),providing the WSDH does not implement a permanent closure.
If that is the case, it is a common practice for shellfish growers to move oysters to a
cleaner site for several months prior to harvesting(i.e. depuration).
5. Parking and loading areas shall be located well away from the immediate waters' edge
and beaches,unless there is no other practical location for parking. Perimeters of parking
areas shall be landscaped to minimize visual impacts to the shorelines,roadways and
adjacent properties subject to approval by Public Works and/or Department of
Transportation. Permit application shall identify the size, general type and location of
landscaping. Design of parking and loading areas shall ensure that surface runoff does not
pollute adjacent waters or cause soil or beach erosion. Design shall provide for storm
SHR2007-00024 -8- Exhibit I
water retention, shall comply with the Mason County Parking Ordinance, and shall be
reviewed by Mason County Department of Public Works for compliance with all
applicable County Ordinances. Creation of parking areas by landfilling beyond OHW
mark or in biological wetlands is prohibited.
Existing parking lot. Not applicable.
6. Provisions shall be made to facilitate the orderly circulation of vehicles and pedestrians in
the vicinity of the marina.
The Marina access and parking area provides for sufficient provisions necessary to
accommodate pedestrians and vehicles associated with its use.
7. Provisions shall be made to facilitate the orderly launching, retrieval and storage of boats.
There is an existing boat launch on the West Side of the facility, operated by the County
and boat storage in the existing building on the site.
8. New marinas, or expansion of existing saltwater marinas which provide moorage for
more than ten boats, shall be required to be equipped with easily accessible vessel pump-
out and shall provide on-shore sewage and waste disposal facilities. Each marina shall
predominately display signs stating that sanitary discharge of wastes is prohibited.
Deviation from pump-out requirements on saltwater shall require a Variance.
Not applicable. Existing structure.
9. In sensitive areas, such as near certified shellfish spawning areas,the applicant shall be
required to demonstrate that the maximum protection of shore features, water quality and
existing uses will be provided.
The replacement of the existing dock floats (which are constructed of known carcinogenic
materials) with environmentally friendly materials such as steel and plastics is expected
to improve water quality at the site. The reconfiguration and grating of the floats should
also allow for expansion of eel grass beds to the west. The shoreline shall be planted
with native and non-native vegetation, including small trees landward of the bulkhead
that are expected to significantly improve the existing degraded shoreline habitat at the
site by providing shade, detrital input, and insects for juvenile salmonids. The existing
septic system shall be substantially improved.
While boat use at the upgraded Marina is expected to increase, it is probable that the
majority of those boats will be from the South Hood Canal area. As previously
discussed, a modern fueling and effluent pump out facility is expected to improve water
quality in the area. By example, according to the USEPA, Cedar Island Marina, Inc., a
recreational boat full-service marina in Connecticut operates a commercially viable bay
scallop aquaculture under its marine docks. Cedar Island Marina, Inc. made similar
improvements to those proposed at the Hood Canal Marina, such as pump out services,
SHR2007-00024 -9- Exhibit 1
an oil absorption boom with special pads to absorb petroleum hydrocarbons, and
landscaping to alleviate runoff pollution.
In response to the issue of increased use, the increased use will likely not be because of
monthly moorage. The amount of moorage space with the new dock floats is going from
532 feet to 530 feet. Therefore, the amount of moorage space will not be expanded with
the new floats. The marina already has a long wait list for moorage on the dock
If WSDOH decides to reduce the shellfish harvesting during certain times of the year
because of increased dock usage, the increased boat usage will be due to fueling and the
boat um -out acili , not necessary because o the replacement of dock floats.
P P .� h' Y .� P
10. Adequate illumination shall be required. Illumination shall be designed and constructed
to minimize off-site light and glare.
Addressed in SHR2007-00003.
11. Physical and/or visual public access opportunities shall be provided unless the proponent
can demonstrate that such access is physically unfeasible.
As proposed. The existing Marina is open to and used by the public.
12. Rest room facilities shall be provided for public use.
Existing restroom facilities will be updated and available for public use.
13. Associated uses shall be limited to those found necessary to marina operation or which
provide visual or physical access to the shoreline to substantial numbers of the public.
Associated uses shall conform to the regulations for those uses.
Existing Marina. Fuel service and pump-out services are permitted.
14. Marina facilities shall project waterward the minimum distance necessary to provide
service to vessels,without creating a hazard to navigation.
Not applicable, existing dock.
15. Marina and launching facilities shall be located to minimize the need for initial and
maintenance dredging, filling,beach feeding and other channel maintenance activities.
None needed.
16. Expansion of existing marinas shall be required to meet the standards set forth for new
development.
As proposed.
SHR2007-00024 - 10- Exhibit 1
Commercial Development
1. The County shall utilize the following information in its review of commercial
development proposals:
• nature of the activity;
The Union Marina is an existing facility. The installation and reconfiguring of the
proposed new floats will have a beneficial impact on the water quality of the Hood Canal
by decreasing pollution from boaters fueling with gas cans and illegally dumping
effluents.
• need for shore frontage;
A marina is a water-dependant use.
• special considerations for enhancing the relationship of the activity to the shoreline;
The proposed float and pier replacement project will have a beneficial impact on the
water quality of the Hood Canal, as well as the immediate shoreline.
• provisions for public visual or physical access to the shoreline;
The existing public view of the shoreline will not be affected by the proposed project. The
Marina is and will continue to operate as a public facility.
