Agendas and Minutes
~
~
~
~
c
City of Yelm
Community Development Department
105 Yelm Avenue West
PO. Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
CANCELLATION
NOTICE
The DECEMBER 19. 2005. PlanninQ Commission meetinQ has been CANCELLED
The next meeting of the Yelm Planning Commission will be held in Council Chambers at
Yelm City Hall, 105 Yelm Ave W, on
MONDAY. JANUARY 23. 2006 at 4:00 pm.
If there are any questions concerning this change, please call the Community
Development Department at (360) 458-3835
ATTEST tj: "'" 0 'vilA,"' L
Agnes Bennick
City ClerkfTreasurer
DO NOT PUBLISH BELOW THIS LINE
Posted WEDNESDAY DECEMBER 14, 2005
Sent to the Planning Commission mailing list: WEDNESDAY DECEMBER 14,2005
c
YELM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
NOVEMBER 21,2005 400 P M
YELM CITY HALL
Glen Cunningham called the meeting to order at 4 00 PM
Members present: Norm Allard, Greg Mattocks, Carlos Perez, John Graver, Terry Kaminski,
and Glen Cunningham
Staff. Grant Beck and Tami Merriman
Members Absent: John Thomson unexcused
Motion No
Approval of Minutes:
05-22 MOTION MADE BY NORM ALLARD, SECONDED BY JOHN GRAVER TO APPROVE THE
MINUTES FROM THE SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 MEETING MOTION CARRIED.
Public Communications.
None
Public Hearing - None
Other:
Mr. Beck introduced the newest planning commission member Terry Kaminski
o
o
Mr. Beck provided excerpts from the 2006 budget process, showing the commission the amount
of development occurring within the city limits, and the growth population projections
Mr. Beck updated the Commission on the progress of the Wal-Mart application There were 4
requests to the Hearing Examiner for reconsideration The Hearing Examiner must make a
decision on the requests
Mr. Beck updated the Commission on the results of a retail trade study that was performed for the
City A full copy of the study can be found on the City's website The study gave a better
determination of the retail trade area for the City, and the amount of loss of retail that the City is
currently experiencing
05-23 MOTION MADE BY GREG MATTOCKS, SECONDED BY CARLOS PEREZ TO ADJOURN.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 4:40 P M
Respectfully submitted,
Tami Merriman, Assistant Planner
Glen Cunningham, Vice Chair
Date
~
v
Yelm Planning Commission
November 21, 2005
Page 1
o
City of Yelm
o
o
Planning Commission
AGENDA
Yelm Planning Commission
Monday, November 21, 2005
4 00 P M
Yelm City Hall
105 Yelm Avenue West
1. Call to Order and Roll Call
2 Approval of Minutes: September 19, 2005
3. Public Communications not associated with agenda items
4
Public Hearings' None Scheduled
5.
Other
a Department Update
6. Adjourn
Next regular meeting
Monday, December 19, 2005 - 400 P M
Yelm City Hall CouncIl Chambers
Enclosures are available to non-Commission members upon request.
It is the City of Yelm's policy to provide reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities. If you are a person
with a disability in need of accommodations to conduct business, or to participate in government processes or
activities, please contact Agnes Bennick, at 360-458-8404 at least four (4) working days prior to the scheduled event.
All Planning Commission meetings are audio taped. For information on obtaining a copy, please call the Community
Development Department at (360) 458-3835
o
o
c
City of Yelm
Community Development Department
105 Yelm Avenue West
P.O. Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
CANCELLA TION
NOTICE
The OCTOBER 17, 2005, PlanninQ Commission meetinQ has been CANCELLED The
next meeting of the Yelm Planning Commission will be held in Council Chambers at
Yelm City Hall, 105 Yelm Ave W , on
MONDAY. NOVEMBER 21. 2005 at 4:00 pm.
If there are any questions concerning this change, please call the Community
Development Department at (360) 458-3835
A TrEST
/! -1
i!r~ltu 06t"4f/tLlbi
Atlhes Bennick
City ClerkfTreasurer
DO NOT PUBLISH BELOW THIS LINE
Posted TUESDAY OCTOBER 11, 2005
Sent to the Planning Commission mailing list: TUESDAY OCTOBER 11, 2005
o
o
o
YELM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 400 P M
YELM CITY HALL
Glen Cunningham called the meeting to order at 4 03 PM
Members present: Norm Allard, Greg Mattocks, Carlos Perez, and Glen Cunningham
Staff' Grant Beck and Tami Merriman
Members Absent. John Graver excused, John Thomson unexcused
Motion No
Approval of Minutes:
05-20 MOTION MADE BY NORM ALLARD, SECONDED BY CARLOS PEREZ TO APPROVE THE
MINUTES FROM THE AUGUST 18, 2005 MEETING MOTION CARRIED
Public Communications.
None
Public Hearing - None
Other:
Mr. Beck provided copies of the letter of resignation from Everette Schirman The vacated
position has been published
Mr. Beck informed the Commission that the Yelm Transportation Advisory Committee wishes to
have a representative from the Planning Commission be on the YT AC board This advisory
board assists in the review of the City's 6-year Transportation Improvement Plan, will begin the
process to update the City's Transportation Comprehensive Plan, and other local transportation
planning Norm Allard Volunteered to sit on this Board
Mr. Beck updated the Commission on the progress of the Critical Areas Code update The City
Council reviewed the proposed amendments at a previous worksession meeting, and it is on the
September 28, 2005 council agenda for adoption
Mr. Beck provided the status of the Walmart application, providing an overview of the public
hearing, and the role of the hearing examiner in making his decision
Mr. Beck informed the Commission of requests for amendment of the City of Yelm Development
Regulations These items will be reviewed in detail by the Planning Commission in the upcoming
months
Docket Item 1 is a request to change Section 17 24 040 YMC to allow for drive through
restaurants
Docket Item 2 is to review the establishment of an overlay district within the Industrial Zone for ~ail
oriented businesses only
Docket Item 3 is to amend Chapter 13 12 YMC, to require latecomer payments to be made at ttile
time of development of a property, defining development to new land uses.
A member of the audience asked to address the Planning Commission Mr Zukowski wished to
speak to the Commission about adding to the docket, an amendment to the zoning code to
restrict new commercial development by a certain size
Mr. Beck informed Mr Zukowski that there is a formal process to amend City Development i
regulations Mr. Beck invited Mr Zukowski to come into the Community Development Office a~d
the department would assist him in the process of adding items to the docket.
Ye\m Planning Commission
September 19, 2005
Page 1
C 05-21 MOTION MADE BY GREG MATTOCKS, SECONDED BY CARLOS PEREZ TO ADJOURN
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 4 55 P M
Respectfully submitted,
Tami Merriman, Assistant Planner
Glen Cunningham, Vice Chair
Date
c
~
V
Yelm Planning Commission
July 18. 2005
Page 2
o
C)
VISITOR SIGN IN SHEET
o
Please sIgn In and mdIcate If you wIsh to be added to the Plannmg CommIssIon Emml hst to receIve future agendas
and mInutes
All Plannmg CommIssIOn meetmgs are audIO taped. For mformatIOn on obtammg a copy please call the Yelm
Comm umty Development Department at (360) 458-3835
MEETING
DATE
LOCATION
Yelm Plannmg CommIssIon
September 19, 2005 at 4 00 PM
Yelm CIty Hall
Name & Address Email Email Address
List?
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
----.-- ---- 0
c
City of Yelm
o
o
Planning Commission
AGENDA
Yelm Planning Commission
Monday, September 19, 2005
4 00 P M
Yelm City Hall
105 Yelm Avenue West
1. Call to Order and Roll Call
2. Approval of Min,utes: August 15, 2005
3 Public Communications not associated with agenda items
4.
Public Hearings: None Scheduled
5.
Other
a Resignation of Ev Shirman
b Appointment of Planning Commission member to Yelm Transportation
Advisory Committee
c Status of Critical Areas Code update
c Status of application by Wal-Mart
d Review of 2004/2005 update docket
6 Adjourn
Next regular meeting
Monday, October 17, 2005 - 400 P M
Yelm City Hall Council Chambers
Enclosures are available to non-Commission members upon request.
It is the City of Yelm's policy to provide reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities. If you are a person
with a disability in need of accommodations to conduct business, or to participate in government processes or
activities, please contact Agnes Bennick, at 360-458-8404 at least four (4) working days prior to the scheduled event.
All Planning Commission meetings are audio taped. For information on obtaining a copy, please call the Community
Development Department at (360) 458-3835
c
MEMORANDUM
City of Yelm
Community Development Department
To Yelm Planning Commission
From Grant Beck, Director of Community Development
Date September 13, 2005
Subj 2004/2005 Update Docket
In 2004, the Community Development Department received or initiated several requests
for amendment to the development regulations (no proposed changes to the
Comprehensive Plan was received)
Community Development staff will be asking for direction from the Planning
Commission on whether to proceed with processing the following requested
amendments to the development regulations
Docket Item 1.
Allow drive through windows in the Central Business District zoning
district.
o
The previous owners of the Blue Bottle Espresso requested a 'zoning change' for the
Blue Bottle Espresso located at 309 Yelm Avenue East to install and run a drive-up
window service for customers
To accomplish this, Section 17.24040 (A)(33) of the Zoning Code would have to be
amended This section currently allows within the CBD zoning district "Restaurants,
bars, taverns and lounges (excluding drive-throughs)"
The intent of the CBD District is "In addition to the commercial zoning districts there is
created an additional zone designated as the CBD, central business district, for the
purposes of providing an area for high intensity uses or mixtures of uses for general
commercial, retail, service and multidwelling activities The purpose of the zone is to
promote the special characteristics of the existing downtown Yelm area, to provide a
pedestrian shopping atmosphere and to promote the rehabilitation of existing structures
and the most desirable uses of land and the following provisions in this chapter shall be
applicable to the zone II Section 17 24 010 YMC
Docket Item 2.
Establish an overlay district within the Yelm Industrial Area to allow
only rail oriented industry on parcels adjacent to the YelmlRoy
Prairie Line
o
c
City staff have requested a change in the Zoning Code and map in order to establish a
'rail overlay district' in the Industrial area The allowed uses within this overlay district
would be limited to those industrial activities that are rail oriented
Over the past several years, the City has been working closely with rail partners to re-
establish rail service to Yelm from the Ports of Tacoma and Olympia While good
progress is being made, it is possible that those parcels within the industrial district
adjacent to the YelmlRoy Prairie line could be developed with uses that are not rail
oriented and which could make it more difficult to attract rail oriented uses in the future
Docket Item 3.
Amend the Latecomers requirements to exempt payment of
latecomers fees under certain circumstances
Although not technically a docket item, City Council members have expressed interest
in amending the Latecomers Chapter of the City Code to exempt the payment of a
latecomer fee in certain circumstances
o
Specifically, a property subject to a latecomers fee must currently pay the assessment
at the time of connection to the sewer or water system Connection is required if the
owner decides to develop the property, but may also be required if an on-site sewage
disposal system fails
The Code could be amended to require payment of a latecomers fee only upon the
development of a parcel, thus exempting payment when connection to the system is
required due to extenuating circumstances
c
September 13, 2005
Page 2 of2
o
o
o
YELM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
AUGUST 15, 2005 4 00 P M
YELM CITY HALL
Glen Cunningham called the meeting to order at 4 11 PM
Members present: Norm Allard, Greg Mattocks, Carlos Perez, John Graver, and Glen
Cunningham
Staff' Grant Beck and Tami Merriman
Members Absent: John Thomson, Excused, Everette Schirman, Unexcused
Motion No
ADDroval of Minutes:
05-18 MOTION MADE BY NORM ALLARD, SECONDED BY CARLOS PEREZ TO APPROVE THE
MINUTES FROM THE JULY 18,2005 MEETING MOTION CARRIED
Public Communications.
None
Public HearinQ - None
Other:
Mr. Beck provided an update on items of interest, including development permits in review,
housing statistics for the City, and the approval of the Tahoma Terra Master Plan Mr. Beck also
discussed the Western Washington Growth Management Hearing Boards decision regarding
Thurston County, and the effect it may have on the City of Yelm
Carlos Perez asked Mr. Beck to clarify the Transportation Facility Charge (TFC) credit in the
Walmart application Mr. Beck clarified that the road improvement mitigation proposed for the
Walmart application are in addition to any TFC charges, and the credit applies only to the TFC
charge
05-19 MOTION MADE BY GREG MATTOCKS, SECONDED BY NORM ALLARD TO ADJOURN
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 5 18 P M.
Respectfully submitted,
Tami Merriman, Assistant Planner
Glen Cunningham, Vice Chair
Date
Yelm Planning Commission
AugUSl15 2005
Page I
o
o
VISITOR SIGN IN SHEET
o
Please sIgn m and mdIcate If you wIsh to be added to the Plannmg CommIssIon EmaIl hst to receIve future agendas
and mmutes
All Plannmg CommIsSIOn meetmgs are audIO taped. For mformatIOn on obtammg a copy please call the Yelm
Commumty Development Department at (360) 458-3835
MEETING
DATE
LOCATION
Yelm Planmng CommIsSIOn
August 15, 2005 at 4'00 PM
Yelm CIty Hall
Name & Address Email Email Address
List?
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
, 1----(1~_~_~~______~____
!
!
I
\
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
,
Agenda
August 15,2005
a.
b.
c.
Development Update
Tahoma Terra Update
6-year Transportation Improvement
Program Update
Growth Management Hearings Board
Update
d.
o
-----1
I
,
PROPOSED RETAIL
YELM, WA 01.i1.05
'-..:::.::~=BCRA!2i:!
......:.._. . !!!II
,
\
I
L_-------
.~__~.---J
z -I ~~ "\:~'~! /,--j /'1'" l"-",:,
\ ~ ..--...----- I If..'J' - "....1~ l
~ - '-":FTO:;;'<~"~, I B",HAVESE J
}Op~ :--- L=E --I 0 ~~~>o~ot~~r! ----I:
~ ~--=J---", MountaL~.:~j!adQ~ L - , Centrailia Power Canal
\'\1, L~ L ~EJtI[S!~96:YL-:J 'sQ!!ii!s.,~~YL ,Si!.~~5-023!1-Yl: il I
jt,,, I' CJij-fitnJ;Vista7Prelim ifGreeftiVillage~~Veln.f:~reek.Es_tate,s
'\~-. --'C:'I-~-~fr-Til >J--::~~''':'> Ir=, 0 v 'to'lWt
\ ~ I ".- v? 0 ~ )SS:!05~0018-VL 21--1
510 Lr- 08 '="tt R dt;;'ommercial Pa-rW- _ VI'i!)
\ . ume oa h\# --. "'I" I
-;--f -- -i --~! - ? i~ '~z;l ~ l \ \~ h;; T~~ cn~v
I , !~' i)AVESE t=~ /~"RAGlJl: , SE~J =~-V@+.~S:-0003iVL_
iT 'm...m_m_'..X,_ "" ' '" CU,'lIenS Roade,l}tt, X-
- L ' J.~,~ .---, t~.. A,c
.11 - \~ I ~ tC::,~, i. " r,' , ,~ /4'1<tVfzf!' \-
..L J'\,----~ "'--1 \ 5 .
---_,,__J '" ! ~~~\ \
\ , ..,<fi."^~ ,,~.i: ~ ?iSPR~05-0158- VL .. ,,--<,;g.-
\ _"ff- IBM '"VelfuiJ1i:[r~nSmissio~ ~op ...,>",-;:. ,
J o~~'.} "'. "'" ~ '"'"
'''!' \. <.:..
1 ;E~~VAllef' Sf! ~. . .~ ,,>!:i \G
\ -~. SPTR-Q5-016.3;~l: Jt
\ ~ 6~' ~~~fJ~e~~ro~~ ;ent~ J
I 0 2 ~ ,,- .,.)- "'"" _~& ~ ~9' SS~5:0100-Vl!
SU~05-0068-~L 5, _ _._ . ",' '":"" '" -.:r "rd.Street SliOrt Plat ,
Tahom!l Terra DIV.#1 L- ,~v.'R"sr "" <f!~' ""<:Y ............" " .1.H_ "
J' \S:" ~~ 1-
","" - ~ '\,c:, r1----,. ~
fI;( ~.f :J .,\;,_(-0-
- /d SS-9~~0~0:rt-.::.! mF.n..,,~ 0 .--... ~~~0~~,;1~~:~.=~~..}
~'''''"." Mill Road ~~9rt~~;~fo~~I?tJ~est ~oad R,r~~;~:o~al ParI(
"t<Pi~ - -: ,-J---- I z ~-"B
",,-1'.'.' ,,<> '" ~,'t;.'P\
>.{fC>~"l.D~~ "):r~WESE - sE.<~q.:-=i----l.. , ~ it \y\ 5-011091 VI
;,. 'Th PlSE ,~ f--l---j <; il SPR-O _ I.:::
(: ~ - '(;:. mp..~ ..\'Jws: ~~ -~--~-3, ;: ~ 1 Wal-Mart superce~~j
. '~~ '(f,;; /llr-j;; ?"'Al'*IlEl".,.,TSrsE ~ {) I \ lilD i--
j\\\ '" r-Ji ,51~. I r ~, '_ \ Ii r--J..l----;
'- City of Yelm I \'i\~\ : 1LJl Lr l_~=--"i', ) I \'S~R-05-(J05J.VL .Utl fill
I 2005 Developments, I \,~.. I h t- ~ ~ BrowA~s\Auto 'Sales & Servl~: ,
rill i "x",,-, I I L/' i L-~--I-'" -i~.. ~ ill! I
---L.....J.,------ ,~ / ~- .. ~-.:,':$-~- '---r-,....' j. -,J,. S\.--- -17 _ ., !-/t' ,
r ' F-Ji.~ --- , I J ' ....., d I ;, e;( I ~l ~,/ I
' ! 'r----"- ,~_:r 'J I "11" -;....
1:/ I I I I I .- __--~ "-S _~;/
i---~ I i r 1 I"JS;;-iAVESE, J=- I \r _~I;_~
.t----, ' I I T I j I I f _-~r fJ r--- 1\ fT---1 --
J ;, J r l i
i ,1
o
i
I
I
I
i
!
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
II
-~---~---
____0
__ 0__,
I
I
i
\
)
.t .-I-----~ ,-
I I b,
I I '<I
\~-,) Jl
S
r"'
,
j
. '4Y elf(.sc ~
5',;
;,:..;
gk
r.::~ I
-~-
~!l
I I
,.
_.J--.. ~.~~.:;
ifr-"
f
f/
,,;;.\. /
lj
I
----<
Land Use Permits 2000 - 2005 (to Date)
I!ISite Plan Reviews
o Special Use Permits
o Subdivision - Preliminary
D Subdivision - Final
9
7
2 2
6
2
2000
2001
I __________.___'. ______ ________ ____________________
9
6
2002
2003
12
5
2
2004
8
5
o
3
2005
7
5
Housing Starts 1995 to 2005 (to Date)
120
iii Duplexes
. Single Family Dwellings
100
80
60
40
20
o
1995
1996
1997
1999
2000
2001
2003
2005
2004
2002
1998
· Hearing Examiner held a public hearing on
July 11 and recommended approval of the
Conceptual and Final Master Site Plan
and preliminary subdivision approval of
Phase I (89 lots)
· City Council held a public hearing on
August 1 0 and approved the Conceptual
and Final Master Site Plan
_~___~_ o__----~- _-----~~---~--------- ___-0----
\
\
I
\
\
\
I
,
1
\
-_.~-----_._._------( )--
.----..----..-.-.--. ._..._--_._-~
Tahoma Terral~
--------~ ""\.
<:~,
.......~,..
i
\
I
I
\
I
\
\' I
i
( \
\ ~ \
\__ _------------- _____ _ __ ___ _ _ __~_ ___ __ __-- _ _~______--~~--------- _____----J
o
f------- ---
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I City of Yelm
I
I
I
I
I
I
___________.______________0.___________
o
----I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i S~~thwe~t Yel~'1
IAnnexation Area
L____.__.__.______._.__ __ __. _____ _. ___.n]' '\
~
.,
I
J
i
/
\
I
______0
o
o
L______________
----,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
J
r
I
!
'i'v
\>9~ ,9'i
~l~,t
,,~ !LJl1li' (II
, 0 IJ
rJi /1
" '
--0
u
I
I
---------------t)~J
o
o
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
j
I
I
!__.,-~-~-~~---~-------_._..__. ---~-'----_._----'----------_._'----- ---...."-.----------.-.--...--.--.--.<
Step 1
Conceptual Master Site Plan Approval
Step 2
Final Master Site Plan Approval
<
Step 3
Development Permits
Current proposal is a conceptual master site
plan for all of Tahoma Terra
· Must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
· A template for future development.
· Establishes land use districts within the Master Plan
Development.
Current proposal is for a final master site plan
for the property east of Thompson Creek.
· Must be consistent with the conceptual master site plan.
· Establishes the development regulations for all
development within the final master site plan area.
- Road Standards
- Design Guidelines
- Utility standards
- Land uses
Current proposal is for an 89 lot subdivision.
Must be consistent with the final site plan.
The typical City approval process for developments.
Subdivisions
Binding Site Plans
Site Plan Review
Townhouse
Developments
.,
~
l ~~T
<~.~+'.;;
:-:....:s,'!'. .
---_.._--,._-------~--+- .~----~----_._._~---~-_. ~._..- - -- -- .~---_._--- .---.--.
---_._-------.__.~---_..__._--,._-_. -_._-,------~- -"-- -~-----,_.--_. ..~---_._- ,--_._,_.-'. ..-.---.--..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
L_<_
Single Family Residential
4 to 6 units per acre
~
(~eigh~:V
comm7
Single Family Residential
4 to 6 units per acre
\
\
\
\
"
-
~
Open Space
High Denisty Residentail
10 to 24 units per acre
\
Moderate Density Residentfal
6 to 10 units per acre
,
,
o
r-----
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
i
I
I
.__0
o
Single Family Residential
4 to 6 units per acre
el
~f
) ~
/ ~
('i~~ ,\\,
"it! "~
! ,i "'<~Y{\
,'\\ '",,,,
a\.. V'
i1t~""
'..;;
if. t'.1 ", ,.
..;,~
.....c\'..,'
:)$\
~l1.f}\
I " \1;\\
..i ~ ~-
\'1 ~.'?
";~"
· "-r>.\
~::\
':.;<oJ;
~ 'l" ,\,,\, ,
0" iopen Spacel
" '". ....."llJ' n--..f'
~~\'~ ~
If !'~ ~ ~\f.\ ~~~"'.~
~('- - ).;~, ~ "\~>
<G
,
I 6
19rfl '
I .'
, ~"" .
~ .
-:i
m:
,
;.. ^ -\
"
~~ '
..,. -- , ,
;",.~J(;;\, .~ O~'--~..,-
'", ''''1..r' _ . ~
. ,.,~~~
',<:';;~} ~~,.){ ~~~- ','
~f (;~, 'r fiFl i'\
~", ',r. ", -;1 t,. , A t\
,. ,-
""'~" ,"
,,",,,M~~
r ,1,.ij,. ,~~?~:;.\.t q
l -,J:. 1''-''''10. f'f) ~ J
'~"",' , : (:1 .C\
l"<<-~t"i ' ,
't'
o
n
o
Conditions of Approval
· Density must be 4 units per acre
· Commercial must be centrally located and screened
· 55 acres (250Ib) of parks and open space
· Commercial ready before development west of creek
· 48 multi-family required for every 300 single family units
· Utilities designed before final master site plan
· Path, sidewalks, and transit stops required throughout
community
· Planning for continuation of streets
· Pocket parks required within each neighborhood
· Water rights required for all development beyond 89 lots
I
j
I
L
I
1
I
I
I
I
. ------_._-----------_._---~
Establishes Development Regulations
· Setbacks
· Number of model homes
· Limitation on size and location of neighborhood
commercial
· Street lig hts
· Water meters
· Stormwater (rain gardens)
· Landscaping and timing of street tree placement
· Pocket parks
I
i
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
,
!
I
L________._
I
I
i
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
_~___________J
'______Q__________________________________O
I
I
I
I
I
3 - Installation of a traffic signal,
left turn lanes, and realign Killion Road NE
/ "-
l
"'- ,
/ '. "-
'-,
/
I
,-
/
,
,
'-
.-"
/
,
/
/
/ ~"'-<.,,~-
3 - Killion Road Extension
/
/........
~
""
'-.'.-
/
"
/
/
'-I
)
()
--~
I
-~//
"-
, "
/ "
/
;' ,
"-,-
/ ~- ";-
I .... r "-
,.A.. ./
1 - Longmire Reconstruction
5 - Mosman Extension or
extend Boulevard to SR 507 ,/
'- " /'~ /
"" / ,/ "'-,("
/~ f/ ...........
1/ ">'-..
/
c:
, -,-
/~
.{
/ '
"-
'-
"-
y
'-
/ ',,- /
"- I
',,--
4 - Mosman Reconstruction
including realignment at intersection and
center turn lane on SR 507
'-"-
'-
~
-/
"
,/
I ~'..~
I ,,-
-"- ,
fY~
"
( ~ __,/1 ~
., // \.
1,,------------ ~
'.
/
/
"-,
',,- I
'-, /
",-,
I
i
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
C'
I
I
I
I
I
I
C1
5
~
cr::
GJ-l' - ~.
s
~
0:::
CA TCH POINT
l
i
s::
o
. .....
..'
u
:s
Ima
..'
(I)
C
o
U
Q)
~
c
m
E
tn
o
~
"C
C
m
(J,)
I...
......
E
C:n
t:
()
..J
(f)
W
ll:::
<(
>
UTI UTY
'0
.- EASEMENT
L,() SIDEWALK
'in
N
./'-0..
(D TRAFFIC LANE
.-
~1
r.o TRAFFIC LANE
~
1
oQJ
Z 0:: .a:::
o::lw
o()f-
. f-
f- ,0:: '=:>
ZWG
WO::
,~ 0:: 0
W<(Z
OCD<(
~
t.....
Ln. , SIDEWALk
UTILITY
2 EASEMENT
.,
.~><
0..::(
.;....;z
If)
w
0:::,
<(
>
CATCH POINT
----------- ~\
----- --- \
\
\
i
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
---.--------
\
\
\
\
\
\
C
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
S
~-------------------------------------------------------
CATCH PO\\'.1T
~
~
~
~
""'-
ex:
~o UT\UT't' EASEMEN1
.......
- ---
- -
~~ S\OEWAU<'
~lf) 6\\<.E LANE
...... TRAff\ C LA E
.......
...... TRAff\C LANE
.......
<.::?y -- "g
to 1WO WA"{
"to LEf~'-"tlE
---- -
......... TRAff\ C LANE
....
\
\
\
..
.......
.......
~lf) 8\KE LANE
"('l S\OEWALK
....
- -
--
5
""'-
a::
- -
1J1\UT"{ EASEMENT
~
~
.,..
~
--
~~
o~
z=,(X:.
o(,)w
(,) ~
r-ffi='
z-"
w ex:. 0
~~:z.
~co.c(
/
~"i
~~
C'" TCH ponn
t:
o
.-
t/)
t:
.s
~
-0
CO
~
C
o
.-
.-
.-
.-
~
o
,---'-"
,
i
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
,
L-
Le!l@nd
Neighborhood Park
...,."..,fI1ttl/gll......._:~~~
~,.r.klloo/.ploIy.~""'*-.,.,..,W1
..-"'~.pii:ric-'-,-"",,;,.~
__.leaf"""....__'*-""ll~-..
~1Wf4airlO""""'-
.-
,-,
"lcw..............clllttll:br.ruw......_~
~1lIor......fJIf1t_
~--.-...I-.....cl
Ope. Play F..ld
r "~ ~~~7
.~ =~:-'....._pr,."
Meadow
r.Fi.'fl;;'.';1
;t5~~!~,:-ii:;~
w:h;~iil
.-
.....,
~Ibr/l"lOdlOrafll""
~,................,
~""""lrpbVlt~IIr..-lng_<IIaJ'_
~goootIIg--.:_/leGhf.'_
Open Wall!r
~.na.rI_
'Si'*Iow....nbetlCllalollll-.......
~~IlIlc>"lI""""'"_:...
.-
.....,
~
..
1;1
~
...
i
E
t1
J:
t
,;
s
I
~
.~
i
~
f!
..
~
~
~
Cl
PraIrie Wetland
f~'~- =":::=::k)'~
i,_'.~ "Mow~k>".- ..-..-M>Ddy,*,*,
_ ~_,aae-wd
Wooded HiUside
Wooded Wetland
V'. ] ==7'=-:=-
..-
.....,
8' G....I Path - _el 0
..",... ",,",nities
4' Gravel Peth
Footbridge Main (Ji:ll1 ~~
DIID Thoroughlere
Boanlwa1k --
~--......."..---
"Cor>td_...~
.-
.....,
.~
,-,
Reiloralion Prairie Welland
D =:=:.--.....
_-....r-WIO_\OOOCfyoegeOllCn
~-...-
.-
.....,
Oak Grove
~""IQw~'"
_........~,..-
"Cc>'*tI'_."__
.-
,-,
TOhornPSO. nCree~~___._
- """""..._~.---
~1JIJIr."__
.-
.....,
o
----I
I
I
I
I i
", 1, .'-:~
"' Taho!ha>
( .J e'rra" '" '\
", ,.,.. .;.,,~ ~t,\
~vi(, .. ',r-:-.z~
(! ') j
\J
'it
.,
.""', WuhlngtDn
_WDroII
Ia~
-"'"-.~
..::~
~=
"-'=
~
""".
""""""
--
,~~
_II""'"
,..,um
-.:er _--.!!!!!!!!!
~---
-..-
-..-
0lDID .,--!!!
'-
'" .ar 1JrlM
Habitat Types
Sheet _ of -=-
~~
I .
I
_____ f\
------_\ )
o
f ~
f ;lJ~.
~ ~
, #..
:t~~:~>Z;!~
.f":__...,..,.,~
Neighborhood
Park
f '
"..1 I;.
~; \ I\:\~ Mi:"
\ :...
....,
o
[-----
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
i
___.____._.____.________.D____
_______0_
::; Washington State Department of Transportation I
Agency' Yelm
Co. No.. 34
City No.. 1495
Six Year Transportation Improvement Program
From 2006 to 2011
Co. Name: Thurston Co.
Hearing Date:
Amend Date:
Adoption Date:
Resolution No..
MPO/RTPO.
NONITRPC
Project Identification Project Costs in Thousands of Dollars Federally Funded
A. Federal Aid No. B. Bridge No. l: " .. Fund Source Information Expenditure Schedule Projects Only
n; ~w c. .. 5l
.~ III i~ .. ." (Local Agenc}lj
.;: .0 C. Project Title c 0 '"
~ .. Federal Funding
t).!ll QE K! ... u .c RIW
.. ~ 0.
50 ~::J D. Street/Road Name or Number t;; 1ii Req uired
o.z 1) Phase Federal Federal State 4th
lL E Beginning MP or Road - Ending MP or Road j; "5 :; Qj Start Fund Cost by Fund State Local Total Envir. Date
I- '0 1st 2nd 3rd Thru
Funds Funds Funds Type (MM/YY)
F Describe WorK to be Done Ii:: (mmfdc/JYyyy) Code Ph ase Code 6th
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
06 1 IState Route 510 Yelm Loop. II IWSDOT I 12001 I 1200 I I I EA
SR 510 Yelm Looo WSDOT I 33000 I I 33000 I I I I Yes
om: SR 507 10: SR 510
Consb'ud new Loop Road around Yelm.
Totals 34200 34200
08 2 M ~ ? ,.. ALL I STPC 206 SCpl 493 699 T I I EA
103td Avenue fl03rd Avenue - Funded... will be constructed in 2005/2006~ No
om: West Road to: Creek street
Reconstruct to Collector standards.
Totals 206 493 699
07 3 I I I
Stevens Street Connection Stevens Street Connection from 1st to Edwards (Y 4) Yes
om: 1 sl Street to: Edwards TIB Funding Application Submitted.
Widen Stevens Street to Collector standards and construct new c
between 1st Street and Railroad Avenue, induding rail crossing
00 4 07 S CE
Roac/ Resurfacing No
om: City Wide to:
Chip Seal and Fog Coat.
Totals
Report Date: July 25, 2001
Page 1
v. 6.6 - Supersedes previous editions
o
Yelm Comprehensive Transportation Plan
design study and engineering plans before construction of the roadway may begin. The
phasing for the project is presented in the Preliminary Cost Estimate section.
Alternative to the Recommendation
The Y21Y3 Corridor Study considered twelve alternatives for potential routes, including a
no-build alternative. The study concluded that without any roadway improvements, traffic
volumes along YoIm Avenue would nearly double by the year 2020, and the YoIm
Avenue/First Street intersection would operate at a LOS F
Significant Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures
An Environmental Assessment in 1999 addressed the design and construction of the Y2/Y3
Corridor, and a Finding of No Significant Impact was issut->d by the Federal Hig"hway
Administration in February 2000.
Preliminary Costs
Ph ase 1.
EIS, Corridor Study Final Engineering
(FY 1997-2002)
ROW Acquisition
81,600,000
8650,000
Phase 2:
Construction of 3-1aoc facility from
SR 510 to SR 507 Grove Road vicinity
WY 2003-2008)
812,700,000
Tot.a1 Cost:
$ 14,950,000
Y..4 Coates-Stevens-103rd Connector
Need for the Improvement
Within t.he City Center, it. was noted t.hat another east-west roadway was needed north of
Yelm Avenue to accommodate existing and projected traffic flo\\'s. The facility would
accommodate this need by providing an alternate route for local traffic to Yclm Avenue.
July 2001
Page 42
o
o
Yelm Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Planned Construction
Two alternatives were considered. Hoth begin at the intcrseetion of Coat.es Road and
Stevens Avenue. Alternative Y 1.1, described in the 1992 plan, would extend to the cast
until it. meets Yelm Creek. At that. point, thl' roadway would continue to a point south of
the Creek and wrap around the storage locker facility and residential area until it meets
\Vest Hoad near NE 4th Htreet. From this point it would follow \Vest. Hoad t.o its realigned
intersection with l03rd Avenue Sl:... Alternative Y -4.2 would follow a similar alignment,
exeept. that it would use t.he existing Stevens A\'l~nue alignment between NE 4t.h St.rL'Ct and
Edwards Street. Rail crossings are required along both routes.
The City Council will decide which alternative to adopt based on the required design study
Each alternative has its merits as well as its drawbacks. The first alternative would avoid
most existing structures, but faces en\'ironmcnt.al and wetland problems if locat.ed too close
to the Yelm Creek. The latter alternative uses existing alignments, but passes through thE"
stora~e locker facilit.y
According to traffic model projections, the need for a three-lane roadway is immediate. The
improvement provides relief to Yelm Avenue. It is recommended that the City proceed with
the project includin~ the design study and engineering plans to det.ermine t.he appropriate
alignment and construction of the roadway
Alternative to Reconunendation
A No-Action scenario \\'as considered in addition to the recommended alternative. The
roadway provides relief to the congested conditions on Yelm Avenue and better circulation
north of the City Center If the roadway is not constructed, then all traffic will circulate to
t.he south and increase congestion in t.he Cit.y Center
Significant Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Route 4.1 as ident.ified in the 1992 plan, would be located adjacent to Yelm Creek and
require extensive analysis of wet.land and shoreline impact.s. Houte 4.2 passes through an
established residential neighborhood and would result in displacement of existing
commercial structures. No-Action would result in significant. traffic congestion along Yelm
Avenue, especially at the First Street/SR 507 intersection.
Significant wetland mitigation measures may be required for Route 4.1. Impacts crcak--d by
Route 4.2 are unavoidable.
July 2001
Page 43
J
o
\-------------------------
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
L~
D 0
l
,,",
~
o
--1
I
Cl
o _____.____
r---------
I
I
I
I
I
.......::.......--...
III
in
( ........
. "'-". -r
/..........
I i1
. I:
L Ii
....~ Ii
=-'--il, I!
llb="_Jj
',.
\.
i /
iii
if
Cf
ii/i.
\\
II
\1
.,
~t
\\
:-.;,
\~\
'\\
~.,
\$~.
"
\\
'\i
~~.
"
~~
I
.
.
....,,\
\
\.
\,
".'
:!
i'
;1
II
I
:1
!
If I
II!
Iii
fo,
'-~~
J
n
1------------------ -------- -------- --------------------1
I ~ ?P~~\). ,\JQ~.VI -- --!
: . ..; h 0
I "" ..,
Ii oJ ,. /", '. :
". ,
~. ;>,
t"J
! b
I
1
City of Yelm
Urban Growth Areas
Thurston County
1:100,000
.+.
iD QIy L;mI"
iD Urban GrowthAroas
K~.-J Ruralla~~
r.... _.-,,,_
....
",,",
,
,
I
I
L i
I
____J
r~_D
I
l
___________________0__
1 We first note that the update provisions of RCW 36 70A_130 require the County to review its
2 comprehensive plan and development regulations to ensure that they comply with the GMk
3 A county or city shall take legislative action to review and, if needed, revise its
4 comprehensive land use plan and development regulations to ensure the plan and
5 regulations comply with the requirements of this chapter according to the time
6 periods specified in subsection (4) of this section_
RCW 36 70A.130(1) (in pertinent part)
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
This requirement imposes a duty upon the County to bring its plan and development
regulations into compliance with the GMA, including any changes in the GMA enacted since
the County's adoption of its comprehensive plan and development regulations_ While some
provisions of the County's plan and development regulations may not have been subjected
to timely challenge when originally adopted, a challenge to the legislative review required by
RCW 36 70A.130(1) and (4) opens those matters that were raised by Petitioner in the
update review process. See RCW 36.70A.280(2)_ It is not, therefore sufficient for the
County to assert that its provisions regarding rural densities have not been changed; those
provisions must themselves comply with the GMA_
As Petitioner points out, densities that are no more than one dwelling unit per five acres are
generally considered "rural" under the GMA. Durtand v San Juan County, WWGMHB Case
No. 00-2-0062c (Final Decision and Order, May 7,2001), Sky Valley v King County,
CPSGMHB Case No 95-3-0068c (Final Decision and Order, March 12, 1996); Yanisch v
Lewis County WWGMHB Case No 02-2-0007c (Final Decision and Order December 11,
2002); but see Vashon-Maury v King County, CPSGMHB Case No 95-3-0008c (Final
Decision and Order October 23, 1995); and City of Moses Lake v Grant County EWGMHB
Case No 99-1-0016 (Final Decision and Order, May 23, 2000) (holding that rural densities
should be no greater than one dwelling unit per ten acres) Densities that are not urban but
are greater than one dwelling unit per fIVe acres are generally deemed to promote sprawl in
violation of goal 2 of the GMA. RCW 36. 70A.020(2)
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No_ 05-2-0002
July 20. 2005
Page 10 of 37
Western Washington
GrOYlth Management Hearings Board
90S 24th Way SW. Su"e B-2
Olympia. WA 96502
P.O. Box 40953
Olympia. Washington 96504-0953
Phone: 360-664-6966
Fax: 360-664-6975
l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Finding:
Densities greater
than one home per
5 acres are not
'Rural' and
promote sprawl
outside an urban
growth area.
Potential Impact:
If Thurston County
downzones rural
lands, more of the
anticipated
population will be
directed to urban
areas, including
Yelm.
o
-l
______0.
1 The cited zoning code provision, T C C 20.09.040(1 )(a), establishes a minimum lot size in
2 the RR 1/5 zone as follows: "Conventional subdivision lot (net) - four acres for single
3 family, eight acres for duplexes." The County does not contest that this development
4
regulation allows one single family dwelling unit per four acres, rather than one dwelling unit
5
6 per five acres, in the RR 1/5 zone
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
This provision is of even greater concern because RR 1/5 is the least dense of the County's
rural residential designations. The determination of proper rural density levels depends in
large measure upon the GMA's strictures against promotion of sprawl. 48.3 percent of the
County's rural residential areas fall into the RR 1/5 category CP Table 2-1A at 2-18 - 2-19
With such a large portion of the County's rural area designated as RR 1/5, the net density
level of one dwelling unit per four acres in the RR 1/5 zone increases the "conversion of
undeveloped land into sprawling, low-density development in the rural area," in
contravention of RCW 36.70A.070(S)(c)(iii).
Conclusion: The County's high density rural residential designations (SR - 4/1, RR 2/1,
RR 1/1, and RR 1/2), Housing and Residential Densities Policies 1 and 2, and Rural Land
Use and Activities Policy 8; and the County's development regulations implementing these
designations (T C C Ch. 20.10; T C C Ch. 20.11, T C C Chapter 20 13; and T C C
Chapter 20 14) fail to comply with RCW 36 70A.070(S). The residential density levels
allowed in these designations are too intensive for rural areas unless they are designated as
limited areas of more intensive rural development (LAMIRDs) pursuant to RCW
36.70A.070(5)(d). If the County is to allow such areas of more intensive rural development,
it must establish them in accordance with RCW 36 70A.070(S)(d). T C C 20.09040(1 )(a)
also fails to comply with RCW 36 70A.070(S)(c) and (d) by effectively increasing the rural
residential density in the RR 1/5 zone from one dwelling unit per five acres to one single-
family dwelling unit per four acres.
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 150137
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
P.O. Box 40953
Olympia. Washington 98504-0953
Phone: 360.664-8966
Fax: 360.664-8975
o
l
I
Finding:
Rural lands must
have a range of
densities, not just
a uniform one
home per 5 acres.
Potential Impact:
Rural lands can't
all be one home per
5 acres, some lands
need to be one to 10
acres or lower.
j
.____ 0
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
i
I
i
i
I
I
i
i
i
I
I
L
________________________________________0
o
-_..-_._---------~---_._-----~----'----' -~
1 The County responds that it has worked with the cities and towns of Thurston County to
2 properly accommodate projected growth. Respondent's Prehearing Brief at 16-18. The
3 County disputes Petitioner's contention that its UGAs are 62 percent larger than needed to
4
accommodate projected growth; the County argues that it has allowed for 38 percent
5
6 excess capacity in its UGAs_ Ibid at 20 The County argues that this is a statutorily
7 permissible market factor and a 38 percent market factor is not excessive Ibid. The
8 County also argues that the Tenino UGA was actually reduced in size, and the Bucoda UGA
9 was expanded to deal with potential contamination of its aquifer Ibid at 19-20.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
Intervenor argues in support of the Tenino UGA expansion to include Intervenor's property
Intervenors' Brief. Intervenor argues that Tenino changed but did not increase its UGA size
and that adding the Intervenor's property to the UGA will enable development needed to
support a planned sewer facility Intervenor's Brief at 3-4 Intervenor also challenges the
sufficiency of the Petitioner's standing in this case because Petitioner did not participate in
the City of Tenino's adoption of its UGA. Ibid at 5-8 (See footnote 8.)
Board Analysis
The requirements for creating and sizing a UGA are set out in RCW 36.70A.110. This
section of the statute provides that UGAs must include areas and densities sufficient to
accommodate the 20-year population projections by the Office of Financial Management
(OFM):
Based upon the growth management population projections made for the county by
the office of financial management, the county and each city within the county shall
include areas and densities sufficient to permit the urban growth that is projected to
occur in the county or city for the succeeding twenty-year period, except for those
urban growth areas contained totally within a national historical reserve An urban
growth area determination may include a reasonable land market supply factor and
shall permit a range of urban densities and uses. In determining this market factor,
cities and counties may consider local circumstances. Cities and counties have
discretion in their comprehensive plans to make many choices about accommodating
growth.
RCW 36 70A.11 0(2) (in pertinent part)
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No_ 05-2.()002
July 20. 2005
Page 19 of 37
Western Washington
GrO'Nth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW. Suile B-2
Olympia. WA 98502
P.O Box 40953
Olympia. Washington 98504-0953
Phone: 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
__..J
I
~
Finding:
Urban Growth Areas must
be large enough to
accommodate the projected
20 year growth.
Fact:
The 20 year projected
growth does NOT act as a
limitation on growth.
Potential Impact:
The City and Thurston
County will be evaluating
the size of the UGA based
on updated population
projections and potential
lower densities in the
rural lands.
---Q---
o
I
i
I
i
I
I
I_L
o
I
1
2 RCW 36 70A.11 0(2) provides that county UGAs shall include areas and densities sufficient
3 to permit the urban growth projected for the county by OFM RCW 36.70A.110(2). This
4
provision has been interpreted to also limit the size of UGAs as well as to ensure that the
5
6 UGA boundaries are sufficient to accommodate projected growth, in light ofthe anti-sprawl
7 goal of the GMA. Diehl v Mason County, 94Wn.App 645,982 P.2d 543 (Div 11,1999).
8 [T]he OFM projection places a cap on the amount of land a county may allocate to
9 UGAs. Ibid at 654. Thus, RCW 36.70A.11 0 requires that the UGAs be created to
10 accommodate the OFM population projection for the 20-year planning horizon and also
11 limits the size of UGAs to those lands needed to accommodate the urban population
12
projection utilized by the county
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
In this case the County has chosen a 2025 total population forecast figure of 334,261 CP
Table 2-1 at 2-12. The population forecast chosen was adopted in 1999 as a regional
forecast (Population and Employment Forecast for Thurston County, Final Report, October
1999, Index No 208) and then compared to the OFM population projections for the County
in 2002. Buildable Lands Report for Thurston County, Technical Documentation, at 46
(Submitted post-hearing, Index No 43) The medium scenario regional forecast was found
to fall within one percent of the new state medium range forecast (OFM's projection) and
was therefore adopted for use in the Buildable Lands Report and, subsequently, the 2004
comprehensive plan update Ibid., Thurston County Comprehensive Plan (CP) Facts
Section and Land Use Chapter Table 2-1 at 2-11 - 2-12. That population forecast, in turn,
was used to determine demand for land within the UGAs through 2025 Thurston County
Comprehensive Plan (CP), Facts Section and Land Use Chapter Table 2-1 at 2-11 - 2-12.
We note first that the Buildable Lands Report for Thurston County is an impressive and
thorough analysis of land supply and demand in Thurston County The land demand
analysis in that report is well-supported and clearly explained. The County's choice to rely
FINAL OECISION ANO ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20. 2005
Page 20 of37
Westem Washing:on
Growth Management Hearings Board
90S 24th Way SW. SUite B-2
Olympia. WA 98502
P.O Box 40953
Olympia. Washington 98504-0953
Phone: 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
Finding:
Urban Growth
Areas are limited
to those lands
needed to
accommodate the
anticipated
growth.
Potential Impact:
Yelm and Thurston
County will
evaluate the size of
the urban growth
.
area to ensure It
will accommodate
the 20 year
projected
population, but not
be oversized.
--..-J
o
1-------------
I
I
I
I
!
___0
L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32 i
I
i
I
,
I
i
I
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20. 2005
Page 21 of 37
Western Washington
GrOYlth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW. Suile B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
P.O Box 40953
Olympia. Washington 96504-0953
Phone: 360-664-6966
Fax: 360-664-6975
upon the land supply and demand analysis in the Buildable lands Report for planning in the
2004 comprehensive plan update is a sound one
Petitioner does not fault the population forecast chosen by the County or claim that the land
supply projections are not compatible with the population projections provided by OFM.
Instead, Petitioner focuses on the amount of land included in the County's UGAs and
compares it to the projected demand for urban land. Petitioners Futurewise's and league
of Women Voters of Thurston County Prehearing Brief at 31 The County's comprehensive
plan acknowledges that in the urban area "approximately 38% of available residential land
in 2000 will remain in the year 2025, assuming the county experiences growth consistent
with state and regional forecasts, and zoning remains consistent." CP footnote 6 at 2-11
On its face, then, the County's UGAs provide a significantly greater amount of land for
residential urban development than is likely to be needed to accommodate the projected
population growth allocated by the County to UGAs.
The County responds that the disparity is due to a market factor Respondent's Pre hearing
Brief at 22.6 Petitioner argues that supply exceeds demand for residential land in the UGAs
by 62 percent, which is excessive even if it were a market factor Petitioners Futurewise's
and League of Women Voters of Thurston County Prehearing Brief at31 The County
responds that the "7,207 acres is the unconsumed land left in 2025 which is thirty-eight
percent (38%) of the total land supply of 18 799 acres. Respondent's Prehearing Briefat
20. A 38 percent market factor, according to the County, is not clearly erroneous in light of
the uncertainties about how much future land will be needed for growth in the cities and
towns of Thurston County Ibid at 22.
6 Since a market factor is used to increase the available land supply it should be applied to the 2025 land
demand figure. As an example, if the projected land demand is 100 acres, a 25 percent market factor would
ncrease the needed land supply to 125 acres.
J
o
Finding:
The population
projections were
NOT found to be
.
znaccurate or too
high.
Potential Impact:
The anticipated
growth has to be
planned for, if it is
not going to be in
the rural lands, it
will be in the
urban areas,
including Yelm.
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
,
I~~
o
o
o
~ ) ?\. \ -7 I.. \.=_.~ ,~~] I ( I~
;!:~;~ ~" ".. \) _Z b 11/./
~J { , :', ./.' I_I. '. !J
'- '{ ,'I.,f ~ ../
~ " ,,,I,, '; ~ 1~ ,,_l~ r-.':i ,;1
. ~ h 't '....- r -; n .
~~' ~ ~ '. I ~.F';
;--~ /,' .,......;v--;::;;z.,. , )1" o. ( ) '-.
,/'{ f~"';5J~1'I':I" r (.' 'f,!~ . ',' '
t'-~..... ~--2 y..~, _ -'~ " j' '!'
r,' j;,.' 4.',;-M/" ";i"/~:7J:7 I {, (
'$P~1rt ..~~~-~~; r):rj~~.
~!,j~! 'f ~'::;// -', :";i\ ,',
~'" r.j-'r/~;,j<_':I- ~! -:_~ ) -'-~-
'.' 'HL"",!,~ ','-;" ,,~fjl t . )., /
'Sir _ ~ I~ l,I~.';~
,r" 7'.-/~ ;r( Irr~ 'I ~~!jJ' · t
l/" -/;cP7',J'r'-;;' ,:; / ~ , ,
~,c:..;r ~, . f (-". ", " )
~ _~_~'X~~ _ /-,._ },
c:r::t''0.~~ <"'-,?, ,~ ~ ()
r("iJ II -;~. 'J 11y(' "'. ;)1
'.:' f' Ii .,j ",. ~i.,t./ '",-} "
f~< 1"*;~....1"J p _
[''','.f!!;,,~1~;' I ) -L
t-'t'J{ .. !.
Jh';;, - 1_ ~.._ ,J t ... ~}
~/,'1r.r.1;j;:';;fj I.
I .'1;,,,.,' )""
~, !tv ":":".-?,.,
"!'" ,-
I: _ , I
I~ d<'/'~'F<
N _#-
]
I -It'
i C""",-,--'-
rr.,J!~~, !
k...:/J: If""'" 1"!l (
~: -;'.'4;",f-: '5ft'L"
~ J.;#':.$.L... ,.;__~,~.,_,.,._
City of Yelm
Urban Growth Areas
Thurston County
1'100.000
w+"
'III City Limits
CJ Urban Growth Areas
_J
;"<,
. '(
~--_! t ,-\-,:h~
o ',0>-~ p_ ~ r
# " : -~~ .
_~ ,,3": ! -. i
~ ~~~VU~~
/j/ .- '-' '- I
o
1------
I
I
I
I I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
,
i
;
I
I
I
I
~.
;:,.:. I ~
"
!
J
, .~
L_
o
__ . ,1
o
---l
~c--.; -..--..~.~-.;:
l~ .. / .., ,-.,
. . .
,-..-...... -. ,
~
City of Yelm
Urban Growth Areas
Thurston County
1"100,000
..-+"
,
o
r-
I
!
)
l_~~__
o
~;J~il\\\J . .\~~
.~J f , " r bl II
c:;/ t.): . ,: !-\ \\,~J 1/
~.. / ~
~ '"
...
,
,
j
it t i
; -,
c: ~--
i
to 'il
~""'''''';*.;,.*
;;
... \
City of Yelm
Urban Growth Areas
Thurston County
1"100,000
w+t
r .... . .. " 1
i c=J City Limits !
II J U"an Growth A_I
I Rural Lands I
~"--_. I
~ ~"
"". .. ,-~r'-\
~,;.>'_4 "~
~~
) \~ ('-:}
j.Ji1,~
" ,.;:,,-~
o
--~
I
I
I
_.....-J
o
n
Support Thurston County's planning efforts:
v"'Review Population projections for SE Thurston
County
v"'Review UrbanIRural split of projected
population
v'" Evaluate Urban Growth Area
J
o
o
c
OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER
CITY OF YELM
REPORT AND DECISION
CASE NO.
MPD-05-0067-YL - TAHOMA TERRA
APPLICANT Tahoma Terra LLC
4200 6th Avenue SE, Suite 301
Lacey, WA 98503
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
The applicant has made application for a Master Plan Development on a 220 acre parcel of
land located south of Berry Valley Road and east of Longmire Street. Concurrently with the
Conceptual approval, Tahoma Terra has applied for a final master site plan for the portion
of the property east of the Thompson Creek and a preliminary subdivision of 89 lots within
the final master site plan area The Conceptual Master Site Plan for the Master Plan
Development includes areas identified for single family dwellings, multi-family dwellings,
town homes, a community park and recreation area, and neighborhood commercial The
proposal would provide between 880 and 1,200 housing units upon completion
SUMMARY OF DECISION
It is hereby recommended that the Yelm City Council approve the Conceptual Master Site
Plan of Tahoma Terra subject to the conditions contained herein
PUBLIC HEARING
After reviewing Planning and Community Development Staff Report and examining
available information on file with the application, the Examiner conducted a public
hearing on the request as follows
The hearing was opened on July 11, 2005, at 9 00 a m
Parties wishing to testify were sworn in by the Examiner
The following exhibits were submitted and made a part of the record as follows
EXHIBIT "1" -
Planning and Community Development Staff Report and
Attachments
-1-
GRANT BECK appeared, presented the Community Development Department Staff
Report, and testified that this southwest area of Yelm was annexed in 1993 as an MPC
The City has a blank slat for development with uses consistent with the comprehensive
plan The MPC has its own zoning code with little direction for the first master plan The
first subdivision must be consistent with the conceptual and final plan approval
o
STEVE CHAMBERLAIN appeared on behalf of the request and testified that they have
developed a conceptual plan for the entire 220 acres, a final plan for the area east of
Thompson Creek, and a preliminary plat of 89 lots The site previously supported a large
dairy farm and was purchased for the MPC The site is generally level with rolling pasture
east of the creek. To the west of the creek the topography ascends to a higher plateau
covered with trees Soils on the site consist of topsoil and sand and gravel which are
conducive to development. The dairy farm ceased operation in 1993 or 1994, but other
cattle have grazed on the site since then They will use a natural feature design
incorporating the City design guidelines They anticipate seven to ten years to develop the
entire site They will locate the commercial area east of the creek and townhouses with
overlook the golf course They anticipate between 700 and 1,200 dwelling units over the
220 acres They will collect, treat, and discharge all stormwater drainage into the soil, and
will have a few ponds in the good soil areas Sanitary sewers will serve the project as well
as a major arterial The City will provide potable water and sanitary sewer service, and they
will construct parks throughout the development.
JEFF SCHRAMM, traffic engineer, appeared and testified that he has provided traffic 0
studies for the past ten years and conducted such study for the entire MPC He evaluated a
conceptual analysis for all phases, and for Phases 1 and 2 east of the creek. They will
provide mitigation for this project in addition to the State and City plans The entire traffic
analysis and development for the annexation area were considered by the City and the
State The MDNS sets forth mitigating measures for traffic which includes an approximate
$1 million dollar impact fee in addition to the road improvements The 89 lot subdivision will
require improvement of Longmire Street to Yelm Avenue to modified collector standards
with shoulders and bike lanes They will improve the Yelm/Longmire intersection with a
center turn lane Future development will require an extension of Killion Road as a new
road to serve the development. No development will occur west of the creek until the initial
connection is made They will also install a new traffic signal and will widen both roads
These improvements will accommodate Phases 3 through 5 For the balance of the site
they will improve Mosman Avenue and realign it to a four leg intersection which is also
consistent with the City TIP They will provide access to SR-510 by either Mosman or the
new road connection to the south All of the improvements are consistent with the City's
plans and methods of determining mitigation
STEVE SHANEWISE appeared and testified that he is a wetland scientist and studied the
wetlands on the site A wetland near the south property line drains north to the creek and
the creek channel is in the wetland All wetlands meet the definition of Category 2 for which
the ordinance requires a 75 foot wide buffer, as compared with their 100 foot wide buffer
They will construct ballfields, park, and lawn in the creek bottom, and will remove fill from 0
-2-
,1;~;
{?
c
the wetlands and will cross the creek with a bridge Construction will affect 5 to 6 acres of
wetlands They will restore two to four acres of drained wetlands
MR. CHAMBERLAIN reappeared and testified that they will utilize purple pipe or recycled
water from the sewer treatment plant for irrigation While the water is not considered
drinkable, it is treated to that standard
BOB DROLL, landscape architect, appeared and testified that 80% of his work is in the
park and recreational fields Larger developments can impact a City They propose 60
acres of open space and parks and about 25% will be developed into active recreational
areas The balance will consist of habitat and open space Neighborhood parks will contain
playground apparatus for elementary children They will also have activities for adults and
seniors to include over a mile of walking trails consisting of paved, boardwalk, and crushed
rock. They will have pocket parks within subdivisions also The main park will have two
picnic shelters
o
MR. CHAMBERLAIN reappeared and testified that the applicant has 60 years experience in
developing property and in home building This will be the most unique development in the
City and Quadrant Homes will build all of the residential dwellings Phase 1 will consist of
89 lots They will carry the same theme throughout the development starting with the
residences in Phase 1 which will be single family residential exclusively The primary
access for the subdivision will be from Longer and they will work with adjoining property
owners to minimize the impacts of construction They will also bring utilities down Longer
and will accommodate storm drainage on site
JIM STROTT, Quadrant Homes, testified that his company is the largest home builder in
the State and that they offer an entry level product. They have a mix of lots on this site and
buyers can determine the size and quality of the home They will have competitive pricing
They anticipate constructing two homes per week to manage the growth They anticipate
home sizes of 1,800 square feet which will sell for between $150,000 and $175,000 and
3,200 square foot homes which will sell for $300,000 or more
MR. BECK reappeared and testified that SEPA review has required different conditions for
different phases They have tied the MONS measures to the number of trips generated not
to the phases Police stations in the area are substandard and the applicant will pay a
police facility charge of $310 per unit for replacement of the existing structure Staff finds
the project consistent with the comprehensive plan and the applicant had to provide more
units to obtain the minimum four dwelling units per acre The Land Use Element promotes
mixed uses such as townhouses and neighborhood commercials, but not to compete with
the downtown businesses. They will have a range of housing and housing prices They will
also provide parks and open space, but install the parks before development as they go
along The dairy farm had water rights and transferred them to the applicant. A condition of
approval requires that development beyond the 89 units have a water transfer The final
development plan contains fixed development regulations for the phases covered The
o Master Site Plan limits the size of the neighborhood commercial to ensure that it will not
-3-
compete with downtown businesses The pocket parks will be constructed in individual
neighborhoods throughout all phases so that children don't need to go far from home The
subdivision conditions are straight forward and staff recommends approval subject to the
mitigating measures and conditions
o
MARGARET CLAPP appeared and testified that she is very impressed with the proposal
and served on the Planning Commission during the southwest annexation This MPC is
what the commission members desired, and it meets all of the tests to include significant
open space She wants to see the wetland mitigation work and believes the applicant has
done a first class job and will provide all infrastructure
DIANE D'ACUTI appeared and concurs with Ms Clapp She did has transportation
questions as she does not believe one stop light will handle the increased traffic She also
discussed the setbacks from Thompson Creek and ascertained that the applicant is vested
under the old ordinance which requires less of a buffer Thompson Creek will not flow
unless someone cleans it out. Adding more water will cause the creek to back up and the
streets to flood
JAMES ZUKOWSKI appeared, asked questions, and obtained the following answers The
conceptual plan covers 220 acres and will result in construction of 800 to 1,200 residential
units The final plan covering the area east of the creek will result in approximately 216
units to include townhomes and commercial He believes the Mosman extension a problem 0
due to ownership issues The critical areas located at the north end of the Thompson
ballfields are still within a 100 foot buffer He questioned the geotechnical hazard area for
the extension of the boulevard He questioned how trails would cross the creek and
whether the picnic shelters would be for general citizen use or just for residents of the MPC
and who is in charge
JEAN HANDLEY appeared and testified that she was at the last Planning Commission
meeting which updated the Critical Areas Ordinance Nowa subcommittee will testify as to
the new regulations The present regulations are outdated and she is concerned about
retention of trees and the road widening She questioned the source of funds which the City
will use to build improvements With the new population growth, Yelm will compete with
other cities for grants No one has discussed the impact on the fire department, but it will
have a large impact and create a large burden The fire department may need another
building in addition to the police department. She questioned whether emergency vehicle
access would be a problem for the lots If an earthquake occurs, the State will not have
any funds for this project. The City should stop the MPC if the State can't fund the
improvements She referred to the United States Supreme Court decision in the Mosman
Road issue and requested a condition prohibiting the City from exercising eminent domain
HENRY DRAGT appeared and testified that he owned and ran the dairy on the site, and
sold the property in December The sale was a fulfillment of his plans for the site since
1993 The City annexed the parcel in October, 2004, and approved the southwest area for
a conceptual master plan for development to include this parcel The critical areas study 0
-4-
c
o
o
determined no significant impact. He believes the plan a great benefit for the City
JENISE MUGLER appeared and testified that she owns the property south of the
development and that the MONS is out of date In 1999 the checklist showed the
development plans with more open space along the borders The townhouses have now
changed to a high density development. The applicant must revisit the plan as the
apartments are shown right on her property line along the south border The creek goes
through the corner and she desires more open space Either offset the apartments or
provide a greenbelt. The apartments are part of Phase 2
ROSALIE SAECKER appeared and testified that she regularly uses Longmire The
applicant should construct all road improvements to include bike paths and sidewalks along
Longmire They should provide a bus stop at Yelm Avenue and Longmire She questioned
how the development will minimize traffic on Berry Valley Road
GEORGE SWARTZ appeared and testified that he owns the property shown by red line
and that he was left out of the loop His concern is eminent domain because his parcel is
necessary to extend Mosman Street.
MR. CHAMBERLAIN reappeared and testified that the current code requires a buffer of 75
feet, but they have expanded the buffer to at least 100 feet. The ballfields are outside of the
100 foot buffer The impact of cattle on the creek is considerably greater than urban
development. Their development will be compatible with the creek. Phase 1 consists of 89
lots The picnic shelters are primarily for the use of the residents, but others can use them
as well The homeowner's association can rent the shelters to outside organizations Trees
lost on the site will be due to roads and development, but they will not lose that many trees
The site was logged many years ago, and they will replant trees where they can The
development will pay for its impacts with the taxes, impact fees, and required mitigation
They have worked with the City to mitigate impacts on the fire department and police
department. They are looking at an area within the commercial portion of the MPC for the
police department. They do not want to compete with downtown business They do not
propose a big box store, just neighborhood area uses Such would prevent residents from
having to go to SR-51 0 or SR-507 The townhomes can enhance the MPC by providing a
mixed residential use The townhomes are compatible with the creek and the golf course
and will contain 18 to 20 units They have no other opportunities for townhomes on Phases
1 and 2 All internal roads will have sidewalks and bike paths Longmire will be the
preferred route which will keep traffic off of Berry Valley The timing of construction will
direct traffic to the boulevard, and neither Longmire nor Berry Valley will serve as the main
access They will regrade the steep areas to balance the site to minimize traffic during the
construction period They have elevated the trails through the wetlands and across the
creek. Critical areas abut the south side of the site, and the nearest townhouse will be set
back 50 feet from the property line
MR. BECK reappeared and testified that both the comprehensive plan and GMA require the
applicant to use the best available science Wetland restoration IS a big part of the project.
-5-
Impacts on the fire department had a large amount of discussion in the MDNS, but the City
can't justify the use of impact fees The issue is the number of firefighters and not the fire
department's capital facilities The fire department has no plan to increase capital facilities
Most of the infrastructure will be located in Thurston Highlands and will be in place for that
development. They could condition the south property line setback. The standards for that
development are in the guidelines They could codify that requirement which would concern
the non-golf course property The State does not allow eminent domain for business or
economic purposes The decision on Mosman is seven to ten years down the road
o
MS M UGLER reappeared and testified that the townhouses should measure 100 feet from
the off-site wetlands
MS HANDLEY reappeared and testified that the applicant evaluated the creek in a drought
and did not get a true picture of its flow
MS KELLY PETERSON appeared and questioned the impact of 1,200 homes on the water
supply
MR. BECK testified that the City would have the right to the water, but the depth of
withdrawal is not decided The City could draw from other aquifers
MS NEWBY appeared and testified that she resides on Longmire Street and that trucks
pass 25 feet from her window A restaurant already exists at the Killion extension She sees 0
years of traffic and wants Berry Valley extended
DARLENE BAKER appeared and testified regarding drinking water wells
No one spoke further in this matter and so the Examiner took the request under
advisement.
NOTE
A complete record of this hearing is available in the City of Yelm Community
Development Department
FINDINGS. CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION
FINDINGS
1 The Hearing Examiner has admitted documentary evidence into the record, viewed
the property, heard testimony, and taken this matter under advisement.
2 The CIty's SEPA Responsible Official issued and published a Mitigated
Determination of Nonsignificance on May 24, 2005, based on Section 197-11-158
WAC
o
-6-
o
c
o
3
A Notice of Public Hearing was mailed to the applicant and parties of record on June
20,2005 This notice was also posted at City Hall and on the City ofYelm web site
on the same date, and published in the Nisqually Valley News on June 24, 2005
4 The applicant has a possessory ownership interest in a generally rectangular,
220 acre parcel of property located south of SR-510 and west of SR-507 in the
southwest portion of the City of Yelm The applicant requests Conceptual Master
Site Plan approval for the entire parcel, Final master site plan approval for the
portion of the parcel located east of Thompson Creek consisting of approximately
55 acres, and preliminary plat approval for Phase 1, located in the northwest
corner of the site, an 89 single-family residential lots on 15 acres.
5
The Draght family previously used the parcel for a dairy farm for many years, but
ceased operation in 1993 Improvements on the site include a home and
outbuildings associated with the dairy, and development of the site will require
removal of all such improvements Thompson Creek, a Type F stream and it's
associated floodplain and wetlands, bisects the eastern portion of the site in a
north/south direction A road used in conjunction with the dairy farm crosses
Thompson Creek near the center of the site Topography is relatively flat, but
west of the creek, the topography rises as much as 50 feet with bluffs of 22-30
feet. Vegetation consists of pasture grass with forested areas in the northeast
and southwest portions
6 Abutting uses to the west, east and south consist of vacant parcels, agricultural
uses, and single family dwellings on large lots The Nisqually Valley Golf Course
abuts the northeast corner Berry Valley Road Southeast abuts the north portion
of the west property line, and Durant Street abuts a portion of the north property
line Longmire Street SE dead ends at Durant Street and an extension of
Longmire provides access to the dairy farm buildings
7
The site is a portion of the 1993 southwest Yelm annexation which also included
the 1,300-acre Thurston Highlands property, the golf course, and 150 additional
acres As part of the annexation process, the City prepared an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) that assessed the impacts of up to 5,000 dwelling units
to include several potential master plan communities, including the present site
In 1994 owners of the 1,260-acre Thurston Highlands property and the present
site obtained conceptual master plan approval for a master plan development
which included both properties The City required preparation of a Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) prior to approval The applicant
performed little, if any, work on the project, and in accordance with the Yelm
Municipal Code (YMC), the approval lapsed after five years In 1999 another
previous owner submitted an application for a master plan development for the
present 220-acre parcel which the Yelm City Council approved subject to the
preservation of the right-of-way for a boulevard designed to serve the project.
However, the previous applicant did not meet CIty requirements, and the City
-7-
deemed the application withdrawn for lack of progress The present applicant,
Tahoma Terra LLC , submitted its application on March 21,2005
o
8 Chapter 17 62 YMC, sets forth the requirements and procedures for master plan
developments Section 17 62 040 YMC authorizes specific development within
an MPC as follows
A. Conceptual review and approval of the master plan,
B Adoption of a final master plan for the site,
C Approval of specific development actions in accordance with phasing in
the master plan
9
The applicant requests approval of a conceptual master plan for the entire 220-
acre parcel The conceptual plan serves as a guide to future detailed planning
and development for the project site The conceptual plan identifies generalized
land uses, transportation circulation routes, and services The Examiner
conducts a public hearing and then makes a written recommendation to the City
Council for final action The final master site plan shows major development
features and services for the portion of the site included therein, including
phasing and means of financing services The Examiner conducts a public
hearing and makes a recommendation to the City Council for final action
Specific development applications within the MPC are reviewed for consistency
with the approved conceptual and final master site plan
o
10 The Tahoma Terra Conceptual Master Plan application shows that 33% of the
220 acre site will remain in open space to include 24-acres of wetlands and
creek, and 38-acres of open space The net developable area of 147-acres will
result in a minimum of 880 dwelling units and maximum of 1,200 units The
example in the application, shows 1,092 dwelling units broken down into 872
single family units, 80 townhouses, 140 apartments The application also shows
between 1 and 10-acres of commercial uses
11
The Conceptual Master Site Plan shows that Phases 1 and 2 are located north of
Thompson Creek and consist of mostly single-family residential homes at
densities of four to six dwelling units per acre (northwest corner) Sandwiched
between the said residential area and the open space associated with Thompson
Creek are the neighborhood commercial uses Moderate density residential
development at six to ten units per acre extends in a narrow band southeast from
the single family units along the north property line to the east property line The
applicant proposes townhouses for this area which will abut both the golf course
and wetlands South of the open space in the eastern portion of the site, the
applicant proposes moderate density residential uses at six to ten units per acre
and high density residential development at 10 to 24 units per acre Open space
associated with steep slopes is located in the southeast corner and the balance
of the site (almost 50%) is set aside for single family residential at four to six
o
-8-
o
o
o
t." /.\
dwelling units per acre Phase 1, consisting of 89 single family residential lots, is
located in the northwest corner' and Phase 2, which comprises the balance of
the site east of Thompson Creek, is located between the creek and Phase 1
Phases 3 through 8, consist of the a large, single family area south of the creek,
and Phase 9, consists of moderate and high density residential uses immediately
south of the creek.
12
Section 17 62 050 YMC provides that the conceptual plan must identify
generalized land uses, transportation circulation routes, and services As
previously found, the applicant has identified proposed uses and phasing The
transportation system includes internal plat roads connecting to Longmire Street,
Berry Valley Road and via Mosman Street to SR 507 The master plan also
shows a new arterial boulevard extending southeast from Killion Road through
the site and across Thompson Creek to the south property line Said road will
eventually extend through other master plan developments to SR-507 The
conceptual plan satisfies Section 17 62 050 YMC
13
Section 1762 050(C) YMC sets forth the requirement for the form and content of
an application for conceptual approval The application satisfies all requirements
set forth therein Subsection (i) requires the applicant to show the means by
which the master plan meets the objectives of YMC 17 62 020 Findings on each
objective set forth therein are hereby made as follows
A. Approval of the MPC will assure future growth and development in accord
with the City's comprehensive plan and planning policies This proposed
MPC implements long-term goals of the City commencing with it's
decision to annex the property along with other properties in 1993 The
proposal is also consistent with two other MPC approvals covering the
same property The MPC complies with specific comprehensive plan
policies
B This large scale project will incorporate a full range of land uses consistent
with the comprehensive plan to include multi-family, townhouse, and
single-family residential development, neighborhood commercial uses,
and significant parks and open spaces
C The MPC represents safe, efficient, and economic use of the land as it
proposes high density neighborhoods, moderate density neighborhoods,
commercial uses, parks, and pedestrian trial systems
o
The City of Yelm will provide water and sanitary sewer services, and the
applicant will construct the storm drainage system to meet City standards
Furthermore, the applicant will use reclaimed water from the City sewer
treatment plant to provide irrigation for ballfields, landscaped areas, and
playgrounds Puget Sound Energy will provide electrical service and
-9-
natural gas
o
E The MPC provides opportunities for decreased trip-lengths of automobile
travel, increased public access to mass transit, bicycle routes, and other
alternative modes of transportation The MPC is located close to the
downtown business district of the City and within easy walking distance of
local recreation and school facilities The neighborhoods will have
abundant walkways, alleys, parks, and trails to provide safe walking and
bicycling routes The compact residential groupings will encourage use of
mass transit and alternative modes of transportation Location of
neighborhood commercial uses within the site will eliminate the need for
many off-site shopping trips
F Compliance with building code requirements will. ensure reduction of
energy consumption and demand, and the significant open space acreage
will minimize degradation of wildlife habitat and natural features Zero lot
line, cluster housing, and multi-family buildings will contribute to efficient
land use and reduce demands on energy consumption Significant stream
and wetland buffers ensure preservation of the most critical wildlife
habitats
G
The MPC will minimize impacts on existing neighborhoods by eventually
providing a boulevard access directly from SR 510 to SR 507, will
encourage neighborhood scale businesses to serve residents of the MPC,
and will provide internal trails and parks for on-site recreational
opportunities
o
H This criteria requires blending of commercial and industrial building
designs However, the MPC proposes no industrial uses and no large
commercial areas
The proposed MPC satisfies all criteria set forth in section 1762 020 YMC
14 Section 1762 020(A) YMC requires that an MPC be "in accordance with the
comprehensive plan and planning policies of the City" as set forth on Pages 9-32
of the Staff Report (Exhibit "1") The project satisfies all applicable
comprehensive plan goals and poliCIes Staff's assessment is hereby
incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full
15
The project meets Growth Management Act planning parameters as it proposes
an overall urban density of four dwelling units per net developable acre, and all
municipal utilities such as sewer, potable water, fire flow, and irrigation water will
serve the site The commercial portion of the MPC complies with policies of the
commercial development element of the comprehensive plan as the proposed
uses will not compete with the downtown businesses, nor will they draw patrons
o
-10-
c
o
o
from other residential areas Limitations on the size of buildings and the
commercial area acreage will ensure that a new commercial core is not created
A condition of approval requires the commercial area ready for construction prior
to development occurring south of Thompson Creek. The open space areas will
provide passive and active recreational opportunities and are intended to serve
all residents of the City The 60-acres of permanent open space greatly exceeds
the minimum requirement of 5% of gross area
16
As previously found, the project proposes a variety of housing types and sizes
which will provide affordable building sites, and therefore should attract
customers of varying income and age levels Staff has required the applicant to
construct 48-multi family units, for every 300 single-family units to ensure a
variety of affordable housing opportunities The multi-family element represents
approximately 14% of the total projected housing units Sidewalks, pathways,
and trails will provide pedestrian orientation throughout the entire project.
17
The most critical issue affecting approval of the MPC is traffic mitigation Upon
build-out, the project will generate between 1,400 to 1,600 p m peak hour trips
and 13,300 to 15,300 average daily trips The City has imposed a mitigating
measure in the MONS which requires numerous road improvements triggered by
increases in project traffic The applicant must also comply with the City's
transportation facility charge, which will upon build-out, result in the payment of
more than one million dollars. In addition, the applicant must construct the
following traffic improvements
A. Prior to the first final subdivision approval, reconstruct Longmire Street to
a modified collector standard from the project entry to Yelm Avenue West
(SR-510)
B Prior to approval of any final subdivision which includes the 90th p m peak
hour trip construct a center left-turn lane on Yelm Ave West at the
Longmire Street intersection with sufficient capacity to serve anticipated
project traffic volumes
C Prior to the 513th pm peak hour trip, construct an extension of Killion
Road from the property to Yelm Ave West, re-align the said intersection,
construct a traffic signal, and construct left turn lanes on all four legs of the
intersection
o Prior to the 1,100th p m peak hour trip, reconstruct Mosman Ave to
modified collector standards from Longmire Street to SR-507, and also
construct the Mosman Avenue/ SR-507 intersection to include re-
alignment and a center left turn lane on SR-507
E
Prior to the 1,301 st p m peak hour trip, define and construct the Mosman
-11-
Avenue connector between Longmire Street and Solberg Street, or
continue the Killion Road Boulevard to SR 507 through the Thurston
Highlands Property
o
The applicant has demonstrated through the environmental review process that
the proposed transportation system improvements will accommodate the traffic
and maintain acceptable levels of service for current and future residents
18 The proposed open space plan meets the objectives of the parks and open
space element of the comprehensive plan The City anticipates between 2,000
and 2,800 new residents will live in the MPC, and the parks level of service policy
requires 5-acres of open space per 1,OOO-projected population Said policy
would require Tahoma Terra LLC , to provide between 10 and 14-acres of open
space suitable for active recreational opportunities The proposal provides
approximately 60-acres of open space and well over 14-acres of improved active
recreational areas Land use goals require an MPC to maintain a minimum of
25% of the total land area as permanent open space The Tahoma Terra project
maintains approximately 27% of the total area in open space The applicant will
also provide small neighborhood pocket-parks with appropriate elementary-aged
activity equipment.
19
The project satisfies elements of the Natural Element, Goals and Policies of the
comprehensive plan as the applicant will protect and enhance Thompson Creek,
a fish-bearing stream, and the wetlands and floodplains associated therewith
The applicant has provided greater buffers than required under the applicable
critical areas ordinance, and will improve wetlands degraded by the dairy farming
operation
o
20 The entire City is designated as a critical aquifer recharge area, and the applicant
must meet the requirements of the 1992 Department of Ecology storm-water
manual as adopted by the City Such requires treatment of storm water prior to
release The applicant proposes to utilize rain gardens as the storm water
treatment method The environmental documents show plant and animal priority
species and habitat in the vicinity of the site The applicant will preserve and
enhance the predominant oak woodland and Shore Pine plant communities
located along the Thompson Creek corridor and will preserve them in open
space
21
The City does not own sufficient water rights to serve the MPC, but the City has
applied to the Washington Department of Ecology for water rights for the
southwest annexation area While the City has not received additional rights,
Tahoma Terra has water rights associated with the previous dairy farm The
applicant has assigned these water rights to the City and the City has applied to
DOE for a transfer which, if approved, would allow the City to provide domestic
water for the initial portion of the development. A previous owner of the property
o
-12-
o
o
c
participated in a Sewer Local Improvement District (LID), and the City will
therefore provide water and sewer connections for 89 units
CONCLUSIONS
1 The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to consider and decide the issues presented
by this request.
2 The Applicant has established that the request for Conceptual Master Site Plan
approval for Tahoma Terra is consistent will applicable policies of the City of
Yelm comprehensive plan and satisfies all criteria set forth in Chapter 17 62
YMC Therefore, the Conceptual Master Site Plan approval for the Tahoma
Terra project should be approved subject to the following conditions
1 The conditions of the Mitigated Determination of Non-significance are hereby
referenced and are considered conditions of this approval
2 The average density of the proposal be not less than four dwelling units
per net developable acre within each final master plan area, consistent
with Growth Management policies
3
Proposed neighborhood commercial areas shall be centrally located within
the master plan development and shall be screened from residential
neighborhoods.
4 A minimum of 55 acres (25% of the site) shall be set aside as permanent
open space with a variety of active and passive recreational
improvements An area within the identified open space equivalent to five
percent of the gross area of each final master site plan application shall be
identified and improved within the community park area as part of each
final master site plan approval and implementation
5 A minimum of 55 acres (25% of the total land area) shall accommodate
medium and high density residential development. This can be
accomplished through all four proposed land use designations
6 Prior to approval of any residential development west of Thompson Creek,
the neighborhood commercial center should be improved and ready for
the construction of commercial buildings Improved means that any
applicable land use or land division approvals have been issued and all
required site improvements for the land use or land division approval has
been completed
7
For every 300 single family detached, duplex, or town home dwelling Units,
48 multi-family units shall be constructed The multi-family dwelling units
-13-
required to meet the prescribed ratio shall be under construction prior to
issuance of building permits for the next block of single family dwelling,
duplex, or town home dwelling units
o
8 Prior to approval of any development within a final master site plan
approval area, the applicant shall prepare an infrastructure plan that
includes water, sanitary sewer, reclaimed water, and streets The plan
shall be consistent with the Capital facilities Plans for the City and shall
include sufficient design detail in order to review subsequent development
approvals The plan shall be submitted to and approved by the City prior
to the issuance of building permits for dwellings or commercial buildings
within each approved development within a final master plan area
9 Each final master plan shall include provisions for a full network of
sidewalks and pathways throughout the master plan to encourage
multimodal opportunities The boulevard shall accommodate transit stops
for school and public transit opportunities
10 Each final master plan application shall provide for the continuation of
streets within the Yelm Urban Growth Area pursuant to the polices of the
Comprehensive Plan
11
A minimum of 55 acres (25% of the site) shall be identified as permanent
open space with a variety of formal and informal recreational
improvements Prior to dwelling construction in any development, land
equivalent to five percent of the gross area of each final Master Plan area
shall be developed within the community park area
o
12 Every final master plan shall include provisions for one pocket park for
every 50 residential units within a neighborhood Larger 'community'
parks of between ;/z acre and 5 acres which are centrally located may be
substituted for half the required 'pocket' parks at a ratio of 1 acre for every
50 lots
RECOMMENDATION
It is hereby recommended that the Yelm City Council approve the Conceptual Master
Site Plan of Tahoma Terra subject to the conditions contained in the conclusions above
ORDERED this 2nd day of August, 2005
o
-14-
c
o
o
STEPHEN K. CAUSSEAUX, JR.
Hearing Examiner
TRANSMITTED this 2nd day of August, 2005, to the following
ENGINEER.
SCA Consulting Group
4200 6th Avenue SE, Ste 301
Lacey, WA 98503
OTHERS
Jenise Mugler
15009 Highway 507 SE
Yelm, WA 98597
Darlene Baker
POBox 727
Yelm, WA 98597
Margaret Clapp
18309 Cook Road SE
Yelm, WA 98597
Henry and Jane Dragt
5815 95th Avenue SW
Olympia, WA 98512
Steven Chamberlain
4200 6th Avenue SE
Lacey, WA 98057
Jean Handley
POBox 1657
Yelm, WA 98597
Diane D'Acuti
19436 93rd Avenue SE
Yelm, WA 98597
Larry Schamm
18217 Highway 507 SE
Yelm, WA 98597
George Swartz
2410 Crestline Drive NW
Olympia, WA 98502
James Zukowski
POBox 858
Yelm, WA 98597
Rosalie Saecker
412 SW McKenzie Avenue
Yelm, WA 98597
Linda J Powell
POBox 891
Yelm, WA 98597
Bob Droll
4405 7th Avenue SE
Lacey, WA 98503
Gaye Newby
15105 Longmire Street SE
Yelm, WA 98597
Mary Lou Clemens
15030 Longmire St.
Yelm, WA 98597
Curtis Smelser
1201 Third Avenue, Ste 3400
Seattle, WA 98101
John Turner
545 Mcphee Road SW
City of Yelm
Tami Merriman
-15-
Olympia, WA 98502
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
Yelm, WA 98597
o
o
o
-16-
o
o
o
OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER
CITY OF YELM
REPORT AND DECISION
CASE NO
MPD-05-0067-YL - TAHOMA TERRA
APPLICANT Tahoma Terra LLC
4200 6th Avenue SE, Suite 301
Lacey, WA 98503
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
The applicant has made application for a final master site plan on the portion of the
Tahoma Terra Master Plan Development located east of Thompson Creek.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION
It is hereby recommended to the City of Yelm City Council that the Final Master Plan for
Phases 1 and 2 of the Tahoma Terra project be approved subject to adoption of then Final
Master Plan Development Guidelines
PUBLIC HEARING
After reviewing Planning and Community Development Staff Report and examining
available information on file with the application, the Examiner conducted a public
hearing on the request as follows
The hearing was opened on July 11, 2005, at 9.00 a m
Parties wishing to testify were sworn in by the Examiner
The following exhibits were submitted and made a part of the record as follows
EXHIBIT "1" -
Planning and Community Development Staff Report and
Attachments
GRANT BECK appeared, presented the Community Development Department Staff
Report, and testified that this southwest area of Yelm was annexed in 1993 as an MPC
The City has a blank slat for development with uses consistent with the comprehensive
plan The MPC has its own zoning code with little direction for the first master plan The
first subdivision must be consistent with the conceptual and final plan approval
-1-
o
STEVE CHAMBERLAIN appeared on behalf of the request and testified that they have
developed a conceptual plan for the entire 220 acres, a final plan for the area east of
Thompson Creek, and a preliminary plat of 89 lots The site previously supported a large
dairy farm and was purchased for the MPC The site is generally level with rolling pasture
east of the creek. To the west of the creek the topography ascends to a higher plateau
covered with trees Soils on the site consist of topsoil and sand and gravel which are
conducive to development. The dairy farm ceased operation in 1993 or 1994, but other
cattle have grazed on the site since then They will use a natural feature design
incorporating the City design guidelines They anticipate seven to ten years to develop the
entire site They will locate the commercial area east of the creek and townhouses with
overlook the golf course They anticipate between 700 and 1,200 dwelling units over the
220 acres They will collect, treat, and discharge all stormwater drainage into the soil, and
will have a few ponds in the good soil areas Sanitary sewers will serve the project as well
as a major arterial The City will provide potable water and sanitary sewer service, and they
will construct parks throughout the development.
JEFF SCHRAMM, traffic engineer, appeared and testified that he has provided traffic
studies for the past ten years and conducted such study for the entire MPC He evaluated a
conceptual analysis for all phases, and for Phases 1 and 2 east of the creek. They will
provide mitigation for this project in addition to the State and City plans The entire traffic
analysis and development for the annexation area were considered by the City and the 0
State The MONS sets forth mitigating measures for traffic which includes an approximate
$1 million dollar impact fee in addition to the road improvements The 89 lot subdivision will
require improvement of Longmire Street to Yelm Avenue to modified collector standards
with shoulders and bike lanes They will improve the Yelm/Longmire intersection with a
center turn lane Future development will require an extension of Killion Road as a new
road to serve the development. No development will occur west of the creek until the initial
connection is made They will also install a new traffic signal and will widen both roads
These improvements will accommodate Phases 3 through 5 For the balance of the site
they will improve Mosman Avenue and realign it to a four leg intersection which is also
consistent with the City TIP They will provide access to SR-510 by either Mosman or the
new road connection to the south All of the improvements are consistent with the City's
plans and methods of determining mitigation
STEVE SHANEWISE appeared and testified that he is a wetland scientist and studied the
wetlands on the site A wetland near the south property line drains north to the creek and
the creek channel is in the wetland All wetlands meet the definition of Category 2 for which
the ordinance requires a 75 foot wide buffer, as compared with their 100 foot wide buffer
They will construct ballfields, park, and lawn in the creek bottom, and will remove fill from
the wetlands and will cross the creek with a bridge Construction will affect 5 to 6 acres of
wetlands They will restore two to four acres of drained wetlands
MR. CHAMBERLAIN reappeared and testified that they will utilize purple pipe or recycled
water from the sewer treatment plant for irrigation While the water is not considered 0
-2-
o
o
o
drinkable, it is treated to that standard
BOB DROLL, landscape architect, appeared and testified that 80% of his work is in the
park and recreational fields Larger developments can impact a City They propose 60
acres of open space and parks and about 25% will be developed into active recreational
areas The balance will consist of habitat and open space Neighborhood parks will contain
playground apparatus for elementary children They will also have activities for adults and
seniors to include over a mile of walking trails consisting of paved, boardwalk, and crushed
rock. They will have pocket parks within subdivisions also The main park will have two
picnic shelters
MR. CHAMBERLAIN reappeared and testified that the applicant has 60 years experience in
developing property and in home building This will be the most unique development in the
City and Quadrant Homes will build all of the residential dwellings Phase 1 will consist of
89 lots They will carry the same theme throughout the development starting with the
residences in Phase 1 which will be single family residential exclusively The primary
access for the subdivision will be from Longer and they will work with adjoining property
owners to minimize the impacts of construction They will also bring utilities down Longer
and will accommodate storm drainage on site
JIM STROTT, Quadrant Homes, testified that his company is the largest home builder in
the State and that they offer an entry level product. They have a mix of lots on this site and
buyers can determine the size and quality of the home They will have competitive pricing
They anticipate constructing two homes per week to manage the growth They anticipate
home sizes of 1,800 square feet which will sell for between $150,000 and $175,000 and
3,200 square foot homes which will sell for $300,000 or more
MR. BECK reappeared and testified that SEPA review has required different conditions for
different phases They have tied the MONS measures to the number of trips generated not
to the phases Police stations in the area are substandard and the applicant will pay a
police facility charge of $310 per unit for replacement of the existing structure Staff finds
the project consistent with the comprehensive plan and the applicant had to provide more
units to obtain the minimum four dwelling units per acre The Land Use Element promotes
mixed uses such as townhouses and neighborhood commercials, but not to compete with
the downtown businesses. They will have a range of housing and housing prices They will
also provide parks and open space, but install the parks before development as they go
along The dairy farm had water rights and transferred them to the applicant. A condition of
approval requires that development beyond the 89 units have a water transfer The final
development plan contains fixed development regulations for the phases covered The
Master Site Plan limits the size of the neighborhood commercial to ensure that it will not
compete with downtown businesses The pocket parks will be constructed in individual
neighborhoods throughout all phases so that children don't need to go far from home The
subdivision conditions are straight forward and staff recommends approval subject to the
mitigating measures and conditions
-3 -
MARGARET CLAPP appeared and testified that she is very impressed with the proposal
and served on the Planning Commission during the southwest annexation This MPC is
what the commission members desired, and it meets all of the tests to include significant
open space She wants to see the wetland mitigation work and believes the applicant has
done a first class job and will provide all infrastructure
o
DIANE D'ACUTI appeared and concurs with Ms Clapp She did has transportation
questions as she does not believe one stop light will handle the increased traffic She also
discussed the setbacks from Thompson Creek and ascertained that the applicant is vested
under the old ordinance which requires less of a buffer Thompson Creek will not flow
unless someone cleans it out. Adding more water will cause the creek to back up and the
streets to flood
JAMES ZUKOWSKI appeared, asked questions, and obtained the following answers The
conceptual plan covers 220 acres and will result in construction of 800 to 1,200 residential
units The final plan covering the area east of the creek will result in approximately 216
units to include townhomes and commercial He believes the Mosman extension a problem
due to ownership issues The critical areas located at the north end of the Thompson
ballfields are still within a 100 foot buffer He questioned the geotechnical hazard area for
the extension of the boulevard He questioned how trails would cross the creek and
whether the picnic shelters would be for general citizen use or just for residents of the MPC
and who is in charge
o
JEAN HANDLEY appeared and testified that she was at the last Planning Commission
meeting which updated the Critical Areas Ordinance Nowa subcommittee will testify as to
the new regulations The present regulations are outdated and she is concerned about
retention of trees and the road widening She questioned the source offunds which the City
will use to build improvements. With the new population growth, Yelm will compete with
other cities for grants No one has discussed the impact on the fire department, but it will
have a large impact and create a large burden The fire department may need another
building in addition to the police department. She questioned whether emergency vehicle
access would be a problem for the lots If an earthquake occurs, the State will not have
any funds for this project. The City should stop the MPC if the State can't fund the
improvements She referred to the United States Supreme Court decision in the Mosman
Road issue and requested a condition prohibiting the City from exercising eminent domain
HENRY DRAGT appeared and testified that he owned and ran the dairy on the site, and
sold the property in December The sale was a fulfillment of his plans for the site since
1993 The City annexed the parcel in October, 2004, and approved the southwest area for
a conceptual master plan for development to include this parcel The critical areas study
determined no significant impact. He believes the plan a great benefit for the City
JENISE MUGLER appeared and testified that she owns the property south of the
development and that the MONS is out of date In 1999 the checklist showed the
development plans with more open space along the borders The townhouses have now 0
-4-
c
o
o
changed to a high density development. The applicant must revisit the plan as the
apartments are shown right on her property line along the south border The creek goes
through the corner and she desires more open space Either offset the apartments or
provide a greenbelt. The apartments are part of Phase 2
ROSALIE SAECKER appeared and testified that she regularly uses Longmire The
applicant should construct all road improvements to include bike paths and sidewalks along
Longmire They should provide a bus stop at Yelm Avenue and Longmire She questioned
how the development will minimize traffic on Berry Valley Road
GEORGE SWARTZ appeared and testified that he owns the property shown by red line
and that he was left out of the loop His concern is eminent domain because his parcel is
necessary to extend Mosman Street.