• provisions to ensure that the development will not cause severe adverse environmental
impacts;
Installation of new floats no anticipated environmental damage.
• provisions to mitigate any significant noise impacts;
The proposed project will not create any significant noise impacts.
• provisions to mitigate light or glare impacts.
The proposed project is not expected to cause any noticeable change in light or glare at
the site.
2. Commercial development may be permitted on the shoreline in the following descending
order of priority: water dependent, water related and water oriented.Non-water related,
non-water dependent and non-water oriented developments in an urban and rural
environment may be permitted by Substantial Development Permit when:
1
SHR2007-00024 - 11 - Exhibit 1
The parcel of land to be developed is a minimum of 100 feet from OHWM and is
P P
located on the upland side of a public roadway, railroad right of way or government
controlled property.
Pre-existing structure.
3. Parking and loading areas shall be located well away from the immediate waters'edge
and beaches,unless there is no other practical location for parking. Perimeters of parking
areas shall be landscaped to minimize visual impacts to the shorelines, roadways and
adjacent properties subject to approval by Public Works and/or Department of
Transportation. Permit application shall identify the size, general type and location of
landscaping. Design of parking and loading areas shall ensure that surface runoff does not
pollute adjacent waters or cause soil or beach erosion. Design shall provide for storm
water retention. Parking plans shall be reviewed by Mason County Department of Public
Works for compliance with all applicable County Ordinances. Creation of parking areas
by landfilling beyond Ordinary High Water Mark or in biological wetlands is prohibited.
Existing parking lot.
Addressed in SHR2007-00003.
4. Those portions of a commercial development, which are not water dependent, are
prohibited over the water.
The proposed float replacements are water dependent activities associated with an
existing marina.
5. Water supply and waste facilities shall comply with the strictest established guidelines,
standards and regulations.
Not applicable.
6. New commercial developments shall be located adjacent to existing commercial
developments whenever possible.
Proposed project will be located at the existing Union Marina, which is located in the
Rural Activity Center of Union. Surrounding land-uses are commercial and recreation.
7. New or expanded structures shall not extend more than 35 feet in height above average
grade level.
No applicable.
8. Commercial developments adjacent to aquaculture operations shall practice strict
pollution control procedures.
SHR2007-00024 - 12- Exhibit 1
Replacement of existing structure. New replacement products are environmental friendly
and will not effect adjacent uses.
9. Commercial developments shall be located and designed to minimize noise impacts on
adjacent properties.
Existing Marina. No expected increase in noise.
X. Public Comments.
Mr. Don Gores and William McKesson are the owners of parcel number 322325047030
located within feet of the existing marina. They have both expressed concerns that the
existing marina will increase its level of use changing the current shellfish harvest area
use from a seasonal closure to a permanent closure area. A permanent closure would
deprive both parties use of their tidelands and would have a financial impact on Russel of
Russ Shellfish who leases the tidelands.
XI. Conclusions. The project as proposed meets all the minimum requirements of the SMP
policies and use regulations. Staff recommends approving this project as proposed.
If the Hearing Examiner approves this permit, staff recommends the following
conditions:
1. Conditions and Comments from Ecology as stated in exhibit 6.
XI. Choices of Action.
1. Approve.
2. Approve with conditions.
3. Deny(reapplication or resubmittal is permitted).
4. Deny with prejudice(reapplication or resubmittal is not allowed for one year).
5. Remand for further proceedings and/or evidentiary hearing in accordance with
Section 15.09.090 of Title 15.
oN.STA MASON COUNTY
o P� A C N DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
o r
s N = Planning Division
°Y 0 P O Box 279, Shelton, WA 98584
(360)427-9670
1864
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
(WAC 197-11-340)
SEP2007-00081
Description of Proposal p p Reconfigure and replace existing floats. New proposed float
coverage is 4,862 sq. ft. A fuel dock will be installed at the end of
the main float walkway.
Proponent: NORTH FORTY TRANSPORTATION
Location of Proposal: 5101 E STATE ROUTE 106 UNION
Parcel Number: 322325001001
Legal Description: UNION HOOD CANAL LAND & IMP CO BILK: 1 LOT: 1-4 &
Directions to Site: MWN 9)WV571Vff.&�tA Route 106.
Lead Agency: Mason County
The Lead Agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant
adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required
under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed
Environmental Checklist and other information on file with the Lead Agency. This information is
available to the public upon request.
Please contact Ryan Crater at ext. 577 with any questions. This DNS is issued under WAC
197-11-340(2). The Lead Agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date shown
below, when the determination is final. Comments must be submitted to Dept. of Community
Development, P.O. Box 279, Shelton WA 98584 by 8/23/2007. Appeal of this determination
must be filed within a 14-day period following this final determination date, per Mason County
Code Chapter 15.11 Appeals.
�L��Id7
Authorized Local Government Official Date
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST �j 1
MASON CO. ENVIROMENTAL CHECKLIST
A. BACKGROUND
1 . Name of proposed project, if applicable: Union Marina Dock
Replacement.
2. Name of applicant: North Forty Transportation LLC dba Hood Canal
Marina
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 22526 SE
641h Place Suite 210, Issaquah WA 98027. 425.369.9290. Authorized
Agent: Wendell Stroud—Marine Floats Corporation, 1208 East `D'
Street, Tacoma WA 98421. 253.383.2740.
4. Date checklist prepared: 5-29-07.
5. Agency requesting checklist: Mason County.
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): No
phasing involved. Project will be completed within seven days, upon
issuance of all required permits.