MR. CHAMBERLAIN reappeared and testified that the current code requires a buffer of 75
feet, but they have expanded the buffer to at least 100 feet. The ballfields are outside of the
100 foot buffer The impact of cattle on the creek is considerably greater than urban
development. Their development will be compatible with the creek. Phase 1 consists of 89
lots The picnic shelters are primarily for the use of the residents, but others can use them
as well The homeowner's association can rent the shelters to outside organizations Trees
lost on the site will be due to roads and development, but they will not lose that many trees
The site was logged many years ago, and they will replant trees where they can The
development will pay for its impacts with the taxes, impact fees, and required mitigation
They have worked with the City to mitigate impacts on the fire department and police
department. They are looking at an area within the commercial portion of the MPC for the
police department. They do not want to compete with downtown business They do not
propose a big box store, just neighborhood area uses Such would prevent residents from
having to go to SR-51 0 or SR-507 The townhomes can enhance the MPC by providing a
mixed residential use The town homes are compatible with the creek and the golf course
and will contain 18 to 20 units They have no other opportunities for townhomes on Phases
1 and 2 All internal roads will have sidewalks and bike paths Longmire will be the
preferred route which will keep traffic off of Berry Valley The timing of construction will
direct traffic to the boulevard, and neither Longmire nor Berry Valley will serve as the main
access They will regrade the steep areas to balance the site to minimize traffic during the
construction period They have elevated the trails through the wetlands and across the
creek. Critical areas abut the south side of the site, and the nearest townhouse will be set
back 50 feet from the property line
MR. BECK reappeared and testified that both the comprehensive plan and GMA require the
applicant to use the best available science Wetland restoration is a big part of the project.
Impacts on the fire department had a large amount of discussion in the MONS, but the City
can't justify the use of impact fees The issue is the number of firefighters and not the fire
department's capital facilities The fire department has no plan to increase capital facilities
Most of the Infrastructure will be located in Thurston Highlands and will be in place for that
development. They could condition the south property line setback. The standards for that
-5-
development are in the guidelines They could codify that requirement which would concern
the non-golf course property The State does not allow eminent domain for business or
economic purposes The decision on Mosman is seven to ten years down the road
o
MS M UGLER reappeared and testified that the townhouses should measure 100 feet from
the off-site wetlands
MS HANDLEY reappeared and testified that the applicant evaluated the creek in a drought
and did not get a true picture of its flow
MS KELLY PETERSON appeared and questioned the impact of 1 ,200 homes on the water
supply
MR. BECK testified that the City would have the right to the water, but the depth of
withdrawal is not decided The City could draw from other aquifers
MS NEWBY appeared and testified that she resides on Longmire Street and that trucks
pass 25 feet from her window A restaurant already exists at the Killion extension She sees
years of traffic and wants Berry Valley extended
DARLENE BAKER appeared and testified regarding drinking water wells
No one spoke further in this matter and so the Examiner took the request under 0
advisement.
NOTE
A complete record of this hearing is available in the City of Yelm Community
Development Department
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION
FINDINGS
1 The Hearing Examiner has admitted documentary evidence into the record, viewed
the property, heard testimony, and taken this matter under advisement.
2 The City's SEPA Responsible Official issued and published a Mitigated
Determination of Nonsignificance on May 24,2005, based on Section 197-11-158
WAC
3 A Notice of Public Hearing was mailed to the applicant and parties of record on June
20,2005 This notice was also posted at City Hall and on the City ofYelm web site
on the same date, and published in the Nisqually Valley News on June 24, 2005
4
The applicant has a possessory ownership interest in a generally rectangular,
220 acre parcel of property located south of SR-510 and west of SR-507 in the
southwest portion of the City of Yelm The applicant requests Conceptual Master
o
-6-
c
c
o
Site Plan approval for the entire parcel, final master site plan approval for the
portion of the parcel located east of Thompson Creek consisting of approximately
55 acres, and preliminary plat approval for Phase 1, located in the northwest
corner of the site, which proposes 89 single-family residential lots on 15 acres
5
The Draght family previously used the parcel for a dairy farm for many years, but
ceased operation in 1993 Improvements on the site include a home and
outbuildings associated with the dairy, and development of the site will require
removal of all such improvements Thompson Creek, a Type F stream and it's
associated floodplain and wetlands, bisects the eastern portion of the site in a
north/south direction A road used in conjunction with the dairy farm crosses
Thompson Creek near the center of the site Topography is relatively flat, but
west of the creek, the topography rises as much as 50 feet with bluffs of 22-30
feet. Vegetation consists of pasture grass with forested areas in the northeast
and southwest portions
6
Abutting uses to the west, east and south consist of vacant parcels, agricultural
uses, and single family dwellings on large lots The Nisqually Valley Golf Course
abuts the northeast corner Berry Valley Road Southeast abuts the north portion
of the west property line, and Durant Street abuts a portion of the north property
line Longmire Street SE dead ends at Durant Street and an extension of
Longmire provides access to the dairy farm buildings
7 The site is a portion of the 1993 southwest Yelm annexation which also included
the 1 ,300-acre Thurston Highlands property, the golf course, and 150 additional
acres As part of the annexation process, the City prepared an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) that assessed the impacts of up to 5,000 dwelling units
to include several potential master plan communities, including the present site
In 1994 owners of the 1,260-acre Thurston Highlands property and the present
site obtained conceptual master plan approval for a master plan development
which included both properties The City required preparation of a Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) prior to approval The applicant
performed little, if any, work on the project, and in accordance with the Yelm
Municipal Code (YMC), the approval lapsed afterfive years In 1999 another
previous owner submitted an application for a master plan development for the
present 220-acre parcel which the Yelm City Council approved subject to the
preservation of the right-of-way for a boulevard designed to serve the project.
However, the previous applicant did not meet City requirements, and the City
deemed the application withdrawn for lack of progress The present applicant,
Tahoma Terra LLC , submitted its application on March 21,2005
8
Phases 1 and 2, located east of Thompson Creek, consist of 55 acres Phase 1
will be developed into 89 single family residential homes, and Phase 2 is
proposed for development into approximately 20 townhomes and 123 single
family residential homes In addition, Phase 2 will provide lots for five commercial
-7-
buildings and open space park areas associated with Thompson Creek.
o
9 The site plan shows Phase 1 located in the northeast corner of the site and
access provided via Longmire Street and Berry Valley Road Phase 2 is located
to the west and south of Phase 1 and will take access from the same two roads
Upon development of future phases to the west of Thompson Creek, the
applicant will construct the Tahoma Terra Boulevard along the north property line
of Phase 1 and through the western portion of Phase 2 The boulevard will
separate the commercial uses from the single family uses A road extending
south from Longmire Street along the east property line will provide access to
approximately 20 townhomes located adjacent to the Nisqually Valley Golf
Course The abutting property owner to the south of the proposed townhomes
requested a greater buffer width from her property line Such will be addressed
during the processing of a land use application covering Phase 2 The Final
Master Plan shows a buffer width of approximately 50 feet.
10
The Final Master Plan shows a grid street system with all lots accessing from
internal plat roads and access to the commercial area provided directly from the
bulkhead and from a driveway system between the critical areas and the
buildings The buildings will have pedestrian access from Tahoma Terra
Boulevard A large parking area serving the community park is shown near the
intersection of Longmire Street and Tahoma Terra Boulevard
o
11 Prior to obtaining Final Master Plan approval, the applicant must show that the
request satisfies the applicable criteria set forth in Section 17 62 060 YMC
Findings on each criteria are hereby made as follows
A. The applicant has submitted maps and a text which show major
development features and services for the first two phases
B The proposed Final Master Plan for Phases 1 and 2 provides all
information required by Section 17 62 060(E) YMC as it sets forth the
acreage within Phases 1 and 2, the total number of dwelling units, and the
average number of dwelling units per acre (232 units on 55 acres) which
calculates to a gross density of 4.2 dwelling units per acre The conceptual
site plan sets forth the acreage of open space including a separate figure
for active recreation space and the percentage of the total area
C
The neighborhood commercial requirements set forth in the Final Master
Plan Development guidelines set forth the approximate floor area and type
of commercial use Said section authorizes a maximum building size of
30,000 square feet, maximum building footprint of 16,000 square feet,
maximum impervious surface coverage of 70%, and building setback
requirements Said plan presently shows four buildings of 24,000 square
feet and one building of 4,800 square feet. The present Final Master Plan
o
-8-
c
c
approval application reflects five acres of commercial uses
D
The means by which the proposed master plan meets the objectives set
forth in Section 17 62 020 YMC are the same as for the conceptual
master plan, and findings thereon are incorporated by their reference as if
set forth in full
12 The Final Master Plan for the portion of the property east of Thompson Creek is
compatible with the conceptual plan, assuming that the development guidelines
are adopted throughout the entire area Said guidelines are consistent with the
conceptual site plan and the City's comprehensive plan
13
According to the traffic impact study provided by Transportation Engineering
Northwest, a qualified transportation engineering firm, Phases 1 and 2 at buildout
will generate 512 p m peak hour trips and 5,120 average daily trips Phase 1 will
generate 90 p m peak hour trips and 850 average daily trips, and Phase 2 will
add 422 p m peak hour trips and 4,270 average daily trips Phase 2 includes 125
units of single family detached housing, 20 condominiums, a gas station with car
wash, and 48,000 square feet of gross floor area for office/commercial building
uses The traffic analysis anticipates that 85% of the traffic will travel northeast to
SR-510 and 15% southwest to SR-507 Traffic mitigation includes payment of the
City's Transportation Facility Charge, the reconstruction of Longmire Street to a
modified collector standard and construction of a center left turn lane on SR-510
at the Longmire Street intersection Upon any development west of Thompson
Creek, the applicant must construct the Killion Road extension which will include
a traffic signal and left turn lanes on all four legs of the intersection with SR-510
The traffic engineer estimates that three different intersections will have a
decreased level of service, and one turning movement will have an increased
level of service Development of additional phases resulting in the construction of
Tahoma Terra Boulevard and the installation of a full service, traffic controlled
intersection with SR-51 0 should significantly improve traffic movement.
CONCLUSIONS
1 The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to consider and decide the issues presented
by this request.
2 The applicant has established that the request for Final Master Plan approval for
Phases 1 and 2 satisfies all criteria set forth in Chapter 17 62 YMC, is consistent
with the City Comprehensive Plan, and meets all other requirements of the YMC
Therefore, the Final Master Plan should be approved and the Tahoma Terra Final
Master Plan Development Guidelines should be adopted to cover development of
Phases 1 and 2
o RECOMMENDATION
-9-
o
It is hereby recommended to the Yelm City Council that the Final Master Plan of Phases
1 and 2 of the Tahoma Terra project be approved subject to adoption of the Final
Master Plan Development Guidelines
ORDERED this 2nd day of August, 2005
STEPHEN K. CAUSSEAUX, JR.
Hearing Examiner
TRANSMITTED this 2nd day of August, 2005, to the following
APPLICANT Tahoma Terra LLC
4200 6th Avenue SE, Suite 301
Lacey, WA 98503
ENGINEER.
SCA Consulting Group
4200 6th Avenue SE, Ste 301
Lacey, WA 98503
o
OTHERS
Jenise Mugler
15009 Highway 507 SE
Yelm, WA 98597
Darlene Baker
POBox 727
Yelm, WA 98597
Margaret Clapp
18309 Cook Road SE
Yelm, WA 98597
Henry and Jane Dragt
581595th Avenue SW
Olympia, WA 98512
Steven Chamberlain
4200 6th Avenue SE
Lacey, WA 98057
Jean Handley
POBox 1657
Yelm, WA 98597
Diane 0' Acuti
19436 93rd Avenue SE
Yelm, WA 98597
Larry Schamm
18217 Highway 507 SE
Yelm, WA 98597
George Swartz
2410 Crestline Drive NW
Olympia, WA 98502
James Zukowski
POBox 858
Yelm, WA 98597
o
-10-
c
c
o
Rosalie Saecker
412 SW McKenzie Avenue
Yelm, WA 98597
Linda J Powell
POBox 891
Yelm, WA 98597
Bob Droll
4405 ih Avenue SE
Lacey, W A 98503
Gaye Newby
15105 Longmire Street SE
Yelm, WA 98597
Mary Lou Clemens
15030 Longmire St.
Yelm, WA 98597
Curtis Smelser
1201 Third Avenue, Ste 3400
Seattle, WA 98101
John Turner
545 Mcphee Road SW
Olympia, WA 98502
City of Yelm
Tami Merriman
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
Yelm, WA 98597
-11-
o
OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER
CITY OF YELM
REPORT AND DECISION
CASE NO
SUB-05-0068-YL (part of MPD-05-0067-YL)
APPLICANT Tahoma Terra LLC
4200 6th Avenue SE, Suite 301
Lacey, WA 98503
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
The applicant is preliminary plat approval to allow construction of 89 single family units, on
approximately 20 acres The applicant has applied for approval of a Conceptual Master
Plan Development of approximately 220 acres, Final Master Plan approval for
approximately 40 acres, and preliminary plat approval of approximately 20 acres Included
in the Final Master Site Plan is the completion of commercial space and developed open
space
o SUMMARY OF DECISION
Request granted, subject to conditions
PUBLIC HEARING
After reviewing Planning and Community Development Staff Report and examining
available information on file with the application, the Examiner conducted a public
hearing on the request as follows
The hearing was opened on July 11, 2005, at 9"00 a m
Parties wishing to testify were sworn in by the Examiner
The following exhibits were submitted and made a part of the record as follows
EXHIBIT "1" -
Planning and Community Development Staff Report and
Attachments
c
GRANT BECK appeared, presented the Community Development Department Staff
Report, and testified that this southwest area of Yelm was annexed in 1993 as an MPC
The City has a blank slat for development with uses consistent with the comprehensive
-1-
plan The MPC has its own zoning code with little direction for the first master plan The
first subdivision must be consistent with the conceptual and final plan approval
o
STEVE CHAMBERLAIN appeared on behalf of the request and testified that they have
developed a conceptual plan for the entire 220 acres, a final plan for the area east of
Thompson Creek, and a preliminary plat of 89 lots The site previously supported a large
dairy farm and was purchased for the MPC The site is generally level with rolling pasture
east of the creek. To the west of the creek the topography ascends to a higher plateau
covered with trees Soils on the site consist of topsoil and sand and gravel which are
conducive to development. The dairy farm ceased operation in 1993 or 1994, but other
cattle have grazed on the site since then They will use a natural feature design
incorporating the City design guidelines They anticipate seven to ten years to develop the
entire site They will locate the commercial area east of the creek and townhouses with
overlook the golf course They anticipate between 700 and 1,200 dwelling units over the
220 acres. They will collect, treat, and discharge all stormwater drainage into the soil, and
will have a few ponds in the good soil areas Sanitary sewers will serve the project as well
as a major arterial The City will provide potable water and sanitary sewer service, and they
will construct parks throughout the development.
JEFF SCHRAMM, traffic engineer, appeared and testified that he has provided traffic
studies for the past ten years and conducted such study for the entire MPC He evaluated a
conceptual analysis for all phases, and for Phases 1 and 2 east of the creek. They will
provide mitigation for this project in addition to the State and City plans The entire traffic 0
analysis and development for the annexation area were considered by the City and the
State The MONS sets forth mitigating measures for traffic which includes an approximate
$1 million dollar impact fee in addition to the road improvements The 89 lot subdivision will
require improvement of Longmire Street to Yelm Avenue to modified collector standards
with shoulders and bike lanes They will improve the Yelm/Longmire intersection with a
center turn lane Future development will require an extension of Killion Road as a new
road to serve the development. No development will occur west of the creek until the initial
connection is made They will also install a new traffic signal and will widen both roads
These improvements will accommodate Phases 3 through 5 For the balance of the site
they will improve Mosman Avenue and realign it to a four leg intersection which is also
consistent with the City TIP They will provide access to SR-510 by either Mosman or the
new road connection to the south All of the improvements are consistent with the City's
plans and methods of determining mitigation
STEVE SHANEWISE appeared and testified that he is a wetland scientist and studied the
wetlands on the site A wetland near the south property line drains north to the creek and
the creek channel is in the wetland All wetlands meet the definition of Category 2 for which
the ordinance requires a 75 foot wide buffer, as compared with their 100 foot wide buffer
They will construct ballfields, park, and lawn in the creek bottom, and will remove fill from
the wetlands and will cross the creek with a bridge Construction will affect 5 to 6 acres of
wetlands They will restore two to four acres of drained wetlands
o
-2-
o
MR. CHAMBERLAIN reappeared and testified that they will utilize purple pipe or recycled
water from the sewer treatment plant for irrigation While the water is not considered
drinkable, it is treated to that standard
BOB DROLL, landscape architect, appeared and testified that 80% of his work is in the
park and recreational fields Larger developments can impact a City They propose 60
acres of open space and parks and about 25% will be developed into active recreational
areas The balance will consist of habitat and open space Neighborhood parks will contain
playground apparatus for elementary children They will also have activities for adults and
seniors to include over a mile of walking trails consisting of paved, boardwalk, and crushed
rock. They will have pocket parks within subdivisions also The main park will have two
picnic shelters
MR. CHAMBERLAIN reappeared and testified that the applicant has 60 years experience in
developing property and in home building This will be the most unique development in the
City and Quadrant Homes will build all of the residential dwellings Phase 1 will consist of
89 lots They will carry the same theme throughout the development starting with the
residences in Phase 1 which will be single family residential exclusively The primary
access for the subdivision will be from Longer and they will work with adjoining property
owners to minimize the impacts of construction They will also bring utilities down Longer
and will accommodate storm drainage on site
o
JIM STROTT, Quadrant Homes, testified that his company is the largest home builder in
the State and that they offer an entry level product. They have a mix of lots on this site and
buyers can determine the size and quality of the home They will have competitive pricing
They anticipate constructing two homes per week to manage the growth They anticipate
home sizes of 1,800 square feet which will sell for between $150,000 and $175,000 and
3,200 square foot homes which will sell for $300,000 or more
o
MR. BECK reappeared and testified that SEPA review has required different conditions for
different phases They have tied the MDNS measures to the number of trips generated not
to the phases Police stations in the area are substandard and the applicant will pay a
police facility charge of $310 per unit for replacement of the existing structure Staff finds
the project consistent with the comprehensive plan and the applicant had to provide more
units to obtain the minimum four dwelling units per acre The Land Use Element promotes
mixed uses such as townhouses and neighborhood commercials, but not to compete with
the downtown businesses They will have a range of housing and housing prices They will
also provide parks and open space, but install the parks before development as they go
along The dairy farm had water rights and transferred them to the applicant. A condition of
approval requires that development beyond the 89 units have a water transfer The final
development plan contains fixed development regulations for the phases covered The
Master Site Plan limits the size of the neighborhood commercial to ensure that it will not
compete with downtown businesses The pocket parks will be constructed in individual
neighborhoods throughout all phases so that children don't need to go far from home The
subdivision conditions are straight forward and staff recommends approval subject to the
-3-
mitigating measures and conditions
o
MARGARET CLAPP appeared and testified that she is very impressed with the proposal
and served on the Planning Commission during the southwest annexation This MPC is
what the commission members desired, and it meets all of the tests to include significant
open space She wants to see the wetland mitigation work and believes the applicant has
done a first class job and will provide all infrastructure
DIANE D'ACUTI appeared and concurs with Ms Clapp She did has transportation
questions as she does not believe one stop light will handle the increased traffic She also
discussed the setbacks from Thompson Creek and ascertained that the applicant is vested
under the old ordinance which requires less of a buffer Thompson Creek will not flow
unless someone cleans it out. Adding more water will cause the creek to back up and the
streets to flood
JAMES ZUKOWSKI appeared, asked questions, and obtained the following answers The
conceptual plan covers 220 acres and will result in construction of 800 to 1,200 residential
units The final plan covering the area east of the creek will result in approximately 216
units to include townhomes and commercial He believes the Mosman extension a problem
due to ownership issues The critical areas located at the north end of the Thompson
ballfields are still within a 100 foot buffer He questioned the geotechnical hazard area for
the extension of the boulevard He questioned how trails would cross the creek and
whether the picnic shelters would be for general citizen use or just for residents of the M PC 0
and who is in charge
JEAN HANDLEY appeared and testified that she was at the last Planning Commission
meeting which updated the Critical Areas Ordinance Nowa subcommittee will testify as to
the new regulations The present regulations are outdated and she is concerned about
retention of trees and the road widening She questioned the source of funds which the City
will use to build improvements. With the new population growth, Yelm will compete with
other cities for grants No one has discussed the impact on the fire department, but it will
have a large impact and create a large burden The fire department may need another
building in addition to the police department. She questioned whether emergency vehicle
access would be a problem for the lots If an earthquake occurs, the State will not have
any funds for this project. The City should stop the MPC if the State can't fund the
improvements She referred to the United States Supreme Court decision in the Mosman
Road issue and requested a condition prohibiting the City from exercising eminent domain
HENRY DRAGT appeared and testified that he owned and ran the dairy on the site, and
sold the property in December The sale was a fulfillment of his plans for the site since
1993 The City annexed the parcel in October, 2004, and approved the southwest area for
a conceptual master plan for development to include this parcel The critical areas study
determined no significant impact. He believes the plan a great benefit for the City
JENISE MUGLER appeared and testified that she owns the property south of the 0
-4-
o
o
o
development and that the MONS is out of date In 1999 the checklist showed the
development plans with more open space along the borders The townhouses have now
changed to a high density development. The applicant must revisit the plan as the
apartments are shown right on her property line along the south border The creek goes
through the corner and she desires more open space Either offset the apartments or
provide a greenbelt. The apartments are part of Phase 2
ROSALIE SAECKER appeared and testified that she regularly uses Longmire The
applicant should construct all road improvements to include bike paths and sidewalks along
Longmire They should provide a bus stop at Yelm Avenue and Longmire She questioned
how the development will minimize traffic on Berry Valley Road
GEORGE SWARTZ appeared and testified that he owns the property shown by red line
and that he was left out of the loop His concern is eminent domain because his parcel is
necessary to extend Mosman Street.
MR. CHAMBERLAIN reappeared and testified that the current code requires a buffer of 75
feet, but they have expanded the buffer to at least 100 feet. The ballfields are outside of the
100 foot buffer The impact of cattle on the creek is considerably greater than urban
development. Their development will be compatible with the creek. Phase 1 consists of 89
lots The picnic shelters are primarily for the use of the residents, but others can use them
as well The homeowner's association can rent the shelters to outside organizations Trees
lost on the site will be due to roads and development, but they will not lose that many trees
The site was logged many years ago, and they will replant trees where they can The
development will pay for its impacts with the taxes, impact fees, and required mitigation
They have worked with the City to mitigate impacts on the fire department and police
department. They are looking at an area within the commercial portion of the MPC for the
police department. They do not want to compete with downtown business They do not
propose a big box store, just neighborhood area uses Such would prevent residents from
having to go to SR-510 or SR-507 The townhomes can enhance the MPC by providing a
mixed residential use The town homes are compatible with the creek and the golf course
and will contain 18 to 20 units They have no other opportunities for townhomes on Phases
1 and 2 All internal roads will have sidewalks and bike paths Longmire will be the
preferred route which will keep traffic off of Berry Valley The timing of construction will
direct traffic to the boulevard, and neither Longmire nor Berry Valley will serve as the main
access They will regrade the steep areas to balance the site to minimize traffic during the
construction periOd They have elevated the trails through the wetlands and across the
creek. Critical areas abut the south side of the site, and the nearest townhouse will be set
back 50 feet from the property line
MR. BECK reappeared and testified that both the comprehensive plan and GMA require the
applicant to use the best available science 'Wetland restoration is a big part of the project.
Impacts on the fire department had a large amount of discussion in the MONS, but the City
can't justify the use of impact fees The issue is the number of firefighters and not the fire
department's capital facilities The fire department has no plan to increase capital facilities
-5-
Most of the infrastructure will be located in Thurston Highlands and will be in place for that
development. They could condition the south property line setback. The standards for that
development are in the guidelines They could codify that requirement which would concern
the non-golf course property The State does not allow eminent domain for business or
economic purposes The decision on Mosman is seven to ten years down the road
o
MS MUGLER reappeared and testified that the townhouses should measure 100 feet from
the off-site wetlands
MS HANDLEY reappeared and testified that the applicant evaluated the creek in a drought
and did not get a true picture of its flow
MS KELLY PETERSON appeared and questioned the impact of 1,200 homes on the water
supply
MR. BECK testified that the City would have the right to the water, but the depth of
withdrawal is not decided The City could draw from other aquifers
MS NEWBY appeared and testified that she resides on Longmire Street and that trucks
pass 25 feet from her window A restaurant already exists at the Killion extension She sees
years of traffic and wants Berry Valley extended
DARLENE BAKER appeared and testified regarding drinking water wells
o
No one spoke further in this matter and so the Examiner took the request under
advisement.
NOTE
A complete record of this hearing is available in the City ofYelm Community
Development Department
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION
FINDINGS
1 The Hearing Examiner has admitted documentary evidence into the record, viewed
the property, heard testimony, and taken this matter under advisement.
2 The City's SEPA Responsible Official issued and published a Mitigated
Determination of Nonsignificance on May 24,2005, based on Section 197-11-158
WAC
3
A Notice of Public Hearing was mailed to the applicant and parties of record on June
o
-6-
o
o
c
20,2005 This notice was also posted at City Hall and on the City of Yelm web site
on the same date, and published in the Nisqually Valley News on June 24, 2005
4
The applicant has a possessory ownership interest in an irregularly shaped, 15 acre
parcel of property abutting the west side of Durant Street, the south side of Berry
Valley Road, and the north side of Longmire Street within the southwest portion of
the City of Yelm The applicant requests preliminary plat approval to allow
subdivision of the site into 89 single family residential lots with an average lot size of
5,500 square feet.
5
The proposed preliminary plat is Phase 1 of the T ahoma Terra Master Planned
Community (MPC) which contemplates between 800 and 1,200 residential units on
220 acres Tahoma Terra has received conceptual master plan approval for the
entire 220 acres and final master plan approval for Phases 1 and 2 located east of
Thompson Creek. The preliminary plat is in accordance with the approved final
master plan
6
The preliminary plat map shows access provided from Longmire Street and Berry
Valley Road An internal plat road extends between said roads and four internal plat
roads extend to the west property line of Phase 1 and will provide access into Phase
2 upon its development. The site is located within the Low Density Residential (R4-
6) classification of the Tahoma Terra Final Master Plan Development Guidelines
Said classification authorizes residential single family subdivisions as outright
permitted uses and allows a minimum density of four dwelling units per gross acre
and a maximum density of six dwelling units per gross acre The applicant proposes
a residential single family subdivision at a density of 5 9 dwelling units per gross
acre Said classification provides building height, off-street parking, lot access, and
setback requirements which all lots and structures thereon must meet.
7 Chapter 14 12 of the Yelm Municipal Code (YMC) requires new subdivisions to
provide a minimum of 5% of the gross area as usable open space While the
preliminary plat shows no open space, the Tahoma Terra MPC provides
approximately 60 acres of open space land which includes Thompson Creek and its
associated floodplain and wetland system The applicant will enhance this area with
park facilities and footpaths The conceptual and final master plans require a
minimum of one pocket park for every 50 dwelling units, or a combination of pocket
parks with a centrally located larger park serving the subdivisions Such will ensure
that the plat makes appropriate provision for open spaces, parks and recreation, and
playgrounds
8 A mitigating measures in the MONS requires the applicant to enter a school
mitigation agreement with the Yelm School District. Entry of such agreement will
ensure appropriate provision for schools and school grounds
9
The applicant has elected to use City street standards for all interior, local access,
-7-
residential streets within the subdivision The applicant will construct all streets to
the local access standard which includes two, 11 foot wide travel lanes, two, seven
foot wide parking lanes, concrete, rolled edge curb and gutter; six foot wide planter
strip with street trees 35 feet on center; five foot sidewalk on one side of the street;
and street lighting The applicant will dedicate all streets to the City upon final plat
approval As previously found, the subdivision provides for continuation of streets to
adjoining subdivisions The conceptual plan shows a street grid system and
continuation of all streets throughout future development within the MPC The
preliminary plat will comply with the City's Transportation Facility Charge, and will
also construct the traffic improvements required by the MONS These measures
include the reconstruction of Longmire Street to a modified collector standard from
the project entry to SR-51 0 Furthermore, the MONS requires that prior to approval
of any development permit which includes the 90th peak p m trip generated from the
project, the applicant must construct a center left turn lane on SR-510 at the
Longmire Street intersection with sufficient storage to serve anticipated traffic
volumes According to the applicant's traffic study, Phase 1 will generate 90 p m
peak hour trips, and therefore prior to final plat approval, the applicant must
reconstruct Longmire Street and install a center left turn lane Such improvements
and payments will ensure that the Phase 1 preliminary plat makes appropriate
provision for streets, roads, alleys, and other public ways
10
The City of Yelm will provide both domestic and fire flow to the site, and the
applicant will decommission any existing water wells pursuant to Department of
Ecology (DOE) standards The applicant will assign/dedicate water rights
associated with said wells to the City which shall use said water to supply Phase 1
The applicant will also use reclaimed water from the City's wastewater treatment
plant for irrigation, decorative fountains, street cleaning, dust control, firefighting,
and other uses with the exception of public consumption The City will also provide
sanitary sewer service to each lot. The preliminary plat makes appropriate provision
for potable water supplies and sanitary waste
11 The applicant will design the storm water drainage system to City standards as set
forth in the 1992 Department of Ecology Stormwater Manual Said standards
requires all development to both treat and control stormwater The conceptual
design provides both treatment and infiltration and includes low impact development
technologies for stormwater treatment to include rain gardens The City has
reviewed the conceptual report and finds it appropriate The plat makes appropriate
provision for drainage ways
12 The applicant will construct sidewalks on at least one side of internal plat roads and
will provide adequate street lighting to include street lights at internal street
intersections and pedestrian scale lighting along internal portions of residential
streets The plat makes appropriate provision for safe walking conditions
13
The applicant will comply with all City landscaping standards and has proposed a
-8-
o
o
o
o
c
o
street tree planting plan which incorporates such requirements The applicant will
also landscape the open space areas and storm water facilities The perimeter must
have Type 2 landscaping or a fence
CONCLUSIONS
1 The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to consider and decide the issues presented
by this request.
2 The proposed preliminary plat makes appropriate provision for the public health,
safety, and general welfare for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, roads, alleys,
other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary waste, parks and
recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and safe walking conditions
3 The proposed subdivision is in conformity with the Low Density Residential zone
classification of the Tahoma Terra Development Guidelines
4 All public facilities impacted by the subdivision are adequate and available to serve
the development.
5
The project is within the City's sewer service area and said system has capacity to
serve all lots
6 The proposed preliminary plat will serve the public use and interest by providing an
attractive location for a single family residential subdivision and by helping
implement the Tahoma Terra Master Planned Community, and therefore should be
approved subject to the following conditions
1 The proponent shall comply with the mitigation requirements of the MDNS
issued on May 24, 2005, which include
· The developer shall mitigate transportation impacts through the
payment of a transportation facility charge (TFC) pursuant to
Chapter 15 40 YMC The fee shall be paid at the time of building
permit issuance
· The applicant shall be responsible for the following transportation
improvements.
o
Prior to the final subdivision approval of any lots the
applicant shall reconstruct Longmire Street to a modified
collector standard from the project entry to Yelm Avenue
West (SR 510)
Prior to the approval of any development permit (including a
o
-9-
c
o
Community
.
The developer shall enter into an agreement with Yelm Community
Schools to mitigate project impacts to the School District.
.
Prior to the approval of any development permit (including a final
subdivision) beyond the 89th lot, the applicant shall convey water
rights to the City of Yelm sufficient to serve the proposed use within
that area of the final master site plan and the first 89 lots The
conveyance shall be made to the City through a water rights
agreement between Tahoma Terra, LLC and the City of Yelm This
condition is not applicable if the City obtains water rights through
the Department of Ecology which are sufficient to serve the
projected density of the City, its urban growth area, and the subject
property
.
Prior to disturbance of any identified geologic hazard area, the
applicant shall submit to the City of Yelm Community Development
Department a geotechnical report that identifies established best
management practices for all activity within the geologic hazard
areas and only allows activities which
.
o will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to
adjacent properties beyond pre-development conditions,
o will not adversely impact other critical areas,
o are designed so that the hazard to the project is eliminated
or mitigated to a level equal to or less than pre-development
conditions,
o are certified as safe as designed by a qualified engineer or
geologist.
Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall enter into a
mitigation agreement with the City of Yelm which includes a
mitigation fee toward the replacement of a police station required to
be expanded in order to serve the proposed development. The
mitigation fee shall be based on the applicant's aliquot impact on
the need for replacement police station, which is $310 per housing
unit.
2 Each dwelling unit with the subdivision shall connect to the City water
system The applicant has provided to the City a "Water Right Conveyance
and Right-of-Entry Agreement" This conveyance establishes the water
connection fees
o
-11-
.
final subdivision) which includes the 90th peak P M trip
generated from the project, the applicant shall construct a
center left-turn lane on Yelm Avenue West (SR-510) at the
Longmire Street intersection with sufficient storage to serve
the anticipated traffic volumes generated by the project.
o Prior to the approval of any development permit (including a
final subdivision) which includes the 513th peak P M trip
generated from the project, construction of the Killion Road
Boulevard extension from the property to Yelm Avenue West
(SR-510) along with the realignment of Killion Road, a traffic
signal, and left turn lanes on all four legs of the intersection
with sufficient storage to serve the anticipated traffic volumes
generated by the project.
o Prior to the approval of any development permit (including a
final subdivision) which includes the 1,1 OOth peak P M trip
generated from the project, reconstruct Mosman Avenue to
modified collector standards from Longmire Street to 1 st
Avenue (SR-507) and the Mosman Avenue/1st Avenue
intersection to include realignment and a center left-turn lane
on 1 st Avenue (SR-507) with sufficient storage to serve the
anticipated traffic volumes generated by the project.
o Prior to the approval of any development permit (including a
final subdivision) which includes the 1,301st peak P M trip
generated from the project, define and construct the
Mosman Avenue connector between Longmire Street and
Solberg Street OR, continue the Boulevard to SR 507
through the Thurston Highlands property
Plans for approval of all transportation improvements associated
with Yelm Avenue (SR 510) and 1st Avenue (SR 507) shall be
submitted to the Washington Department of Transportation and the
City of Yelm for review and approval and all required improvements
shall be constructed by the applicant pursuant to approved plans,
and inspected and approved by the City of Yelm and Washington
Department of Transportation
.
To mitigate previous impacts from agricultural activities to surface
waters, plant communities and animal communities along the
Thompson Creek corridor and its associated wetlands, the
applicant has prepared a mitigation and enhancement plan to
improve the surface water features of the site for both habitat and
recreation purposes Each Final Master Site Plan shall include a
schedule for implementing improvements tied to the number of
dwelling units of each subdivision within the Master Planned
-10-
o
o
o
3
The existing wells shall be abandoned per Washington State Department of
Ecology standards Any water rights associated with the well shall be
deeded to the City of Yelm
o
4 All conditions for cross connection control as required in Section 246-290-490
WAC
5 Each dwelling within the subdivision shall connect to the City S T E P sewer
system The connection fee and inspection fee will be established at the time
of building permit issuance Existing septic systems shall be abandoned per
the Thurston County Department of Health standards
6 The applicant shall connect to the City's reclaimed water system All
irrigation systems for planting strips and required landscaping located within
any open space, stormwater tracts, and the Boulevard shall be served by an
irrigation system utilizing reclaimed water where available The civil plans
shall identify proposed reclaimed water lines, meters, and valves
7 The applicant shall provide a final landscape and irrigation plan for this
subdivision as a part of civil plan submission Landscape plans shall meet
Chapter 17 80 YMC, or as amended in the Final Master Plan approval
8
The applicant shall provide for a minimum of one "pocket park" for the
preliminary plat of 89/ots, and the completion of the proposed three (3) acres
of open space area located at the southwest end of Longmire Street.
9 The proponent shall design and construct all stormwater facilities in
accordance with the 1992 DOE Stormwater Manual, as adopted by the City
of Yelm, and as amended in the Final Master Plan Approval Best
Management Practices (BMP's) are required during construction
o
10 The final stormwater plan shall be submitted with civil engineering plans and
shall include an operation and maintenance plan
11 Storm water facilities shall be located in a separate recorded tract owned and
maintained by the homeowners association
12 All roof drain runoff shall be infiltrated on each lot utilizing individual drywells
13 The stormwater system shall be held in common by the Homeowners
Association The Homeowners Agreement shall include provisions for the
assessment of fees against individual lots for the maintenance and repair of
the stormwater facilities
o
-12-
o
o
o
14
The proponent shall submit a fire hydrant plan to the Community
Development Department for review and approval as part of the civil
engineering plans prior to final subdivision approval
15 The proponent shall submit fire flow calculations for all existing and proposed
hydrants All hydrants must meet minimum City standards
16 The proponent shall be responsible for the installation of hydrant locks on all
fire hydrants required and installed as part of development. The proponent
shall coordinate with the Yelm Public Works Department to purchase and
install required hydrant locks Hydrant lock details shall be included in civil
plan submission
17 Street lighting will be required Civil plan submittal shall include a lighting
design plan for review and approval
18 Prior to the submission offinal plat application, the proponent will provide the
Community Development Department an addressing map for approval
19 Prior to the submission of final plat application, a subdivision name must be
reserved with the Thurston County Auditor's Office
The proponent shall submit a final landscaping and irrigation plan for this plat,
along with the phased open space improvements with civil engineering plans
21 The proponent shall provide a performance assurance device in order to
provide for maintenance of the required landscaping for this plat, until the
tenant or homeowners' association becomes responsible for landscaping
maintenance The performance assurance device shall be 150 percent of the
anticipated cost to maintain the landscaping for three years
20
DECISION
The request for preliminary plat approval of Phase 1 of the Tahoma Terra Master Planned
Community is hereby granted subject to the conditions contained in the conclusions above
ORDERED this 2nd day of August, 2005
STEPHEN K. CAUSSEAUX, JR.
Hearing Examiner
TRANSMITTED this 2nd day of August, 2005, to the following
-13-
APPLICANT Tahor'na Terra LLC
4200 6th Avenue SE, Suite 301
Lacey, W A 98503
o
ENGINEER.
SCA Consulting Group
4200 6th Avenue SE, Ste 301
Lacey, WA 98503
OTHERS
Jenise Mugler
15009 Highway 507 SE
Yelm, WA 98597
Darlene Baker
POBox 727
Yelm, WA 98597
Margaret Clapp
18309 Cook Road SE
Yelm, WA 98597
Henry and Jane Dragt
581595th Avenue SW
Olympia, WA 98512
Steven Chamberlain
4200 6th Avenue SE
Lacey, WA 98057
Jean Handley
POBox 1657
Yelm, WA 98597
Diane D'Acuti
19436 93rd Avenue SE
Yelm, WA 98597
Larry Schamm
18217 Highway 507 SE
Yelm, WA 98597
o
George Swartz
2410 Crestline Drive NW
Olympia, WA 98502
James Zukowski
POBox 858
Yelm, WA 98597
Rosalie Saecker
412 SW McKenzie Avenue
Yelm, WA 98597
Linda J Powell
POBox 891
Yelm, WA 98597
Bob Droll
4405 yth Avenue SE
Lacey, W A 98503
Gaye Newby
15105 Longmire Street SE
Yelm, WA 98597
Mary Lou Clemens
15030 Longmire St.
Yelm, WA 98597
Curtis Smelser
1201 Third Avenue, Ste 3400
Seattle, WA 98101
John Turner
545 Mcphee Road SW
Olympia, W A 98502
City of Yelm
Tami Merriman
105 Yelm Avenue West
o
-14-
c
POBox 479
Yelm, WA 98597
,r~
G
c
-15-
CASE NO. SUB-OS-0068-YL (part of MPD-OS-0067-YL)
o
NOTICE
1 RECONSIDERATION Any interested party or agency of record, oral or
written, that disagrees with the decision of the hearing examiner may make a written
request for reconsideration by the hearing examiner Said request shall set forth specific
errors relating to
A. Erroneous procedures,
B Errors of law objected to at the public hearing by the person requesting
reconsideration,
Incomplete record,
An error in interpreting the comprehensive plan or other relevant material, or
Newly discovered material evidence which was not available at the time of
the
hearing The term "new evidence" shall mean only evidence discovered after the hearing
held by the hearing examiner and shall not include evidence which was available or which
could reasonably have been available and simply not presented at the hearing for whatever
c
o
E
o
reason
The request must be filed no later than 430 pm on Auqust 15, 2005 (10 days from
mailing) with the Community Development Department 105 Yelm Avenue West, Yelm, WA
98597 This request shall set forth the bases for reconsideration as limited by the above
The hearing examiner shall review said request in light of the record and take such further
action as he deems proper The hearing examiner may request further information which
-16-
o
c
c
o
shall be provided within 10 days of the request.
2 APPEAL OF EXAMINER'S DECISION The final decision by the Examiner
may be appealed to the city council, by any aggrieved person or agency of record, oral or
written that disagrees with the decision of the hearing examiner, except threshold
determinations (YMC 1549 160) in accordance with Section 2.26150 of the Yelm
Municipal Code (YMC)
NOTE
In an effort to avoid confusion at the time of filing a request for
reconsideration, please attach this page to the request for reconsideration
-17-
City of Yelm
c
STAFF REPORT
To Mayor Adam Rivas
Yelm City Council
From Yelm Transportation Committee
Date July 19, 2005 (for July 27,2005 City Council Meeting)
Subj Updated Six Year Transportation Improvement Program
Recommendation
Approve Resolution Number 455 adopting the 2006-2011 Six Year Transportation
Improvement Program
Background
o
The six year transportation improvement program (STIP) is the capital facilities
document that guides transportation funding for a six year cycle The plan is required to
be updated annually
In 2004, the City created a Yelm Transportation Committee to review the STIP,
transportation funding applications, and other transportation related issues The YTC is
comprised of'
· Councilman Ron Harding (Yelm's representative on the Transportation Policy
Board at the Thurston Regional Planning Council)
· Shelly Badger, City Administrator
· Tim Peterson, Public Works Director
· Stephanie Ray, Program/Project Manager
· Grant Beck, Community Development Director
· Jim Gibson, Development Review Engineer
The Committee in 2004 adopted criteria for the establishment of priorities for
transportation projects, updated construction estimates, and prioritized transportation
projects against that critiera This year, the Committee reviewed the priorities against
changing conditions and recommend updates to the STIP accordingly
o The draft STIP as recommended by the YTC is attached to this staff report.
July 19, 2005
Page 1 of 2
C The recommended STIP is similar to the previous version, with the following exceptions
· The Stevens Avenue connection from 1 st Street to 4th Street was removed as the
project is constructed!
· The 103fd Avenue reconstruction from West Road to Creek Street remains on the
STIP, but the project is funded and will begin construction this year
· The Stevens Avenue connection from 1st Street to Edwards Street (across the
railroad tracks) is moved up to the number 3 priority
Applications for funding from Transportation Improvement Board will be submitted for
the top new construction priority, the Stevens Avenue connection from 1 st to Edwards
This project would provide connectivity between the northwest and southwest areas of
the City without having to travel through the light at 1st Street and Yelm Avenue and is
the completion of the Y -4 transportation improvement.
Current Situation
The Yelm Transportation Committee has prepared an updated six year transportation
improvement program for the Council's consideration
C
C
July 19, 2005
Page 2 of 2
c
o
c
CITY OF YELM
RESOLUTION NUMBER 455
SIZE YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Whereas, Section RCW 35 77 010 RCW requires the adoption of a six year
transportation improvement program, and
Whereas, the adopted six year transportation improvement program has been
updated annually by the City Council, and
Whereas, the City Council has determined that recommendations of the Yelm
Transportation Committee to update and amend the adopted six year transportation
improvement program are consistent with the Comprehensive Transportation Plan,
which is part of the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Yelm,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City ofYelm
that the 2006-2011 six year transportation improvement program attached to this
resolution as Exhibit A is hereby adopted and that a copy of this resolution be filed with
the Director of the Washington State Department of Transportation
APPROVED this 2ih day July, 2005
Adam Rivas, Mayor
ATTEST
Agnes P Bennick, City Clerk
o
o
o
Agency.
Co. No..
City No..
Yelm
34
1495
Six Year Transportation Improvement Program
From 2006 to 2011
~
W
Washington State Department of Transportation
Thurston Co
NONfTRPC
Hearing Date:
Amend Date:
Adoption Date:
Resolution No..
Co. Name:
MPO/RTPO:
Project Identification Project Costs in Thousands of Dollars Federally Funded
l6 ~m A. Federal Aid No. B. Bridge No. 1: .l: '" Fund Source Information Expenditure Schedule Projects Only
~u; ;;, .. Ql
C II> '" '8 II> (Local Agency)
"C ..Q C. Project Title c '"
.Q rJ) ,,- " .. Federal Funding
- '" .Q E ~8. 1;j -l U .J:: RfW
u_ ~=> D. Street/Road Name or Number ~ 0..