7. Do you have any plans for future expansion, or further activity related to or
connected with this proposal: if yes, explain. No.
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been
prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal.
A Biological Evaluation has been prepared for the ACOE permit.
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. Several permits have already been
issued (for the removal of a derelict barge and the addition of a fuel
tank at the site).
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your
proposal, if known. A Mason County Shoreline Substantial permit and
building permit, a WDFW HPA, and an Army Corp of Engineer
Nationwide permit.
11.Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed
uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions
later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your
proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead
agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on
project description.) The existing floating docks at the Union Marina
shall be reconfigured and replaced. The existing pier and ramp will
remain. The existing float coverage is 4,864 sq. ft. and the new
proposed float coverage is 4,862 sq. ft. A fuel dock shall be installed
at the end of the main float walkway. The purpose of the proposed
reconfiguration is to position the floats to be waterward of 0.0' MLLW
to prevent grounding. The existing pilings shall also be replaced
with 21 steel pilings.
12. What is the location of the proposal? Give sufficient information for a
person to understand the precise location of your proposed project
including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if
known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range
or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity
map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should
submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate
maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to
this checklist.
5101 E SR 106, Union, Mason County, 98592, Quarter section NW of
NW, Section 32, Township 22N, Range 03W. N47.213, W123.051.
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 3
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS:
1. EARTH:
a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep
slopes, mountainous, other.
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approx. percent slope)? Approx.
90 percent at the toe of the beach.
C. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand,
gravel, peat, muck)? If you know classification of agricultural soils, specify
them and note any prime farmland. Sand, gravel, and mud.
d. Are there surface indications of history of unstable soils in the immediate
vicinity: If so, describe. No.
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or
grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. No filling or grading will
occur.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use: If so,
generally describe. No.
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces
after project constructions (for example, asphalt or buildings)? The
project will not impact impervious surfaces. The docks shall be
grated.
i
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 4
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the
earth, if any: WDOE's Best Management Practices shall be followed
throughout the project. HPA provisions and WAC Marina and
shoreline construction provisions shall also be strictly adhered to.
2. AIR:
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e.
duct, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and
when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give
approximate quantities, if known. Machinery exhaust is not expected
to be excessive.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your
proposal? If so, generally describe.
No.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air,
if any:
None. Emissions are expected to be minimal.
3. WATER:
a. Surface:
1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of
the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater,
lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names.
If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into.
The Hood Canal.
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200
feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach
available plans.
Yes. Work shall be done from a barge.
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 5
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be
placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate
the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill
material.
None.
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions?
Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if
known.
No.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note
location on the site plan. Yes.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to
surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated
volume of discharge. No.
b. Ground:
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground
water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities,
if known. No.
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from
septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: domestic sewage,
industrial, containing the following chemicals...,agricultural, etc.).
Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems,
the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of
animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None.
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
6
C. Water runoff (including storm water):
1) Describe the source of runoff (including stormwater) and method of
collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Here
will this water flow? Will this flow into other waters? If so, describe.
None.
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters: if so,
generally describe.
No.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water
impacts, if any:
None. The project will have no impact on surface, ground, or
stormwater.
4. PLANTS:
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
x_shrubs
x_grass
pasture
crop or grain
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, 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?
No vegetation shall be disturbed.
C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
Puget Sound Chinook salmon, bull trout, Hood Canal summer-run
chum salmon, Puget Sound steelhead, the eagle, the killer whale, the
humpback whale, the Steller sea lion, the leatherback turtle, and the
marbled murrelet are all listed on the Endangered Species List and
may be found in the area.
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 7
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to
preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any:
A buffer of native plants shall be planted along the shoreline
(landward of the existing bulkhead), as part of the fuel dock addition
project.
5. ANIMALS
a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the
site or are known to be on or near the site:
Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other
Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other
Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the
site. Puget Sound Chinook salmon, bull trout, Hood Canal summer-
run chum salmon, the eagle, the killer whale, the humpback whale,
the Steller sea lion, the leatherback turtle, and the marbled murrelet
are all listed on the Endangered Species List and may be found in
the area.
C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: WDOE's
Best Management Practices shall be followed throughout the project.
HPA provisions and WAC Marina and shoreline construction
provisions shall also be strictly adhered to.
6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES:
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be
used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it
will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity shall be used to
operate the fuel dispensing and waste pumping facilities at the site.
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
a
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent
properties: If so, generally describe. 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:
Work to be completed as quickly as possible.
7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH:
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic
chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could
occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Best management
practices will be observed to insure minimal impact.
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
An on site accident could conceivably require medical
assistance.
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health
hazards, if any:
Best management practices will be observed to insure minimal
impact.
b. Noise:
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project
(for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? None.
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated
with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example.
traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise
would come from the site. Work shall take place during daylight
working hours. Noise will not be more excessive than the
noise from nearby SR106.
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 9
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any"
Noise will not be more excessive than the noise from nearby
SR106.
8) LAND AND SHORELINE USE:
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site is
an operating marina. Adjacent properties are also commercial.
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No.
C. Describe any structures on the site. A marina with a ramp and a
floating dock, a 6,000 sq. ft. building, and a concrete bulkhead are
located on the site.
Will an structures be demolished? If so what? Yes, the existing
d. y ,
floating docks shall be removed from the site.
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Rural Commercial-
3.
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
Unknown. h4to.,V- (fr ..
g. If applicable, what is the current Shoreline Master Program designation of
the site? Urban commercial.
classified as an "Environmental)
h. Has any part of the site been class y sensitive"
area? If so, specify. Not that I know of.
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 10
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed
project? Approximately 6.
j. Approximately how may people would the completed project displace?
None.
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:
None.
i. Proposed measure to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and
projected land uses and plans, if any: The project will improve the
existing marina, which should benefit local businesses and
residents.
9. HOUSING:
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate
whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None.
b. Approximately how many units, if any would be eliminated? Indicate
whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None.
10. AESTHETICS:
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including
antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed?
The new pilings will be approximately the same height as the
existing.
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 11
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
None.
C. Proposed measure to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
None.
11. LIGHT AND GLARE
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day
would it mainly occur? None.
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere
with views? No.
C. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal:
None.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
None.
12. RECREATION
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the
immediate vicinity? The property is an existing public marina, so there
is boating, fishing, etc. in the area.
12
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so,
describe. No, it would enhance recreational use at the site.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including
recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
None.
13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION:
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state,
or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so,
generally describe. None that I know of.
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological,
scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
None that I know of.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
None.
14. TRANSPORTATION
a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site and describe
proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
SR 106. Access to remain unchanged.
b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate
distance to the existing street system? Show on site plans, if any.
Unknown. The site is located on SR 106.
C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many
would the project eliminate? Unknown.
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 13
d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to
existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally
describe (indicate whether public or private).
No.
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air
transportation? If so, generally describe.
Yes. There is an operating marina on the site.
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed
project. If known, indicated when peak volumes would occur.
None.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
The access and parking is be reconfigured to meet current
regulations.
15. PUBLIC SERVICES
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public service (for
example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If
so, generally describe:
No.
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services,
if any: None.
14
MASON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
16. UTILITIES
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas,
water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, 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. None.
Signature:
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I
understand thatagency the lead a is relying on them to make its decision.
Y
Signature: i
Date submitted: Z o
M
i 1 �
' I I
1 i R]
' "� 1 e tgi �apgpgix ;j, Mason County Parks Boat Ramp j Q a g da -
:� Alllit
1
F I 19 m x17
jaii$ ii 5s s S it8
y
3
all
� i p
i g
e �
i
• e
E
: i gip' � •' i'�2 .'% ./'
$...g...... R //
g r 17
ra I
Al
lie
l 5
r /
o
-------- -------.............-......---1 ,
lit
g m ai
aD
F
i
3
s t e r & W i l l i a m s
Modifications to ............................................
A 1.0 Hood Canal Marina A I A A r c hitect a
Union,Washington 11-e-ml ^Lain
o Inns b 4N%ell a ron;ila0
Fxk. f- 3
oN STATE MASON COUNTY
o P� A C o DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
s U Planning Division
o Y �? P 0 Box 279, Shelton,WA 98584
of �,oY (360)427-9670
�864
SHR2007-00024 NOTICE OF SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT
Notice is hereby given that NORTH FORTY TRANSPORTATION,who is the owner of the described property, has filed an
application for a Shoreline Management Permit for the development of:
Sub. Dev.
UNION MARINA REPLACEMENTS FLOATS
Site Address: 5101 E STATE ROUTE 106 UNION
Parcel Number: 322325001001
Project: <
Location of Proj
Within: (quarter section)of Section:32 Township:22N N Range:3W W,W.M.
in ,Mason County Washington.
Said development is proposed within Hood Canal and/or its associated wetlands. Any person desiring to express
their view or to be notified of the action taken on the application should notify.
MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
P 0 BOX 279
SHELTON,WA 98584
in writing of their interest.The comment period is at least 30 days from the final date of publication given pursuant to WAC 173-14-020. The
final date of publication,posting,or mailing of notice is 07-07-19.
Written comments will be accepted up to the date of the hearing.
A public hearing will be held on this permit request. Contact this office at(360)427-9670,ext.577 for date and time of hearing.
A Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on 07-07-12 under WAC 197-11-340. Written comments regarding this determination must
be received by 07-07-26.
SHR2007-00024
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE DATE: Y 0
STATE OF WASHINGTON)
:SS
COUNTY OF MASON )
I, lguan C fM+2S , do hereby certify that I posted _� copies of the
attached Sµ2 7�0nQL!- in 3 public places as follows:
1 at Si tb 1 E 57a�r- Qo m lb .b,, &A�- o-� p ro,pe/
J
1 at .510 f= 0 SGn C 00,C),04,
k1
1 at U A,.� P,:n 5'1 D--U,'C-e
WITNESS my hand and seal this day of ,
Name
OFc,4-� yeJw
Address
STATE OF WASHINGTON)
:SS
COUNTY OF MASON ) �T
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to me this day
j,Cgp�y�ii� otary Pu ' for the State
4
of Washington residing at
OF
�����►I1111IIIHIN\\\�
O
400
.r�
Affidavit of Publics i� y
NOTICE OF SHORELINE MANAGEMENT
PERMIT
SHR2007-00024 STATE OF WASHINGTON 1 SS.