50 o..z ~... en ;;; U Phase Federal Federal State Required
0..... ~ 4th
u.. E. Beginning MP or Road Ending MP or Road .E :5 Ql Start Fund Cost by Fund State Local Total Envir Date
"e Funds Funds Funds 1st 2nd 3rd Thru Type
F Describe Work to be Done 0.. (mmlddlyyyy) Code Phase Code 6th (MMIYY)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
06 1 01 S 4.2 C PE I 6/1/2004 I STP(S) I I WSDOT 1 12001 I 1200 1 I 1 EA
SR 510 Yelm Loop G RW 6/112005 WSDOT I 330001 1 33000 1 1 1 1 Yes
P
rom: SR 507 to: SR 510 T
Construct new Loop Road around Yelm. W
Totals 34200 34200
08 2 03 S .2 C ALL I I STP(C) I 2061 scpI 4931 1 6991 1 1 1 EA
103rd Avenue G No
P
rom: West Road to: Creek Street T
Reconstruct to Collector standards. W
Totals 206 493 699
07 3 03 P .2 ALL I I STP(C) I 1 scpl 5651 4001 9651 1 1 I
Stevens Street Connection 01 Yes
rom: 1 st Street to: Edwards
Widen Stevens Street to Collector standards and construct new connection
between 1 st Street and Railroad Avenue, including rail crossing.
Totals 565 400 965
00 4 07 S CE
Road Resurfacinq No
rom: City Wide to:
Chip Seal and Fog Coat.
Totals
Report Date: July 25, 2001
Page 1
v 5.6 - Supersedes previous editions
o
o
o
~
w
Agency'
Co. No..
City No..
Yelm
34
1495
Six Year Transportation Improvement Program
From 2006 to 2011
Washington State Department of Transportation
Co. Name:
MPO/RTPO'
Thurston Co
NONITRPC
Hearing Date:
Amend Date:
Adoption Date:
Resolution No..
Project Identification Project Costs in Thousands of Dollars Federally Funded
ro >,'- A. Federal Aid No. B. Bridge No. 'C ~ III Fund Source Information Expenditure Schedule Projects Only
tn .. '"
c: <II ~Q) ~~ III '8 <II (Local Agency)
.~ .0 C. Project Title c co
.Qw .a .. Federal Funding
- co .2 E ~8. ...J U ..c: R/W
u_ '- ::J D. Street/Road Name or Number .s ~ a.
5(,) c..z a~ II) iO t; Phase Federal Federal State 4th Required
LL E. Beginning MP or Road - Ending MP or Road .E '0 5 '" Start Fund Cost by Fund State Local Total Envir Date
~ "e- 1st 2nd 3rd Thru
Funds Funds Funds Type
F Describe Work to be Done a. (mmlddlyyyy) Code Phase Code 6th (MMIYY)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
07 5 02 P ALL I I STP(C) I 871 scpl 3311 121 430 1 I I
Mosman Realignment 03
rom: Edwards Street to: SR 507
Realign roadway and widen to Collector standards.
Totals 87 331 12 430
06 6 01 P 1.5 C ALL I I I I WSDOT I 210001 I 210001 I 1 I
SR 507 Yelm Loop G
P
rom: SR 507 to: SR 507 T
New southern loop road. W
Totals 21000 21000
06 7 04 P 1.2 C ALL I I STP(C) I 901 scpl 5001 40891 46791 I 1 1
Yelm Avenue West (SR 507) Widening 03 G Yes
P
rom: 1 st Street to: 93rd Street S
Widen roadway to Urban Arterial standards. W
Totals 90 500 4089 4679
07 8 03 P .5 C ALL I I STP(C) I 901 scpl 5001 4601 10501 I 1 I
Solbern Street/Mosman Street Connection G No
P
rom: SR 507 to: Edwards T
Widen roadway to Collector standards with planter strip/sidewalk on north W
side of Mosman.
Totals 90 500 460 1050
Report Date: July 25, 2001
Page 2
v 5.6 - Supersedes previous editions
o
o
()
.....
~
Agency'
Co. No..
City No..
Yelm
34
1495
Six Year Transportation Improvement Program
From 2006 to 2011
Washington State Department of Transportation
Co. Name:
MPO/RTPO:
Thurston Co.
NONITRPC
Hearing Date:
Amend Date:
Adoption Date:
Resolution No..
Project Identification Project Costs in Thousands of Dollars Federally Funded
ro >,.... A. Federal Aid No. B. Bridge No. e J:: .. Fund Source Information Expenditure Schedule Projects Only
'6> " <1>
C (J) -<1> ~~ '" -g <J) (Local Agency)
"i:;..o C. Project Title c '"
.Q CI) .a " Federal Funding
- '" .Q E ~8. ..J tJ .<: RIW
u_ J!l a.
co ....:J D. Street/Road Name or Number ftj ~
:J o.z a~ 1Il '0 13 Phase Federal Federal State 4th Required
LL E. Beginning MP or Road - Ending MP or Road .s <1> Start Fund Cost by State Local Total Envir Date
f- ~ "e- Fund 1st 2nd 3rd Thru
Funds Funds Funds Type
F Describe Work to be Done a. (mm/ddlyyyy) Code Phase Code 6th (MM/YV)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
07 9 04 P 1.00 C ALL I I STP(C) I 901 scpl 5001 12\ 602 I I I
Mill RoadlSR 507 Intersection Reali!Jnment 06 G Yes
07 P
T
rom: SR 507 to: 109th 12 W
Realign intersection of Mill Road and SR 507 to corrector standards with a
dedicated left turn lane on Mill and a left turn pocket an SR 507
Totals 90 500 12 602
07 10 12 P ALL I I STP(C) I 901 scpl 5001 121 6021 I I I
Mill Road Vertical Reali!Jnment 03 Yes
Mill Road
rom: l04th to: 107th
Reconstruct Mill Road with appropriate vertical alignment! for traffic safety,
reconstruct to Collector standards.
Totals 90 SOD 12 602
07 11 05 P .360 C ALL I I STP(C) I 901 scpl 5001 121 6021 I I I CE
West Road Improvements G Yes
P
rom: Creek Street to: 103rd Avenue T
Complete half street improvements to Collector standands. W
Totals 90 500 12 602
07 12 03 P .740 C ALL I I STP(C) I 901 SCP! 5001 2492\ 30821 I I I
Rhoton Road Improvements G Yes
T
rom: 1st Street to: Canal Road W
Widen roadway to Collector standards.
Totals 90 500 2492 3082
Report Date: July 25, 2001
Page 3
v 5.6 - Supersedes previous editions
o
o
()
Agency'
Co. No..
City No..
Yelm
34
1495
Six Year Transportation Improvement Program
From 2006 to 2011
.....
VI
Washington State Department of Transportation
Co. Name:
MPO/RTPO'
Thurston Co.
NONITRPC
Hearing Date:
Amend Date:
Adoption Date:
Resolution No..
Project Identification Project Costs in Thousands of Dollars Federally Funded
ro >,.... A. Federal Aid No. B. Bridge No. e J:: '" Fund Source Information Expenditure Schedule Projects Only
en " Q)
.~ ~ :c:J5 ~~ <J) ." <J) (Local Agency)
C. Project Title c: 0
::l " '" Federal Funding
o~ .Q E >" fti ..J tJ .<: RIW
SO ....:J D. Street/Road Name or Number oc. ii) ftj ~ a.
o..z Q.~ 13 Phase Federal Federal State 4th Required
LL E. Beginning MP or Road - Ending MP or Road .5 '0 :5 Q) Start Fund Cost by Fund State Local Total Envir Date
f- "e 1st 2nd 3rd Thru
Funds Funds Funds Type
F Describe Work to be Done a. (mm/dd/yyyy) Code Phase Code 6th (MM/YV)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
07 13 03 P .550 T ALL I I STP(C) I 901 scpl 5001 12471 1837 I I I
NP Road Improvements W Yes
rom: Rhoton Road to: Canal Road
Widen roadway to Collector standards, railroad crossing, new intersection
alignment and lighting.
Totals 90 500 1247 1837
07 14 03 P .230 C ALL I I STP(C) I 901 scpl 1601 121 2621 I I I CE
Mosman Street Connection G No
P
rom: SR 507 to: 2nd T
Widen roadway to Collector standards W
Totals 90 160 12 262
07 15 03 P 1 ALL I I STP(C) I 901 scpl 3701 121 4721 I I I
2nd Street Improvements No
rom: Mosman Street to: Yelm Avenue (SR 510)
Widen roadway to Collector standards.
Totals 90 370 12 472
07 16 04 P 1 C ALL I I I I I I 150001 150001 I I I
Kif/ion Road Extension 01 G Yes
12 P
T
rom: Berry Valley Road to: SR 510 Yelm Loop 03 W
New alignment from Berry Valley to SR 510, widen roadway to urban
arterial standards from SR 510 to SR 510 Yelm Loop, realign with SR 510,
install traffic signal. Totals 15000 15000
Grand Totals for Yelm 1103 60619 23760 85482
Report Date: July 25, 2001
Page 4
v 5.6 - Supersedes previous editions
o
o
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
BEFORE THE WESTERN WASHINGTON GROWTH MANAGEMENT HEARINGS BOARD
1000 FRIENDS OF WASHINGTON
Petitioners,
Case No 05-2-0002
v
THURSTON COUNTY,
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Respondent,
And,
WILLIAM AND GAIL BARNETT AND
ALPACAS OF AMERICA,
Intervenors
I. SYNOP~IS OF DECISION
Thurston County was one of the first counties in this Board's jurisdiction to engage in
thorough and collaborative planning Its commendable early efforts led to the adoption of a
comprehensive plan in 1995 on which the County has largely relied in meeting its update
requirements under RCW 36 70A.130 In 2002, the County adopted its Buildable Lands
Report, a thorough and well-documented analysis of land available for development and
projected demand for such lands through 2025 In 2004, Thurston County met its deadline
under RCW 36 70A.130(4) to timely conduct a review and, if needed, revision of its
comprehensive plan and development regulations to ensure compliance with the Growth
Management Act (GMA) (Chapter 36 70A RCW)
In this decision, the Board is asked to determine whether Thurston County's 2004 update of
its comprehensive plan and development regulations complies with the requirements of
RCW 36 70A.130 to "review and, if needed, revise its comprehensive plan policies and
development regulations to ensure the plan and regulations comply with the requirements of
this chapter" RCW 36 70A.130(1)
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 1 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone: 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
We observe that many elements of the County's comprehensive plan and development
regulations further the goals and requirements of the GMA in creative and impressive ways
and are compliant. However, we find there are several areas in which the County did not
meet its update requirements
First, Thurston County has not revised its Rural Element as necessary to comply with the
GMA. It has relied upon its earlier plan provisions to continue a policy of allowing rural
residential development in high density zones -- Residential - One Unit per Two Acres,
Residential - One Unit per One Acre, Residential - Two Units per One Acre, and
Residential - Four Units per Acre -- without complying with the GMA requirements for
limited areas of more intensive rural development (LAMIRDs) It has also allowed rural
densities in its RR 1/5 zone to develop at densities of one dwelling unit per four acres
While the County argues that it should not have to disturb policies it established years ago
for these areas, this argument fails to address the update requirement to revise existing
policies where necessary to ensure compliance with the GMA. RCW 36 70A.130 These
policies and regulations create intense rural residential densities without meeting GMA
requirements for limiting those areas and are therefore non-compliant. RCW
3670A.070(5)(d) The County further has failed to establish a variety of rural densities in
the rural area as required by RCW 36 70A.070(5)(b) by establishing no rural designations or
zones that have less intense densities than one dwelling unit per five acres
o
Second, the County's urban growth areas (UGAs) provide a significant excess of land
supply over projected demand for such urban lands through 2025 Both land supply and
projected land demand were reviewed for purposes of its buildable lands analysis in 2002
Buildable Lands Report, September 2002 At that time, it was determined that there was
sufficient land in the UGAs to accommodate projected growth However, the buildable lands
analysis also showed that there was a significant excess of available residential lands in the
urban areas over the projected demand for such lands through 2025 The UGA boundaries
o
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 2 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone: 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
o
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
established in the 2004 update continue to provide excess lands within the UGA boundaries
beyond the demand calculated on the basis of the OFM population projection chosen by the
County This excess of urban land supply for the population allocated to (and therefore land
demand projected for) urban growth areas during the 20-year planning horizon fails to
comply with RCW 36 70A.110 In addition, two cities, Tenino and Bucoda, sought to have
their urban growth areas enlarged to accommodate development to support sewer systems
for those UGAs The County concurred and expanded areas in the Tenino and Bucoda
UGAs, but did not adjust the population allocations to comport with the land supply the UGA
boundaries provide This, too, fails to correlate demand for urban lands with the supply of
those lands as required by RCW 36 70A11 0
Finally, the County has adopted designation criteria for agricultural resource lands that
exclude lands that otherwise meet the statutory criteria for designation The first of these
excludes lands that are not currently being used for agriculture from designation as
agricultural resource lands The Supreme Court has determined that the statutory definition
of agricultural lands is based on whether the lands are "in an area where the land is actually
used or capable of being used for agricultural production" City of Redmond v Central
Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board, 136 Wn.2d 38, 53, 959 P.2d 1091,
1998 Wash LEXIS 575 (1998) The second challenged County agricultural lands
designation criterion requires a predominant parcel size of 20 acres or more Regardless of
common ownership or use, farms consisting of more than one parcel of less than 20 acres
would not be conserved under this criterion Since farm size is not equivalent to parcel size,
this criterion may exclude viable farms from conservation and protection For these
reasons, both of these policies fail to comply with RCW 36 70A030, RCW 36 70A060, and
36 70A170
Although Petitioner has requested a finding of invalidity as to the noncompliant provisions of
the rural and urban element (and their implementing development regulations), we decline
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 3 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
to enter an invalidity finding at this time The record before the Board does not persuade us
that inconsistent development will occur during the remand period such that proper planning
cannot take place without the imposition of invalidity However, if circumstances change
and Petitioner brings forward a basis for believing that substantial interference with the
goals of the GMA may be occurring during the remand period, we would consider setting a
compliance hearing to rule upon a properly supported motion to impose invalidity before the
compliance period expires RCW 36 70A.330( 4)
II PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On November 22, 2004, the Thurston County Commissioners adopted Resolution No
13234 and Ordinance No 13235 Both legislative enactments, by their terms, were adopted
to comply with the requirement in RCW 36 70A.130 that the County review and, if
necessary, revise its comprehensive plan and development regulations to ensure the plan
and regulations comply with the Growth Management Act (Ch 36 70A RCW), no later than
December 1, 2004 RCW 36 70A.130( 4) Resolution No 13234 amends the County's
comprehensive plan Ordinance No 13235 amends the County's development regulations
o
Petitioner, 1000 Friends of Washington (now known as "Futurewise"), filed a petition for
review of these two adoptions on January 21,2005 A prehearing conference was held on
February 17, 2005 On March 23, 2005, the County filed a Motion to Dismiss or Limit Issues
arguing that the Petitioner had failed to join cities as indispensable parties and that the
appeal of the urban growth areas (UGAs) was time barred Petitioner opposed the motion,
Petitioner Futurewise's Response to Motion to Dismiss or Limit Issues, April 4, 2005 The
Board denied the County's motions. Order on Motions to Dismiss, April 21,2005
On April 27, 2005, Petitioner requested permission to file a motion to add the League of
Women Voters of Thurston County as a Petitioner Request for Permission to File Motion
and Motion to Add the League of Women Voters of Thurston County as a Petitioner The
o
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20 2005
Page 4 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
c
o
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
County opposed the motion Respondent's Opposition to Petitioner's Motion to Add the
League of Women Voters of Thurston County as a Petitioner, May 9, 2005 This motion
was denied
There is no explanation provided in the Petitioner's request why this motion could not
have been brought within the timelines set in the Prehearing Order Nor is any
excuse offered for the failure of the proposed petitioner to file a timely petition for
review itself At this stage in the proceedings, it is unduly burdensome on the County
and the Board to be considering a new issue that apparently could have been raised
in the timeframe set by the Prehearing Order
Order Denying Leave to File Motion, May 16, 2005
On May 20,2005, Intervenor William and Gail Barnett and Alpacas of America moved to
intervene in this case Intervenor owns property that was added to the Tenino UGA in the
County's 2004 update of its comprehensive plan Arguing that Intervenor had only recently
learned that this case "directly affects the Tenino UGA," Intervenor submitted the substance
of its brief with its motion Motion to Intervene by William and Gail Barnett and Alpacas of
America, and Statement of Issues and Argument Concerning the Tenino UGA, May 20,
2005 The parties had no objection and intervention was granted subject to certain
conditions Order Granting Intervention to William and Gail Barnett, and Alpacas of
America, June 3, 2005
The County moved to supplement the Index to the Record with Index Nos 466 - 528
Motion to Supplement the Record, Apri/4, 2005 Petitioner had no objection and the Index
was supplemented as the County requested Order on Motion to Supplement the Record,
May 5, 2005
At the hearing on the merits, the Board allowed the parties to submit additional materials in
response to Board questions As part of its post-hearing submission, the County provided
the Board with the Buildable Lands Report for Thurston County, September 2002 (Index
No 43), the Population and Employment Forecast for Thurston County, Final Report (Index
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 5 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone: 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
No 208), and the Population and Employment Forecast for Thurston County, Volume II
Appendix (Index No 209) The City of Tenino also asked and was granted leave to supply
the Board with answers to its questions concerning adopted updated development
regulations This was submitted in the form of the Letter of Dan Carnrite, Senior Planner, to
the Board, dated June 21,2005 Intervenor submitted a blow-up of the Thurston County
buildable lands map and post-argument brief Intervenors' Post-Hearing Brief, June 23,
2005 Petitioner objects and moves to strike the post-hearing brief submitted by Intervenor
as submitting additional argument. Petitioner Futurewise's Objection to Post-Hearing
Arguments To the extent that the Intervenor's brief submits argument rather than
responsive materials, Petitioner's motion to strike is granted
III ISSUES PRESENTE01
1 Does the adoption of Resolution 13234 and Ordinance 13235 fail to comply with RCW
36 70A020( 1), RCW 36 70A.020(2), RCW 36 70A070, RCW 36 70A11 O( 1) and RCW
36 70A130 when they allow, through several rural area designations totaling over
21,000 acres, development at densities of greater than one unit per five acres when this
board has determined that such densities fail to comply with the GMA?
o
2 Does the adoption of Resolution 13234 and Ordinance 13235 fail to comply with RCW
36 70A.070 and RCW 36 70A.130 when they fail to provide for a variety of rural
densities, providing instead that the only GMA compliant rural designations allow a
uniform one unit per five acres?
3 Does the adoption of Resolution 13234 and Ordinance 13235 fail to comply with RCW
36 70A020(1), RCW 36 70A020(2), RCW 36 70A.110 and RCW 36 70A130 when the
ordinances establish urban growth areas that substantially exceed the capacity
necessary to accommodate the Washington Office of Financial Management population
forecast adopted by the County, even assuming a 25 percent market factor? This issue
1 Petitioner elected not to pursue Issue No 5 of the Prehearing Order "Does the adoption of Resolution 13234
and Ordinance 13235 fail to comply with RCW 36 70A.020(1), RCW 36 70A.110 and RCW 36 70A.130 when
they allow densities in unincorporated urban growth areas of less than 4 units per acre?" Petitioners'
Futurewise's and League of Women Voters Prehearing Brief at 29 An issue not addressed in petitioner's brief
is considered abandoned WEC v Whatcom County, WWGMHB Case No. 95-2-0071 (Final Decision and
Order, December 20, 1995)
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20,2005
Page 6 of 37
o
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
o
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
includes UGAs that preexisted these ordinances that were too large and a UGA
expansion effected by these ordinances
4 Does the adoption of Resolution 13234 and Ordinance 13235 fail to comply with RCW
36 70A020(8), RCW 36 70A060, RCW 36 70A.170, RCW 36 70A.050 and RCW
36 70A130 when they fail to designate and conserve hundreds of acres of land that
meet the GMA criteria for agricultural lands of long term commercial significance?
5 Does the continued validity of the violations of RCW Title 36 70A in Section 7 of
Ordinance 13235 described above, substantially interfere with the fulfillment of the goals
of the Growth Management Act such that the enactments at issue should be held invalid
pursuant to RCW 36 70A302?
IV. BURDEN OF PROOF
For purposes of board review of the comprehensive plans and development regulations
adopted by local government, the GMA establishes three major precepts a presumption of
validity; a "clearly erroneous" standard of review; and a requirement of deference to the
decisions of local government.
Pursuant to RCW 36 70A320( 1), comprehensive plans, development regulations and
amendments to them are presumed valid upon adoption
Except as provided in subsection (5) of this section, comprehensive plans and
development regulations, and amendments thereto, adopted under this chapter are
presumed valid upon adoption
RCW 36 70A320(1)
The statute further provides that the standard of review shall be whether the challenged
enactments are clearly erroneous.
The board shall find compliance unless it determines that the action by the state
agency, county, or city is clearly erroneous in view of the entire record before the
board and in light of the goals and requirements of this chapter
RCW 36 70A320(3)
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 7 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
In order to find the County's action clearly erroneous, the Board must be "left with the firm
and definite conviction that a mistake has been made" Department of Ecology v PUD1,
121 Wn.2d 179,201,849 P.2d 646 (1993)
Within the framework of state goals and requirements, the boards must grant deference to
local government in how they plan for growth
In recognition of the broad range of discretion that may be exercised by counties and
cities in how they plan for growth, consistent with the requirements and goals of this
chapter, the legislature intends for the boards to grant deference to the counties and
cities in how they plan for growth, consistent with the requirements and goals of this
chapter Local comprehensive plans and development regulations require counties and
cities to balance priorities and options for action in full consideration of local
circumstances The legislature finds that while this chapter requires local planning to
take place within a framework of state goals and requirements, the ultimate burden and
responsibility for planning, harmonizing the planning goals of this chapter, and
implementing a county's or city's future rests with that community
RCW 36 70A.3201 (in part)
o
In sum, the burden is on the Petitioner to overcome the presumption of validity and
demonstrate that any action taken by the County is clearly erroneous in light of the goals
and requirements of Ch 36 70A RCW (the Growth Management Act) RCW 36 70A.320(2)
Where not clearly erroneous and thus within the framework of state goals and requirements,
the planning choices of local government must be granted deference
V DISCUSSION
Issue NO.1: Does the adoption of Resolution 13234 and Ordinance 13235 fail to
comply with RCW 36.70A.020(1), RCW 36 70A.020(2), RCW 36.70A.070, RCW
36.70A.110(1) and RCW 36.70A.130 when they allow, through several rural area
designations totaling over 21,000 acres, development at densities of greater than
one unit per five acres when this board has determined that such densities fail to
comply with the GMA?
Positions of the Parties
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 8 of 37
o
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
o
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
Petitioner argues that the County's comprehensive plan creates rural land use designations
that are neither rural in density nor compliant with the statutory provisions for limited areas
of more intensive rural development (LAMIRDs) Petitioners Futurewise's and League of
Women Voters of Thurston County Prehearing Brief at 8-14 2 Petitioner points to the
following designations of rural lands in the County's comprehensive plan Residential - One
Unit per Two Acres, Residential - One Unit per One Acre, Residential - Two Units per One
Acre, and Residential - Four Units per Acre Index No 89, Land Use Chapter Attachment
Table 2-1 A Percentage of Land Allocated for Rural Uses, p 2-19 Petitioner then points to
the provisions in the County's development regulations (zoning code) that allow rural
residential densities greater than one dwelling unit per five acres Petitioners Futurewise's
and League of Women Voters of Thurston County Prehearing Brief at 9, Index No 64
Petitioner urges that allowable residential densities on rural lands may not exceed one
dwelling unit per five acres unless the rural designation complies with the requirements for a
LAMIRD pursuant to RCW 36 70A.070(5)(d)
The County responds that the 2004 comprehensive plan update did not change the zoning
densities in the rural area "because these rural densities already comply with the Growth
Management Act." Respondent's Prehearing Brief at 8 The County references its criteria
for higher density rural zones and asserts that these criteria reflect local circumstances and
pre-existing development. Ibid at 10-11 The County asserts that new or expanded areas
of this zoning will not be allowed and no new areas will be designated for these densities
without going through a LAMIRD designation process Ibid at 8-9
Board Analysis
2 The Petitioner's brief was submitted on April 27, 2005 before the Board had ruled that the League of Women
Voters of Thurston County could not be added as an additional petitioner Order Denying Leave to File
Motion, May 16,2005
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 9 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
We first note that the update provisions of RCW 36 70A130 require the County to review its
comprehensive plan and development regulations to ensure that they comply with the GMA
A county or city shall take legislative action to review and, if needed, revise its
comprehensive land use plan and development regulations to ensure the plan and
regulations comply with the requirements of this chapter according to the time
periods specified in subsection (4) of this section
RCW 36 70A130( 1) (in pertinent part)
This requirement imposes a duty upon the County to bring its plan and development
regulations into compliance with the GMA, including any changes in the GMA enacted since
the County's adoption of its comprehensive plan and development regulations While some
provisions of the County's plan and development regulations may not have been subjected
to timely challenge when originally adopted, a challenge to the legislative review required by
RCW 36 70A130( 1) and (4) opens those matters that were raised by Petitioner in the
update review process See RCW 36 70A280(2) It is not, therefore, sufficient for the
County to assert that its provisions regarding rural densities have not been changed, those 0
provisions must themselves comply with the GMA
As Petitioner points out, densities that are no more than one dwelling unit per five acres are
generally considered "rural" under the GMA Durland v San Juan County, WWGMHB Case
No 00-2-0062c (Final Decision and Order, May 7,2001), Sky Valley v King County,
CPSGMHB Case No 95-3-0068c (Final Decision and Order, March 12, 1996), Yanisch v
Lewis County, WWGMHB Case No 02-2-0007c (Final Decision and Order, December 11,
2002), but see Vashon-Maury v King County, CPSGMHB Case No 95-3-0008c (Final
Decision and Order, October 23, 1995), and City of Moses Lake v Grant County, EWGMHB
Case No 99-1-0016 (Final Decision and Order, May 23,2000) (holding that rural densities
should be no greater than one dwelling unit per ten acres) Densities that are not urban but
are greater than one dwelling unit per five acres are generally deemed to promote sprawl in
violation of goal 2 of the GMA RCW 36 70A020(2)
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20 2005
Page 10of37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
(\
u
c
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
The County does not argue that rural residential densities in excess of one dwelling per five
acres comply with the GMA Instead, the County argues that its areas of higher rural
densities are compliant because they existed before the enactment of the GMA and contain
the areas where more intensive rural residential uses exist. Respondent's Prehearing Brief
at 10 Prior to the adoption of RCW 36 70A.070(5)(d) in 1997, there had been no legislative
guidance on how communities should deal with existing development in the rural areas that
was already more intensive than a rural level of development. When the County adopted its
comprehensive plan in 1995, it developed its own criteria for determining how to contain
such areas of more intensive development in the rural areas In 1997, the legislature
adopted the provisions of RCW 36 70A070(d) that set the requirements for "limited areas of
more intensive rural development" (LAMIRDs) ESB 6094 (1997) Now that there is
direction in the GMA on how to address areas of more intensive rural development, the
County's update must ensure that it complies with those terms See Futurewise v
Whatcom County, WWGMHB Case No 05-2-0013 (Order on Dispositive Motions, June 15,
2005)
While the County's brief asserts that its areas of higher rural residential densities "existed
prior to the enactment of the Growth Management Act in 1990," the County does not argue
that its areas of higher rural residential densities comply with the requirements of RCW
3670A070(5)(d) The findings in Resolution 13234 similarly indicate that these areas are
not designations of limited areas of more intensive rural development (LAMIRDs)
Residential LAMIRDs are addressed in RCW 36 70A070(5)(d)(i) 3
Rural development consisting of the infi", development or redevelopment of existing
commercial, industrial, residential, or mixed-use areas, whether characterized as
shoreline development, villages, hamlets, rural activity centers, or crossroads
developments
3 The other two types of LAMIRDs are recreational and tourist areas (RCW 36 70A.070(5)(d)(ii)) and small
business and cottage industry areas (RCW 36 70A.070(5)(d)(iii)) - both non-residential LAMIRDs.
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 11 of37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
To comply with RCW 36 70A.070(5)(d)(i), there must be a determination of the "built
environment" as of July 1, 1990, (the date applicable to Thurston County)4 upon which the
establishment of logical outer boundaries for limited areas of more intensive rural
development (LAMIRDs) are based RCW 36 70A,070(5)(d)(iv) Residential LAMIRDs
must be created within logical outer boundaries that contain the existing development, and
they may include only limited undeveloped lands that fit within those logical outer
boundaries
A county shall adopt measures to minimize and contain the existing areas or uses of
more intensive rural development, as appropriate, authorized under this subsection
Lands included in such existing areas or uses shall not extend beyond the logical
outer boundary of the existing area or use, thereby allowing a new pattern of low-
density sprawl Existing areas are those that are clearly identifiable and contained
and where there is a logical boundary delineated predominately by the built
environment, but that may also include undeveloped lands if limited as provided in
this subsection The county shall establish the logical outer boundary of an area of
more intensive rural development. In establishing the logical outer boundary the
county shall address (A) the need to preserve the character of existing natural
neighborhoods and communities, (8) physical boundaries such as bodies of water,
streets and highways, and land forms and contours, (C) the prevention of abnormally
irregular boundaries, and (D) the ability to provide public facilities and public services
in a manner that does not permit low-density sprawl
RCW 36 70A.070(5)(d)(iv)
o
The Thurston County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element contains a discussion of rural
area designations CP at 2-17 - 2-27 This discussion includes the criteria for inclusion in
any of the rural area designations, including the higher density residential designations. CP
at 2-24 - 2-27 None of the criteria include a review of the existence of development as of
July 1, 1990, nor do they establish logical outer boundaries with reference to the statutory
criteria Ibid
4 Existing development, for purposes of creating the logical outer boundaries of a LAMIRO, is that which was
in existence on July 1, 1990 RCW 36 70A.070(5)(d)(v)(A)
o
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No 05-2-0002
July 20,2005
Page 12 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
P.O Box 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone: 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
o
c
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
The County's comprehensive plan policies reflect the County's intention to only apply the
statutory LAMIRD criteria to areas which have not yet been designated for high density rural
residential development, or when the existing high density rural areas are expanded
One dwelling unit per five acres should be the common, minimum residential density
level in rural areas, except in areas already dominated by higher density
development.
Housing and Residential Densities Policy 1, CP at 2-46
Thus, this policy assumes that existing high density rural residential zones need not be
designated as LAMIRDs Similarly, another comprehensive plan policy addresses existing
rural residential designations and provides that they may not expand unless they are
designated as LAMIRDs
Thurston County should not expand or intensify rural residential land use
designations or zoning districts with densities greater than 1 unit per 5 acres unless
these areas are designated as a limited area of more intensive rural development
(LAMIRD) as defined in the GMA
Housing and Residential Densities Policy 2, CP at 2-46
Again, this policy accepts existing high density rural residential areas without further
determination that they comply with the statutory LAMIRD criteria, and even discusses the
potential to expand LAMIRDs once they have been designated with logical outer
boundaries
Rural Land Use and Activities Policy 8 (CP at 2-43-44) sets criteria for designation and
expansion of "commercial centers" which do not incorporate the requirements of RCW
3670A070(5)(d)
Rural commercial centers should be designated only for identified rural community
areas, like Rochester and Steamboat Island Road at Highway 101 These centers
should serve a larger rural community than neighborhood convenience and have a
greater variety of uses, while maintaining a rural character Expansion of a
Commercial Center should only be considered if it will result in a more "logical outer
boundary", as defined in 36 70A070(5) of the Growth Management Act, and if it is
needed to accommodate population growth in the rural community served
CP 2-43 - 2-44 (in part)
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 13 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
1
2 As is true of the other policies, this policy only applies the lAMIRD criteria of RCW
3 36 70A.070(5)(d) in the event of "expansion" of an area of more intense rural development.
4 Rural land Use and Activities Policy 8 does not accurately incorporate the statutory criteria
5
6 for lAMIRDs, logical outer boundaries may not be based on accommodating population
7 growth RCW 36 70A.070(5)(d)(i) and (iv)
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
The policies with respect to more intensive rural development are further elaborated in the
zoning code as development regulations Thurston County's zoning code contains
development regulations setting residential density levels in excess of one dwelling unit per
five acres in rural areas Rural Residential- One Dwelling Unit per Two Acres (RR 1/2)
(T C C Ch 20 10), Rural Residential- One Dwelling Unit per Acre (RR 1/1) (T C C Ch
20 11), Rural Residential - Two Dwelling Units per Acre (RR 2/1) (T C C Chapter 20 13),
and Suburban Residential- Four Dwelling Units per Acre (SR 4/1) (T C C Chapter 20 14)
Index No 64 These development regulations also fail to comply with the GMA because
they do not incorporate the statutory criteria for lAMIRDs All of these residential density
levels constitute "more intensive rural development" within the meaning of RCW
3670A070(5)(d) If the County intends to allow them, they must conform to the statutory
requirements for residential lAMIRDs RCW 36 70A.070(5)(d)(i)
o
Petitioner also argues that even the Rural Residential - One Dwelling Unit per Five Acres
(RR 1/5) zone exceeds a rural residential density level of one dwelling unit per five acres
Petitioners Futurewise's and league of Women Voters of Thurston County Prehearing Brief
at 9 Petitioner points to T C C 2009040(1 )(a) to argue that the effective density for this
zone is actually a net minimum lot size of four acres for single family residences and eight
acres for duplexes Ibid
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 14 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
o
c
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
The cited zoning code provision, T C C 2009040(1 )(a), establishes a minimum lot size in
the RR 1/5 zone as follows "Conventional subdivision lot (net) - four acres for single
family, eight acres for duplexes" The County does not contest that this development
regulation allows one single family dwelling unit per four acres, rather than one dwelling unit
per five acres, in the RR 1/5 zone
This provision is of even greater concern because RR 1/5 is the least dense of the County's
rural residential designations The determination of proper rural density levels depends in
large measure upon the GMA's strictures against promotion of sprawl 48 3 percent of the
County's rural residential areas fall into the RR 1/5 category CP Table 2-1A at 2-18 - 2-19
With such a large portion of the County's rural area designated as RR 1/5, the net density
level of one dwelling unit per four acres in the RR 1/5 zone increases the "conversion of
undeveloped land into sprawling, low-density development in the rural area," in
contravention of RCW 36 70A070(5)(c)(iii)
Conclusion: The County's high density rural residential designations (SR - 4/1, RR 2/1,
RR 1/1, and RR 1/2), Housing and Residential Densities Policies 1 and 2, and Rural Land
Use and Activities Policy 8, and the County's development regulations implementing these
designations (T C C Ch 20 10, T C C Ch 20 11, T C C Chapter 20 13, and T C C
Chapter 20 14) fail to comply with RCW 36 70A.070(5) The residential density levels
allowed in these designations are too intensive for rural areas unless they are designated as
limited areas of more intensive rural development (LAMIRDs) pursuant to RCW
3670A070(5)(d) If the County is to allow such areas of more intensive rural development,
it must establish them in accordance with RCW 36 70A070(5)(d) T C C 2009040(1 )(a)
also fails to comply with RCW 36 70A070(5)(c) and (d) by effectively increasing the rural
residential density in the RR 1/5 zone from one dwelling unit per five acres to one single-
family dwelling unit per four acres
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 15 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
Issue No.2: Does the adoption of Resolution 13234 and Ordinance 13235 fail to
comply with RCW 36. 70A.070 and RCW 36. 70A.130 when they fail to provide for a
variety of rural densities, providing instead that the only GMA compliant rural
designations allow a uniform one unit per five acres?
Positions of the Parties
Petitioner argues that the County's comprehensive plan fails to provide a variety of rural
densities as required by RCW 36 70A.070(5)(b) Petitioners Futurewise's and League of
Women Voters of Thurston County Prehearing Brief at 14 Petitioner claims that only two of
the rural area designations in the County's plan require densities of no more than one
dwelling unit per five acres - the Rural Residential Resource zone and the McAllister
Geologically Sensitive Area District. Ibid at 15
The County responds that it provides densities of one dwelling unit per twenty acres, one to
forty and one to eight in non-urban zones Respondent's Prehearing Brief at 14 The
County also cites to its provisions for the transfer of development rights, its open space tax
program, private conservation easements and public wildlife refuges and open spaces, and
parks Ibid at 14-15
o
Board Analysis
The GMA expressly requires "a variety of rural densities" in the rural e'lement of the
comprehensive plan
The rural element shall permit rural development, forestry, and agriculture in rural
areas The rural element shall provide for a variety of rural densities, uses, essential
public facilities, and rural governmental services needed to serve the permitted
densities and uses To achieve a variety of rural densities and uses, counties may
provide for clustering, density transfer, design guidelines, conservation easements,
and other innovative techniques that will accommodate rural densities and uses that
are not characterized by urban growth and that are consistent with rural character
RCW 36 70A.070(5)(b)
The County concedes that it does predominately provide densities of one dwelling unit per
five acres in the rural zone Respondent's Prehearing Brief at 14 However, the County
asserts that it has other designations that are less dense than one in five Ibid The
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER Western Washington
Case No 05-2-0002 Growth Management Hearings Board
July 20,2005 905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Page 16 of 37 Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
o
o
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
densities that the County cites as being less intense than one dwelling unit per five acres
include designations of natural resource lands T C C Chapter 20 08A applies to lands in
the long-term agricultural district; Ch T C C.20 080 applies to lands in the long-term forestry
district; and T C C Chapter 20 62 creates a program for transfer of development rights in
long-term commercially significant agricultural lands Rural lands are lands "not designated
for urban growth, agriculture, forest, or mineral resources" RCW 36 70A070(5) Thus, the
designations of low-intensity resource lands do not create a variety of rural densities
Rural densities, as we have discussed above, are generally no more intense than one
dwelling unit per five acres The County has designated and zoned a variety of rural areas
with residential densities higher than this rural level Residential - One Unit per Two Acres,
Residential - One Unit per One Acre, Residential - Two Units per One Acre, and
Residential - Four Units per Acre The RR 1/5 zone, although stating that it limits
development density to one dwelling unit per five acres, has a net density of one single
family dwelling unit per four acres T C C 2009040(1 )(a) None of these densities are
rural in nature and therefore cannot be used to establish a variety of rural densities
The GMA allows a county to achieve a variety of rural densities through innovative
techniques RCW 36 70A070(5)(b) However, where the rural designations and zones
themselves do not include a variety of rural densities, the comprehensive plan and
development regulations must demonstrate how the "Innovative techniques" create such
varieties of densities in the rural area The County argues that its natural shoreline
environment residential zone limits densities to a minimum lot area of ten acres
Respondent's Prehearing Brief at 12 However, it is not clear how or even if this zone
affects rural densities 5 A similar problem exists with its "clustering ordinance" Ibid at 14
The County asserts that it "owns and funds conservation easements" but does so in the
5 Although the County references exhibits in its brief, the exhibits provided to the Board are not tabbed and an
order cannot be discerned In some instances, it does not appear that the Board has actually been provided
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER Western Washington
Case No. 05-2-0002 Growth Management Hearin9s Board
July 20, 2005 905 24th Way SW Suite B-2
Page 170f37 Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone: 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
same sentence in which it refers to its transfer of development rights program, which applies
to agricultural lands rather than rural lands Ibid The Board is therefore unable to find that
the County has achieved a variety of rural densities and uses through innovative
techniques
Conclusion: The County's comprehensive plan and development regulations fail to provide
for a variety of rural densities as required by RCW 36 70A.070(5)(b)
Issue No.3: Does the adoption of Resolution 13234 and Ordinance 13235 fail to
comply with RCW 36.70A.020(1), RCW 36.70A.020(2), RCW 36.70A.110 and RCW
36. 70A.130 when the ordinances establish urban growth areas that substantially
exceed the capacity necessary to accommodate the Washington Office of
Financial Management population forecast adopted by the County, even assuming
a 25 percent market factor? This issue includes UGAs that preexisted these
ordinances that were too large and a UGA expansion effected by these
ordinances.
o
Positions of the Parties
Petitioner argues that the County's urban growth areas (UGAs) are 62 percent larger than
necessary to accommodate the County's growth target. Petitioners Futurewise's and
League of Women Voters of Thurston County Prehearing Brief at 16 This, Petitioner
argues, is well beyond the 25 percent market factor allowed under the GMA. Ibid at 17
Petitioner argues that urban growth areas must be sized to accommodate the OFM
population projection chosen by the County and may not be "over-sized" without creating
sprawling growth Ibid at 19 Petitioner also argues that the County's Urban Growth Area
Policy 8 (allowing expansion of urban growth areas if there is an overriding benefit to the
public health, safety, and weifare) fails to comply with the GMA. Ibid
the cited exhibit. If an exhibit has not been provided, it cannot be considered by the Board and thus will not be
part of the record It would also aid the Board if the exhibits were clearly marked and organized for reference
o
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No 05-2-0002
July 20,2005
Page 18 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
c
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
The County responds that it has worked with the cities and towns of Thurston County to
properly accommodate projected growth Respondent's Prehearing Brief at 16-18 The
County disputes Petitioner's contention that its WGAs are 62 percent larger than needed to
accommodate projected growth, the County argues that it has allowed for 38 percent
excess capacity in its UGAs Ibid at 20 The County argues that this is a statutorily
permissible market factor and a 38 percent market factor is not excessive Ibid The
County also argues that the Tenino UGA was actually reduced in size, and the Bucoda UGA
was expanded to deal with potential contamination of its aquifer Ibid at 19-20
Intervenor argues in support of the Tenino UGA expansion to include Intervenor's property
Intervenors' Brief Intervenor argues that Tenino changed but did not increase its UGA s;:ze
and that adding the Intervenor's property to the UGA will enable development needed to
support a planned sewer facility Intervenor's Brief at 3-4 Intervenor also challenges the
sufficiency of the Petitioner's standing in this case because Petitioner did not participate in
the City of Tenino's adoption of its UGA. Ibid at 5-8 (See footnote 8 )
Board Analysis
The requirements for creating and sizing a UGA are set out in RCW 36 70A.11 0 This
section of the statute provides that UGAs must include areas and densities sufficient to
accommodate the 20-year population projections by the Office of Financial Management
(OFM)
Based upon the growth management population projections made for the county by
the office of financial management, the county and each city within the county shall
include areas and densities sufficient to permit the urban growth that is projected to
occur in the county or city for the succeeding twenty-year period, except for those
urban growth areas contained totally within a national historical reserve An urban
growth area determination may include a reasonable land market supply factor and
shall permit a range of urban densities and uses In determining this market factor,
cities and counties may consider local circumstances. Cities and counties have
discretion in their comprehensive plans to make many choices about accommodating
growth
RCW 36 70A.11 0(2) (in pertinent part)
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 19 of 37
Western Washingfon
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
P.O Box 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone: 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
RCW 36 70A.11 0(2) provides that county UGAs shall include areas and densities sufficient
to permit the urban growth projected for the county by OFM RCW 36 70A.11 0(2) This
provision has been interpreted to also limit the size of UGAs as well as to ensure that the
UGA boundaries are sufficient to accommodate projected growth, in light of the anti-sprawl
goal of the GMA. Diehl v Mason County, 94 Wn.App 645,982 P.2d 543 (Div 11,1999)
[T]he OFM projection places a cap on the amount of land a county may allocate to
UGAs" Ibid at 654 Thus, RCW 36 70A.11 0 requires that the UGAs be created to
accommodate the OFM population projection for the 20-year planning horizon and also
limits the size of UGAs to those lands needed to accommodate the urban population
projection utilized by the county
In this case, the County has chosen a 2025 total population forecast figure of 334,261 CP
Table 2-1 at 2-12 The population forecast chosen was adopted in 1999 as a regional
forecast (Population and Employment Forecast for Thurston County, Final Report, October
1999, Index No 208) and then compared to the OFM population projections for the County
in 2002 Buildable Lands Report for Thurston County, Technical Documentation, at 46
(Submitted post-hearing, Index No 43) The medium scenario regional forecast was found
to fall within one percent of the new state medium range forecast (OFM's projection) and
was therefore adopted for use in the Buildable Lands Report and, subsequently, the 2004
comprehensive plan update Ibid, Thurston County Comprehensive Plan (CP), Facts
Section and Land Use Chapter Table 2-1 at 2-11 - 2-12 That population forecast, in turn,
was used to determine demand for land within the UGAs through 2025 Thurston County
Comprehensive Plan (CP), Facts Section and Land Use Chapter Table 2-1 at 2-11 - 2-12
We note first that the Buildable Lands Report for Thurston County is an impressive and
thorough analysis of land supply and demand in Thurston County The land demand
analysis in that report is well-supported and clearly explained The County's choice to rely
o
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 20 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone: 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
c
c
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
upon the land supply and demand analysis in the Buildable Lands Report for planning in the
2004 comprehensive plan update is a sound one
Petitioner does not fault the population forecast chosen by the County or claim that the land
supply projections are not compatible with the population projections provided by OFM
Instead, Petitioner focuses on the amount of land included in the County's UGAs and
compares it to the projected demand for urban land Petitioners Futurewise's and League
of Women Voters of Thurston County Prehearing Brief at 31 The County's comprehensive
plan acknowledges that in the urban area "approximately 38% of available residentiallan<;1
in 2000 will remain in the year 2025, assuming the county experiences growth consistent i
with state and regional forecasts, and zoning remains consistent." CP footnote 6 at 2-11
On its face, then, the County's UGAs provide a significantly greater amount of land for
residential urban development than is likely to be needed to accommodate the projected
population growth allocated by the County to UGAs
The County responds that the disparity is due to a market factor Respondent's Prehearing
Brief at 22 6 Petitioner argues that supply exceeds demand for residential land in the UGAs
by 62 percent, which is excessive even if it were a market factor Petitioners Futurewise's
and League of Women Voters of Thurston County Prehearing Brief at 31 The County
responds that the "7,207 acres is the unconsumed land left in 2025 which is thirty-eight
percent (38%) of the total land supply of 18,799 acres" Respondent's Prehearing Brief at
20 A 38 percent market factor, according to the County, is not clearly erroneous in light of
the uncertainties about how much future land will be needed for growth in the cities and
towns of Thurston County Ibid at 22
6 Since a market factor is used to increase the available land supply, it should be applied to the 2025 landl
demand figure As an example. if the projected land demand is 100 acres, a 25 percent market factor WOliJld
increase the needed land supply to 125 acres. ~
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20,2005
Page 21 of 37
,
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
The use of a "land market supply factor" is permissible under the statute to account for the
vagaries of the real estate market supply RCW 36 70A.11 0(2) The Central Puget Sound
Growth Management Hearings Board describes the market factor as follows
In general, it accounts for the fact that not all vacant land will be built or all
redevelopable property redeveloped, because the property owners simply will not
take the necessary actions during the planning period
City of Gig Harbor, et al v Pierce County, CPSGMHB Case No 95-3-0016c (Final Decision
and Order, October 31, 1995)
The first problem with the County's response is that nowhere in the County's comprehensive
plan is it indicated that a 38 percent market factor was utilized to increase the amount of
acreage that is needed to accommodate projected urban residential growth While the
comprehensive plan acknowledges that 38 percent of urban residential land will remain
unconsumed in 2025, it does not claim that the reason for this was a market factor CP
footnote 6 at 2-11
o
At argument, the County claimed that the 38 percent market factor was based on overlays
of critical areas and shorelines However, the Buildable lands Report already accounted
for critical areas deductions
Critical area and right-of-way exclusions can reduce net density in significant
amounts taken across all zoning districts as a whole, (note the difference in
deduction of those jurisdictions including all critical areas and rights-of-way versus
those that are much more selective, Table 12) In real terms, however, these
deductions playa relatively small role in the difference between net density
calculations once a parcel has been through the platting process In addition, many
jurisdictions further protect critical areas from all development pressure by placing
them into Open Space or Institutional zoning categories Overall, critical areas
deductions to net density, as applied by various jurisdictions, were found to comprise
less than one percent of those parcels developed between 1996 and 2000 in
residential and mixed use zoning categories
Building lands Report, Technical Documentation, (Index No 43) at 35
In fact, the disparity between land supply and demand in the urban areas does not appear
to be the result of a market factor at all, but appears instead to be an unavoidable
consequence of the urban growth boundaries chosen by the County
o
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 22 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone: 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
c
c
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
The second problem with the County's assertion that the disparity between residential land
supply and projected demand is a result of a market factor is that there is no analysis
demonstrating the reason for the market factor "Although a county may enlarge a UGA to
account for a 'reasonable land market supply factor,' it must also explain why this market
factor is required and how it was reached II Diehl v Mason County, 95 Wn App 645,654,
982 P.2d 543 (Div II, 1999)
The land supply analysis performed in the Buildable Lands Report concluded that the
supply of residential land as of 2000 for urban Thurston County will exceed demand for
urban residential land in 2025, it found a supply of 18,789 acres and a 2025 demand of 11,
582 acres Buildable Lands Report for Thurston County, September 2002 (Index No 43),
Figure 11-1 at 11-4 The 2004 update of the comprehensive plan accepts and utilizes these
figures for residential land supply and demand in urban areas Thurston County
Comprehensive Plan (CP), Facts Section and Land Use Chapter Table 2-1 at 2-11 - 2-12
However, there is no explanation in the comprehensive plan for the use of a market factor,
perhaps because the buildable lands analysis appears to already account for many of the
market vagaries in its own assessment of land availability The buildable lands analysis
provides an individualized look at the available land (generally on a parce/-by-parcel basis)
and produces a figure for net developable land based on development assumptions
established in light of the actual development trends in the area of the lands assessed
Buildable Lands Report for Thurston County, September 2002 (Index No 43) The
analysis includes a review of subdivision trends from 1995 to 1999 and residential building
permits from 1996 to 2000 Buildable Lands Report for Thurston County at 32-33
Development assumptions were derived based on current comprehensive plans and
development codes, recent development trends and information provided by long-range
planners from jurisdictions throughout the County Ibid at 11- 10 The buildable lands
analysis assesses many of the potential market factors and incorporates them into the
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER Western Washington
Case No. 05-2-0002 Growth Management Hearings Board
July 20, 2005 905 24th Way SW Suite B-2
Page 23 of 37 Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
figures for land supply and demand that it produces This analysis appears to take the
place of a market factor
Since the number used in the comprehensive plan update to determine residential land
supply in the Thurston County urban growth areas was derived from the buildable lands
analysis, any market factor must be based on factors that were not already incorporated into
the determination of residential land supply
Petitioners also challenge the expansion of two UGAs - the Tenino UGA and the Bucoda
UGA. Petitioners Futurewise's and League of Women Voters of Thurston County
Prehearing Brief at 17 - 18 Citing to Table 2-1 of the County's comprehensive plan I
Petitioner points out that the 2025 residential land demand for the Bucoda UGA is 30 acres
and the corresponding land supply is 81 acres Ibid Tenmo's residential land demand in
2025 is projected to be 353 acres with a corresponding land supply of 505 acres Ibid 0
Petitioner further asserts that the County's Urban Growth Area Policy 8 (allowing expansion
of urban growth areas if there is an overriding benefit to the public health, safety, and
welfare) fails to comply with the GMA.