Notice is hereby given that NORTH FOR-
TY COUNTY OF MASON f
TRANSPORTATION,who is the owner of
the described property, has filed an applica-
tion for a Shoreline Management Permit for Julie G.Orme being first duly sworn
the development of
Sub.Dev. on oath deposes and says that she is the clerk
UNION MARINA REPLACEMENTS of the SHELTON-MASON COUNTY JOURNAL, a weekly newspaper. That
FLOATS said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and has been for more than six
Site Address:5101 E STATE ROUTE 106 months prior to the date of the publication hereinafter referred to, published in
UNION p P
Parcel Number:322325001001 the English language continuously as a weekly newspaper in SHELTON,Mason
Location of Project: County, Washington,and it is now and during all of said time was printed in an
Within: (quarter section) of Section: 32 office maintained at the aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper. That
Township:22N N Range:3W W,W.M. the said SHELTON-MASON COUNTY JOURNAL was on the 9th day of
in,Mason County Washington. August, 1941, approved as a legal newspaper by the Superior Court of said
Said development is proposed within Mason County.
Hood Canal and/or its associated wetlands.
Any person desiring to express their view or
to be notified of the action taken on the ap- That the annexed is a true copy of a Notice of Shoreline MEmt
plication should notify:
MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF Permit—North Forty Transportation LLC
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
P O BOX 279
SHELTON WA 98584as it was published in regular issues and not in supplement form of said
in writing of their interest.. The comment h
period is at least 30 days from the final date
of publication given pursuant to WAC 173- newspaper once each week for a period of two
14-020.The final date of publication,posting, consecutive weeks,commencing on the
or mailing of notice is 07-19-07.
Written comments will be accepted up to 12th day of July 20 07 and ending on the
the date of the hearing.
A public hearing will be held on this permit 19th day of July 20 07 both dates inclusive,
request.Contact this office at(360)427-9670, y
ext.577 for date and time of hearing. and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers during all of
A Determination of Nonsignificance was the said period.That the full amount of the fee charged for the
issued on 07-12-07 under WAC 197-11-340.
Written comments,regarding this determina- foregoing publication is the sum of$ 84.00
ton must be received by 07-26-07.
7/12-19 2t A cad amAk
Subscribed and sworn to before me th 19th day of
July n ^- 20�0(7� ip/O
Notary blic in and for the State of Washingtct cF
,�.
Residing at Shelton,Washington Z U NOTARY
My commission expires ,20 (� '. pV BLIC _
'O
�..1 l 2 �,
OF i W Qp'sy
STATg
W
6_ RECEIVED
Irria A�IC 14 7007
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY MCCD - PLANNING
PO Box 47775• Olympia, Washington 98504-7775• (360)407-6300
August 23,2007
Mr.Ryan Crater
Mason County , Your address
Department of Community Development is in the
Planning Division S Kennedy-
PO Box 279 Goldsborough
Shelton,WA 98584 watershed
Dear Mr. Crater:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the determination of nonsignificance for the Union Marina
Dock Replacement project(SEP2007-00081)located at 5101 East State Route in Union as proposed by
North Forty Transportation,LLC dba Hood Canal Marina. The Department of Ecology(Ecology)
reviewed the environmental checklist and has the following comment(s):
SOLID WASTE&FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE: Dan Farrell(360)407-6084
The applicant proposes to demolish an existing structure(s). If applicable,the applicant should ensure
that any potentially dangerous or hazardous materials present are removed prior to demolition. It is
important that these materials and wastes are removed and appropriately managed prior to demolition.
It is equally important that demolition debris is also safely managed,especially if it contains painted
wood or concrete,treated wood,or other possibly dangerous materials.
Please review the"Dangerous Waste Rules for Demolition,Construction,and Renovation Wastes,"
posted at Ecology's website,www.ecy.wa. og_y/prom ms/hwtr/demodebris/. The applicant may also
contact Rob Rieck of Ecology's Hazardous Waste and Toxics Reduction Program at(360)407-6751
for more information about safely handling dangerous wastes and demolition debris.
The applicant proposes to remove a structure that may contain treated wood. If applicable,please
refer to Ecology's publication"Focus on Treated Wood Exclusion," available at
hb://www.egy.wa��ubs/0304038�,for suggested best management practices and disposal
requirements for treated wood. For additional information or clarification,please contact Dee
Williams with Ecology's Hazardous Waste and Toxics Reduction program,at(360)407-6348.
WATER QUALITY: Roberta Woods(360)407-6269
Any discharge of sediment-laden runoff or other pollutants to waters of the state is in violation of
Chapter 90.48 RCW,Water Pollution Control,and WAC 173-201A,Water Quality Standards for
Surface Waters of the State of Washington,and is subject to enforcement action.
Erosion control measures must be in place prior to any clearing,grading, or construction. These
control measures must be effective to prevent stormwater runoff from carrying soil and other
pollutants into surface water or storm drains that lead to waters of the state. Sand,silt,clay particles,
and soil will damage aquatic habitat and are considered to be pollutants. ft
I
AUG-23-2007 THU 12: 14 PM DOE SW REGIONAL OFFICE FAX NO. 360 407 6305 P. 03/03
. August 23,2007
Page 2
Proper disposal of construction debris must be on land in such a manner that debris cannot enter the
Hood Canal or cause water quality degradation of state waters.
Ecology's comments are based upon information provided by the lead agency. As such,they do not
constitute an exhaustive list of the various authorizations that must be obtained or legal requirements that
must be fulfilled in order to carry out the proposed action.
If you have any questions or would like to respond to these comments please contact the appropriate
reviewing staff listed above.