The County responds that land was taken out of, as well as added to, the T enino UGA so
that the Tenino UGA was actually reduced by 6 acres Respondent's Prehearing Brief at
19 The Intervenor points out that the addition of its property to the UGA is necessary to
finance a new sewer facility that will allow the City to encourage more intense urban
development than can now be adequately served with urban levels of governmental
services Intervenors' Brief at 2-3 7 This will allow truly urban density levels of residential
7 Intervenor also challenges Petitioner's standing to raise challenges to the Tenino UGA because Petitioner did
not participate in the City's process in developing its comprehensive plan However, Petitioner is not
challenging the City's adoption of its plan but rather the County's adoption of UGA boundaries. Adoption of
urban growth area boundaries is the responsibility of the County RCW 36 70A.11 0 Petitioner participated in 0
the County's process in adopting those boundaries and raised its concerns at that time RCW
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER Western Washington
Case No. 05-2-0002 Growth Management Hearings Board
July 20,2005 905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Page 24 of 37 Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone: 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
c
c
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
development within the City limits As to the Bucoda UGA, the County argues that
expansion of its boundaries adds sufficient developable lands for projected residential
growth if sewer becomes available, and reduces pressure on the existing aquifer from
residential development based on septic systems Respondent's Prehearing Brief at 19-20
However, the fundamental problem identified by Petitioner is that the UGAs are much larger
than the growth projected to be accommodated in them It may well be, as Intervenor
argues, that there are good reasons for increasing the size of the Tenino UGA. However, if
the County does this, it must "show its work"B on the reasons for the expansion and also
increase its allocated population growth to the Tenino UGA and adjust its population
allocations elsewhere in the County's UGAs accordingly Similarly, it may be reasonable for
the County to adjust the Bucoda UGA boundaries to accommodate additional growth in that
UGA (if that urban growth is provided with urban levels of services) However, if it does so,
the County must "show its work," allocate additional population growth to the Bucoda UGA,
and account for that re-allocation in the other land use designations in the county The
OFM population allocation to the county is the basis upon which the UGAs may be sized,
the population growth allocations to each UGA must add up to comport with the overall
county urban growth population allocation
Urban Growth Area Policy 8(b) (CP at 2-50) provides for expansion of UGA boundaries for
reasons other than accommodation of projected urban population growth
There can be shown an overriding public benefit to public health, safety and welfare
by moving the urban growth boundary
Urban Growth Area Policy 8(b), CP at 2-50
36 70A.280(2)(b) Since the adoptions being challenged are the County's resolution and ordinance, Petitioner
has standing to bring this appeal
8 Berschauer v Tumwater, WWGMHB Case No 94-2-0002 (Final Decision and Order, July 27, 1994),
Association of Rural Residents v Kitsap County, CPSGMHB Case No 93-1-0010 (Final Decision and Order,
June 3, 1994)
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 25 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone: 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
This policy appears to confuse expansion of UGA boundaries with extension of urban levels
of service Under RCW 36 70A.11 O( 4), urban governmental services may not be extended
to rural areas "except in those limited circumstances shown to be necessary to protect basic
public health and safety and the environment and when such services are financially
supportable at rural densities and do not permit urban development." However, this
exception does not apply to the extension of UGA boundaries UGA boundaries are to be
set to accommodate projected urban population growth (RCW 36 70A.11 0(2)) and to
contain such urban growth RCW 36 70A.110(1) Urban Growth Area Policy 8(b) allows the
extension of urban growth in violation of these provisions of the GMA and its anti-sprawl
goal, RCW 36 70A.020(2)
Conclusion. The size of any UGA must be based upon the projected population growth
allocated to that UGA. Since the supply of urban residential lands (18,789 acres)
significantly exceeds the projected demand for such lands over the course of the 20-year
planning horizon (11,582 acres), the County's UGAs fail to comply with RCW 36 70A.11 0
For the Tenino and Bucoda UGAs, the population projection allocations and the 2025 land
demand figures based on them are not consistent with the land supply for those urban
growth areas This also fails to comply with RCW 36 70A.11 0
o
Issue No.4: Does the adoption of Resolution 13234 and Ordinance 13235 fail
to comply with RCW 36.70A.020(B), RCW 36.70A.060, RCW 36.70A.170, RCW
36 70A.050 and RCW 36. 70A.130 when they fail to designate and conserve
hundreds of acres of land that meet the GMA criteria for agricultural lands of
long term commercial significance?
Petitioner argues that Thurston County's designation criteria are internally inconsistent
because the land capability classification system and prime farmland are not the same
systems, yet Thurston County's designation criterion mixes them all together and ultimately
relies on prime farmland Petitioners Futurewise's and League of Women Voters of
Thurston County Prehearing Brief at 22-23 Petitioner also argues that County's criteria for
o
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 26 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone: 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
o
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
designation of agricultural lands of long-term commercial significance are erroneous for
three reasons they fail to consider farmlands of statewide importance, they require that land
actually be used for agriculture, and they require a predominant parcel size of 20 acres
Ibid at 24 - 29 9
The County responds that the Petitioner has not shown that the County's criteria for
designation of agricultural lands of long-term commercial significance are clearly
erroneous 10
The County's designation criteria for agricultural lands of long-term commercial significance
are found at Chapter Three - Natural Resources, pp 3-3 - 3-7 of the County's
comprehensive plan The County's comprehensive plan also states that almost 15 percent
of land in the county is used for local agriculture Ibid at 3-1
As a first step towards designating natural resource lands, the Minimum Guidelines to
Classify Agriculture, Forest, Mineral Lands and Critical Areas (Ch 365-190 WAC)
("Minimum Guidelines" hereafter) call for classification of natural resource land categories
WAC 365-190-040(1) WAC 365-190-050 directs counties and cities to use the land-
capability classification system of the United States Department of Agriculture Soil
Conservation Service as defined in Agriculture Handbook No 21011 The Petitioner faults
the County's classification of soils for inconsistency with the Agriculture Handbook No 210
9At the hearing on the merits, Petitioner abandoned its argument that the County erred in using an out-dated
list of prime farmland soils, conceding that the list was not provided to the County in sufficient time to be
included in its 2004 update .
10 The County devoted most of its argument in its Prehearing Brief to the Petitioner's claim that the County
should have included the newest list of prime farmland soils in its 2004 update That claim was later
abandoned
11 Although couched in mandatory terms, the Minimum Guidelines call for counties to "consider" the minimum
guidelines. WAC 365-190-040(2)(b)(ii).
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20 2005
Page 27 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia. Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
However, Petitioner's very abbreviated argument simply does not demonstrate how the
County's classification system fails to follow Agriculture Handbook No 210
Petitioner also faults the County for failing to consider farmlands of statewide importance in
its classification scheme For this argument, Petitioner relies upon the holding of the
Eastern Washington Growth Management Hearings Board in Williams, et al v Kittitas
County, EWGMHB Case No 95-1-0009 (Order of Noncompliance, November 6, 1998)
However, in that decision, the Eastern Board did not hold that farmlands of statewide
importance must be considered in establishing a classification scheme Again, Petitioner
has failed to meet its burden of proof on this point.
On the other hand, Petitioner points to two of the County's criteria for designation of
agricultural lands of long-term commercial significance that do not comply with the Growth
Management Act's directives to designate and conserve agricultural resource lands RCW 0
36 70A.040 and 36 70A.170 The first is the requirement in Chapter 3 of the County
comprehensive plan that "Designated agricultural lands should include only areas that are
used for agriculture" Thurston County Comprehensive Plan, Chapter Three - Natural
Resource Lands, p 3-4 Lands otherwise eligible for designation as agricultural lands of
long-term commercial significance may not be excluded simply on the basis of current use
Our State Supreme Court has ruled on this point:
One cannot credibly maintain that interpreting the definition of "agricultural land" in a
way that allows land owners to control its designation gives effect to the Legislature's
intent to maintain, enhance, and conserve such land We hold land is "devoted to"
agricultural use under RCW 36 70A.030 if it is in an area where the land is actually
used or capable of being used for agricultural production
City of Redmond v Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board, 136 Wn.2d
38,53,959 P.2d 1091, 1998 Wash LEXIS 575 (1998)
Therefore, agricultural lands designation criterion number three does not comply with the
GMA definitions of agricultural lands RCW 36 70A.030(2) and (10)
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 28 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
c'
c
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
The second designation criterion that fails to comply with the GMA is criteria number 5,
which requires that the predominant parcel size must be 20 acres or more Thurston
County Comprehensive Plan, Chapter Three - Natural Resource Lands, p 3-4 The
comprehensive plan explains that the reason for this parcel size limitation is it "provides
economic conditions sufficient for managing agriculture lands for long-term commercial
production" Ibid However, as Petitioner points out (and as the Eastern Board found in the
Kittitas County case cited above) parcel size does not necessarily correlate to the size of a
farm Farms may consist of several parcels in common ownership or use (under lease for
example), thus achieving the economies of scale the County appears to rely upon in
restricting smaller farms from designation and conservation While parcel size may be a
factor in determining the possibility of more intense uses of the land, it is just one in many
factors to consider on the question of the possibility of more intense uses of the land WAC
365-190-050( e) Parcel size is not determinative of the size of a farm, which may consist of
more than one parcel
Parcel size itself does not correspond to farm size because it is not indicative of the amount
of acreage that would be farmed together Using predominant parcel size of 20 acres as a
designation criterion may exclude viable farms in which the total acreage farmed is in
excess of 20 acres in size but each of the parcels making up the farm is less than 20 acres
If size is to be used as a factor in designating agricultural lands, farm size rather than parcel
size is the relevant consideration
Agricultural land designation criteria no 5 therefore fails to comply with RCW 36 70A030,
RCW 36 70A060 and 36 70A170
Conclusion: Petitioner has failed to meet its burden of proof as to the County's
classification system for agricultural lands of long-term commercial significance and any
inconsistencies alleged between the comprehensive plan provisions concerning it.
However, designation criteria numbers 3 and 5 fail to comply with the requirements of the
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 29 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia. Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
GMA to designate and conserve agricultural resource lands RCW 36 70A060 and
36 70A170
VI INVALIDITY
Petitioner asks the Board to enter a finding of invalidity as to the comprehensive plan
designations and zones that allow rural densities greater than one dwelling unit per five
acres in the rural area Petitioner Futurewise's and Thurston County League of Women
Voter Prehearing Brief at 29-30 12 Petitioner also requests that the urban growth areas be
found invalid because they have resulted in an average net residential density of 1 73
dwelling units per acre in the unincorporated urban growth areas and damage to Puget
Sound Ibid at 32
The County responds that all of the provisions of Resolution 13234 and Ordinance 13235
are compliant with the GMA so a finding of invalidity may not be entered Respondent's 0
Prehearing Brief at 25
A finding of invalidity may be entered when a board makes a finding of noncompliance and
further includes a "determination, supported by findings of fact and conclusions of law that
the continued validity of part or parts of the plan or regulation would substantially interfere
with the fulfillment of the goals of this chapter" RCW 36 70A302(1) (in pertinent part)
We have held that invalidity should be imposed if continued validity of the noncompliant
comprehensive plan provisions or development regulations would substantially interfere with
the local jurisdiction's ability to engage in GMA-compliant planning See Butler v Lewis
County, WWGMHB Case No 99-2-0027c (Order Finding Noncompliance and Imposing
12 Petitioner also requests a finding of invalidity based on the lack of variety of rural densities but it is unclear
what portions of the resolution and ordinance could be found invalid to address this lack. Ibid at 31
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 30 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
c
c
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
Invalidity, February 13, 2004) On the record before us, we do not find that a remand with
an order to achieve compliance is insufficient to enable the County to pursue proper
planning under the Act. However, if circumstances change such that development
applications during the pendency of the County's compliance efforts are likely to vest in
ways that will substantially interfere with the achievement of the goals and requirements of
the GMA, we will entertain a motion to impose invalidity on provisions of Resolution 13234
and Ordinance 13235 that we have found noncompliant in this final decision and order
RCW 36 70A330(4) Such a motion may be brought at any time until compliance has been
found but must be accompanied by documents indicating the conditions justifying a finding
of invalidity
VII. FINDINGS OF FACT
1 Thurston County is a county located west of the crest of the Cascade Mountains
that is required to plan pursuant to RCW 36 70A040
2 Petitioner is a non-profit organization that participated in the adoption of Resolution
13234 and Ordinance 13235 in writing and orally Petitioner raised the matters
addressed in its Petition for Review to the County in its participation below
3 Intervenor is a property owner whose property was added to the Tenino UGA in the
County's adoption of Resolution 13234 and Ordinance 13235
4 Resolution 13234 and Ordinance 13235 were adopted by the County on
November 22, 2004 and notice of adoption was published on November 24, 2004
5 Petitioner filed its petition for review of Resolution 13234 and Ordinance 13235 on
January 21,2005
6 When the County adopted its comprehensive plan in 1995, it developed its own
criteria for determining how to contain existing areas of more intensive development
in the rural areas
7 In 1997, the legislature adopted the provisions of RCW 36 70A070(d) that set the
requirements for "limited areas of more intensive rural development" (LAMIRDs)
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 31 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
o
8 The County's comprehensive plan designates high density rural residential areas
which allow 4 dwelling units per acre (SR - 4/1) 2 dwelling units per acre (RR 2/1) 1
dwelling unit per acre (RR 1/1) and 1 dwelling unit per two acres (RR 1/2)
9 Thurston County's zoning code contains development regulations setting residential
density levels in excess of one dwelling unit per five acres in rural areas Rural
Residential- One Dwelling Unit per Two Acres (RR 1/2) (T C C Ch 20 10), Rural
Residential- One Dwelling Unit per Acre (RR 1/1) (T C C Ch 20 11), Rural
Residential - Two Dwelling Units per Acre (RR 2/1) (T C C Chapter 20 13), and
Suburban Residential - Four Dwelling Units per Acre (SR 4/1) (T C C Chapter
20 14)
10 All of these residential density levels constitute "more intensive rural development"
within the meaning of RCW 36 70A.070(5)(d)
11 5 5 percent of rural lands in the county are designated for high intensity rural
residential uses, i e SR - 4/1, RR 2/1, RR 1/1, and RR 1/2
12 In its 2004 update of its comprehensive plan and development regulations, the 0
County has not applied the statutory LAMIRD criteria to its existing areas of more
intensive development in the rural areas
13 County comprehensive plan Housing and Residential Densities Policies 1 and 2,
and Rural Land Use and Activities Policy 8 exempt existing areas of high density
rural residential development from the statutory requirements for LAMIRDs
14 The Thurston County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element contains a
discussion of rural area designations CP at 2-17 - 2-27 This discussion includes
the criteria for inclusion in any of the rural area designations, including the higher
density residential designations CP at 2-24 - 2-27 None of the criteria include a
review of the existence of development as of July 1, 1990, nor do they establish
logical outer boundaries with reference to the statutory criteria Ibid
15 T C C 20 09 040( 1 )( a) establishes a minimum lot size in the RR 1/5 zone as
follows "Conventional subdivision lot (net) - four acres for single family, eight
acres for duplexes" This development regulation allows one single family dwelling
unit per four acres, rather than one dwelling unit per five acres, in the RR 1/5 zone
16 48 3 percent of the County's rural residential areas fall into the RR 1/5 category
CP Table 2-1A at 2-18 - 2-19
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 32 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
c
(j
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
17 With such a large portion of the County's rural area designated as RR 1/5, the net
density level of one dwelling unit per four acres in the RR 1/5 zone increases the
conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling, low-density development in the
rural area
18 T C C Chapter 20 08A applies to lands in the long-term agricultural district; Ch
T C C 20 080 applies to lands in the long-term forestry district, and T C C Chapter
2062 creates a program for transfer of development rights in long-term
commercially significant agricultural lands All of these designations are resource
land designations
19 Rural lands are lands "not designated for urban growth, agriculture, forest, or
mineral resources" RCW 36 70A.070(5) Thus, the designations of agricultural
and forest resource lands do not create a variety of rural densities
20 Where the rural designations and zones themselves do not include a variety of
densities, the comprehensive plan and development regulations must demonstrate
how the "innovative techniques" create such varieties of densities in the rural area
The County's comprehensive plan does not describe how any innovative
techniques have been used to provide a variety of rural densities in the rural area
21 The County has chosen a 2025 total population forecast figure of 334,261 CP
Table 2-1 at 2-12
22 The OFM population forecast for the county forms the basis for the Buildable Lands
Report determination of demand for urban lands in 2025
23 The medium scenario regional forecast was found to fall within one percent of the
new state medium range forecast (OFM's projection) and was therefore adopted for
use in the Buildable Lands Report and, subsequently, the 2004 comprehensive
plan update
24 The County's buildable lands analysis concludes that the supply of residential land
as of 2000 for urban Thurston County will exceed demand for urban residential land
in 2025, it found a supply of 18,789 acres and a 2025 demand of 11, 582 acres
Buildable Lands Report for Thurston County, September 2002, Figure 11-1 at 11-4
25 The 2004 update of the comprehensive plan accepts and utilizes the figures from
the Buildable Lands Report for residential land supply and demand in urban areas
Thurston County Comprehensive Plan (CP), Facts Section and Land Use Chapter
Table 2-1 at 2-11 - 2-12
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 33 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
o
26 The County's allocation of residential urban lands (18,789 acres) exceeds its
projected 2025 demand for such lands (11,582 acres) by 7,205 acres
27 Nowhere in the County's comprehensive plan is it indicated that a 38 percent
market factor was utilized to increase the amount of acreage that is needed to
accommodate projected urban residential growth
28 The basis for the use of the urban residential land supply and demand figures is
well grounded in the County's Buildable Lands Report.
29 The comprehensive plan does not include an explanation or justification for the use
of a land supply market factor
30 The Buildable Lands Report accounted for critical areas deductions in the net
developable land available for urban residential development.
31 The County's comprehensive plan allocates a 2025 residential land demand of 30
acres and a corresponding land supply of 81 acres for the Bucoda UGA. CP
Table 2-1
32 The County's comprehensive plan allocates 353 acres for urban residential land
demand in the Tenino UGA 2025 and projects a corresponding land supply of 505
acres CP Table 2-1
o
33 Urban Growth Area Policy 8(b) (CP at 2-50) provides for expansion of UGA
boundaries when "There can be shown an overriding public benefit to public health,
safety and welfare by moving the urban growth boundary "
34 Urban Growth Area Policy 8(b) and the expansion of the Tenino and Bucoda UGAs
expand UGA boundaries beyond those lands needed to accommodate projected
urban population growth
35 Almost 15 percent of land in the County is used for local agriculture CP Chapter
Three - Natural Resources, pp 3-3 - 3-7
36 Petitioner's abbreviated argument simply does not demonstrate how the County's
classification system fails to follow Agriculture Handbook No 210
37 Chapter 3 of the County comprehensive plan provides that "Designated agricultural
lands should include only areas that are used for agriculture" Thurston County
Comprehensive Plan, Chapter Three - Natural Resource Lands, p 3-4 This
provision limits the designation (and thus conservation) of agricultural lands to
those that are currently in use for agriculture
o
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 34 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone: 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
c
c
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
o
38 County criteria number 5 for designation of agricultural resource lands requires that
the predominant parcel size must be 20 acres or more Thurston County
Comprehensive Plan, Chapter Three - Natural Resource Lands, p 3-4
39 Using predominant parcel size of 20 acres as a designation criterion may exclude
viable farms in which the total acreage farmed is in excess of 20 acres in size but
each of the parcels making up the farm is less than 20 acres
VIII CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
A This Board has jurisdiction over the parties to this action
B This Board has jurisdiction over the subject-matter of this action
C Petitioner has standing to raise the issues in its Petition for Review
D The petition for review in this case was timely filed
E The County's high density rural residential designations (SR - 4/1, RR 2/1, RR 1/1,
and RR 1/2), Housing and Residential Densities Policies 1 and 2, and Rural Land
Use and Activities Policy 8, and the County's development regulations
implementing these designations (T C C Ch 20 10, T C C Ch 20 11, T C C
Chapter 2013, and T C C Chapter 2014) fail to comply with RCW 36 70A070(5)
FTC C 2009040(1 )(a) fails to comply with RCW 36 70A070(5)(c) and (d) by
effectively increasing the rural residential density in the RR 1/5 zone from one
dwelling unit per five acres to one single-family dwelling unit per four acres
G The County's comprehensive plan and development regulations fail to provide for a
variety of rural densities in the rural element as required by RCW 36 70A070(5)(b)
H The County's UGA designations and development regulations implementing them
fail to comply with RCW 36 70A11 0 by creating UGA boundaries that significantly
exceed the projected demand for urban residential lands over the course of the 20-
year planning horizon
Urban Growth Area Policy 8(b) fails to comply with RCW 36 70A11 0(1) and (2)
J Petitioner has failed to meet its burden of proof as to the County's classification
system for agricultural lands of long-term commercial significance and any
inconsistencies alleged between the comprehensive plan provisions concerning it.
Therefore, these provisions are compliant with the GMA
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No 05-2-0002
July 20, 2005
Page 35 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
K. Petitioner has failed to meet its burden of proof that the County's failure to consider
farmlands of statewide importance violates the goals and requirements of the GMA
L Agricultural land designation criteria numbers 3 and 5 (Thurston County
Comprehensive Plan, Chapter Three - Natural Resource Lands, p 3-4) fail to
comply with the requirements of the GMA to designate and conserve agricultural
resource lands RCW 36 70A060 and 36 70A170
IX. ORDER
The County is ordered to achieve compliance with the Growth Management Act pursuant to
this decision no later than January 18, 2006 The following schedule for compliance,
briefing and hearing shall apply.
Compliance Due
Compliance Report (County to file
and serve on all parties)
Any Objections to a Finding of
Compliance Due
County's Response Due
Compliance Hearing (location to be
determined)
January 17, 2006
January 24, 2006
o
February 17, 2006
March 10, 2006
March 22,2006
The Board incorporates the findings and conclusions of its Order Denying Motions
To Dismiss, April 21, 2005, by reference in this final decision and order As part of
this final decision and order, the Order Denying Motions To Dismiss shall also
become a final order upon entry of this decision
Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.300 this is a final order of the Board
Reconsideration. Pursuant to WAC 242-02-832, you have ten (10) days from the
mailing of this Order to file a petition for reconsideration. Petitions for
reconsideration shall follow the format set out in WAC 242-02-832. The original and
o
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20 2005
Page 36 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
C
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
C 15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
C
three copies of the petition for reconsideration, together with any argument in
support thereof, should be filed by mailing, faxing or delivering the document directly
to the Board, with a copy to all other parties of record and their representatives.
Filing means actual receipt of the document at the Board office. RCW 34.05.010(6),
WAC 242-02-330 The filing of a petition for reconsideration is not a prerequisite for
filing a petition for judicial review
Judicial Review Any party aggrieved by a final decision of the Board may appeal the
decision to superior court as provided by RCW 36.70A.300(5) Proceedings for
judicial review may be instituted by filing a petition in superior court according to tlhe
procedures specified in chapter 34 05 RCW, Part V, Judicial Review and Civil
Enforcement. The petition for judicial review of this Order shall be filed with the
appropriate court and served on the Board, the Office of the Attorney General, and all
parties within thirty days after service of the final order, as provided in RCW
34 05 542. Service on the Board may be accomplished in person, by fax or by mail,
but service on the Board means actual receipt of the document at the Board office
within thirty days after service of the final order
Service. This Order was served on you the day it was deposited in the United States
mail RCW 34 05 010(19)
Entered this 20th day of July 2005
Margery Hite, Board Member
Holly Gadbaw, Board Member
Gayle Rothrock, Board Member
FINAL DECISION AND ORDER
Case No. 05-2-0002
July 20 2005
Page 37 of 37
Western Washington
Growth Management Hearings Board
905 24th Way SW, Suite B-2
Olympia, WA 98502
POBox 40953
Olympia, Washington 98504-0953
Phone. 360-664-8966
Fax: 360-664-8975
c
City of Yelm
!\
U
c
Planning Commission
AGENDA
Yelm Planning Commission
Monday, August 15,2005
4 00 P M
Yelm City Hall
105 Yelm Avenue West
1. Call to Order and Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes
July 18, 2005
3.
Public Communications not associated with agenda items
4.
Public Hearings
None Scheduled
5. Other
a Development Update
b Tahoma Terra Update
c 6-year STIP Update (and add member to YTAC)
d Growth Management Hearings Board Update - what it means for Yelm
6. Adjourn
Next regular meeting
Monday, September 19, 2005 - 4 00 P M
Yelm City Hall Council Chambers
Enclosures are available to non-Commission members upon request.
It is the City of Yelm's policy to provide reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities. If you are a person
with a disability in need of accommodations to conduct business, or to participate in government processes or
activities, please contact Agnes Bennick, at 360-458-8404 at least four (4) working days prior to the scheduled event.
All Planning Commission meetings are audio taped. For information on obtaining a copy, please call the Community
Development Department at (360) 458-3835
c
c
c
STAFF REPORT
City of Yelm
To Mayor Adam Rivas
Yelm City Council
From Grant Beck, Director of Community Development
Date August 1,2005 (for August 10, 2005 City Council Meeting)
Subj Tahoma Terra Master Plan Development
Recommendation
Accept the Hearing Examiners recommendation and approve the Conceptual Master
Site Plan for the Tahoma Terra Master Plan Development, file number MPD-05-0067-
YL, and the Final Master Site Plan for that portion of the Master Plan Development
located east of Thompson Creek.
Background
Tahoma Terra LLC has applied for a Master Plan Development on 220 acres within the
Southwest Yelm Annexation Area formerly owned by Henry Dragt.
Approval of a Master Plan Development is a three step process, two of which require
action by the City Council
First is the review of a Conceptual Master Site Plan The purpose of conceptual review
and approval is to establish general land use policies to guide detailed planning for and
development of the master plan area The conceptual plan identifies the generalized
land uses, transportation circulation routes and services proposed for the site
Review of a conceptual master site plan is performed initially by the hearing examiner
The examiner reviews the application for consistency with the comprehensive plan and
the City's other plans and policies The examiner makes a recommendation regarding
the conceptual master site plan to the City Council for final action
Upon conceptual approval by the City Council, the proposed master plan boundaries,
proposed use districts, transportation routes and case file number are identified on the
official zoning map
Next is review of a Final Master Site Plan, which consists of maps and text which
indicate major development features and services for the entire site included in the final
August 1, 2005
Page 1 of 2
master site plan, including a schedule indicating phasing of development and the means
of financing services for the site ;'"-\
~
A complete final master plan for the entire conceptual master site plan area must be
submitted within 10 years of conceptual approval The master plan is reviewed by the
hearing examiner who makes a recommendation to the City Council for final action The
examiner conducts a public hearing and determines if the plan is consistent with the
conceptual approval and complies with the policies of the comprehensive plan, and the
purposes of Section 17 62 020
A decision by the City Council approving a final master site plan shall be accompanied
by a schedule for periodic review of the master plan by the examiner not less than once
every five years following approval until development of the master plan is substantially
complete
Finally, development applications within the Master Plan Development are reviewed
through their required review processes, but are reviewed for consistency with the
provisions of the conceptual and final master site plan approvals
Current Situation
The Hearing Examiner held a duly advertised public hearing on the Tahoma Terra
Conceptual Master Site Plan and a Final Master Site Plan for the portion of the property
east of Thompson Creek and has recommended the City Council approve both plans
The Hearing Examiners decision is attached to this staff report, as is the staff analysis
of the Conceptual and Final Master Site Plans prepared for the public hearing before
the Examiner
August 1, 2005
Page 2 of 2
~
o
:J
lu __
I
!
c
c
c
YELM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
JULY 18, 2005 4 00 P M
YELM CITY HALL
John Thomson called the meeting to order at 4 00 PM
Members present: John Thomson, Norm Allard, Greg Mattocks, Carlos Perez, John Graver,
and Glen Cunningham
Staff. Grant Beck and Tami Merriman
Members Absent: Everette Schirman, Unexcused
Motion No
Approval of Minutes:
05-15 MOTION MADE BY GREG MATTOCKS, SECONDED BY JOHN GRAVER TO APPROVE THE
MINUTES FROM THE JUNE 20, 2005 MEETING. MOTION CARRIED.
Public Communications.
None
Public Hearina - None
Other:
Deliberation - Critical Areas Code Update
Mr. Thomson thanked the public for their input in the update to the critical areas code, and asked
for a report from the subcommittee
John Graver reported that the subcommittee met and discussed points raised from the public
hearing on June 20, 2005 After discussion, the subcommittee proposes to change the order of
the flood zone chapter to make it more clear, and changed the definition of "Qualified
Professional" to include 5 years of experience, and to clarify that the professional must have
experience in the field in question
Carlos Perez reported that in the areas that were questioned, it was explained adequately that
the items addressed are covered either in this code, or in other codes already in place with the
City The subcommittee determined that there just isn't enough information to try to control
pesticides at a local level
Norm Allard reported that the question regarding the length of permitting is addressed by the
underlying permit associated with any critical areas study
Mr. Thomson thanked the committee and the Commission for their time in reviewing this
document.
Mr Steve Klein asked the commission if Mr Wiltsie was notified of the results of the
subcommittee meeting
Mr. Beck responded that Mr Wiltsie and others who have been on a list for comments received
these results
05-16 MOTION MADE BY CARLOS PEREZ, SECONDED BY JOHN GRAVER TO FORWARD THE
CRITICAL AREAS CODE UPDATE TO CITY COUNCIL WITH RECOMMENDATION TO
APPROVE. MOTION CARRIED 6-0
Yelm Planning Commission
July 18,2005
Page 1
c
Mr. Beck informed the Commission that the City Council will hold a public hearing on Wednesday,
August 10, 2005 regarding the Critical Areas Code, and suggested that it would be a good idea if
a Planning Commission member or two attend that meeting to help answer any questions the
Council may have Carlos Perez volunteered to attend, and John Thomson also said that he
would try to make it.
Mr. Beck updated the Commission on two large projects in progress in the City The Hearing
Examiner held a public hearing on the Tahoma Terra Master Plan application on July 11, 2005
The Hearing Examiner has taken the matter under consideration and will issue his
recommendation to City Council whether to approve the Master Plan
The Hearing Examiner will also hold public hearings on August 29, 30, and September 1, 2005, to
hear the appeal of the Walmart SEPA determination The first day of hearings are intended for
opening statements, and comments from the public The following two days will be presentations
from the attorneys for the appeal and for Walmart. Public testimony will be taken on all three
days
05-17 MOTION MADE BY GLEN CUNNINGHAM, SECONDED BY NORM ALLARD TO ADJOURN
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 418 P.M
Respectfully submitted,
Tami Merriman, Assistant Planner
c
John Thomson, Chair
Date
c
Yelm Planning Commission
July 18,2005
Page 2
c
City of Yelm
c
(\
\.J
Planning Commission
AGENDA
Yelm Planning Commission
Monday, July 18, 2005
4 00 P M
Yelm City Hall
105 Yelm Avenue West
1. Call to Order and Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes
June 20, 2005
3.
Public Communications not associated with agenda items
4.
Public Hearings
5. Other
Deliberation - Critical Areas Code Update
6. Adjourn
Next regular meeting
Monday, August 15, 2005 - 4 00 P M
Yelm City Hall Council Chambers
Enclosures are available to non-Commission members upon request.
It is the City of Yelm's policy to provide reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities. If you are a person
with a disability in need of accommodations to conduct business, or to participate in government processes or
activities, please contact Agnes Bennick, at 360-458-8404 at least four (4) working days prior to the scheduled event.
All Planning Commission meetings are audio taped For information on obtaining a copy, please call the Community
Development Department at (360) 458-3835
o
To
From
Date
Subj
MEMORANDUM
City of Yelm
Community Development Department
Yelm Planning Commission
Grant Beck, Director of Community Developmen~
July 15, 2005
Cntical Areas Sub-committee Report
The Critical Areas Sub-committee of the Planning Commission met on July 14, 2005, to
review the public comments received at the public hearing on the proposed updates to
the Critical Areas Code
The Sub-committee recommends that the Plannmg Commission forward the draft
Critical Areas Code to the City Council for adoption with the following changes
Page 31, Section 14 08 120 (F) - Renumber the specific standards so that construction
on pre-existing, non-conforming lots follows the standards for new construction in order
to clarify that there are performance standards for developments on lots created after
1999
c
F Performance Standards - Specific Uses in the FEMA Designated 100 year floodplain Specific
uses shall adhere to the following relevant standards, in addition to the general standards
Divisions of Land
c
a.
All new divisions of land, including subdivisions, short subdivisions, boundary line
adjustments, binding site plans, and master planned communities shall not
create any building lot for commercial or residential purposes with any portion
within the floodplain
Floodplain areas shall be dedicated as open space
No infrastructure required for the subdivision with the exception of utility transport
lines identified by the appropriate utility capital facilities plan shall be located
within the floodplain
Subdivisions and short subdivisions shall be designed to minimize or eliminate
flood damage and impacts to floodplain functions and values. Public utilities and
facilities that are installed as part of such subdivisions, such as sewer, gas,
electrical, and water systems, shall be located and constructed to also minimize
flood damage and impacts to floodplain functions and values Subdivisions
should be designed using natural features of the landscape and should not
incorporate flood protection changes
Subdivisions and short subdivisions shall have adequate natural surface water
drainage to reduce exposure to flood hazards, and
Subdivisions and short subdivisions shall show the 1 DO-year floodplain, floodway,
b
c,
d
e
f
c
and channel migration zone on the preliminary and final plat and short plat maps
and designate such areas as "no build," when applicable
Utilities
a. Infiltration of Flood Waters. All new and replacement water supply systems shall
be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the systems
b Sanitary Sewage Systems. New and replacement sanitary sewage systems
shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the
systems and discharges from the systems into flood waters
c. On-Site Waste Disposal Systems On-site waste disposal systems shall be
located to avoid impairment to them or contamination from them during flooding
New on-site sewage disposal systems are prohibited within the floodplain
3 Residential Construction on lots created prior to 1999
a. Must be Above Base Flood Elevation New construction and substantial
improvement of any residential structure shall have the lowest floor, including
basement, elevated one (1) foot or more above the base flood elevation
b Areas Below the Lowest Floor Fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor that
are subject to flooding shall only be allowed when designed to automatically
equalize hydrostatic flood forces on exterior walls by allowing for the entry and
exit of floodwaters Designs for meeting this requirement must either be certified
by a registered professional engineer or architect or must meet or exceed the
following minimum criteria.
A minimum of two (2) openings having a total net area of not less than
one (1) square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to
flooding shall be provided,
The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one (1) foot above
grade, and
Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, or other coverings or
devices provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of
floodwaters.
c. Manufactured Homes Must be Elevated All manufactured homes to be placed
or substantially improved shall be elevated on a permanent foundation such that
the lowest floor of the manufactured home is elevated one (1) foot or more above
the base flood elevation and be securely anchored to an adequately anchored
foundation system to resist flotation, collapse, and lateral movement.
Nonresidential Construction on lots created prior to 1999
a. Above Base Flood Elevation New construction and substantial improvement of
any commercial, industrial, or other nonresidential structure shall either have the
lowest floor, including basement, elevated one foot (1) or more above the base
flood elevation, or, together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities, shall
Be floodproofed so that below one (1) foot or more above the base flood
level the structure is watertight with walls substantially impermeable to
the passage of water;
ii Have structural components capable of resisting hydrostatic and
hydrodynamic loads and effects of buoyancy; and
III Be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the
2
C i.
ii
iii
4
o
July 15, 2005
Page 2 of 4
c
('
v
1\
G
b
design and methods of construction are in accordance with accepted
standards of practice for meeting provisions of this Subsection based on
their development and/or review of the structural design, specifications,
and plans.
Areas Below the Lowest Floor Fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor that
are not floodproofed shall be designed to automatically equalize hydrostatic flood
forces on exterior walls by allowing for the entry and exit of floodwaters Designs
for meeting this requirement must either be certified by a registered professional
engineer or architect, or must meet or exceed the following minimum criteria.
A minimum of two (2) openings having a total net area of not less than
one (1) square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to
flooding shall be provided,
ii The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one (1) foot above
grade, and
iii Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, or other coverings or
devices provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of
floodwaters.
Page 51, Section 1408 150 - Definition of Qualified Professional amended to require 5
years expenence and require that a qualified expert for wetlands be a professional
wetland scientist certified by the Society of Wetland SCientists
Qualified Professional - A person with experience and training in the pertinent scientific discipline, and
who is a qualified scientific expert with expertise appropriate for the relevant critical area subject in
accordance with WAC 365-195-905(4) A qualified professional must have obtained a B S or BA or
equivalent degree in biology, engineering, environmental studies, fisheries, geomorphology, or related
field, and twe--five years of related work experience
A. A qualified professional for habitats or wetlands must have a degree in biology and
professional experience related to the subject species.
B A qualified professional for a geological hazard must be a professional engineer or
geologist, licensed in the state of Washington
C A qualified professional for critical aquifer recharge areas means a hydrogeologist,
geologist, engineer, or other scientist with experience in preparing hydrogeologic
assessments
D. A qualified professional for wetlands means a professional wetland scientist certified bv
the Society of Wetland Scientists.
July 15 2005
Page 3 of 4
c
c
c
The Sub-committee also reviewed in detail the following sections of the proposed code,
but recommend that they be forwarded to the City Council as written
Page 8, Section 14 08 040 (C)(1) - Permit requests subsequent to previous critical area
review Subsection d of this section allows an activity that has been previously
approved through a permitting process provided the underlying permit has not expired
If the underlying permit has no expiration date, the project is allowed for a five year
period The sub-committee found that there is suffiCient protection for activitres that
have previously prepared a special report, as
../ Site Plan Reviews are valid for 18 months
../ BUilding permits expire after 1 year (6 months if work is not started)
../ Short plats and subdivisions expire after 5 years
../ Special Uses do not expire, but always require a site plan review as well, which
expire after 18 months
In addition, even if the underlying permit has not expired, a new special report IS
required if there have been changes in the potential impacts to the Critical area or buffer
or there IS new information available that is applicable to the cntical area review
Page 16, Section 1408070 0 - Variance Criteria The sub-committee felt that the
required hearing before the Yelm Hearing Examiner together with the criteria for
approval of a variance, which includes the requirement to utilize best available science
and a requirement that the functions or values of the critical area are not degraded, are
sufficient to protect critical area resources
Page 17, Section 1408080 - Enforcement. The sub-committee felt that the
enforcement provisions prOVide flexibility for the City to address various degrees of
violation with appropriate levels of penalty and also requires that critrcal area be
restored to its historic functions and values
July 15, 2005
Page 4 of 4
c
c
c
YELM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
JUNE 20, 2005 4 00 P M
YELM CITY HALL
John Thomson called the meeting to order at 4 02 PM
Members present: John Thomson, Norm Allard, Greg Mattocks, Carlos Perez, and John
Graver
Staff. Grant Beck and Tami Merriman
Members Absent: Everette Schirman and Glen Cunningham, Unexcused
Motion No
Aooroval of Minutes.
05-13 MOTION MADE BY NORM ALLARD, SECONDED BY JOHN GRAVER TO APPROVE THE
MINUTES FROM THE MAY 16, 2005 MEETING. MOTION CARRIED 5 - 0
Public Communications.
None
Public Hearina - Critical Areas Updated Code
Mr. Thomson opened the public hearing at 403 PM, and asked for a staff report.
Mr. Beck gave the history of the review and update to the Critical Areas Code The review draft
was published, and sent to the list of interested parties on March 18,2005 The existing code
was emailed to the emaillist based on a public comment received on March 29, 2005
On April 4, 2005 the Planning Commission held an evening public open house on the proposed
draft. The review draft was sent to Washington State Agencies for comment on April 7,2005
At the April 18, 2005 Planning Commission Meeting, the Commission reviewed the public
comment received and formed a subcommittee to review the public comments
The subcommittee met on May 3, 2005, they reviewed the public comment and recommended
changes to the draft.
May 17, 2005, the Public Hearing Draft was sent to all interested parties, and to State agencies
This draft includes language clarification, and minor changes, as well as 3 major changes These
changes are 1) Wetland buffers have been changed to meet the most recent Department of
Ecology recommendations, 2) Added restrictions on high ground water flood hazard areas to
include vertical buffers and 3) Definitions added for high ground water area and essential public
facilities
Mr. Thomson asked for Planning Commission Comments Mr. Perez asked why we added more
restrictive comments for high ground water areas Mr. Beck responded that regulations based on
Thurston County findings were used
Mr. Thomson asked for public comment.
Mr Hashim, EI Camino Lane, Yelm
Mr Hashim stated that he didn't think that public comments were given enough consideration
Mr Hashim stated that Yelm offiCials need to treat citizens in a more respectful and courteous
manner Mr Hashim stated that all Impervious surfaces need to be reviewed, that 1,000 new
Yelm Planning Commission
June 20, 2005
Page I
c
f\
V
c
homes will create disastrous impacts Mr Hashim requested that all comments received should
be revisited
Mr Wiltsie, Riechel Road, Rainier
Mr Wiltsie stated that the draft is using only the minimum requirements, and that following other
jurisdictions plans is not the best, because Yelm is unique Mr Wiltsie took this opportunity to
repeat each comment he submitted to the Commission regarding the draft, with examples and
detail to explain his comments Mr Wiltsie feels that his comments were not adequately
addressed (a recorded copy of all comments may be requested by contacting Yelm City Hall )
Mr. Thomson closed the public hearing at 5 20 PM Mr. Thomson asked the Commission how
they wished to move forward The subcommittee stated that they would like to revisit the
comments, and report back to the Planning Commission at the next scheduled meeting on July
18,2005
05-14 MOTION MADE BY GREG MATTOCKS, SECONDED BY CARLOS PEREZ TO ADJOURN
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 5 25 P M
Respectfully submitted,
Tami Merriman, Assistant Planner
John Thomson, Chair
Date
Yelm Planning Commission
June 20 2005
Page 2
o
o
VISITOR SIGN IN SHEET
o
Please sIgn m and mdIcate If you wIsh to be added to the Planmng CommlsslOn Emml lIst to recelVe future agendas
and mmutes
All Plannmg CommlsslOn meetmgs are audlO taped. For mformatlOn on obtammg a copy please call the Yelm
Commumty Development Department at (360) 458-3835
MEETING
DATE
LOCATION
Yelm Planmng CommlsslOn
June 20, 2005 at 400 PM
Yelm CIty Hall
Name & Address
Email
List?
Email Address
\J i \. \
IT
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
c
City of Yelm
o
c
Planning Commission
AGENDA
Yelm Planning Commission
Monday, June 20, 2005
4 00 P M
Yelm City Hall
105 Yelm Avenue West
1. Call to Order and Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes
May 16, 2005
3.
Public Communications not associated with agenda items
4.
Public Hearings
Critical Areas Code Update
5. Other
6. Adjourn
Next regular meeting
Monday, July 18, 2005 - 4 00 P M
Yelm City Hall Council Chambers
Enclosures are available to non-Commission members upon request.
It is the City of Yelm's policy to provide reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities. If you are a person
with a disability in need of accommodations to conduct business, or to participate in government processes or
activities, please contact Agnes Bennick, at 360-458-8404 at least four (4) working days prior to the scheduled event.
All Planning Commission meetings are audio taped For information on obtaining a copy, please call the Community
Development Department at (360) 458-3835
c
~.~'.;/---'~
. 'f '\ .
:~~
City of Yelm
c
c
Community Development Department
105 Yelm Avenue West
P.O. Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
YELM PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE' Monday, June 20,2005,4.00 p.m
PLACE Council Chambers, City Hall, 105 Yelm Ave West, Yelm Washington
PURPOSE' Public Hearing on an updated Critical Areas Code.
The Yelm Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to receive comments on proposed
updates to the Yelm Critical Areas Code, Chapter 14 08 YMC The hearing draft is available at
www.ci.velm.wa.us or for public review during normal business hours at the City of Yelm, 105
Yelm Ave West, Yelm Washington For additional information, please contact Grant Beck at
(360) 458-3835
Testimony may be given at the hearings or through any written comments. Comments
must be received by the close of the public hearing Such written comments may be
submitted to the City of Yelm at the address shown above or mailed to City of Yelm, PO
Box 479, Yelm WA 98597.
The City of Yelm provides reasonable accommodations to persons with disabilities If you need
special accommodations to attend or participate in this hearing, call the City Clerk, Agnes
Bennick, at (360) 458-8404, at least 4 days before the meeting
ATTEST
CIty of Yelm
DO NOT PUBLISH BELOW THIS LINE
Published in the Nisqually Valley News Friday, May 27,2005
Posted in Public Areas Friday, May 27,2005
c
City of Yelm
c
c
Community Development Department
105 Yelm Avenue West
P.O. Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
YELM PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE' Monday, June 20,2005,400 p.m
PLACE Council Chambers, City Hall, 105 Yelm Ave West, Yelm Washington
PURPOSE' Public Hearing on an updated Critical Areas Code.
The Yelm Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to receive comments on proposed
updates to the Yelm Critical Areas Code, Chapter 14 08 YMC The hearing draft is available at
www.ci.velm.wa.us or for public review during normal business hours at the City of Yelm, 105
Yelm Ave West, Yelm Washington For additional information, please contact Grant Beck at
(360) 458-3835
Testimony may be given at the hearings or through any written comments. Comments
must be received by the close of the public hearing Such written comments may be
submitted to the City of Yelm at the address shown above or mailed to City of Yelm, PO
Box 479, Yelm WA 98597
The City of Yelm provides reasonable accommodations to persons with disabilities If you need
special accommodations to attend or participate in this hearing, call the City Clerk, Agnes
Bennick, at (360) 458-8404, at least 4 days before the meeting
ATTEST
City of Yelm
DO NOT PUBLISH BELOW THIS LINE
Published in the Nisqually Valley News Friday, May 27,2005
Posted in Public Areas Friday, May 27,2005
c
c
c
YELM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MAY 16, 2005 400 P M
YELM CITY HALL
John Thomson called the meeting to order at 4 02 PM
Members present: John Thomson, Glen Cunningham, Greg Mattocks, Carlos Perez, Everette Schirman,
and John Graver who arrived at 4 10 PM
Staff' Grant Beck and Tami Merriman
Members Absent: Norm Allard, Unexcused
Motion No
Approval of Minutes.
05-11 MOTION MADE BY CARLOS PEREZ, SECONDED BY EVERETTE SCHIRMAN TO APPROVE THE
MINUTES FROM THE APRIL 18, 2005 MEETING. MOTION CARRIED 5 - 0
Public Communications.
None
Public Hearin~s.
None
Critical Areas Update.
Mr. Beck updated the Commission on the results of the subcommittee review of public comments received
on the draft from the open house A complete rewrite of the draft was submitted by the Coot Company
The subcommittee felt that the changes were too drastic, and hard to defend with Best Available Science
(BAS) Since the submission was a total rewrite, there were not individual comments to use
Mr. Beck gave the Commission a copy of all comments received and included responses to each comment.
Most comments were either already in the code, or changes made in the draft.
Mr. Beck did include new regulations from the Department of Ecology in regards to wetland ratings High
Ground Water regulations are included with similar requirements from Thurston County's regulations
The Planning Commission is in agreement that this draft is ready to be presented to the public as proposed
regulations at the Public Hearing scheduled for June 20, 2005
Other:
Mr. Beck updated the Commission on the status of the Tahoma Terra Master Planned Community
application and the Wal-Mart application
05-12 MOTION MADE BY JOHN GRAVER, SECONDED BY CARLOS PEREZ TO ADJOURN MEETING
ADJOURNED AT 503 P.M
Respectfully submitted,
Tami Merriman, Assistant Planner
John Thomson, Chair
Date
Yelm Planning Commission
May 16,2005
Page 1
()
()
VISITOR SIGN IN SHEET
C)
Please SIgn m and mdIcate If you wIsh to be added to the Plannmg CommlsslOn Emall lIst to reCeIve future agendas
and mmutes
All Planmng CommlsslOn meetmgs are audlO taped For mformatlOn on obtammg a copy please call the Yelm
Commumty Development Department at (360) 458-3835
MEETING
DATE
TIME
LOCATION
Yelm Plannmg CommlsslOn
May 16, 2005
4 00 PM
Yelm CIty Hall
Name & Address Email Emall Address
List?
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
c
City of Yelm
c\
c
Planning Commission
AGENDA
Yelm Planning Commission
Monday, May 16, 2005
4 00 P M
Yelm City Hall
105 Yelm Avenue West
1. Call to Order and Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes
April 18, 2005
3. Public Communications not associated with agenda items
4.
Public Hearings
None Scheduled
5 Other
a Critical Areas Code Update - review of potential public hearing draft.
6 Adjourn
Next regular meeting
Monday, June 20, 2005 - 4 00 P M
Yelm City Hall Council Chambers
Enclosures are available to non-Commission members upon request.
It is the City of Yelm's policy to provide reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities. If you are a person
with a disability in need of accommodations to conduct business, or to participate in government processes or
activities, please contact Agnes Bennick, at 360-458-8404 at least four (4) working days prior to the scheduled event.
All Planning Commission meetings are audio taped. For information on obtaining a copy, please call the Community
Development Department at (360) 458-3835
c
o
o
City of Yelm
Community Development Department
MEMORANDUM
To Planning Commission
From Grant Beck, Community Development Director
Date May 16, 2005
Subj Report from Critical Areas Subcommittee
The Critical Areas Subcommittee met on May 5, 2005, to review the comments received
at the open house and to prepare a 'hearing draft' of the updated critical areas code
The subcommittee consists of Norm Allard, Carlos Perez, and John Graver
The first Issue before the Committee was whether to adopt the approach to regulating
critical areas suggested by the Coot Company, who offered a complete amendment to
the draft code The basIc premise of these comments were to treat cntical areas In
urban areas differently than the state model code, which treats rural and urban areas
the same The offered draft allows more intensive use of critical areas within the Yelm
urban area
The sub-committee determined that, while the Coot Company's approach may be
worthwhile, Yelm would be among the first in the State to adopt 'urban' critical areas
regulations significantly different than the State model code and it is not an appropnate
approach at this time
The remainder of the comments are addressed in the attached document and a draft
update of the March 18, 2005, proposed amendments are attached for the Planning
Commissions review If the Commission is comfortable with the proposed changes
based on public comment received to date, the public hearing would be scheduled for
June 20, 2005, at the next regular Planning Commission meeting
c
c
c
YELM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
APRIL 18, 2005 4'00 P M
YELM CITY HALL
John Thomson called the meeting to order at 4 00 PM
Members present: John Graver, John Thomson, Glen Cunningham, Greg Mattocks, Carlos Perez, Norm
Allard and Everette Schirman, who arrived at 4.25 PM
Staff' Grant Beck and Tami Merriman
Members Absent: None
Motion No
Aooroval of Minutes.
05-09 MOTION MADE BY NORM ALLARD, SECONDED BY JOHN GRAVER TO APPROVE THE MINUTES
FROM THE MARCH 21, 2005 MEETING AND THE APRIL 4, 2005 OPEN HOUSE. MOTION CARRIED 6
-0
Public Communications.
None
Public HearinQs.
None
CRITICAL AREAS OPEN HOUSE REVIEW.
Mr. Thomson asked the Commission for their comments, and comments received at the open house on the
Critical Areas Code update
Each member responded with their thoughts on the meeting, and specific concerns raised by those in
attendance. There was a consensus that many of those in attendance didn't understand the Planning
Commission's role in land use applications There were few comments on the draft Critical Areas Code
update
Mr. Thomson suggested that in future meetings an opening statement be made to those in attendance,
explaining the process of the Commission and the purpose for an open house
Mr. Beck summarized the written public comment received on the draft updated Critical Areas Code and
asked the Commission for direction on whether to go directly to public hearing with the March 18 draft or
revise the draft prior to the public hearing
The Commission decided to refer the matter to a subcommittee in order to meet and discuss the comments
received on the draft and prepare a hearing draft for the full Commissions review The subcommittee will
consist of John Graver, Carlos Perez, and Norm Allard The subcommittee is to bring its comments back to
the Commission at its next regularly scheduled meeting on May 16, 2005
05-10 MOTION MADE BY GLEN CUNNINGHAM, SECONDED BY JOHN GRAVER TO ADJOURN MEETING
ADJOURNED AT 4 45 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Tami Merriman, Assistant Planner
John Thomson, Chair
Date
Yelm Planning Commission
April 18, 2005
Page I
c
City of Yelm
c
c
Planning Commission
AGENDA
Yelm Planning Commission
Monday, April 18,2005
4 00 P M
Yelm City Hall
105 Yelm Avenue West
1. Call to Order and Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes
March 21, 2005
April 4, 2005 - Special Meeting
3.
Public Communications not associated with agenda items
4. Public Hearings
None Scheduled
5. Other
a Report from Commission members regarding the April 4 open house on
the Critical Areas Code update
b Discussion of next steps regarding Critical Areas Code update
6. Adjourn
Next regular meeting
Monday, May 16, 2005 - 4 00 P M
Yelm City Hall Council Chambers
Enclosures are available to non-Commission members upon request.
It is the City of Yelm's policy to provide reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities. If you are a person
with a disability in need of accommodations to conduct business, or to participate in government processes or
activities, please contact Agnes Bennick, at 360-458-8404 at least four (4) working days prior to the scheduled event.
All Planning Commission meetings are audio taped. For information on obtaining a copy, please call the Community
Development Department at (360) 458-3835
c
c
c
To
From
Date
Subj
MEMORANDUM
City of Yelm
Community Development Department
Yelm Planning Commission
Grant Beck, Director of Community Development
April 8, 2005
Cntlcal Areas Update Status
At the upcomIng Planning Commission meeting, one of the agenda items is a chance
for the Planning CommissIon to discuss any comments received on the Critical Areas
Code update during the open house
Based on those comments, the next steps to complete the Critical Areas Code update
need to be discussed Options for how to proceed include
If comments received were fairly minor or technical in nature, the March 18 draft
of the Critical Areas Code update could be considered the hearing draft and the
Planning Commission public heanng can be scheduled for the regular meeting in
May
If the Plannrng CommissIon has identified areas of the March 18 draft of the
Critical Areas Code that require additional discussion, research, or redrafting, a
subcommittee of the Commission could be formed to help prepare a heanng draft
of the Code update In this case, it may be necessary to eIther hold a special
meeting in Mayor hold the public heanng on the Code update In June
I have also Included in this packet for the Planning Commissions information the draft
flood hazard regulations from Thurston County, which IS also currently in the process of
updating it's Cnt,cal Areas Code This Chapter includes the County's proposed
regulatrons as they relate to High Groundwater areas I have also included the County
definition of a high groundwater area, as they specIfically indicate that accurate
mapping has been a problem
CitY of yelm
critical Areas Code Vpdate
o
\
t '
\ '~
o
Planning commission fte.ie'" oraft
Ma'19,2005
.:-
_~_< -r
" ~
...~ ,1,S
.> '"
r.~,
.- ~-"""""'-' ,-
L
\
~,
::?';"
'> ~ ",-1:'
\;.\-
,~
--.~ ~
Chapter 14 08
Critical Areas 0
1408010 General Provisions 1
1408020 Best Available Science. 3
1408030 Applicability, Exemption, and Exceptions 5
1408040 Allowed Activities 8
1408050 Critical Areas Review Process 11
1408060 Determination Process 15
1408070 Modifications and Variances 16
1408080 Unauthorized Critical Area Alterations and Enforcement 17
1408090 General Critical Area Protective Measures 18
1408100 Wetlands 19
14 08 11 0 Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas 28
1408120 Frequently Flooded Areas 30
1408130 Geologically Hazardous Areas 34
1408 140 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas 37
1408150 Definitions 45
0
o
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
1408.010 General Provisions
o A. Purpose
o
B
C
o
The purpose of this Chapter is to designate and classify ecologically sensitive and
hazardous areas and to protect these areas and their functions and values, while also
allowing for reasonable use of private property
This Chapter is to implement the goals, policies, guidelines, and requirements of the
Yelm Comprehensive Plan and the Growth Management Act, Chapter 36 lOA RCW
Critical areas provide a variety of valuable and beneficial biological and physical functions
that benefit the City and its residents, and/or may pose a threat to human safety or to
public and private property
By limiting development and alteration of critical areas, this Chapter seeks to
a. Protect members of the public and public resources and facilities from injury, loss
of life, or property damage due to landslides and steep slope failures, erosion,
seismic events, volcanic eruptions, or flooding,
b Maintain healthy, functioning ecosystems through the protection of unique,
fragile, and valuable elements of the environment, including ground and surface
waters, wetlands, and fish and wildlife and their habitats, and to conserve the
biodiversity of plant and animal species,
c. Direct activities not dependent on critical areas resources to less ecologically
sensitive sites and mitigate unavoidable impacts to critical areas by regulating
alterations in and adjacent to critical areas, and
d Prevent cumulative adverse environmental impacts to water quality, wetlands,
and fish and wildlife habitat, and the overall net loss of wetlands, frequently
flooded areas, and habitat conservation areas.
The regulations of this Chapter are intended to protect critical areas in accordance with
the Growth Management Act and through the application of the best available science, as
determined according to WAC 365-195-900 through 365-195-925, and in consultation
with state and federal agencies and other qualified professionals.
This Chapter is to be administered with flexibility and attention to site-specific
characteristics. It is not the intent of this Chapter to make a parcel of property unusable
by denying its owner reasonable economic use of the property or to prevent the provision
of public facilities and services necessary to support existing development and planned
for by the community without decreasing current service levels below minimum
standards
Authority
As provided herein, the Director of Community Development is given the authority to
interpret and apply, and the responsibility to enforce this Chapter to accomplish the
stated purpose
2. The City may withhold, condition, or deny development permits or activity approvals to
ensure that the proposed action is consistent with this Chapter
Relationship to Other Regulations
These critical areas regulations shall apply as an overlay and in addition to zoning and
other development regulations adopted by the City
2. When a property or development is subject to more than one critical area overlay or other
regulations apply to a development, the more restrictive shall apply
3 Compliance with the provisions of this Chapter does not constitute compliance with other
1
2.
3
4
5
6
- Page 1 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
federal, state, and local regulations and permit requirements The applicant is
responsible for complying with these requirements, apart from the process established in
this Chapter
Unless otherwise indicated in this Chapter, the applicant shall be responsible for the initiation,
preparation, submission, and expense of all required reports, assessment(s), studies, plans,
reconnaissance(s), peer review(s) by qualified consultants, and other work prepared in support of
or necessary to review the application
Interpretation
In the interpretation and application of this Chapter, the provIsions of this Chapter shall be
considered to be the minimum requirements necessary, shall be liberally construed to serve the
purpose of this Chapter, and shall be deemed to neither limit nor repeal any other provisions
under state statute
€-E Jurisdiction - Critical Areas
gQ
Q!;
The City shall regulate all uses, activities, and developments within, adjacent to, or likely
to affect, one or more critical areas, consistent with the best available science and the
provisions herein
2. Critical areas regulated by this Chapter include
a. Wetlands,
b Critical aquifer recharge areas,
c Frequently flooded areas,
d Geologically hazardous areas, and
e Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas
All areas within the City meeting the definition of one or more critical areas, regardless of
any formal identification, are hereby designated critical areas and are subject to the
provisions of this Chapter
Areas Adjacent to Critical Areas Subject to Regulation Areas adjacent to critical areas
shall be considered to be within the jurisdiction of these requirements and regulations
Adjacent shall mean any activity located
3
4
a. On a site immediately adjoining a critical area;
b A distance equal to or less than the required critical area buffer width and
building setback;
c A distance equal to or less than one-half mile (2,640 feet) from a bald eagle nest;
d A distance equal to or less than three hundred (300) feet upland from a stream,
wetland, or water body;
e Within the floodway, floodplain, or channel migration zone, or
f A distance equal to or less than two hundred (200) feet from a critical aquifer
recharge area.
f-G Protection of Critical Areas
Any action taken pursuant to this Chapter shall result in equivalent or greater functions and
values of the critical areas associated with the proposed action, as determined by the best
available science All actions and developments shall be designed and constructed to avoid,
minimize, and restore all adverse impacts Applicants must first demonstrate an inability to avoid
or reduce impacts, before restoration and compensation of impacts will be allowed No activity or
use shall be allowed that results in a net loss of the functions or values of critical areas
- Page 2 -
o
o
o
(\
~
o
o
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
",.
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
1408.020 Best Available Science
A. Protect Functions and Values of Critical Areas With Special Consideration to Anadromous Fish.
Critical area reports and decisions to alter critical areas shall rely on the best available science to
protect the functions and values of critical areas and must give special consideration to
conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fish, such
as salmon and bull trout, and their habitat.
B Best Available Science to be Consistent With Criteria. The best available science is that scientific
information applicable to the critical area prepared by local, state, or federal natural resource
agencies, a qualified scientific professional, or team of qualified scientific professionals that is
consistent with criteria established in WAC 365-195-900 through WAC 365-195-925
C Characteristics of a Valid Scientific Process In the context of critical areas protection, a valid
scientific process is one that produces reliable information useful in understanding the
consequences of a local government's regulatory decisions, and in developing critical areas
policies and development regulations that will be effective in protecting the functions and values
of critical areas. To determine whether information received during the permit review process is
reliable scientific information, the administrator shall determine whether the source of the
information displays the characteristics of a valid scientific process Such characteristics are as
follows.
Peer Review The information has been critically reviewed by other persons who are
qualified scientific experts in that scientific discipline The proponents of the information
have addressed the criticism of the peer reviewers. Publication in a refereed scientific
journal usually indicates that the information has been appropriately peer-reviewed,
Methods. The methods used to obtain the information are clearly stated and
reproducible. The methods are standardized in the pertinent scientific discipline or, if not,
the methods have been appropriately peer-reviewed to ensure their reliability and validity;
Logical Conclusions and Reasonable Inferences. The conclusions presented are based
on reasonable assumptions supported by other studies and consistent with the general
theory underlying the assumptions The conclusions are logically and reasonably derived
from the assumptions and supported by the data presented Any gaps in information and
inconsistencies with other pertinent scientific information are adequately explained;
Quantitative Analysis. The data have been analyzed using appropriate statistical or
quantitative methods,
Context. The information is placed in proper context. The assumptions, analytical
techniques, data, and conclusions are appropriately framed with respect to the prevailing
body of pertinent scientific knowledge, and
References The assumptions, analytical techniques, and conclusions are well
referenced with citations to relevant, credible literature and other pertinent existing
information.
D Nonscientific Information. Nonscientific information may supplement scientific information, but it
is not an adequate substitute for valid and available scientific information Common sources of
nonscientific information include anecdotal Information, non-expert opinion, and hearsay
E. Absence of Valid Scientific Information. Where there is an absence of valid scientific information
or incomplete scientific information relating to a critical area leading to uncertainty about the risk
to critical area function of permitting an alteration of or impact to the critical area, the
administrator shall:
2.
3
4
5
6
2.
Take a "precautionary or a no-risk approach," that strictly limits development and land
use activities until the uncertainty is sufficiently resolved, and
Require application of an effective adaptive management program that relies on scientific
methods to evaluate how well regulatory and nonregulatory actions protect the critical
- Page 3 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
area. An adaptive management program is a formal and deliberate scientific approach to
taking action and obtaining information in the face of uncertainty An adaptive 0
management program shall
a. Address funding for the research component of the adaptive management
program,
b Change course based on the results and interpretation of new information that
resolves uncertainties, and
c. Commit to the appropriate timeframe and scale necessary to reliably evaluate
regulatory and nonregulatory actions affecting protection of critical areas and
anadromous fisheries
o
o
- Page 4 -
,0
o
~~~'.
Ii
o
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
1408.030 Applicability, Exemption, and Exceptions
A. Applicability
1 The provisions of this Chapter shall apply to all lands, all land uses and development
activity, and all structures and facilities in the City, whether or not a permit or
authorization is required, and shall apply to every person, firm, partnership, corporation,
group, governmental agency, or other entity that owns, leases, or administers land within
the City No person, company, agency, or applicant shall alter a critical area or buffer
except as consistent with the purposes and requirements of this Chapter
2. The City shall not approve any permit or otherwise issue any authorization to alter the
condition of any land, water, or vegetation, or to construct or alter any structure or
improvement in, over, or on a critical area or associated buffer, without first ensuring
compliance with the requirements of this Chapter
B Exempt Activities and Impacts to Critical Areas.
All exempt activities shall use reasonable methods to avoid potential impacts to critical areas.
Any incidental damage to, or alteration of, a critical area that is not a necessary outcome of the
exempted activity shall be restored, rehabilitated, or replaced.
C Exempt Activities.
The following developments, activities, and associated uses shall be exempt from the provisions
of this Chapter, provided that they are otherwise consistent with the provisions of other local,
state, and federal laws and requirements.
Emergencies. Those activities necessary to prevent an immediate threat to public health,
safety, or welfare, or that pose an immediate risk of damage to private property and that
require remedial or preventative action in a timeframe too short to allow for compliance
with the requirements of this Chapter
Emergency actions that create an impact to a critical area or its buffer shall use
reasonable methods to address the emergency; in addition, they must have the least
possible impact to the critical area or its buffer The person or agency undertaking such
action shall notify the City within one (1) working day following commencement of the
emergency activity Within thirty (30) days, the administrator shall determine if the action
taken was within the scope of the emergency actions allowed in this Subsection.
After the emergency, the person or agency undertaking the action shall fully fund and
conduct necessary restoration and/or mitigation for any impacts to the critical area and
buffers resulting from the emergency action in accordance with an approved critical area
report and mitigation plan The person or agency undertaking the action shall apply for
review, and the alteration, critical area report, and mitigation plan shall be reviewed by
the City in accordance with the review procedures contained herein Restoration and/or
mitigation activities must be initiated within one (1) year of the date of the emergency,
and completed in a timely manner;
2. Operation, Maintenance, or Repair Operation, maintenance, or repair of existing
structures, infrastructure improvements, utilities, public or private roads, dikes, levees, or
drainage systems, that do not require construction permits, if the activity does not further
alter or increase the impact to, or encroach further within, the critical area or buffer and
there is no increased risk to life or property as a result of the proposed operation,
maintenance, or repair
3 Passive Outdoor Activities. Recreation, education, and scientific research activities that
do not degrade the critical area.
Exception - Essential Public Facilities
If the application of this Chapter would prohibit a development proposal for an essential
public facility the agency or utility may apply for an exception.
D
- Page 5 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
E.
2.
Exception Request and Review Process An application for a exception shall be made to
the City and shall include a critical area report. The administrator shall act on the
exception request as part of the underlying permit approval based on the proposal's
ability to comply with public agency and utility exception review criteria. The decision on
the exception may be appealed pursuant to the appeal procedures of the underlying
permit or approval
Exception Criteria.
a. There is no other practical alternative to the proposed development with less
impact on the critical areas,
b The application of this Chapter would unreasonably restrict the ability to provide
utility services to the public;
c. The proposal does not pose an unreasonable threat to the public health, safety,
or welfare on or off the development proposal site,
d. The proposal attempts to protect and mitigate impacts to the critical area
functions and values consistent with the best available science, and
e The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulations and standards
5 Burden of Proof The burden of proof shall be on the applicant to show that the criteria
are met.
4
Exception - Reasonable Use
If the application of this Chapter would deny all reasonable economic use of the subject
property, the City shall determine if compensation is an appropriate action, or the
property owner may apply for an exception
2. Exception Request and Review Process An application for a reasonable use exception
shall be made to the City and shall include a critical area report. The administrator shall
prepare a recommendation to the Hearing Examiner based on the proposal's ability to
comply with reasonable use exception criteria.
3 Hearing Examiner Review The Hearing Examiner shall review the application and
conduct a public hearing The Hearing Examiner shall approve, approve with conditions,
or deny the request based on the proposal's ability to comply with all of the reasonable
use exception review criteria.
4 Reasonable Use Review Criteria.= Critoria for ro'/iov: and approv31 of r03sonablo uso
exceptions follow, one or more may apply.
a. The application of this Chapter would deny all reasonable economic use of the
property;
b No other reasonable economic use of the property has less impact on the critical
area,
c The proposed impact to the critical area is the minimum necessary to allow for
reasonable economic use of the property;
d. The inability of the applicant to derive reasonable economic use of the property is
not the result of actions by the applicant after the effective date of this Chapter,
or its predecessor;
e.
The proposal does not pose an unreasonable threat to the public health, safety,
or welfare on or off the development proposal site,
The proposal will result in no net loss of critical area functions and values
consistent with the best available science, or
The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulations and standards
o
o
o
f
g
- Page 6 -
c
o
c
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
E.
Burden of Proof The burden of proof shall be on the applicant to show the exception meets the
criteria for approval.
- Page 7 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
1408.040
Allowed Activities
A.
Critical Area Report. Activities allowed under this Chapter shall have been reviewed and
permitted or approved by the City, but do not require submittal of a separate critical area report,
unless required previously for an underlying permit. The administrator may apply conditions to
the underlying permit or approval to ensure that the allowed activity is consistent with the
provisions of this Chapter to protect critical areas
Required Use of Best Management Practices. All allowed activities shall be conducted using the
best management practices, that result in the least amount of impact to the critical areas The
City shall observe the use of best management practices to ensure that the activity does not
result in degradation to the critical area. Any incidental damage to, or alteration of, a critical area
shall be restored, rehabilitated, or replaced
Allowed Activities The following activities are allowed
1 Permit Requests Subsequent to Previous Critical Area Review Development permits
and approvals that involve both discretionary land use approvals, and construction
approvals if all of the following conditions have been met:
a. The provisions of this Chapter have been previously addressed as part of
another approval,
b There have been no material changes in the potential impact to the critical area
or buffer since the prior review;
c There is no new information available that is applicable to any critical area review
of the site or particular critical area;
d The permit or approval has not expired or, if no expiration date, no more than five
years have elapsed since the issuance of that permit or approval; and
e Compliance with any standards or conditions placed upon the prior permit or
approval has been achieved or secured,
2. Modification to Existing Structures Structural modification of, addition to, or replacement
of an existing legally constructed structure that does not further alter or increase the
impact to the critical area or buffer and there is no increased risk to life or property as a
result of the proposed modification or replacement, provided that restoration of structures
substantially damaged by fire, flood, or act of nature must be initiated within 18 months of
the date of such damage, as evidenced by the issuance of a valid building permit, and
diligently pursued to completion,
3 Activities Within the Improved Right-of-Way Replacement, modification, installation, or
construction of utility facilities, lines, pipes, mains, equipment, or appurtenances, not
including substations, when such facilities are located within the improved portion of the
public right-of-way or a City authorized private roadway except those activities that alter a
wetland or watercourse, such as culverts or bridges, or result in the transport of sediment
or increased stormwater; subject to the following
a. Critical area and/or buffer widths shall be increased, where possible, equal to the
width of the right-of-way improvement, including disturbed areas, and
b Retention and replanting of native vegetation shall occur wherever possible along
the right-of-way improvement and resulting disturbance,
4 Minor Utility Projects Utility projects which have minor or short-duration impacts to
critical areas, as determined by the administrator in accordance with the criteria below,
and which do not significantly impact the function or values of a critical area(s), provided
that such projects are constructed with best management practices and additional
restoration measures are provided Minor activities shall not result in the transport of
sediment or increased stormwater Such allowed minor utility projects shall meet the
following criteria:
o
o
o
B
C
- Page 8 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
n
"-/
~
V
c
a. There is no practical alternative to the proposed activity with less impact on
critical areas,
b The activity involves the placement of a utility pole, street signs, anchor, or vault
or other small component of a utility facility; and
c. The activity involves disturbance of an area less than 75 square feet;
Public and Private Pedestrian Trails Public and private pedestrian trails, except in
wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, or their buffers, subject to the
following:
a. The trail surface shall meet all other requirements including water quality
standards set forth in the [locally adopted stormwater management regulations],
b Critical area and/or buffer widths shall be increased, where possible, equal to the
width of the trail corridor, including disturbed areas, and
c. Trails proposed to be located in landslide or erosion hazard areas shall be
constructed in a manner that does not increase the risk of landslide or erosion
and in accordance with an approved geotechnical report;
Select Vegetation Removal Activities. The following vegetation removal activities,
provided that no vegetation shall be removed from a critical area or its buffer without
approval from the administrator.
a. The removal of the following vegetation with hand labor and light equipment:
Invasive and noxious weeds;
5
6
ii
English Ivy (Hedera helix),
Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor, R. procerus), and
Evergreen blackberry (Rubus laciniatus),
III
iv
b The removal of trees from critical areas and buffers that are hazardous, posing a
threat to public safety, or posing an imminent risk of damage to private property,
provided that:
The applicant submits a report from a certified arborist, registered
landscape architect, or professional forester that documents the hazard
and provides a replanting schedule for the replacement trees,
II Tree cutting shall be limited to pruning and crown thinning, unless
otherwise justified by a qualified professional Where pruning or crown
thinning is not sufficient to address the hazard, trees should be removed
or converted to wildlife snags,
All vegetation cut (tree stems, branches, etc) shall be left within the
critical area or buffer unless removal is warranted due to the potential for
disease or pest transmittal to other healthy vegetation,
The landowner shall replace any trees that are removed with new trees
at a ratio of two replacement trees for each tree removed (2.1) within one
(1) year in accordance with an approved restoration plan Replacement
trees may be planted at a different, nearby location if it can be
determined that planting in the same location would create a new hazard
or potentially damage the critical area. Replacement trees shall be
species that are native and indigenous to the site and a minimum of one
(1) inch in diameter-at-breast height (dbh) for deciduous trees and a
minimum of six (6) feet in height for evergreen trees as measured from
the top of the root ball;
iii
iv
- Page 9 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
7
v If a tree to be removed provides critical habitat, such as an eagle perch,
a qualified wildlife biologist shall be consulted to determine timing and
methods or removal that will minimize impacts, and
vi Hazard trees determined to pose an imminent threat or danger to public
health or safety, to public or private property, or of serious environmental
degradation may be removed or pruned by the landowner prior to
receiving written approval from City provided that within fourteen (14)
days following such action, the landowner shall submit a restoration plan
that demonstrates compliance with the provisions of this Chapter
c. Measures to control a fire or halt the spread of disease or damaging insects
consistent with the state Forest Practices Act; Chapter 7609 RCW, [and local
forest practices regulations if adopted] provided that the removed vegetation
shall be replaced in-kind or with similar native species within one (1) year in
accordance with an approved restoration plan, and
d Unless otherwise provided, or as a necessary part of an approved alteration,
removal of any vegetation or woody debris from a habitat conseNation area or
wetland shall be prohibited,
Chemical Applications The application of herbicides, pesticides, organic or mineral-
derived fertilizers, or other hazardous substances, if necessary, as approved by the City,
provided that their use shall be restricted in accordance with state Department of Fish
and Wildlife Management Recommendations and the regulations of the state Department
of Agriculture and the U S Environmental Protection Agency;
Minor Site Investigative Work. Work necessary for land use submittals, such as sUNeys,
soil logs, percolation tests, and other related activities, where such activities do not
require construction of new roads or significant amounts of excavation In every case,
impacts to the critical area shall be minimized and disturbed areas shall be immediately
restored, and
Navigational Aids and Boundary Markers. Construction or modification of navigational
aids and boundary markers
8
9
- Page 1 0 -
()
'......J
o
o
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
1408.050
Critical Areas Review Process
c
A.
Critical Areas Report - Requirements
Preparation by Qualified Professional If required by the administrator, the applicant shall
submit a critical area report prepared by a qualified professional as defined herein.
2. Incorporating Best Available Science. The critical area report shall use scientifically valid
methods and studies in the analysis of critical area data and field reconnaissance and
reference the source of science used The critical area report shall evaluate the proposal
and all probable impacts to critical areas in accordance with the provisions of this
Chapter
3 Minimum Report Contents At a minimum, the report shall contain the following:
a. The name and contact information of the applicant, a description of the proposal,
and identification of the permit requested;
b A copy of the site plan for the development proposal including
A map to scale depicting critical areas, buffers, the development
proposal, and any areas to be cleared, and
ii A description of the proposed stormwater management plan for the
development and consideration of impacts to drainage alterations
c The dates, names, and qualifications of the persons preparing the report and
documentation of any fieldwork performed on the site,
d Identification and characterization of all critical areas, wetlands, water bodies,
and buffers adjacent to the proposed project area,
e A statement specifying the accuracy of the report, and all assumptions made and
relied upon,
f An assessment of the probable cumulative impacts to critical areas resulting from
development of the site and the proposed development;
g An analysis of site development alternatives including a no development
alternative,
h A description of reasonable efforts made to apply mitigation sequencing pursuant
to Mitigation Sequencing to avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts to critical
areas,
Plans for adequate mitigation, as needed, to offset any impacts, in accordance
with Mitigation Plan Requirements, including, but not limited to
a. The impacts of any proposed development within or adjacent to a critical
area or buffer on the critical area, and
b The impacts of any proposed alteration of a critical area or buffer on the
development proposal, other properties and the environment;
A discussion of the performance standards applicable to the critical area and
proposed activity;
Financial guarantees to ensure compliance, and
Any additional information required for the critical area as specified in the
corresponding chapter
Unless otherwise provided, a critical area report may be supplemented by or
composed, in whole or in part, of any reports or studies required by other laws
and regulations or previously prepared for and applicable to the development
proposal site, as approved by the administrator
k.
I
c
m
o
- Page 11 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
o
o
o
B
Critical Area Report - Modifications to Requirements
1 Limitations to Study Area. The administrator may limit the required geographic area of
the critical area report as appropriate if
a. The applicant, with assistance from the City, cannot obtain permission to access
properties adjacent to the project area, or
b The proposed activity will affect only a limited part of the subject site
2. Modifications to Required Contents The applicant may consult with the administrator
prior to or during preparation of the critical area report to obtain City approval of
modifications to the required contents of the report where, in the judgment of a qualified
professional, more or less information is required to adequately address the potential
critical area impacts and required mitigation
3 Additional Information Requirements. The administrator may require additional
information to be included in the critical area report when determined to be necessary to
the review of the proposed activity in accordance with this Chapter Additional
information that may be required, includes, but is not limited to
a. Historical data, including original and subsequent mapping, aerial photographs,
data compilations and summaries, and available reports and records relating to
the site or past operations at the site,
b Grading and drainage plans, and
c Information specific to the type, location, and nature of the critical area,
Mitigation Requirements
1 The applicant shall avoid all impacts that degrade the functions and values of a critical
area or areas Unless otherwise provided in this Chapter, if alteration to the critical area
is unavoidable, all adverse impacts to or from critical areas and buffers resulting from a
development proposal or alteration shall be mitigated using the best available science in
accordance with an approved critical area report and SEPA documents, so as to result in
no net loss of critical area functions and values
2 Mitigation shall be in-kind and on-site, when possible, and sufficient to maintain the
functions and values of the critical area, and to prevent risk from a hazard posed by a
critical area.
3 Mitigation shall not be implemented until after City approval of a critical area report that
includes a mitigation plan, and mitigation shall be in accordance with the provisions of the
approved critical area report.
Mitigation Sequencing Applicants shall demonstrate that all reasonable efforts have been
examined with the intent to avoid and minimize impacts to critical areas When an alteration to a
critical area is proposed, such alteration shall be avoided, minimized, or compensated for in the
following sequential order of preference
1 Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action,
2. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
implementation, by using appropriate technology, or by taking affirmative steps, such as
project redesign, relocation, or timing, to avoid or reduce impacts,
3 Rectifying the impact to wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded
areas, and habitat conservation areas by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected
environment to the historical conditions or the conditions existing at the time of the
initiation of the project;
4 Minimizing or eliminating the hazard by restoring or stabilizing the hazard area through
engineered or other methods,
C
D
- Page 12 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
Reducing or eliminating the impact or hazard over time by preservation and maintenance
operations during the life of the action,
Compensating for the impact to wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently
flooded areas, and habitat conservation areas by replacing, enhancing, or providing
substitute resources or environments, and
7 Monitoring the hazard or other required mitigation and taking remedial action when
necessary
Mitigation for individual actions may include a combination of the above measures.
E Mitigation Plan Requirements. When mitigation is required, the applicant shall submit for
approval by City a mitigation plan as part of the critical area report. The mitigation plan shall
include
c
o
F
c
5
6
Environmental Goals and Objectives. The mitigation plan shall include a written report
identifying environmental goals and objectives of the compensation proposed and
including.
a. A description of the anticipated impacts to the critical areas and the mitigating
actions proposed and the purposes of the compensation measures, including the
site selection criteria, identification of compensation goals, identification of
resource functions, and dates for beginning and completion of site compensation
construction activities. The goals and objectives shall be related to the functions
and values of the impacted critical area,
b A review of the best available science supporting the proposed mitigation and a
description of the report author's experience to date in restoring or creating the
type of critical area proposed, and
c. An analysis of the likelihood of success of the compensation project.
d. Performance Standards. The mitigation plan shall include measurable specific
criteria for evaluating whether or not the goals and objectives of the mitigation
project have been successfully attained and whether or not the requirements of
this Chapter have been met.
e Detailed Construction Plans. The mitigation plan shall include written
specifications and descriptions of the mitigation proposed, such as
The proposed construction sequence, timing, and duration,
ii. Grading and excavation details,
III. Erosion and sediment control features,
iv A planting plan specifying plant species, quantities, locations, size,
spacing, and density; and
v Measures to protect and maintain plants until established
These written specifications shall be accompanied by detailed site
diagrams, scaled cross-sectional drawings, topographic maps showing
slope percentage and final grade elevations, and any other drawings
appropriate to show construction techniques or anticipated final outcome.
Monitoring Program. The mitigation plan shall include a program for monitoring construction of
the compensation project and for assessing a completed project. A protocol shall be included
outlining the schedule for site monitoring (for example, monitoring shall occur in years 1, 3, 5, and
7 after site construction), and how the monitoring data will be evaluated to determine if the
performance standards are being met. A monitoring report shall be submitted as needed to
document milestones, successes, problems, and contingency actions of the compensation
project. The compensation project shall be monitored for a period necessary to establish that
1
- Page 13 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
G
performance standards have been met, but not for a period less than five (5) years.
Contingency Plan The mitigation plan shall include identification of potential courses of action,
and any corrective measures to be taken if monitoring or evaluation indicates project performance
standards are not being met.
Financial Guarantees The mitigation plan shall include financial guarantees, if necessary, to
ensure that the mitigation plan is fully implemented
H
- Page 14 -
o
o
o
c
()
c
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
1408060 Determination Process
A. Determination The administrator shall make a determination as to whether the proposed activity
and mitigation, if any, is consistent with the provisions of this Chapter The administrator's
determination shall be based on the Review Criteria.
B Review Criteria
Any alteration to a critical area, unless otherwise provided for in this Chapter, shall be
reviewed and approved, approved with conditions, or denied based on the proposal's
ability to comply with all of the following criteria.
a. The proposal minimizes the impact on critical areas in accordance with Mitigation
Sequencing,
b The proposal does not pose an unreasonable threat to the public health, safety,
or welfare on or off the development proposal site,
c. The proposal is consistent with the general purposes of this Chapter and the
public interest;
d. Any alterations permitted to the critical area are mitigated in accordance with
Mitigation Requirements,
e The proposal protects the critical area functions and values consistent with the
best available science and results in no net loss of critical area functions and
values, and
f The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulations and standards
2. The City may condition the proposed activity as necessary to mitigate impacts to critical
areas and to conform to the standards required by this Chapter
3 Except as provided for by this Chapter, any project that cannot adequately mitigate its
impacts to critical areas in the sequencing order of preferences shall be denied.
Completion of the Critical Area Review The City's determination regarding critical areas
pursuant to this Chapter shall be final concurrent with the final decision to approve, condition, or
deny the development proposal or other activity involved
Appeals Any decision to approve, condition, or deny a development proposal or other activity
based on the requirements of this Chapter may be appealed according to, and as part of, the
appeal procedure for the permit or approval involved
C
D
- Page 15 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
1408070
Modifications and Variances
A.
Modifications to the prescriptive standards for the protection of critical areas may be authorized
by the City The Site Plan Review Committee shall review the request and make a written finding
that the request meets or fails to meet the modification criteria as part of the underlying permit
approval
Modification Criteria. A modification may be granted only if the applicant demonstrates that the
requested modification includes the best available science and gives special consideration to
conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fish habitat.
Variances from the standards of this Chapter may be authorized by the City in accordance with
the procedures set forth in Chapter 2.26 Yelm Municipal Code The Hearing Examiner shall
review the request and make a written finding that the request meets or fails to meet the variance
criteria.
B
C
D
Variance Criteria. A variance may be granted only if the applicant demonstrates that the
requested action conforms to all of the criteria set forth as follows.
Special conditions and circumstances exist that are peculiar to the land, the lot, or
something inherent in the land, and that are not applicable to other lands in the same
district;
2. The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant;
3 A literal interpretation of the provisions of this Chapter would deprive the applicant of all
reasonable economic uses and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and
zone of the subject property under the terms of this Chapter, and the variance requested
is the minimum necessary to provide the applicant with such rights,
4 Granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that
is denied by this Chapter to other lands, structures, or buildings under similar
circumstances,
5 The granting of the variance is consistent with the general purpose and intent of this
Chapter, and will not further degrade the functions or values of the associated critical
areas or otherwise be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the
property or improvements in the vicinity of the subject property;
6 The decision to grant the variance includes the best available science and gives special
consideration to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance
anadromous fish habitat.