Department of Ecology
Southwest Regional Office
(SM: 07-6530)
cc: Dan Farrell, SW/FAP
Roberta Woods,WQ
North Forty Transportation,LLC dba Hood Canal Marina(Applicant/Contact)
Wendell Stroud,Marina Floats Corporation(Agent)
I^
'7'.a 7'F. �x�••,J
b� . RECEIVED
1.9
STATE OF WASHINGTON AUG 2 O �aQ�
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH MCGp _ PLANNING
OFFICE OF SHELLFISH AND WATER PROTECTION -'
PO Box 47824 • Olympia, Washington 98504-7824
(360) 236-3330 • TDD Relay Service: 1-800-833-6388
August 6, 2007
Don Gores,
4716 77`h.Ave Court West
University Place, Washington 98466
Dear Mr. Gores:
RE: Copy of Russ' Shellfish, WA 1029-SS
Certified Harvest Site(s)
The Department of Health, Office of Shellfish and Water Protection has certified the harvest
site(s) below for commercial harvest of shellfish by your company. Please be advised, this
parcel currently lies in a conditionally approved area and is under a conditional closure from
May thru September.
Owner: William McKesson /Gores
Description: 47 Tax 736-A EX & Tax 703 EX
Parcel Number: 322325047030
Growing Area: Annas Bay
Enclosed you will find your replacement Shellfish Operation License and Certificate of
Approval. Your new Shellfish License reflects the addition of Annas Bay as a certified growing
area for Russ' Shellfish.
Also enclosed is the current Application for Harvest Site Certification, required for future
certification requests. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this letter, contact Cathy
Barker,Public Health Advisor, at(360) 236-3303.
Sincerely,
c')Cati
Cathy Barker
Public Health Advisor
Enclosures
August 23,2007
Page 2
Proper disposal of construction debris must be on land in such a manner that debris cannot enter the
Hood Canal or cause water quality degradation of state waters.
Ecology's comments are based upon information provided by the lead agency. As such,they do not
constitute an exhaustive list of the various authorizations that must be obtained or legal requirements that
must be fulfilled in order to carry out the proposed action.
If you have any questions or would like to respond to these comments please contact the appropriate
reviewing staff listed above.
Department of Ecology
Southwest Regional Office
(SM: 07-6530)
cc: Dan Farrell, SW/FAP
Roberta Woods,WQ
North Forty Transportation,LLC dba Hood Canal Marina(Applicant/Contact)
Wendell Stroud,Marina Floats Corporation(Agent)
NOTES- DESCRIPTION OF SURKr. UPLAND PORT,or THE foL10WING DESCRIBED PROPERTY
SEE PREVIOUS SHAKY OF RECORD BOOK 27, LOTS I 2, 3 AND 4, BLOCK 1, C07GWAL PLAT OF UNION GTY, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT THEREOF
NOTE. PACE 169, AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 1733734. IN THE OFFICE OF THE AUDITOR FOR MASON COUNTY, WASHING ON, VOLUME 2 Of PLAT£ PAGE 21,
LOCATION Of LEASE. DOCK AREA, PIER, RAMP, PILINGS AND EDGE OF VEGETATION (AS SHOWN ON BLOCKS -A-AND V AS SHOW4 ARE A ALL OF BLOCKS 'A`AND 'b', MCREAVYS SUPPLEMENTAL PLAT OF UNION CITY, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED
ACUA77C LAND LEASE NO. 20-0126 9 1, AS RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE N0. 1756754, RECORDS PORTION Of MCfL:AVYS SUPPLEMENTAL PLAT PLAT THEREOF IN THE OFFICE OF THE AUDITOR FOR MASON COANTY, WASHINGTON, VOLUME J OF PLATS,
OF MASON COUNTY WASHINGTON) ARE FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY AND MAY NOT REFLECT OF UNION CITY VOLUME 3 OF PLATS, PAGE la PACE 10.
CURRENT CONOTIONS. ALL THAT PORTION OF VACATED CANAL STREET, AS SHOWN ON SAID ORIGINAL PLAT OF UNION) CITY ABUTTING
BLOCKS 1, 2 AM) 8, AND VACATED CANAL SAO BLOCK I, THEREOF ON THE NORTH, AND ABUTTING ANY PORTION OF BLOCK 'A', SAID MCREAVYS
STREET AND VACATED SEATTLE STREET ARE AS SUPPLEMENTAL PLAT OF UNION CITY ON THE SOUTH
SHOWN ON THE ORIGINAL PLAT OF UNION OTY
VOLUME 2 OF PLATS, PATE 21. ALL THAT PORTION OF THE NORTH ONE HALF OF THAT PORTIO'e OF VACATED EAST 250 FEET O'FIRST
THE EAST BOUNDARY OF THE SECOND- STREET IN SAID ORIGINAL PLAT OF UNION CITY, LYING NORTHERL Y OF THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF
CLASS TIDELANDS IS THE EAST LINE OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 10 AND SOUTHERLY OF THE SOVi'fERLY LINE OF BLOCK 1, OF SAID ORIGINAL
F
SEATTLE STREET. PLAT OF UNION CITY.
,�p ALL TIDELANDS OF THE SECOND-CLASS AS CONVEYED BY THE STATE OF WASHINGTON SITUATE IN FRONT OF,
[ ADJACENT TO OR ABVTTIIG UPON THAT PORTION OF THE GOKIfiNMENT MEANDER LINE M FRONT OF
GOVERNMENT LOT 4, SECTION 32, TOWNSKP 22 NORTH. RANGE 3 W+EST, W,M., MASON COUNTY, WASHINGTW
NORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS
C O BEGINNING AT THE MEANDER CORNER BETWEEN SECTIONS 31 AND J2. TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 3 WEST,
9 W.M.: THENCE FOLLOWING SAID MEANDER LINE IN AN EASTERLY )IRECTION AND SOUTHEASTERLY DIRECTION TO
THE INTERSECTION OF SAID MEANDER LINE WITH THE SOUTH LWI' OF BLOCK 1. ORIGINAL PLAT OF UNION CITY,
ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT THEREOF IN THE OFFICE Of THE AUDITOR OF MASON COUNTY,
WASHINGTON, EXTENDING EAST.
EXCEPTING ALL THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING WEST OF THE EA37ERLY LINE OF ALDER STREET ON THE
ti0 �b,o ORIGINAL PLAT OF UNION CITY, EXTENDED NORTHERLY, AND ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION
THEREOF EXTENDING TO THE UNE OF EXTREME LOW 77D£AND L 1NG EAST OF THE EASTERLY WINE OF SEATTLE
STREET, (ALSO KNOWN AS SKOOKUM STREET)EXTENDED NORTH, AS SAID STREET IS DESIGNATED ON THE SAID
ORIGINAL PLAT OF UNION CITY.
nn 1/
•�W ti0 `�Nn''v '9� EXCEPTING RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. I+18.
TOGETHER WITH AND SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS AN)RESERVATIONS OF RECORD.
FOUND IRON PIPE REFERRED TO AS MEANDER C R
ON PLAT OF WONDERVUE VOLUME 4 OF PLATS, PA '4`� A�( Q!� ,
139. AND UNRECORDED SURVEY BY SWIFT DATED MA gL OCK A ' 9' Fn"
�a
CANAL ST.
EDGE OF VEGETATION -.... _
.........
......_....
(VACATED) / a LEGEND
a
t- OCR 15 IRON BAR W/PLASTIC - UTILITY POLE W/2•C,'XNOUIT&METER
V L 0C 1 \ 1 YELLOW CAP SET LA
h' UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED - EXISTING POWER MEIEF LA
cn
I \ O O - IRON PIPE AS SHOWN ON - RV HOLY(-UP POST WjPOWER k WATER z�
¢ O f UNRECORDED SURVEY BY Q
I�� ' E 4 j 4: 2 ,1j JOHN SWIFT DATED MAY 1963 - - EXISTING WATER METER Z N
gL OCK W $ m R V� \ \� O UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED -- U�ERCROUMD POWER
`
z S ;/ - UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE
t \ SEPTIC CLEAN—OUT 0
SW EAK CORNER `� rr�0 SEE 1 \ ` 4 F s ■ >,- 6'CYCLONE FENCE G
CALL COOR'NER OFQ x � DETAIL i � �'� � � ; —oHO-- OVERHEAD UTILITIES ��
01
Ut 2
FIRS T " z
` (vacArEO) \ SET BAR k CAP 158'S.
SET N \ c^ OF 8'CYCLW FENM ;
BLOCK 8 \ 30, Jw
3 I 2 1
ON SURVEY SK. PAC£ t66
Q N:747244.03 ^ [+
E:995971.52 S/�.+ ���~ \•I'
OS' \ Marine Floats
3/4'IRON PIPE AS SHOWN 1208 East D St-Tacoma-WA 98421-253-383-2740
�`•-.,�..,`�
ON SURVEY fW 12 PAGE 201
SCALE: 1 "=801 APPROV:D BY: DRAWN BY
SCALE
2 40 80 '1
DATE: 5/Z 5/0 7 REVISED
0 0 r ®
N:995967,29 SITE PLAN WITH PROPOSED MARINA LAYOUT
E:99596729 ,.t1 Cij
L 0 p,`S
DRAWN
MARINEFWATT'S USE OF DRAWNG NUMBER
CORP. NORTH FORTY LODGING
ANY OT HM USE OR
REPRODUCTION IS PROHIBUED
�xkl%64
r NO TES DESCRIPTION DF SURVEY.' UPLAND PORTION OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY
Y RECORD BOOK ?7, LOTS 1, 2, 3 AND 4, BLOCK 1, ORIGINAL PLAT OF UNION CITY ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT THEREOF
SEE PREVIOUS SURVUDITOR FOR MASON COUNTY, WASHINGTON, VOLUME 2 OF PLATS, PACE 21.
NOTE: IN THE OFFICE OF THE A
PAGE 169, AUDfTORti FILE NO 1735754.
` LOCATION OF LEASE, DOCK AREA, PIER, RAMP, PILINGS AND EDGE OF VEGETATION AS SHOWN ON ALL T BLOCKS 'A'AND ICE OF THE A SUPPLEMENTAL PLAT OF UKQV CITY ACCORDING i0 THE RECORDED
( BLOCKS 'A"AND "D"AS SHOWN AREA PLAT THEREOF IN THE OFFICE OF THE AUDITOR FOR MASON COUNTY WASHMICTON, VOLUME J OF PLATS,
AOUATIC LAND LEASE NO. 20-012691, AS RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 1755754, RECORDS PORTION OF McREAVYS SUPPLEMENTAL PLAT PACE 10.