E. Conditions May Be Required. In granting any modification or variance, the City may prescribe
such conditions and safeguards as are necessary to secure adequate protection of critical areas
from adverse impacts, and to ensure conformity with this Chapter
F Time Limit. A modification or variance shall be valid for the time period of the underlying permit
approval
G Burden of Proof The burden of proof shall be on the applicant to bring forth evidence in support
of the application and upon which any decision has to be made on the application
- Page 16 -
o
o
o
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
G
14 08.080 Unauthorized Critical Area Alterations and Enforcement
A. When a critical area or its buffer has been altered in violation of this Chapter, all ongoing
development work shall stop and the critical area shall be restored. The City shall have the
authority to issue a stop work order to cease all ongoing development work, and order
restoration, rehabilitation, or replacement measures at the owner's or other responsible party's
expense to compensate for violation of provisions of this Chapter
B Requirement for Restoration Plan. All development work shall remain stopped until a restoration
plan is prepared and approved by City Such a plan shall be prepared by a qualified professional
using the best available science and shall describe how the actions proposed meet the minimum
performance standards The administrator shall, at the violator's expense, seek expert advice in
determining the adequacy of the plan Inadequate plans shall be returned to the applicant or
violator for revision and resubmittal
C Minimum Performance Standards for Restoration
c
For alterations to critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, wetlands, and
habitat conservation areas, the following minimum performance standards shall be met
for the restoration of a critical area, provided that if the violator can demonstrate that
greater functional and habitat values can be obtained, these standards may be modified
a. The historic structural and functional values shall be restored, including water
quality and habitat functions,
b The historic soil types and configuration shall be replicated,
c. The critical area and buffers shall be replanted with native vegetation that
replicates the vegetation historically found on the site in species types, sizes, and
densities. The historic functions and values should be replicated at the location
of the alteration, and
d. Information demonstrating compliance with the requirements for Mitigation Plans
shall be submitted to the administrator
2. For alterations to flood and geological hazards, the following minimum performance
standards shall be met for the restoration of a critical area, provided that, if the violator
can demonstrate that greater safety can be obtained, these standards may be modified
a. The hazard shall be reduced to a level equal to, or less than, the pre-
development hazard,
b Any risk of personal injury resulting from the alteration shall be eliminated or
minimized, and
1
D
c The hazard area and buffers shall be replanted with native vegetation sufficient
to minimize the hazard
Site Investigations The administrator is authorized to make site inspections and take such
actions as are necessary to enforce this Chapter The administrator shall present proper
credentials and make a reasonable effort to contact any property owner before entering onto
private property
Penalties. Any person, party, firm, corporation, or other legal entity convicted of violating any of
the provisions of this Chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor Each day or portion of a day
during which a violation of this Chapter is committed or continued shall constitute a separate
offense Any development carried out contrary to the provisions of this Chapter shall constitute a
public nuisance and may be enjoined as provided by the statutes of the state of Washington. The
City may levy civil penalties against any person, party, firm, corporation, or other legal entity for
violation of any of the provisions of this Chapter The civil penalty shall be assessed at a
maximum rate of $250 00 dollars per day per violation
E.
c
- Page 17 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
1408090
General Critical Area Protective Measures
A.
Critical Area Markers and Signs
1 The boundary at the outer edge of critical area tracts and easements shall be delineated
with permanent survey stakes, using iron or concrete markers as established by local
survey standards.
2. The boundary at the outer edge of the critical area or buffer shall be identified with
temporary signs prior to any site alteration. Such temporary signs shall be replaced with
permanent signs prior to occupancy or use of the site
3 These provisions may be modified by the administrator as necessary to ensure protection
of sensitive features or wildlife needs.
Financial Guarantee to Ensure Mitigation, Maintenance, and Monitoring
When mitigation required pursuant to a development proposal is not completed prior to
the City final permit approval, such as final plat approval or final building inspection, the
City shall require the applicant to post a financial guarantee in a form and amount
deemed acceptable by the City If the development proposal is subject to mitigation, the
applicant shall post a financial guarantee security in a form and amount deemed
acceptable by the City to ensure mitigation is fully functional
2 The bond shall be in the amount of one hundred and w/onty fivofiftv percent (150%) of
the estimated cost of the uncompleted actions or the estimated cost of restoring the
functions and values of the critical area that are at risk, whichever is greater
3 The bond shall be in the form of a assignment of savings account in the City trust fund
4 Financial Guarantees shall remain in effect until the City determines, in writing, that the
standards bonded for have been met. Bonds or other security shall be held by the City
for a minimum of five (5) years to ensure that the required mitigation has been fully
implemented and demonstrated to function, and may be held for longer periods when
necessary
5 Depletion, failure, or collection of bond funds shall not discharge the obligation of an
applicant or violator to complete required mitigation, maintenance, monitoring, or
restoration
o
o
o
B
6 Public development proposals shall be relieved from having to comply with the bonding
requirements of this Section if public funds have previously been committed for
mitigation, maintenance, monitoring, or restoration
7 Any failure to satisfy critical area requirements established by law or condition including,
but not limited to, the failure to provide a monitoring report within thirty (30) days after it is
due or comply with other provisions of an approved mitigation plan shall constitute a
default, and the City may demand payment of any financial guarantees or require other
action authorized by the City code or any other law
8 Any funds recovered pursuant to this Section shall be used to complete the required
mitigation
B Critical Area Inspections Reasonable access to the site shall be provided to the City, state, and
federal agency review staff for the purpose of inspections during any proposal review, restoration,
emergency action, or monitoring period
- Page 18 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
o
1408.100 Wetlands
A. Designating Wetlands. Wetlands are those areas, designated in accordance with the Washington
State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual (1997), that are inundated or saturated by
surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal
circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation adapted for life in saturated soil conditions
All areas within the City meeting the wetland designation criteria in the Identification and
Delineation Manual, regardless of any formal identification, are hereby designated critical areas
and are subject to the provisions of this Chapter
B Wetland Ratings. Wetlands shall be rated according to the Washington State Department of
Ecology wetland rating system found in the Washington State Wetland Rating System documents
or as revised by Ecology
1 Wetland Rating Categories
a. Category I Category I wetlands are those that meet one or more of the following
GFiteJ:ia .
b
i. reoresent a uniaue or rare wetland tvoe. or
ii. are more sensitive to disturbance than most wetlands. or
III. are relativelv undisturbed and contain ecoloaical attributes that are
imoossible to reolace within a human lifetime or
iv, orovide a hiah level of functions. These include estuarine wetlands.
Natural Heritaae wetlands. boas. mature and old-arowth forested
wetland, wetlands in coastallaaoons and wetlands that score more than
70 ooints in the 2004 ratina system.
Documented hobitot for federol or stote listed endongered or threotened
fish, onimol, or pl3nt species,
II. High quolity notive wetlond communities, including documented cotegory
I or II quality Natural Heritage wetland sites and sites which qualify as a
cotegory I or II quolity Natural Heritage wetland (defined in the rating
system documents),
iii. High quolity, regionolly rom wetlond communities with irreploceoble
ecological functions, including sphagnum bogs and f-ens, estuarine,
'Netl3nds, or moture forested s'.'I.'omps (defined in the roting system
documents), or wetlands of exceptional local significance.
Category II W-ashington Department of Fish and Wildlif-e, U.S. Fish and 'Nildlife
Services, and National Marine Fisheries Services documented habitats for state
listed sensitive plant, fish, or animal species, Cateaorv II wetlands are difficult
thouah not imoossible to reolace and orovide hiah levels of some functions.
Cateaorv II wetlands in western Washinaton include wetlands scorina between
51- 69 ooints in the 2004 ratina system,
W-etlands that contain fish or animal species listed as priority species by
the Washington Department of Fish ond VVildlifo, or plant species listed
os rore by the VV-oshington Stote Deportment of N3turol Resources,12
ii, \^letlond types with significont ecological functions 3S determined by on
agency approved functional evaluation methodology that may not be
adequately replicated through creation or restoration,
III. W-etlands possessing significant habitat value based on a score of
1\venty 1\-'0 (22) or more points in the stote Deportment of Ecology
h3bit3t roting system, or
iv. Documented wetl3nds of IOC31 significonce.
o
c
- Page 19 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
o
o
o
C
c Category III Category III wetlands are those that do not satisfy category I, II, or
IV criteria, and with a habitat value rating of tltlenty one (21) points or less. are
wetlands with a moderate level of functions (scores between 30 - 50 oointSf
Wetlands scorina between 30 - 50 ooints aenerallv have been disturbed in some
ways and are often less diverse or more isolated from other natural resources in
the landscaoe than Cateaorv II wetlands.
d Category IV Category IV wetlands are those that meet one or more of the
following criteria. have the lowest levels of functions (scores less than 30 ooints)
and are often heavvilv disturbed.
I. Hydrologically isolated \I'.'etlands, as determined by the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers Regulatory Branch that are less than or equal to one (1)
acre in size, have only one wetland CI3SS, and 3m domin3ted [gre3ter
than eighty percent (80%) area cover] by a single, non native pl3nt
species (monotypic '1eget3tion), or
ii. Hydrologically isolated wetlands that are less than or equal to w/o (2)
acres in size, and have only one wetland class and greater than ninety
percent (90%) a re31 co'.'er of non n3tive pl3nt species
2. Date of wetland rating Wetland rating categories shall be applied as the wetland exists
on the date of adoption of the rating system by the local government, as the wetland
naturally changes thereafter, or as the wetland changes in accordance with permitted
activities. Wetland rating categories shall not change due to illegal modifications
Mapping The approximate location and extent of wetlands are shown on the critical area maps
prepared by the Community Development Department. These maps are to be used as a guide
for the City, project applicants, and/or property owners, and may be continuously updated as new
critical areas are identified They are a reference and do not provide a final critical area
designation.
The exact location of a wetland's boundary shall be determined through the performance of a
field investigation by a qualified professional wetland scientist applying the Washington State
Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual as required by RCW 36 70A.175
Activities Allowed in Wetlands The activities listed below are allowed in wetlands in addition to
those activities listed in, and consistent with, the provisions established in Allowed Activities, and
do not require submission of a critical area report, except where such activities result in a loss to
the functions and values of a wetland or wetland buffer These activities include
1 Conservation or preservation of soil, water, vegetation, fish, shellfish, and other wildlife
that does not entail changing the structure or functions of the existing wetland
2. The harvesting of wild crops in a manner that is not injurious to natural reproduction of
such crops and provided the harvesting does not require tilling of soil, planting of crops,
chemical applications, or alteration of the wetland by changing existing topography, water
conditions, or water sources
3 Drilling for utilities under a wetland provided that the drilling does not interrupt the ground
water connection to the wetland or percolation of surface water down through the soil
column Specific studies by a hydrologist are necessary to determine whether the ground
water connection to the wetland or percolation of surface water down through the soil
column is disturbed
4 Enhancement of a wetland through the removal of non-native invasive species Weeding
shall be restricted to hand removal and weed material shall be removed from the site
Bare areas that remain after weed removal shall be re-vegetated with native shrubs and
trees at natural densities. Some hand seeding may also be done over the bare areas
with native herbs.
Critical Area Report - Additional Requirements for Wetlands
o
E.
- Page 20 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
i ~:'
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
1
Area Addressed in Critical Area Report. The following areas shall be addressed in a
critical area report for wetlands.
a. The project area of the proposed activity;
b All wetlands and recommended buffers within three hundred (300) feet of the
project area, and
c All shoreline areas, water features, floodplains, and other critical areas, and
related buffers within three hundred (300) feet of the project area.
2. Wetland analysis
a. A written assessment and accompanying maps of the wetlands and buffers
within three hundred (300) feet of the project area, including the following
information at a minimum
Wetland delineation and required buffers,
ii Existing wetland acreage,
III Wetland category;
iv Vegetative, faunal, and hydrologic characteristics,
v Soil and substrate conditions,
vi. Topographic elevations, at two-foot contours, and
vii A discussion of the water sources supplying the wetland and
documentation of hydrologic regime (locations of inlet and outlet
features, water depths throughout the wetland, evidence of recharge or
discharge, evidence of water depths throughout the year - drift lines,
algal layers, moss lines, and sediment deposits)
A discussion of measures, including avoidance, minimization, and mitigation,
proposed to preserve existing wetlands and restore any wetlands that were
degraded prior to the current proposed land use activity
A habitat and native vegetation conservation strategy that addresses methods to
protect and enhance on-site habitat and wetland functions
Functional evaluation for the wetland and adjacent buffer using a local or state
agency staff-recognized method and including the reference of the method and
all data sheets
e Proposed mitigation, if needed, including a written assessment and
accompanying maps of the mitigation area, including the following information at
a minimum
G
c
b
c.
d
c
ii.
iii
Existing and proposed wetland acreage,
Vegetative and faunal conditions,
Surface and subsurface hydrologic conditions including an analysis of
existing and future hydrologic regime and proposed hydrologic regime for
enhanced, created, or restored mitigation areas,
Relationship within watershed and to existing waterbodies,
Soil and substrate conditions, topographic elevations,
Existing and proposed adjacent site conditions,
Required wetland buffers (including any buffer reduction and mitigation
proposed to increase the plant densities, remove weedy vegetation, and
replant the buffers),
IV
v
vi.
VII
- Page 21 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
F
viii. Property ownership, and
ix. Associated wetlands and related wetlands that may be greater than three
hundred (300) feet from the subject project.
f A scale map of the development proposal site and adjacent area A discussion
of ongoing management practices that will protect wetlands after the project site
has been developed, including proposed monitoring and maintenance programs.
g A bond estimate for the installation (including site preparation, plant materials
and installation, fertilizers, mulch, stakes) and the proposed monitoring and
maintenance work for the required number of years
h Chapter Notification All activity in critical area protection areas shall be
accompanied by a Chapter
Wetland Performance Standards - General Requirements
Activities may only be permitted in a wetland or wetland buffer if the applicant can show
that the proposed activity will not degrade the functions and functional performance of the
wetland and other critical areas.
Activities and uses shall be prohibited in wetlands and wetland buffers, except as
provided for in this Chapter
Category I Wetlands. Activities and uses shall be prohibited from Category I wetlands,
except as provided for in the public agency and utility exception, reasonable use
exception, and variance sections of this Chapter
Category II and III Wetlands.
a. Water-dependent activities may be allowed where there are no practicable
alternatives that would have a less adverse impact on the wetland, its buffers and
other critical areas
2.
3
4
b Where nonwater-dependent activities are proposed, it shall be presumed that
alternative locations are available, and activities and uses shall be prohibited,
unless the applicant demonstrates that:
The basic project purpose cannot reasonably be accomplished and
successfully avoid, or result in less adverse impact on, a wetland on
another site or sites in the general region, and
II. All alternative designs of the project as proposed, that would avoid or
result in less of an adverse impact on a wetland or its buffer, such as a
reduction in the size, scope, configuration, or density of the project, are
not feasible
5 Category IV Wetlands Activities and uses that result in unavoidable and necessary
impacts may be permitted in Category IV wetlands and associated buffers in accordance
with an approved critical area report and mitigation plan, and only if the proposed activity
is the only reasonable alternative that will accomplish the applicant's objectives Full
compensation for the acreage and loss functions will be provided
6 Wetland Buffers
a.
Standard Buffer Widths The standard buffer widths presume the existence of a
relatively intact native vegetation community in the buffer zone adequate to
protect the wetland functions and values at the time of the proposed activity If
the vegetation is inadequate, then the buffer width shall be increased or the
buffer should be planted to maintain the standard width Required standard
wetland buffers, based on wetland category and land use intensity, are as
follows
- Page 22 -
o
o
o
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
G
c
c
i. Cateaorv I
Natural Heritaae Wetlands
Boas
Hiah level of function for habitat (score of 29 - 36 points)
Moderate level of function for habitat (score of 20-28 points)
Hiah level of function for water Quality imorovement
(24- 32 points) and low for habitat (less than 20 points)
Not meetina any other characteristics
ii. Cateaorv II
Hiah level of function for habitat (score of 29 - 36 points)
Moderate level of function for habitat (score of 20 - 28 points)
High level of function for water auality improvement and low
for habitat (score for water auality 24-32 points and habitat
less than 20 points)
Not meetina any other characteristics
iii. Cateaorv III
Moderate level of function for habitat (score of 20 - 28 points)
Not meetina above characteristic
iv. Cateaorv IV
Score for all three basic functions less than 30 points
I. Category I 300 feet
II. Category II 200 feet
iii. C3tegory III 100 f-eet
250 feet
250 feet
300 feet
150 feet
1 00 feet
1 00 feet
300 feet
1 50 feet
1 00 feet
100 feet
150 feet
80 feet
50 feet
j"
. .
C3tOgOry IV
50 foot
b
Measurement of Wetland Buffers All buffers shall be measured from the
wetland boundary as surveyed in the field. The width of the wetland buffer shall
be determined according to the wetland category and the proposed land use
The buffer for a wetland created, restored, or enhanced as compensation for
approved wetland alterations shall be the same as the buffer required for the
category of the created, restored, or enhanced wetland Only fully vegetated
buffers will be considered Lawns, walkways, driveways, and other mowed or
paved areas will not be considered buffers.
Increased Wetland Buffer Widths. The administrator shall require increased
buffer widths in accordance with the recommendations of an experienced,
qualified professional wetland scientist, and the best available science on a case-
by-case basis when a larger buffer is necessary to protect wetland functions and
values based on site-specific characteristics. This determination shall be based
on one or more of the following criteria:
A larger buffer is needed to protect other critical areas,
ii The buffer or adjacent uplands has a slope greater than fifteen percent
(15%) or is susceptible to erosion and standard erosion-control
measures will not prevent adverse impacts to the wetland; or
c.
- Page 23 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
G
iii The buffer area has minimal vegetative cover In lieu of increasing the
buffer width where existing buffer vegetation is inadequate to f*)jeGt
orotect the wetland functions and values, implementation of a buffer
planting plan may substitute Where a buffer planting plan is proposed, it
shall include densities that are not less than three (3) feet on center for
shrubs and eight (8) feet on center for trees and require monitoring and
maintenance to ensure success. Existing buffer vegetation is considered
"inadequate" and will need to be enhanced through additional native
plantings and (if appropriate) removal of non-native plants when. (1)
non-native or invasive plant species provide the dominant cover, (2)
vegetation is lacking due to disturbance and wetland resources could be
adversely affected, or (3) enhancement plantings in the buffer could
significantly improve buffer functions
d. Wetland Buffer Width Averaging The administrator may allow modification of the
standard wetland buffer width in accordance with an approved critical area report
and the best available science on a case-by-case basis by averaging buffer
widths. Averaging of buffer widths may only be allowed where a qualified
professional wetland scientist demonstrates that:
i. It will not reduce wetland functions or functional performance,
iii The wetland contains variations in sensitivity due to existing physical
characteristics or the character of the buffer varies in slope, soils, or
vegetation, and the wetland would benefit from a wider buffer in places
and would not be adversely impacted by a narrower buffer in other
places,
iv The total area contained in the buffer area after averaging is no less than
that which would be contained within the standard buffer; and
v The buffer width is not reduced to less than 75 percent (75%) of the
standard width or thirty-five (35) feet.
e Buffer Consistency All mitigation sites shall have buffers consistent with the
buffer requirements of this Chapter
f Buffer Maintenance. Except as otherwise specified or allowed in accordance
with this Chapter, wetland buffers shall be retained in an undisturbed or
enhanced condition Removal of invasive non-native weeds is required for the
duration of the mitigation bond.
g Buffer Uses. The following uses may be permitted within a wetland buffer in
accordance with the review procedures of this Chapter, provided they are not
prohibited by any other applicable law and they are conducted in a manner so as
to minimize impacts to the buffer and adjacent wetland
Conservation and Restoration Activities Conservation or restoration
activities aimed at protecting the soil, water, vegetation, or wildlife
ii. Passive Recreation Passive recreation facilities designed and in
accordance with an approved critical area report.
Performance Standards - Compensatory Mitigation Requirements. Compensatory mitigation for
alterations to wetlands shall achieve equivalent or greater biologic functions Compensatory
mitigation plans shall be consistent with the state Department of Ecology Guidelines for
Developing Freshwater Wetlands Mitigation Plans and Proposals, 1994, as revised
Mitigation Shall Be Required in the Following Order of Preference.
a. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action
b Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
- Page 24 -
o
o
o
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
",
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
o
c
c
implementation, by using appropriate technology, or by taking affirmative steps to
avoid or reduce impacts
Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected
environment.
d, Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance
operations
e, Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute
resources or environments
c,
2.
Mitigation for Lost or Affected Functions. Compensatory mitigation actions shall address
functions affected by the alteration to achieve functional equivalency or improvement and
shall provide similar wetland functions as those lost, except when
a. The lost wetland provides minimal functions as determined by a site-specific
function assessment, and the proposed compensatory mitigation action(s} will
provide equal or greater functions or will provide functions shown to be limiting
within a watershed through a formal Washington state watershed assessment
plan or protocol, or
b Out-of-kind replacement will best meet formally identified watershed goals, such
as replacement of historically diminished wetland types.
Preference of Mitigation Actions Mitigation actions that require compensation by
replacing, enhancing, or substitution shall occur in the following order of preference
a. Restoring wetlands on upland sites that were formerly wetlands.
b Creating wetlands on disturbed upland sites such as those with vegetative cover
consisting primarily of non-native introduced species. This should only be
attempted when there is a consistent source of hydrology and it can be shown
that the surface and subsurface hydrologic regime is conducive for the wetland
community that is being designed
c. Enhancing significantly degraded wetlands in combination with restoration or
creation Such enhancement should be part of a mitigation package that
includes replacing the impacted area meeting appropriate ratio requirements.
Type and Location of Mitigation Unless it is demonstrated that a higher level of
ecological functioning would result from an alternate approach, compensatory mitigation
for ecological functions shall be either in-kind and on-site, or in-kind and within the same
stream reach, sub-basin, or drift cell Mitigation actions shall be conducted within the
same sub-drainage basin and on the site as the alteration except when the all of the
following apply'
3
4
a.
There are no reasonable on-site or in-subdrainage basin opportunities or on-site
and in-subdrainage basin opportunities do not have a high likelihood of success,
after a determination of the natural capacity of the site to mitigate for the impacts.
Consideration should include anticipated wetland mitigation replacement ratios,
buffer conditions and proposed widths, hydrogeomorphic classes of on-site
wetlands when restored, proposed flood storage capacity, potential to mitigate
riparian fish and wildlife impacts (such as connectivity),
Off-site mitigation has a greater likelihood of providing equal or improved wetland
functions than the impacted wetland, and
Off-site locations shall be in the same sub-drainage basin unless.
Established watershed goals for water quality, flood or conveyance,
habitat, or other wetland functions have been established and strongly
justify location of mitigation at another site, or
b
c.
- Page 25 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
5
Credits from a state certified wetland mitigation bank are used as
mitigation and the use of credits is consistent with the terms of the bank's
certification.
Mitigation Timing Mitigation projects shall be completed with an approved monitoring
plan prior to activities that will disturb wetlands In all other cases, mitigation shall be
completed immediately following disturbance and prior to use or occupancy of the activity
or development. Construction of mitigation projects shall be timed to reduce impacts to
existing fisheries, wildlife, and flora.
The administrator may authorize a one-time temporary delay, up to one-hundred-twenty
(120) days, in completing minor construction and landscaping when environmental
conditions could produce a high probability of failure or significant construction difficulties.
The delay shall not create or perpetuate hazardous conditions or environmental damage
or degradation, and the delay shall not be injurious to the health, safety, and general
welfare of the public The request for the temporary delay must include a written
justification that documents the environmental constraints that preclude implementation
of the mitigation plan The justification must be verified and approved by the City and
include a financial guarantee.
Mitigation Ratios
a. Acreage Replacement Ratios. The following ratios shall apply to creation or
restoration that is in-kind, is on-site, is the same category, is timed prior to or
concurrent with alteration, and has a high probability of success These ratios do
not apply to remedial actions resulting from unauthorized alterations, greater
ratios shall apply in those cases. These ratios do not apply to the use of credits
from a state certified wetland mitigation bank. When credits from a certified bank
are used, replacement ratios should be consistent with the requirements of the
bank's certification The first number specifies the acreage of replacement
wetlands and the second specifies the acreage of wetlands altered
ii.
6
Category I
Category II
Category III
Category IV
6-to-1
3-to-1
2-to-1
1 5-to-1
7
b Increased Replacement Ratio The administrator may increase the ratios under
the following circumstances
Uncertainty exists as to the probable success of the proposed restoration
or creation,
ii A significant period of time will elapse between impact and replication of
wetland functions,
c. Proposed mitigation will result in a lower category wetland or reduced functions
relative to the wetland being impacted, or
d The impact was an unauthorized impact.
Wetlands Enhancement as Mitigation
a. Impacts to wetland functions may be mitigated by enhancement of existing
significantly degraded wetlands, but must be used in conjunction with restoration
and/or creation Applicants proposing to enhance wetlands must produce a
critical area report that identifies how enhancement will increase the functions of
the degraded wetland and how this increase will adequately mitigate for the loss
of wetland area and function at the impact site. An enhancement proposal must
also show whether existing wetland functions will be reduced by the
- Page 26 -
o
o
o
o
o
c
.;~,)
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
enhancement actions.
At a minimum, enhancement acreage shall be double the acreage required for
creation or restoration The ratios shall be greater than double the required
acreage where the enhancement proposal would result in minimal gain in the
performance of wetland functions and/or result in the reduction of other wetland
functions currently being provided in the wetland
Mitigation r3tions ratios for enhancement in combination with other forms of
mitigation shall range form 61 to 31 and be limited to Class III and Class IV
wetlands.
H Performance Standards - Land Divisions. The division, redivision, or adjusting of boundary lines
of land in wetlands and associated buffers is subject to the following
1 Land that is located wholly within a wetland or its buffer may not be subdivided
2. Land that is located partially within a wetland or its buffer may be subdivided provided
that an accessible and contiguous portion of each new lot is.
a. Located outside of the wetland and its buffer; and
b
c
b Meets the minimum lot size requirements of [locally adopted zoning dimensions]
3 Access roads and utilities serving the proposed subdivision may be permitted within the
wetland and associated buffers only if the City determines that no other feasible
alternative exists and when consistent with this Chapter
- Page 27 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
14 08 110 Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas
A. Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas Designation Critical aquifer recharge areas are those areas with 0
a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water as defined by Section 365-190-030
(2) WAC A critical aquifer recharge area has prevailing geologic conditions associated with
infiltration rates that create a high potential for contamination of ground water resources or
contribute significantly to the replenishment of ground water
B Designation of Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas. The entire City of Yelm and its Urban Growth
Area is identified as a highly susceptible Critical Aquifer Recharge Area.
C Performance Standards - General Requirements
1 Activities may only be permitted in a critical aquifer recharge area if the applicant can
show that the proposed activity will not cause contaminants to enter the aquifer and that
the proposed activity will not adversely effect the recharging of the aquifer
2 The proposed activity must comply with the water source protection requirements and
recommendations of the U S Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State
Department of Health, and the Thurston County Environmental Health Division
3 All new development, redevelopment, and small parcel development shall meet the water
quality requirements of the Stormwater Manual as adopted by the City of Yelm
D Performance Standards - Specific Uses
1 Storage Tanks. All storage tanks proposed to be located in a critical aquifer recharge
area must comply with local building code requirements and must conform to the
following requirements
a. Underground Tanks All new underground storage facilities proposed for use in
the storage of hazardous substances or hazardous wastes shall be designed and
constructed so as to 0
Prevent releases due to corrosion or structural failure for the operational
life of the tank;
ii. Be protected against corrosion, constructed of noncorrosive material,
steel clad with a noncorrosive material, or designed to include a
secondary containment system to prevent the release or threatened
release of any stored substances, and
iii Use material in the construction or lining of the tank that is compatible
with the substance to be stored
b Aboveground Tanks All new aboveground storage facilities proposed for use in
the storage of hazardous substances or hazardous wastes shall be designed and
constructed so as to
Not allow the release of a hazardous substance to the ground, ground
waters, or surface waters,
II Have a primary containment area enclosing or underlying the tank or part
thereof; and
III A secondary containment system either built into the tank structure or a
dike system built outside the tank for all tanks
2 Vehicle Repair and Servicing
a.
Vehicle repair and servicing must be conducted over impermeable pads and
within a covered structure capable of withstanding normally expected weather
conditions Chemicals used in the process of vehicle repair and servicing must
be stored in a manner that protects them from weather and provides containment
o
- Page 28 -
o
o
c
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
3
should leaks occur
b No dry wells shall be allowed in critical aquifer recharge areas on sites used for
vehicle repair and servicing Dry wells existing on the site prior to facility
establishment must be abandoned using techniques approved by the state
Department of Ecology prior to commencement of the proposed activity
Use of Reclaimed Water for Surface Percolation or Direct Recharge Water reuse
projects for reclaimed water must be in accordance with the adopted water or sewer
comprehensive plans that have been approved by the state departments of Ecology and
Health.
a. Use of reclaimed water for surface percolation must meet the ground water
recharge criteria given in Chapter 90 46 080(1) and Chapter 90 46 010(10) RCW
The state Department of Ecology may establish additional discharge limits in
accordance with Chapter 90 46 080(2) RCW
b Direct injection must be in accordance with the standards developed by authority
of Chapter 90 46 042 RCW
- Page 29 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
1408.120 Frequently Flooded Areas
A. Designation of Frequently Flooded Areas Frequently flooded areas shall include areas Identified 0
on the Flood Insurance Map(s) and areas maDDed bv Thurston Countv as hiah around water
flood hazard areas. The Flood Insurance Maps and hiah around water maDS are hereby adopted
by reference, declared part of this Chapter, and are available for public review at the City
B Flood Elevation Data. When base flood elevation data is not available (A and V zones), the
administrator shall obtain, review, and reasonably utilize any base flood elevation and floodway
data available from a federal, state, or other source, in order to administer this Chapter
C Maintenance of Records Where base flood elevation data is provided through the Flood
Insurance Study or required through this Chapter, the administrator shall obtain and record the
flood elevation certificates of all new or substantially improved structures, and whether or not the
structure contains a basement. The administrator shall also maintain for public inspection all
records of floodplain hazards, certificates of flood proofing, and flood elevation data.
D Performance Standards - General Requirements. The following standards shall be adhered to in
all frequently flooded areas, except as otherwise provide for in this Chapter
Approval of work in a frequently flooded area Prior to any clearing, grading, dumping,
drilling, dredging, filling, or the construction or reconstruction of any structure, the City
shall have approved through the underlying permit or through approval of a critical areas
report that the standards for development within a frequently flooded area have been
met.
2 No activity within a frequently flooded area shall increase the base flood elevation
Performance Standards - General Requirements.,. in -FEMA designated 100 year floodDlain.
Structures Shall Be Located Outside the Floodplain All structures, utilities, and other
improvements shall be located on the buildable portion of the site out of the floodplain
unless there is no buildable site area out of the floodplain For sites with no buildable
area out of the floodplain, structures, utilities, and other improvements shall be placed on
the highest land on the site, oriented parallel to flow rather than perpendicular, and sited
as far from the watercourse and other critical areas as possible If the administrator
detects any evidence of active hyporheic exchange on a site, the development shall be
located to minimize disruption of such exchange
2. Methods That Minimize Flood Damage All new construction and substantial
improvements shall be constructed using flood resistant materials and using methods
and practices that minimize flood damage
3 Utility Protection Electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, air-conditioning equipment,
and other service facilities shall be designed and/or otherwise elevated or located so as
to prevent water from entering or accumulating within the components during conditions
of flooding.
4 Elevation Certificate Following Construction. Following construction of a structure within
the floodplain where the base flood elevation is provided, the applicant shall obtain an
elevation certificate that records the elevation of the lowest floor The elevation certificate
shall be completed by a surveyor or engineer licensed in the state of Washington and
shall be submitted to the City for recording
5 Anchoring
a. Anchoring Requirement. All new construction and substantial improvements
within the floodplain shall be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse, or lateral
movement of the structure
I E
b
Manufactured Homes. All manufactured homes placed within the floodplain must
be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse, or lateral movement and shall be
installed using methods and practices that minimize flood damage Anchoring
o
o
- Page 30 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
~FiP'~
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
I F
methods may include, but are not limited to, use of over-the-top or frame ties to
ground anchors
6 Fill and Grading Fill and grading with the floodplain shall only occur after a
determination that the fill or grading will not block side channels, inhibit channel
migration, increase the base flood elevation, or be within a channel migration zone
Performance Standards - Specific Uses in the FEMA Desianated 100 vear floodolain Specific
uses shall adhere to the following relevant standards, in addition to the general standards
1 Residential Construction on lots created prior to 1999
a. Must be Above Base Flood Elevation New construction and substantial
improvement of any residential structure shall have the lowest floor, including
basement, elevated one (1) foot or more above the base flood elevation
b Areas Below the Lowest Floor Fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor that
are subject to flooding shall only be allowed when designed to automatically
equalize hydrostatic flood forces on exterior walls by allowing for the entry and
exit of floodwaters Designs for meeting this requirement must either be certified
by a registered professional engineer or architect or must meet or exceed the
following minimum criteria:
A minimum of two (2) openings having a total net area of not less than
one (1) square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to
flooding shall be provided,
ii. The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one (1) foot above
grade, and
c
c
Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, or other coverings or
devices provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of
floodwaters
c. Manufactured Homes Must be Elevated All manufactured homes to be placed
or substantially improved shall be elevated on a permanent foundation such that
the lowest floor of the manufactured home is elevated one (1) foot or more above
the base flood elevation and be securely anchored to an adequately anchored
foundation system to resist flotation, collapse, and lateral movement.
2. Divisions of Land
111
a. All new divisions of land, including subdivisions, short subdivisions, boundary line
adjustments, binding site plans, and master planned communities shall not
create any building lot for commercial or residential purposes with any portion
within the floodplain.
b Floodplain areas shall be dedicated as open space
c. No infrastructure required for the subdivision with the exception of utility transport
lines idenfied identified by the appropriate utility capital facilities plan shall be
located within the floodplain.
d.
Subdivisions and short subdivisions shall be designed to minimize or eliminate
flood damage and impacts to floodplain functions and values. Public utilities and
facilities that are installed as part of such subdivisions, such as sewer, gas,
electrical, and water systems, shall be located and constructed to also minimize
flood damage and impacts to floodplain functions and values. Subdivisions
should be designed using natural features of the landscape and should not
incorporate flood protection changes
Subdivisions and short subdivisions shall have adequate natural surface water
drainage to reduce exposure to flood hazards, and
c
e
- Page 31 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9,2005
3
f Subdivisions and short subdivisions shall show the 1 OO-year floodplain, floodway,
and channel migration zone on the preliminary and final plat and short plat maps
and designate such areas as "no build," when applicable
Nonresidential Construction on lots created prior to '1999
a. Above Base Flood Elevation. New construction and substantial improvement of
any commercial, industrial, or other nonresidential structure shall either have the
lowest floor, including basement, elevated one foot (1) or more above the base
flood elevation, or, together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities, shall
Be flood proofed so that below one (1) foot or more above the base flood
level the structure is watertight with walls substantially impermeable to
the passage of water;
ii. Have structural components capable of resisting hydrostatic and
hydrodynamic loads and effects of buoyancy; and
III Be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the
design and methods of construction are in accordance with accepted
standards of practice for meeting provisions of this Subsection based on
their development and/or review of the structural design, specifications,
and plans
b Areas Below the Lowest Floor Fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor that
are not flood proofed shall be designed to automatically equalize hydrostatic flood
forces on exterior walls by allowing for the entry and exit of floodwaters. Designs
for meeting this requirement must either be certified by a registered professional
engineer or architect, or must meet or exceed the following minimum criteria.
A minimum of two (2) openings having a total net area of not less than
one (1) square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to
flooding shall be provided;
ii The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one (1) foot above
grade, and
iii Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, or other coverings or
devices provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of
floodwaters.
4 Utilities
a. Infiltration of Flood Waters. All new and replacement water supply systems shall
be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the systems.
b Sanitary Sewage Systems New and replacement sanitary sewage systems
shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the
systems and discharges from the systems into flood waters.
c On-Site Waste Disposal Systems. On-site waste disposal systems shall be
located to avoid impairment to them or contamination from them during flooding
New on-site sewage disposal systems are prohibited within the floodplain
G. Performance Standards - General reauirements in Hiah Ground Water Hazard Areas.
1. Flood elevations. The base flood elevation for hiah around water flood hazard areas
corresoonds to the elevation of the outer edae of the hiah around water flood hazard
area.
2.
Delineation of the base flood elevation. Aoolicants shall submit to the aooroval authoritv
hvdroloaic and hvdroaeoloaic studies as necessary to delineate the hiah around water
flood hazard area and the base flood elevation.
o
o
o
- Page 32 -
c
(\
\J
o
~
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
No develoDment shall locate within fifty feet. measured on a horizontal Diane. from the
outer edae of the hiah around water hazard area or extendina to a around elevation two
feet above the base flood elevation. whichever is less.
The bottom of any infiltration facility for stormwater discharae shall be located at least 6
feet above the base flood elevation.
Gt! Uses and Activities Prohibited From Frequently Flooded Areas
Critical Facilities. Critical facilities are prohibited from frequently flooded areas to prevent
damage to such facilities, to avoid costs that will be incurred by the public, and to
maintain functionality of such facilities during flood events. If such a prohibition is
unreasonable, an allowance for critical facilities in frequently flooded areas with the
following specific conditions.
a. Construction of new critical facilities shall be permissible within frequently flooded
areas if no feasible alternative site is available
3.
4.
2.
b Critical facilities constructed within frequently flooded areas shall have the lowest
floor elevated three (3) feet or more above the level of the base flood elevation
(1 OO-year flood)
c. Floodproofing and sealing measures must be taken to ensure that toxic
substances will not be displaced by or released into flood waters.
d Access routes elevated to or above the level of the base flood elevation shall be
provided to all critical facilities to the extent possible
Wells Used for Potable Water Water wells shall be located on high ground and are
prohibited from being within the floodway
On-Site Sewage Disposal Systems. On-site sewage disposal systems are prohibited
from the floodway, the channel migration zone, and the ten-year floodplain elevation
3
- Page 33 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9,2005
14 08.130 Geologically Hazardous Areas
A. Designation of Geologically Hazardous Areas. Geologically hazardous areas include areas 0
susceptible to erosion, sliding, earthquake, or other geological events They pose a threat to the
health and safety of citizens when incompatible development is sited in areas of significant
hazard Such incompatible development may not only place itself at risk, but also may increase
the hazard to surrounding development and use
B Designation of Specific Hazard Areas
Erosion Hazard Areas Erosion hazard areas are at least those areas identified by the
U S Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service as having a
"moderate to severe," "severe," or "very severe" rill and inter-rill erosion hazard Erosion
hazard areas are also those areas impacted by shore land and/or stream bank erosion
and those areas within a river's channel migration zone
2. Landslide Hazard Areas Landslide hazard areas are areas potentially subject to
landslides based on a combination of geologic, topographic, and hydrologic factors
They include areas susceptible because of any combination of bedrock, soil, slope
(gradient), slope aspect, structure, hydrology, or other factors Example of these may
include, but are not limited to the following
a. Areas of historic failures
3
Areas with all three of the following characteristics.
Slopes steeper than fifteen percent (15%),
ii Hillsides intersecting geologic contacts with a relatively permeable
sediment overlying a relatively impermeable sediment or bedrock; and
iii Springs or ground water seepage
Areas that have shown movement during the Holocene epoch (from ten
thousand years ago to the present) or that are underlain or covered by mass
wastage debris of that epoch,
Slopes that are parallel or subparallel to planes of weakness (such as bedding
planes, joint systems, and fault planes) in subsurface materials,
Slopes having gradients steeper than eighty percent (80%) subject to rock fall
during seismic shaking,
f Areas potentially unstable because of rapid stream incision, stream bank erosion,
and undercutting by wave action,
g Areas that show evidence of, or are at risk from snow avalanches,
h. Areas located in a canyon or on an active alluvial fan, presently or potentially
subject to inundation by debris flows or catastrophic flooding, and
Any area with a slope of forty percent (40%) or steeper and with a vertical relief
of ten (10) or more feet except areas composed of consolidated rock. A slope is
delineated by establishing its toe and top and is measured by averaging the
inclination over at least ten (10) feet of vertical relief
b
c.
d
e
Seismic Hazard Areas Seismic hazard areas are areas subject to severe risk of damage
as a result of earthquake induced ground shaking, slope failure, settlement, soil
liquefaction, lateral spreading, or surface faulting One indicator of potential for future
earthquake damage is a record of earthquake damage in the past. Ground shaking is the
primary cause of earthquake damage in Washington The strength of ground shaking is
primarily affected by.
a. The magnitude of an earthquake,
- Page 34 -
o
o
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
c
C
D
c
c
b The distance from the source of an earthquake,
c. The type of thickness of geologic materials at the surface, and
d The type of subsurface geologic structure
Mapping of Geologically Hazardous Areas
1 The approximate location and extent of geologically hazardous areas are shown on the
adopted critical area maps
2. These maps are to be used as a guide for the City, project applicants and/or property
owners and may be continuously updated as new critical areas are identified. They are a
reference and do not provide a final critical area designation
Performance Standards - General Requirements
Alterations of geologically hazardous areas or associated buffers may only occur for
activities that:
a. Will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent properties
beyond pre-development conditions,
b Will not adversely impact other critical areas,
c Are designed so that the hazard to the project is eliminated or mitigated to a level
equal to or less than pre-development conditions, and
d Are certified as safe as designed and under anticipated conditions by a qualified
engineer or geologist, licensed in the state of Washington
2. Critical Facilities Prohibited Critical facilities shall not be sited within geologically
hazardous areas unless there is no other practical alternative
3
Buffer Requirement. A buffer shall be established from all edges of landslide hazard
areas. The size of the buffer shall be determined by the administrator to eliminate or
minimize the risk of property damage, death, or injury resulting from landslides caused in
whole or part by the development, based upon review of and concurrence with a critical
area report prepared by a qualified professional
a. Minimum Buffer The minimum buffer shall be equal to the height of the slope or
fifty (50) feet, whichever is greater
b Buffer Reduction The buffer may be reduced to a minimum of ten (10) feet
when a qualified professional demonstrates to the administrator's satisfaction
that the reduction will adequately protect the proposed development, adjacent
developments, and uses and the subject critical area.
c. Increased Buffer The buffer may be increased where the administrator
determines a larger buffer is necessary to prevent risk of damage to proposed
and existing development;
Alterations. Alterations of an erosion or landslide hazard area and/or buffer may only
occur for activities for which a hazards analysis is submitted and certifies that:
a. The development will not increase surface water discharge or sedimentation to
adjacent properties beyond pre-development conditions,
b The development will not decrease slope stability on adjacent properties, and
c. Such alterations will not adversely impact other critical areas,
Vegetation Retention Unless otherwise provided or as part of an approved alteration,
removal of vegetation from an erosion or landslide hazard area or related buffer shall be
prohibited,
4
5
- Page 35 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
Seasonal Restriction. Clearing shall be allowed only from May 1 to October 1 of each
year provided that the City may extend or shorten the dry season on a case-by-case
basis depending on actual weather conditions, except that timber harvest, not including
brush clearing or stump removal, may be allowed pursuant to an approved forest practice
permit issued by the City or the Washington State Department of Natural Resources,
Utility Lines and Pipes Utility lines and pipes shall be permitted in erosion and landslide
hazard areas only when the applicant demonstrates that no other practical alternative is
available. The line or pipe shall be located above ground and properly anchored and/or
designed so that it will continue to function in the event of an underlying slide
Stormwater conveyance shall be allowed only through a high-density polyethylene pipe
with fuse-welded joints, or similar product that is technically equal or superior;
Point Discharges Point discharges from surface water facilities and roof drains onto or
upstream from an erosion or landslide hazard area shall be prohibited
Division of Land The division of land in landslide hazard areas and associated buffers is
subject to the following
a. Land that is located wholly within a landslide hazard area or its buffer may not be
subdivided Land that is located partially within a landslide hazard area or its
buffer may be divided provided that each resulting lot has sufficient buildable
area outside of, and will not affect, the landslide hazard or its buffer
b Access roads and utilities may be permitted within the landslide hazard area and
associated buffers if the City determines that no other feasible alternative exists,
and
E Prohibited Development. On-site sewage disposal systems, including drain fields, shall be
prohibited within erosion and landslide hazard areas and related buffers.
6
7
8
9
- Page 36 -
o
o
o
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
c
1408.140 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas
C A. Designation of Fish And Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas
1 Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas include
a. Areas With Which State or Federally Designated Endangered, Threatened, and
Sensitive Species Have a Primary Association
Federally designated endangered and threatened species are those fish
and wildlife species identified by the U S Fish and Wildlife Service and
the National Marine Fisheries Service that are in danger of extinction or
threatened to become endangered
II. State designated endangered, threatened, and sensitive species are
those fish and wildlife species native to the state of Washington identified
by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, that are in danger of
extinction, threatened to become endangered, vulnerable, or declining
and are likely to become endangered or threatened in a significant
portion of their range within the state without cooperative management or
removal of threats.
b State Priority Habitats and Areas Associated With State Priority Species Priority
habitats and species are considered to be priorities for conservation and
management. Priority species require protective measures for their perpetuation
due to their population status, sensitivity to habitat alteration, and/or recreational,
commercial, or tribal importance Priority habitats are those habitat types or
elements with unique or significant value to a diverse assemblage of species. A
priority habitat may consist of a unique vegetation type or dominant plant
species, a described successional stage, or a specific structural element. Priority
habitats and species are identified by the state Department of Fish and Wildlife.
c Naturally Occurring Ponds Under Twenty Acres Naturally occurring ponds are
those ponds under twenty (20) acres and their submerged aquatic beds that
provide fish or wildlife habitat, including those artificial ponds intentionally created
from dry areas in order to mitigate impacts to ponds. Naturally occurring ponds
do not include ponds deliberately designed and created from dry sites, such as
canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, temporary
construction ponds, and landscape amenities, unless such artificial ponds were
intentionally created for mitigation
d. Waters of the State Waters of the state include lakes, rivers, ponds, streams,
inland waters, underground waters, salt waters, and all other surface waters and
watercourses within the jurisdiction of the state of Washington.
e Areas of Rare Plant Species and High Quality Ecosystems. Areas of rare plant
species and high quality ecosystems are identified by the Washington State
Department of Natural Resources through the Natural Heritage Program.
f Land Useful or Essential for Preserving Connections between Habitat Blocks and
Open Spaces
2. All areas within the City meeting one or more of these criteria, regardless of any formal
identification, are hereby designated critical areas and are subject to the provisions of this
Chapter and shall be managed consistent with the best available science
3 Mapping. The approximate location and extent of habitat conservation areas are shown
on the critical area maps adopted by the City
Critical Area Report - Additional Requirements for Habitat Conservation Areas.