OF MASON COUNTY WASHINGTON)ARE FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY AND MAY NOT REFLECT OF UNION CITY VOLUME 3 Of PLATS, PAGE fa
CURRENT CONDITIONS. ALL THAT PORTION OF VACATED CANAL STREET, AS SHOWN ON SAID ORIGINAL PLAT OF UNION CITY ABUTTING
BLOCKS 1, 2 AND A AND VACATED CANAL SAID BLOCK 1, THEREOF ON THE NORTH, AND ABUTTING ANY PORTION OF BLOCK "A", SAID MCREAVY'S
STREET AND VACATED SEATTLE STREET ARE AS SUPPLEMENTAL PLAT OF UNION CITY ON THE SOUTH.
SHOWN ON THE OWL4NAL PLAT OF UNION CITY
VOLUME 2 OF PLAT$, PACE 21. ALL THAT PORTION OF THE NORTH ONE HALF OF THAT PORTION Of VACATED EAST 250 FEET OF FIRST
STREET IN SAID ORIGINAL PLAT OF UNION CITY, LYING NORTHERLY OF THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF
THE EAST BOUNDARY•OF THE SECOND- PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 10 AND SOUTHERLY OF THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF BLOCK I. OF SAID ORIGINAL
CLASS TIDELANDS IS THE EAST LINE OF PLAT OF UNION CITY, t
A„+ two SEATTLE STREET,
ALL TIDELANDS OF THE SECOND-CLASS, AS CONVEYED BY THE STATE OF WASHINGTON SITUATE IN FRONT OF,
ADJACENT TO OR ABUTTING UPON THAT PORTION OF THE GOVERNMENT MEANDER LINE IN FRONT OF 6
GOVERNMENT LOT 4, SECTION 32, TOWVS40 22 NORTH, RANGE J WEST, W,M., MASON COUNTY, WASHINGTON. E
�J MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOW& f
7 BEGINNING AT THE MEANDER CORNER BETWEEN SECTIONS 31 AND 3?, TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 3 WEST,
� 9OG,4 O W.M.: THENCE FOLLOWING SAID MEANDER LINE IN AN EASTERLY DIRECTION AND SOUTHEASTERLY DIRECTION TO
THE INTERSECTION OF SAID MEANDER LINE WITH W SOUTH LINE OF BLOCK 1, ORIGINAL PLAT OF UNION CITY,
ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT THEREOF M THE OFFICE OF T1i£AUDITOR OF MASON COUNTY,
WASHINGTON, EXTENDING EAST.
�br 4tiQ EXCEPTING ALL THAT PORTION THEREOF LYINC WEST OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF ALDER STREET ON THE
Sr ORIGINAL PLAT Of UNION CITY, EXTENDED NORTHERLY, AND ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION
Q 7� Fq THEREOF EXTENDING TO THE LIFE OF EXTREME LOW TIDE AND LYING EAST OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF SEATTLE +
STREET, (ALSO KNOWN AS SKOOKUM STREET)EXTENDED NORTH, AS SAID STREET IS DESIGNATED ON THE SAID i
ORIGINAL PLAT OF UNION CITY.
rY I
EXCEPTING RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR PR/NARY STATE HIGHWAY N0. 106. s
TOGETHER WITH AND SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS AND RESERVATIONS OF RECORD.
FOUND IRON PIPE REFERRED TO AS MEANDER C ER S `'
i
ON PLAT OF WONDERW£ VOLUME 4 OF PLATS. PA
139, AND UNRECORDED SURVEY BY SWIFT DATED MA <�q 4„ V+
1965. B L 0 CK A RAAIP �E: N"
EDGE OF VEGETATION Cw
CANAL ST.
(VACATED) / \ N 494,,.�ai". r
j?
�0C s
V)
Cif 2
4 \ 'L,
BLOCK 2 o m� �� , �, W
-1 a g SEE `I I w \ I—
SW EAVE CORNER to ii ¢ w
0.16 S, 0.17 C., OF Q DETAIL " �� Q LEGEND ZZ
CALC. CORNER e\ \ $ W `' O
' NS N
\ _ 2
>, YE LIRON BAR OW CAPSE ASTIC ELECTRICAL BREAKER BOX
I G � - UTILITY POLE W/2"CONDUIT k METER
J UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED
FIRST -&u_4o£L BOX
„ QyL . IRON PIPE AS SHOWN ON - EXISTING POWER METER U
UNRECORDED SURVEY BY
/ q gAR �15r s, JOHN SWIFT DATED MAY 1965 ' RV HOOK-UP POST W/POM[R a WATER
-.-.... $ElJ (VACATED) N OF 6' CYddE FENCE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED EXISliNG WATER METER ~�
_ -ucv—. UNDERGROUND POWER
MPK BL TI CK 1 so' ao - SEPTIC CLEAN-OUT . ZZq
N,1 . UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE O Q
GAS PUMP x x x x- 6'CYCLONE FENCE Z 2
2 —oHU-- OVERHEAD UTILITIESS
?'IRON PIPE AS SHOWN
ON q
SURVEY BK. 18 PAGE 166_'
E:995971,52 J� '^•.,,`.Q�/N
7 06' , Marine Floats
, s,'
1208 East D St-Tacoma-WA 98421-253-383-2740
3/4"IRON PIPE AS SHOWN
ON SURVEY BK. 12 PAGE 201
SCAM
SCALE: 1"=80' APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY
��
DATE 25 07 REVISED
o so ao so
5
N:744590.57 SITE PLAN WITH EXISTING MARINA LAYOUT
E:995967.29
L O A`t
DRAWN FOR THE USE OF DRAWING NUMBER
MARINE FLOATS CORP. NORTH FORTY LODGING
ANY OTHER USE OR
REPRODUCTION 15 PROHIBITED