1 Areas Addressed in Critical Area Report. The following areas shall be addressed in a
critical area report for habitat conservation areas
C
B
- Page 37 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
C
2.
a. The project area of the proposed activity;
b All habitat conservation areas and recommended buffers within three hundred
(300) feet of the project area, and
c. All shoreline areas, floodplains, other critical areas, and related buffers within
three hundred (300) feet of the project area.
Habitat Assessment. A habitat assessment is an investigation of the project area to
evaluate the potential presence or absence of designated critical fish or wildlife species
or habitat. A critical area report for a habitat conservation area shall contain an
assessment of habitats including the following site- and proposal-related information at a
minimum.
o
o
o
a. Detailed description of vegetation on and adjacent to the project area and its
associated buffer;
b Identification of any species of local importance, priority species, or endangered,
threatened, sensitive, or candidate species that have a primary association with
habitat on or adjacent to the project area, and assessment of potential project
impacts to the use of the site by the species,
c. A discussion of any federal, state, or local special management
recommendations, including Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife habitat
management recommendations, that have been developed for species or
habitats located on or adjacent to the project area,
d A detailed discussion of the direct and indirect potential impacts on habitat by the
project, including potential impacts to water quality;
e A discussion of measures, including avoidance, minimization, and mitigation,
proposed to preserve existing habitats and restore any habitat that was degraded
prior to the current proposed land use activity and to be conducted in accordance
with Mitigation Sequencing, and
f A discussion of ongoing management practices that will protect habitat after the
project site has been developed, including proposed monitoring and maintenance
programs.
Additional Information May Be Required. When appropriate due to the type of habitat or
species present or the project area conditions, the administrator may also require the
habitat management plan to include
a. An evaluation by an independent qualified professional regarding the applicant's
analysis and the effectiveness of any proposed mitigating measures or programs,
to include any recommendations as appropriate,
b A request for consultation with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
or the local Native American Indian Tribe or other appropriate agency; and
c Detailed surface and subsurface hydrologic features both on and adjacent to the
site.
Performance Standards - General Requirements.
1 Non-indigenous Species No plant, wildlife, or fish species not indigenous to the region
shall be introduced into a habitat conservation area unless authorized by a state or
federal permit or approval.
2. Mitigation and Contiguous Corridors Mitigation sites shall be located to preserve or
achieve contiguous wildlife habitat corridors in accordance with a mitigation plan that is
part of an approved critical area report to minimize the isolating effects of development
on habitat areas, so long as mitigation of aquatic habitat is located within the same
aquatic ecosystem as the area disturbed
3
- Page 38 -
.'~ "-~ .'.
~-)
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
CI
o
G
3
Approvals of Activities. The administrator shall condition approvals of activities allowed
within or adjacent to a habitat conservation area or its buffers, as necessary to minimize
or mitigate any potential adverse impacts Conditions shall be based on the best
available science and may include, but are not limited to, the following
a. Establishment of buffer zones,
b Preservation of critically important vegetation and/or habitat features such as
snags and downed wood,
c Limitation of access to the habitat area, including fencing to deter unauthorized
access,
d Seasonal restriction of construction activities,
e. Establishment of a duration and timetable for periodic review of mitigation
activities, and
f Requirement of a performance bond, when necessary, to ensure completion and
success of proposed mitigation.
4 Mitigation and Equivalent or Greater Biological Functions Mitigation of alterations to
habitat conservation areas shall achieve equivalent or greater biologic and hydrologic
functions and shall include mitigation for adverse impacts upstream or downstream of the
development proposal site Mitigation shall address each function affected by the
alteration to achieve functional equivalency or improvement on a per function basis
5 Approvals and the Best Available Science Any approval of alterations or impacts to a
habitat conservation area shall be supported by the best available science
6 Buffers
Establishment of Buffers The administrator shall require the establishment of
buffer areas for activities adjacent to habitat conservation areas when needed to
protect habitat conservation areas. Buffers shall consist of an undisturbed area
of native vegetation or areas identified for restoration established to protect the
integrity, functions, and values of the affected habitat. Required buffer widths
shall reflect the sensitivity of the habitat and the type and intensity of human
activity proposed to be conducted nearby and shall be consistent with the
management recommendations issued by the Washington Department of Fish
and Wildlife Habitat conservation areas and their buffers shall be preserved in
perpetuity through the use of native growth protection areas and critical area
tracts
b Seasonal Restrictions. When a species is more susceptible to adverse impacts
during specific periods of the year, seasonal restrictions may apply Larger
buffers may be required and activities may be further restricted during the
specified season
c. Habitat Buffer Averaging The administrator may allow the recommended habitat
area buffer width to be reduced in accordance with a critical area report, the best
available science, and the management recommendations issued by the
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, only if'
It will not reduce stream or habitat functions,
a.
ii It will not adversely affect salmonid habitat;
ijj It will provide additional natural resource protection, such as buffer
enhancement;
IV
The total area contained in the buffer area after averaging is no less than
that which would be contained within the standard buffer; and
-' - Page 39 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
D
v The buffer area width is not reduced by more than twenty-five percent
(25%) in any location
Divisions of Land The subdivision and short subdivision of land in fish and wildlife
habitat conservation areas and associated buffers is subject to the following
a. Land that is located wholly within a habitat conservation area or its buffer may
not be subdivided
b Land that is located partially within a habitat conservation area or its buffer may
be divided provided that the developable portion of each new lot and its access is
located outside of the habitat conservation area or its buffer and meets the
minimum lot size requirements.
c Access roads and utilities serving the proposed may be permitted within the
habitat conservation area and associated buffers only if the City determines that
no other feasible alternative exists and when consistent with this Chapter
Performance Standards - Specific Habitats
Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive Species
a. No development shall be allowed within a habitat conservation area or buffer with
which state or federally endangered, threatened, or sensitive species have a
primary association, except that which is provided for by a management plan
established by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife or applicable
state or federal agency
b Whenever activities are proposed adjacent to a habitat conservation area with
which state or federally endangered, threatened, or sensitive species have a
primary association, such area shall be protected through the application of
protection measures in accordance with a critical area report prepared by a
qualified professional and approved by the City Approval for alteration of land
adjacent to the habitat conservation area or its buffer shall not occur prior to
consultation with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife for animal
species, the Washington State Department of Natural Resources for plant
species, and other appropriate federal or state agencies.
c. Bald eagle habitat shall be protected pursuant to the Washington State Bald
Eagle Protection Rules (WAC 232-12-292) Whenever activities are proposed
adjacent to a verified nest territory or communal roost, a habitat management
plan shall be developed by a qualified professional Activities are adjacent to
bald eagle sites when they are within eight hundred (800) feet or within one half
mile (2,640 feet) and in a shoreline foraging area. The City shall verify the
location of eagle management areas for each proposed activity Approval of the
activity shall not occur prior to approval of the habitat management plan by the
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
2. Riparian Habitat Areas. Unless otherwise allowed in this Chapter, all structures and
activities shall be located outside of the riparian habitat area.
a. Establishment of Riparian Habitat Areas. Riparian habitat areas shall be
established for habitats that include aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems that
mutually benefit each other and that are located adjacent to rivers, perennial or
intermittent streams, seeps, and springs
7
b
A Riparian Habitat Area Width of 150 feet is established along Yelm Creek and
Thompson Creek, both Type 5, intermittent streams with low mass wasting
potential
Increased Riparian Habitat Area Widths The recommended riparian habitat area
widths shall be increased, as follows.
o
o
o
c
- Page 40 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
When the administrator determines that the recommended width is
insufficient to prevent habitat degradation and to protect the structure
and functions of the habitat area,
ii. When the frequently flooded area exceeds the recommended riparian
habitat area width, the riparian habitat area shall extend to the outer
edge of the frequently flooded area,
iii When the habitat area is within an erosion or landslide hazard area, or
buffer, the riparian habitat area width shall be the recommended
distance, or the erosion or landslide hazard area or buffer, whichever is
greater
Riparian Habitat Area Width Averaging. The administrator may allow the
recommended riparian habitat area width to be reduced in accordance with a
critical area report only if
The width reduction will not reduce stream or habitat functions, including
those of nonfish habitat;
II. The width reduction will not degrade the habitat, including habitat for
anadromous fish,
The proposal will provide additional habitat protection,
The total area contained in the riparian habitat area of each stream on
the development proposal site is not decreased,
The recommended riparian habitat area width is not reduced by more
than twenty-five percent (25%) in anyone location,
The width reduction will not be located within another critical area or
associated buffer; and
The reduced riparian habitat area width is supported by the best
available science
e Riparian Habitat Mitigation Mitigation of adverse impacts to riparian habitat
areas shall result in equivalent functions and values on a per function basis, be
located as near the alteration as feasible, and be located in the same sub-
drainage basin as the habitat impacted
f Alternative Mitigation for Riparian Habitat Areas. The performance standards set
forth in this Subsection may be modified at the City's discretion if the applicant
demonstrates that greater habitat functions, on a per function basis, can be
obtained in the affected sub-drainage basin as a result of alternative mitigation
measures.
c
d.
iii
IV
v
0 vi
vii
4 Aquatic Habitat. The following specific activities may be permitted within a riparian habitat
area, pond, lake, water of the state, and marine habitat or associated buffer
a. Clearing and Grading When clearing and grading is permitted as part of an
authorized activity or as otherwise allowed in these standards, the following shall
apply'
c
II
Grading is allowed only during the dry season, which is typically
regarded as beginning on May 1 and ending on October 1 of each year,
provided that the City may extend or shorten the dry season on a case-
by-case basis, determined on actual weather conditions
Filling or modification of a wetland or wetland buffer is permitted only if it
is conducted as part of an approved wetland alteration
The soil duff layer shall remain undisturbed to the maximum extent
iii
- Page 41 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
possible Where feasible, any soil disturbed shall be redistributed to
other areas of the project area.
The moisture-holding capacity of the topsoil layer shall be maintained by
minimizing soil compaction or reestablishing natural soil structure and
infiltrative capacity on all areas of the project area not covered by
impervious surfaces.
Erosion and sediment control that meets or exceeds the standards set
forth in the [locally adopted stormwater management regulations] shall
be provided
b Shoreline Erosion Control Measures New, replacement, or substantially
improved shoreline erosion control measures may be permitted in accordance
with an approved critical area report that demonstrates the following
Natural shoreline processes will be maintained The project will not
result in increased beach erosion or alterations to, or loss of, shoreline
substrate within one-quarter (1/4) mile of the project area.
ii The shoreline erosion control measures will not degrade fish or wildlife
habitat conservation areas or associated wetlands
c
d
iv
v
iii Adequate mitigation measures ensure that there is no net loss of the
functions or values of intertidal habitat or riparian habitat as a result of
the proposed shoreline erosion control measures
iv The proposed shoreline erosion control measures do not result in
alteration of intertidal migration corridors
Streambank Stabilization Streambank stabilization to protect new structures
from future channel migration is not permitted except when such stabilization is
achieved through bioengineering or soft armoring techniques in accordance with
an approved critical area report.
Roads, Trails, Bridges, and Rights-of-Way Construction of trails, roadways, and
minor road bridging, less than or equal to thirty (30) feet wide, may be permitted
in accordance with an approved critical area report subject to the following
standards
There is no other feasible alternative route with less impact on the
environment;
ii
The crossing minimizes interruption of downstream movement of wood
and gravel,
Roads in riparian habitat areas or their buffers shall not run parallel to the
water body;
Trails shall be located on the outer edge of the riparian area or buffer,
except for limited viewing platforms and crossings,
Crossings, where necessary, shall only occur as near to perpendicular
with the water body as possible,
Mitigation for impacts is provided pursuant to a mitigation plan of an
approved critical area report;
Road bridges are designed according to the Washington Department of
Fish and Wildlife Fish Passage Design at Road Culverts, 1999, and the
National Marine Fisheries Service Guidelines for Salmonid Passage at
Stream Crossings, 2000; and
Trails and associated viewing platforms shall not be made of continuous
o
o
o
iii
iv
v
vi.
vii
VII
- Page 42 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
c
c
c
impervious materials.
Utility Facilities. New utility lines and facilities may be permitted to cross
watercourses in accordance with an approved critical area report, if they comply
with the following standards.
Fish and wildlife habitat areas shall be avoided to the maximum extent
possible,
II Installation shall be accomplished by boring beneath the scour depth and
hyporheic zone of the water body and channel migration zone, where
feasible,
iii. The utilities shall cross at an angle greater than sixty (60) degrees to the
centerline of the channel in streams or perpendicular to the channel
centerline whenever boring under the channel is not feasible,
IV Crossings shall be contained within the footprint of an existing road or
utility crossing where possible,
v The utility route shall avoid paralleling the stream or following a down-
valley course near the channel, and
VI. The utility installation shall not increase or decrease the natural rate of
shore migration or channel migration
Public Flood Protection Measures New public flood protection measures and
expansion of existing ones may be permitted, subject to the City's review and
approval of a critical area report and the approval of a Federal Biological
Assessment by the federal agency responsible for reviewing actions related to a
federally listed species
Instream Structures. Instream structures, such as, but not limited to, high flow
bypasses, sediment ponds, instream ponds, retention and detention facilities,
tide gates, dams, and weirs, shall be allowed only as part of an approved
watershed basin restoration project approved by the City and upon acquisition of
any required state or federal permits The structure shall be designed to avoid
modifying flows and water quality in ways that may adversely affect habitat
conservation areas
h Stormwater Conveyance Facilities Conveyance structures may be permitted in
accordance with an approved critical area report subject to the following
standards
e.
f
g
No other feasible alternatives with less impact exist;
ii Mitigation for impacts is provided,
iii Stormwater conveyance facilities shall incorporate fish habitat features,
and
IV Vegetation shall be maintained and, if necessary, added adjacent to all
open channels and ponds in order to retard erosion, filter out sediments,
and shade the water
On-Site Sewage Systems and Wells
New on-site sewage systems and individual wells may be permitted in
accordance with an approved critical area report only if accessory to an
approved residential structure, for which it is not feasible to connect to a
public sanitary sewer system
Repairs to failing on-site sewage systems associated with an existing
structure shall be accomplished by utilizing one of the following methods
ii.
- Page 43 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
that result in the least impact:
Connection to an available public sanitary sewer system, 0
Replacement with a new on-site sewage system located in a portion of
the site that has already been disturbed by development and is located
landward as far as possible, provided the proposed sewage system is in
compliance with local health regulations, or
Repair to the existing on-site septic system.
o
o
- Page 44 -
o
o
c
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9,2005
1408.150
Definitions
Words not defined in this Chapter shall be as defined in the City code, the Washington Administrative
Code, or the Revised Code of Washington Words not found in either code shall be as defined in the
Webster's Third New International Dictionary, latest edition
Adaptive Management - Adaptive management relies on scientific methods to evaluate how well
regulatory and nonregulatory actions protect the critical area. An adaptive management program
is a formal and deliberate scientific approach to taking action and obtaining information in the face
of uncertainty
Alteration - Any human induced change in an existing condition of a critical area or its buffer Alterations
include, but are not limited to grading, filling, channelizing, dredging, clearing (vegetation),
construction, compaction, excavation, or any other activity that changes the character of the
critical area.
Anadromous Fish - Fish that spawn and rear in freshwater and mature in the marine environment. While
Pacific salmon die after their first spawning, adult char (bull trout) can live for many years, moving
in and out of saltwater and spawning each year The life history of Pacific salmon and char
contains critical periods of time when these fish are more susceptible to environmental and
physical damage than at other times The life history of salmon, for example, contains the
following stages upstream migration of adults, spawning, inter-gravel incubation, rearing,
smoltification (the time period needed for juveniles to adjust their body functions to live in the
marine environment), downstream migration, and ocean rearing to adults.
Aquifer - A geological formation, group of formations, or part of a formation that is capable of yielding a
significant amount of water to a well or spring.
Aquifer, Confined - An aquifer bounded above and below by beds of distinctly lower permeability than
that of the aquifer itself and that contains ground water under sufficient pressure for the water to
rise above the top of the aquifer
Aquifer Recharge Areas - Areas that, due to the presence of certain soils, geology, and surface water,
act to recharge ground water by percolation.
Aquifer, Sole Source - An area designated by the U S Environmental Protection Agency under the Safe
Drinking Water Act of 1974, Section 1424(e) The aquifer(s) must supply fifty percent (50%) or
more of the drinking water for an area without a sufficient replacement available.
Aquifer Susceptibility - The ease with which contaminants can move from the land surface to the aquifer
based solely on the types of surface and subsurface materials in the area Susceptibility usually
defines the rate at which a contaminant will reach an aquifer unimpeded by chemical interactions
with the vadose zone media.
Aquifer, Unconfined - An aquifer not bounded above by a bed of distinctly lower permeability than that of
the aquifer itself and containing ground water under pressure approximately equal to that of the
atmosphere This term is synonymous with the term "water table aquifer"
Base Flood - A flood event having a one percent (1 %) chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given
year, also referred to as the 1 OO-year flood Designations of base flood areas on flood insurance
map(s) always include the letters A or V
Best Available Science - Current scientific information used in the process to designate, protect, or
restore critical areas, that is derived from a valid scientific process as defined by WAC 365-195-
900 through 925 Sources of the best available science are included in Citations of
Recommended Sources of Best Available Science for Designating and Protecting Critical Areas
published by the Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic
Development.
Best Management Practices (BMPs) - Conservation practices or systems of practices and management
measures that:
A. Control soil loss and reduce water quality degradation caused by high concentrations of
- Page 45 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
nutrients, animal waste, toxics, and sediment;
B Minimize adverse impacts to surface water and ground water flow and circulation
patterns and to the chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of wetlands,
C Protect trees and vegetation designated to be retained during and following site
construction and use native plant species appropriate to the site for re-vegetation of
disturbed areas, and
D Provide standards for proper use of chemical herbicides within critical areas
Biodiversity - The variety of animal and plant life and its ecological processes and interconnections -
represented by the richness of ecological systems and the life that depends on them, including
human life and economies
Buffer or Buffer Zone - An area that is contiguous to and protects a critical area which is required for the
continued maintenance, functioning, and/or structural stability of a critical area.
Compensation Project - Actions necessary to replace project-induced critical area and buffer losses,
including land acquisition, planning, construction plans, monitoring, and contingency actions
Compensatory Mitigation - Replacing project-induced losses or impacts to a critical area, and includes,
but is not limited to, the following
Restoration - Actions performed to reestablish wetland functional characteristics and processes that have
been lost by alterations, activities, or catastrophic events within an area that no longer meets the
definition of a wetland
Enhancement - Actions performed to improve the condition of existing degraded wetlands so that the
functions they provide are of a higher quality
Preservation - Actions taken to ensure the permanent protection of existing, high-quality wetlands.
Critical Aquifer Recharge Area - Areas designated by WAC 365-190-080(2) that are determined to have 0
a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water as defined by WAC 365-190-030(2)
Critical Areas - Critical areas include any of the following areas or ecosystems aquifer recharge areas,
fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, frequently flooded areas, geologically hazardous
areas, and wetlands, as defined in RCW 36 70A and this Chapter
Critical Area Tract - Land held in private ownership and retained in an open condition in perpetuity for the
protection of critical areas Lands within this type of dedication may include but are not limited to,
portions and combinations of forest habitats, grasslands, shrub steppe, on-site watersheds, 100-
year floodplains, shorelines or shorelines of statewide significance, riparian areas, and wetlands
Critical Facility - A facility for which even a slight chance of flooding, inundation, or impact from a hazard
event might be too great. Critical facilities include, but are not limited to, schools, nursing homes,
hospitals, police, fire and emergency response installations, and installations that produce, use,
or store hazardous materials or hazardous waste.
o
Critical Species - All animal and plant species listed by the state or federal government as threatened or
endangered
Development - Any activity upon the land consisting of construction or alteration of structures, earth
movement, dredging, dumping, grading, filling, mining, removal of any sand, gravel, or minerals,
driving of piles, drilling operations, bulkheading, clearing of vegetation, or other land disturbance
Development includes the storage or use of equipment or materials inconsistent with the existing
use. Development also includes approvals issued by the City that binds land to specific patterns
of use, including but not limited to, subdivisions, short subdivisions, zone changes, conditional
use permits, and binding site plans Development activity does not include the following
activities
A.
Interior building improvements
o
- Page 46 -
c
OJ
c
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
B Exterior structure maintenance activities, including painting and roofing
C Routine landscape maintenance of established, ornamental landscaping, such as lawn
mowing, pruning, and weeding.
D Maintenance of the following existing facilities that does not expand the affected area.
septic tanks (routine cleaning), wells, individual utility service connections, and individual
cemetery plots in established and approved cemeteries
Development Permit - Any permit issued by the City, or other authorized agency, for construction, land
use, or the alteration of land
Emergent Wetland - A wetland with at least thirty percent (30%) of the surface area covered by erect,
rooted, herbaceous vegetation extending above the water surface as the uppermost vegetative
strata.
Erosion Hazard Areas - At least those areas identified by the US Department of Agriculture National
Resources Conservation Service as having a "severe" rill and inter-rill erosion hazard
Essential Public Facility - Those facilities that are tvoicallv difficult to site. such as airoorts. state education
facilities. state and local correctional facilities. state or reaional transoortation facilities. solid
waste handlina facilities. and in-oatient facilities includina substance abuse facilities. mental
health facilities and arouo homes. For Yelm essential oublic facilities include such facilities as
adequate administrative. oublic safety and oublic works vard areas. wastewater disoosal with
reuse/recycle areas, and water riahts. storaae. and transmission caoabilities.
Exotic - Any species of plants or animals, which are foreign to the planning area.
Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas - Areas necessary for maintaining species in suitable
habitats within their natural geographic distribution so that isolated subpopulations are not
created as designated by WAC 365-190-080(5) These areas include
A. Areas with which state or federally designated endangered, threatened, and sensitive
species have a primary association,
B Habitats of local importance, including but not limited to areas designated as priority
habitat by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife,
C Commercial and recreational shellfish areas,
D Kelp and eelgrass beds,
E. Herring and smelt spawning areas,
F Naturally occurring ponds under twenty (20) acres and their submerged aquatic beds that
provide fish or wildlife habitat, including those artificial ponds intentionally created from
dry areas in order to mitigate impacts to ponds,
G Waters of the state, including lakes, rivers, ponds, streams, inland waters, underground
waters, salt waters, and all other surface waters and watercourses within the jurisdiction
of the state of Washington,
H Lakes, ponds, streams, and rivers planted with game fish by a governmental or tribal
entity;
State natural area preserves and natural resource conservation areas, and
J Land essential for preserving connections between habitat blocks and open spaces.
Fish Habitat - Habitat that is used by fish at any life stage at any time of the year, including potential
habitat likely to be used by fish that could be recovered by restoration or management and
includes off-channel habitat.
Flood or Flooding - A general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of normally dry
land areas from the overflow of inland waters and/or the unusual and rapid accumulation of runoff
- Page 47 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
of surface waters from any source
Flood Insurance Map - The official map on which the Federal Insurance Administration has delineated
the areas of special flood hazards and include the risk premium zones applicable to the
community Also known as "flood insurance rate map" or "FIRM"
Flood Insurance Study - The official report provided by the Federal Insurance Administration that
includes flood profiles, the Flood Boundary-Floodway Map, and the water surface elevation of the
base flood
Floodplain - The total land area adjoining a river, stream, watercourse, or lake subject to inundation by
the base flood
Flood Protection Elevation - The elevation that is one (1) foot above the base flood elevation
Floodway - The channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land area that must be reserved
in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the surface water elevation
more that one (1) foot. Also known as the "zero rise floodway "
Forested Wetland - A wetland with at least thirty percent (30%) of the surface area covered by woody
vegetation greater than twenty (20) feet in height that is at least partially rooted within the
wetland
Frequently Flooded Areas - Lands in the floodplain subject to a one percent (1 %) or greater chance of
flooding in any given year and those lands that provide important flood storage, conveyance, and
attenuation functions, as determined by the administrator in accordance with WAC 365-190-
080(3) Frequently flooded areas perform important hydrologic functions and may present a risk
to persons and property Classifications of frequently flooded areas include, at a minimum, the
100-year floodplain designations of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the
National Flood Insurance Program.
Functions and Values - The beneficial roles served by critical areas including, but are not limited to, water
quality protection and enhancement; fish and wildlife habitat; food chain support; flood storage,
conveyance and attenuation, ground water recharge and discharge, erosion control, wave
attenuation, protection from hazards, historical, archaeological, and aesthetic value protection,
educational opportunities, and recreation These beneficial roles are not listed in order of priority
Critical area functions can be used to help set targets (species composition, structure, etc) for
managed areas, including mitigation sites.
Geologically Hazardous Areas - Areas that may not be suited to development consistent with public
health, safety, or environmental standards, because of their susceptibility to erosion, sliding,
earthquake, or other geological events as designated by WAC 365-190-080(4) Types of
geologically hazardous areas include erosion, landslide, seismic, mine, and volcanic hazards.
Ground Water - Water in a saturated zone or stratum beneath the surface of land or a surface water
body
Ground Water Management Area - A specific geographic area or subarea designated pursuant to
Chapter 173-100 WAC for which a ground water management program is required
Ground Water Management Program - A comprehensive program designed to protect ground water
quality, to ensure ground water quantity, and to provide for efficient management of water
resources while recognizing existing ground water rights and meeting future needs consistent
with local and state objectives, policies, and authorities within a designated ground water
management area or subarea and developed pursuant to Chapter 173-100 WAC
Ground Water, Perched - Ground water in a saturated zone is separated from the underlying main body
of ground water by an unsaturated rock zone
Growth Management Act - RCW 36 70A and 36 70B, as amended
Habitat Conservation Areas - Areas designated as fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas.
Habitats of Local Importance - These areas include a seasonal range or habitat element with which a
- Page 48 -
o
o
o
c
c
o
, ~..- "" ,,~ \ .
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
given species has a primary association, and which, if altered may reduce the likelihood that the
species will maintain and reproduce over the long-term. These might include areas of high
relative density or species richness, breeding habitat, winter range, and movement corridors.
These might also include habitats that are of limited availability or high vulnerability to alterations
such as cliffs, talus, and wetlands (WAC 365-190-030)
Hazard Areas - Areas designated as frequently flooded areas or geologically hazardous areas due to
potential for erosion, landslide, seismic activity, mine collapse, or other geological condition
Hazardous Substances - Any liquid, solid, gas, or sludge, including any material, substance, product,
commodity, or waste, regardless of quantity, that exhibits any of the physical, chemical, or
biological properties described in WAC 173-303-090 or 173-303-100
"Hiah around water flood hazard areas" means an area where floodina occurs as a result of subsurface
aeoloaic conditions that orevent recharaina water from movina downward or laterally as fast as it
enters the around water svstem. The result is a rise in the around water table and accumulation
of surfacina around water. tvoicallv intermixed with stormwater that cannot infiltrate. at low ooints
on the around's surface. Such oondina mav oersist-over orotracted oeriods of time.
High Quality Wetlands - Those wetlands that meet the following criteria.
A. No, or isolated, human alteration of the wetland topography;
B No human-caused alteration of the hydrology or the wetland appears to have recovered
from the alteration,
C Low cover and frequency of exotic plant species,
D Relatively little human-related disturbance of the native vegetation, or recovery from past
disturbance,
E. If the wetland system is degraded, it still contains a viable and high quality example of a
native wetland community; and
F No known major water quality problems
Historic Condition - Condition of the land, including flora, fauna, soil, topography, and hydrology that
existed before the area and vicinity were developed or altered by human activity
Hydric Soil - A soil that is saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to
develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part. The presence of hydric soil shall be determined
following the methods described in the Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation
Manual
Hydrologic Soil Groups - Soils grouped according to their runoff-producing characteristics under similar
storm and cover conditions Properties that influence runoff potential are depth to seasonally
high water table, intake rate and permeability after prolonged wetting, and depth to a low
permeable layer Hydrologic soil groups are normally used in equations that estimate runoff from
rainfall, but can be used to estimate a rate of water transmission in soil There are four hydrologic
soil groups
Low Runoff potential and a high rate of infiltration potential,
Moderate Infiltration potential and a moderate rate of runoff potential;
Slow Infiltration potential and a moderate to high rate of runoff potential, and
High Runoff potential and very slow infiltration and water transmission rates.
Hydrophytic Vegetation - Macrophytic plant life growing in water or on a substrate that is at least
periodically deficient in oxygen as a result of excessive water content. The presence of
hydrophytic vegetation shall be determined following the methods described in the Washington
State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual.
Hyporheic Zone - The saturated zone located beneath and adjacent to streams that contains some
- Page 49 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
portion of surface waters, serves as a filter for nutrients, and maintains water quality
Impervious Surface - A hard surface area that either prevents or retards the entry of water into the soil
mantle as under natural conditions prior to development or that causes water to run off the
surface in greater quantities or at an increased rate of flow from the flow present under natural
conditions prior to development. Common impervious surfaces include, but are not limited to,
rooftops, walkways, patios, driveways, parking lots or storage areas, concrete or asphalt paving,
gravel roads, packed earthen materials, and oiled macadam or other surfaces which similarly
impede the natural infiltration of stormwater
In-Kind Compensation - To replace critical areas with substitute areas whose characteristics and
functions closely approximate those destroyed or degraded by a regulated activity It does not
mean replacement "in-category "
Isolated Wetlands - Those wetlands that are outside of and not contiguous to any 1 OO-year floodplain of
a lake, river, or stream and have no contiguous hydric soil or hydrophytic vegetation between the
wetland and any surface water
Infiltration - The downward entry of water into the immediate surface of soil
Inter-Rill- Areas subject to sheet wash.
Joint Aquatic Resource Permits Application - A single application form that may be used to apply for
hydraulic project approvals, shoreline management permits, approvals of exceedance of water
quality standards, water quality certifications, coast guard bridge permits, Washington State
Department of Natural Resources use authorization, and U S Army Corps of Engineers permits
Landslide Hazard Areas - Areas that are potentially subject to risk of mass movement due to a
combination of geologic landslide resulting from a combination of geologic, topographic, and
hydrologic factors These areas are typically susceptible to landslides because of a combination
of factors including: bedrock, soil, slope gradient, slope aspect, geologic structure, ground water,
or other factors
Mitigation - Avoiding, minimizing, or compensating for adverse critical areas impacts Mitigation, in the
following sequential order of preference, is
A. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action,
B Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
implementation, by using appropriate technology, or by taking affirmative steps, such as
project redesign, relocation, or timing, to avoid or reduce impacts,
C Rectifying the impact to wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, and habitat
conservation areas by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment to
the conditions existing at the time of the initiation of the project;
D Minimizing or eliminating the hazard by restoring or stabilizing the hazard area through
engineered or other methods,
E Reducing or eliminating the impact or hazard over time by preservation and maintenance
operations during the life of the action,
F Compensating for the impact to wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, and habitat
conservation areas by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or
environments, and
G Monitoring the hazard or other required mitigation and taking remedial action when
necessary
Mitigation for individual actions may include a combination of the above measures
Monitoring - Evaluating the impacts of development proposals on the biological, hydrological, and 0
geological elements of such systems, and assessing the performance of required mitigation
measures throughout the collection and analysis of data by various methods for the purpose of
- Page 50 -
o
o
c
c
c
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
understanding and documenting changes in natural ecosystems and features, including gathering
baseline data.
Native Vegetation - Plant species that are indigenous to the area in question
Native Growth Protection Area (NGPA) - An area where native vegetation is preserved for the purpose of
preventing harm to property and the environment, including, but not limited to, controlling surface
water runoff and erosion, maintaining slope stability, buffering, and protecting plants and animal
habitat;
Natural Waters - Waters, excluding water conveyance systems that are artificially constructed and
actively maintained for irrigation
Non-conformity - A legally established existing use or legally constructed structure that is not in
compliance with current regulations
Non-indigenous - See "Exotic."
Off-Site Compensation - To replace critical areas away from the site on which a critical area has been
impacted
On-site Compensation - To replace critical areas at or adjacent to the site on which a critical areas has
been impacted
Out-of-Kind Compensation - To replace critical areas with substitute critical areas whose characteristics
do not closely approximate those destroyed or degraded. It does not refer to replacement "out-
of-category"
Perched Ground Water - See "Ground Water, Perched"
Permeability - The capacity of an aquifer or confining bed to transmit water It is a property of the aquifer
or confining bed and is independent of the force causing movement.
Porous Soil Types - Soils, as identified by the National Resources Conservation Service, U S
Department of Agriculture, that contain voids, pores, interstices, or other openings which allow
the passing of water
Practical Alternative - An alternative that is available and capable of being carried out after taking into
consideration cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of overall project purposes, and has
less impacts to critical areas
Primary Association Area - The area used on a regular basis by, is in close association with, or is
necessary for the proper functioning of the habitat of a critical species Regular basis means that
the habitat area is normally, or usually known to contain a critical species, or based on known
habitat requirements of the species, the area is likely to contain the critical species Regular
basis is species and population dependent. Species that exist in low numbers may be present
infrequently yet rely on certain habitat types
Priority Habitat - Habitat type or elements with unique or significant value to one or more species as
classified by the state Department of Fish and Wildlife A priority habitat may consist of a unique
vegetation type or dominant plant species, a described successional stage, or a specific structural
element.
Qualified Professional - A person with experience and training in the pertinent scientific discipline, and
who is a qualified scientific expert with expertise appropriate for the relevant critical area subject
in accordance with WAC 365-195-905(4) A qualified professional must have obtained a B S or
B.A. or equivalent degree in biology, engineering, environmental studies, fisheries,
geomorphology, or related field, and two years of related work experience
A. A qualified professional for habitats or wetlands must have a degree in biology and
professional experience related to the subject species.
B A qualified professional for a geological hazard must be a professional engineer or
geologist, licensed in the state of Washington
- Page 51 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
c
A qualified professional for critical aquifer recharge areas means a hydrogeologist,
geologist, engineer, or other scientist with experience in preparing hydrogeologic
assessments
Reclaimed Water - Municipal wastewater effluent that has been adequately and reliability treated so that
it is suitable for beneficial use Following treatment it is no longer considered wastewater
(treatment levels and water quality requirements are given in the water reclamation and reuse
standards adopted by the state departments of Ecology and Health)
o
Repair or Maintenance - An activity that restores the character, scope, size, and design of a serviceable
area, structure, or land use to its previously authorized and undamaged condition Activities that
change the character, size, or scope of a project beyond the original design and drain, dredge, fill,
flood, or otherwise alter critical areas are not included in this definition
Restoration - Measures taken to restore an altered or damaged natural feature including
A. Active steps taken to restore damaged wetlands, streams, protected habitat, or their
buffers to the functioning condition that existed prior to an unauthorized alteration, and
B Actions performed to reestablish structural and functional characteristics of the critical
area that have been lost by alteration, past management activities, or catastrophic
events
Rills - Steep-sided channels resulting from accelerated erosion A rill is generally a few inches deep and
not wide enough to be an obstacle to farm machinery Rill erosion tends to occur on slopes,
particularly steep slopes with poor vegetative cover
Riparian Habitat - Areas adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contain elements of both
aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems that mutually influence each other The width of these areas
extends to that portion of the terrestrial landscape that directly influences the aquatic ecosystem
by providing shade, fine or large woody material, nutrients, organic and inorganic debris,
terrestrial insects, or habitat for riparian-associated wildlife. Widths shall be measured from the 0
ordinary high water mark or from the top of bank if the ordinary high water mark cannot be
identified It includes the entire extent of the floodplain and the extent of vegetation adapted to
wet conditions as well as adjacent upland plant communities that directly influence the stream
system Riparian habitat areas include those riparian areas severely altered or damaged due to
human development activities
River - See "Watercourse"
Scientific Process - A valid scientific process is one that produces reliable information useful in
understanding the consequences of a decision The characteristics of a valid scientific process
are as follows.
A. Peer Review The information has been critically reviewed by other qualified scientific
experts in that scientific discipline
B Methods. The methods that were used are standardized in the pertinent scientific
discipline or the methods have been appropriately peer-reviewed to ensure their reliability
and validity
C
D
Logical Conclusions and Reasonable Inferences. The conclusions presented are based
on reasonable assumptions supported by other studies and are logically and reasonably
derived from the assumptions and supported by the data presented
Quantitative Analysis. The data have been analyzed using appropriate statistical or
quantitative methods.
Context. The assumptions, analytical techniques, data, and conclusions are
appropriately framed with respect to the prevailing body of pertinent scientific knowledge
References. The assumptions, techniques, and conclusions are well referenced with
citations to pertinent existing information
o
E
F
- Page 52 -
c
c
c
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
Scrub-Shrub Wetland - A wetland with at least thirty percent (30%) of its surface area covered by woody
vegetation less than twenty (20) feet in height as the uppermost strata. I
Section 404 Permit - A permit issued by the U S Army Corps of Engineers for the placement of dredge I
or fill material or clearing in waters of the United States, including wetlands, in accordance with 33 :
USC S 1344 Section 404 permits may also be for endangered species consultation They
require a consultation under Section 7 of the Federal Endangered Species Act.
Seeps - A spot where water oozes from the earth, often forming the source of a small stream.
Seismic Hazard Areas - Areas that are subject to severe risk of damage as a result of earthquake-
induced ground shaking, slope failure, settlement, or soil liquefaction
Significant Portion of its Range - That portion of a species range likely to be essential to the long-term
survival of the population in Washington.
Soil Survey - The most recent soil survey for the local area or county by the National Resources
Conservation Service, U S Department of Agriculture.
Special Flood Hazard Areas - The land in the floodplain within an area subject to a one percent (1 %) or
greater chance of flooding in any given year Designations of special flood hazard areas on flood
insurance map(s) always include the letters A or V
Special Protection Areas - Aquifer recharge areas defined by WAC 173-200-090 that require special i
consideration or increased protection because of unique characteristics, including, but not limited I
to
A.
Ground waters that support an ecological system requiring more stringent criteria than
drinking water standards,
Ground water recharge areas and wellhead protection areas that are vulnerable to
pollution because of hydrogeologic characteristics, and
Sole source aquifer status
B
C
Sole Source Aquifer - See "Aquifer, Sole Source"
Species - Any group of animals classified as a species or subspecies as commonly accepted by the
scientific community
Species, Endangered - Any fish or wildlife species that is threatened with extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of its range and is listed by the state or federal government as an endangered
species.
Species of Local Importance - Those species of local concern due to their population status or their
sensitivity to habitat manipulation, or that are game species
Species, Priority - Any fish or wildlife species requiring protective measures and/or management
guidelines to ensure their persistence as genetically viable population levels as classified by the
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, including endangered, threatened, sensitive,
candidate and monitor species, and those of recreational, commercial, or tribal importance
Species, Threatened - Any fish or wildlife species that is likely to become an endangered species within
the foreseeable future throughout a significant portion of its range without cooperative
management or removal of threats, and is listed by the state or federal government as a
threatened species
Stream - See "Watercourse"
Sub-drainage Basin or Subbasin - The drainage area of the highest order stream containing the subject
property impact area. Stream order is the term used to define the position of a stream in the
hierarchy of tributaries in the watershed. The smallest streams are the highest order (first order)
tributaries. These are the upper watershed streams and have no tributaries of their own When
two first order streams meet, they form a second order stream, and when two second order
- Page 53 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
streams meet they become a third order stream, and so on
Substantial Damage - Damage of any origin sustained by a structure whereby the cost of restoring the 0
structure to its before damaged condition would equal or exceed fifty percent (50%) of the market
value of the structure before the damage occurred
Substantial Improvement - Any repair, reconstruction, or improvement of a structure, the cost of which
equals or exceeds fifty percent (50%) of the market value of the structure either' before the
improvement or repair is started, or if the structure has been damaged and is being restored,
before the damage occurred
Unavoidable - Adverse impacts that remain after all appropriate and practicable avoidance and
minimization have been achieved.
Vulnerability - The combined effect of susceptibility to contamination and the presence of potential
contaminants
Water Table - That surface in an unconfined aquifer at which the pressure is atmospheric. It is defined
by the levels at which water stands in wells that penetrate the aquifer just far enough to hold
standing water
Water Table Aquifer - See "Aquifer, Unconfined"
Water Typing System - Waters classified according to WAC 222-16-031 as follows
A. Type 1 Water - All waters, within their ordinary high-water mark, as inventoried as
"shorelines of the state" under Chapter 90 58 RCW and the rules promulgated pursuant
to Chapter 90 58 RCW, but not including those waters' associated wetlands as defined in
Chapter 90 58 RCW
B Type 2 Water - Segments of natural waters that are not classified as Type 1 Water and
have a high fish, wildlife, or human use These are segments of natural waters and 0
periodically inundated areas of their associated wetlands, which
Are diverted for domestic use by more than one hundred (100) residential or
camping units or by a public accommodation facility licensed to serve more than
ten (10) persons, where such diversion is determined by the Washington State
Department of Natural Resources to be a valid appropriation of water and only
considered Type 2 Water upstream from the point of such diversion for 1,500 feet
or until the drainage area is reduced by fifty percent (50%), or whichever is less,
2. Are diverted for use by federal, state, tribal, or private fish hatcheries Such
waters shall be considered Type 2 Water upstream from the point of diversion for
1,500 feet, including tributaries if highly significant for protection of downstream
water quality;
3 Are within a federal, state, local, or private campground having more than thirty
(30) camping units Provided, that the water shall not be considered to enter a
campground until it reaches the boundary of the park lands available for public
use and comes within one hundred (100) feet of a camping unit;
4 Are used by fish for spawning, rearing or migration Waters having the following
characteristics are presumed to have highly significant fish populations
a. Stream segments having a defined channel twenty (20) feet or greater
within the bankfull width and having a gradient of less than four percent
(4%)
b Lakes, ponds, or impoundments having a surface area of one (1) acre or
greater at seasonal low water; or
Are used by fish for off-channel habitat. These areas are critical to the
maintenance of optimum survival of fish. This habitat shall be identified based on
the following criteria.
5
o
- Page 54 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
o
c
c
a, The site must be connected to a fish bearing stream and be accessible
during some period of the year; and
b The off-channel water must be accessible to fish through a drainage with
less than a five percent (5%) gradient.
Type 3 Water - Segments of natural waters that are not classified as Type 1 or 2 Waters
and have a moderate to slight fish, wildlife, and human use These are segments of
natural waters and periodically inundated areas of their associated wetlands which
1 Are diverted for domestic use by more than ten (10) residential or camping units
or by a public accommodation facility licensed to serve more than ten (10)
persons, where such diversion is determined by the Washington State
Department of Natural Resources to be a valid appropriation of water and the
only practical water source for such users Such waters shall be considered to
be Type 3 Water upstream from the point of such diversion for 1,500 feet or until
the drainage area is reduced by fifty percent (50%), whichever is less, or
2. Are used by fish for spawning, rearing, or migration The requirements for
determining fish use are described in the State Forest Practices Board Manual,
Section 13 If fish use has not been determined'
a. Waters having the following characteristics are presumed to have fish
use
C
Stream segments having a defined channel of two (2) feet or greater
within the bankfull width in Western Washington, or three (3) feet or
greater in width in Eastern Washington, and having a gradient of sixteen
percent (16%) or less,
Stream segments having a defined channel or two (2) feet or greater
within the bankfull width in Western Washington, or three (3) feet or
greater within the bankfull width in Eastern Washington, and having a '
gradient greater than sixteen percent (16%) and less than or equal to !
twenty percent (20%), and having greater than fifty (50) acres in I
contributing basin size in Western Washington or greater than 175 acres
contributing basin size in Eastern Washington, based on hydrographic
boundaries,
iii Ponds or impoundments having a surface area of less than one (1) acre
at seasonal low water and having an outlet to a fish stream, and
IV Ponds of impoundments having a surface area greater than one half
(0 5) acre at seasonal low water
b The Washington State Department of Natural Resources shall waive or
modify the characteristics in (a) of this Subsection where
Waters have confirmed, long-term, naturally occurring water quality
parameters incapable of supporting fish,
ii Snowmelt streams have short flow cycles that do not support successful
life history phases of fish. These streams typically have no flow in the
winter months and discontinue flow by June 1, or
III Sufficient information about a geomorphic region is available to support a
departure from the characteristics in (a) of this Subsection, as
determined in consultation with the Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife, Washington State Department of Ecology, affected tribes, and
interested parties.
Type 4 Water - All segments of natural waters within the bankfull width of defined
channels that are perennial nonfish habitat streams Perennial streams are waters that
D
ii
- Page 55 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Planning Commission Review Draft
May 9, 2005
do not go dry any time of a year of normal rainfall. However, for the purpose of water
typing, Type 4 Waters include the intermittent dry portions of the perennial channel below n
the uppermost point of perennial flow If the uppermost point of perennial flow cannot be '-----/
identified with simple, nontechnical observations (see State Forest Practices Board
Manual, Section 23), then Type 4 Waters begin at a point along the channel where the
contributing basin area is
1 At least thirteen (13) acres in the Western Washington coastal zone (which
corresponds to the Sitka spruce zone defined in Franklin and Dyrness, 1973),
2. At least fifty two (52) acres in other locations in Western Washington, or
3 At least three hundred (300) acres in Eastern Washington
E. Type 5 Waters - All segments of natural waters within the bankfull width of the defined
channels that are not Type 1, 2, 3, or 4 Waters These are seasonal, nonfish habitat
streams in which surface flow is not present for at least some portion of the year and are
not located downstream from any stream reach that is a Type 4 Water Type 5 Waters
must be physically connected by an above-ground channel system to Type 1, 2, 3, or 4
Waters.
Watercourse - Any portion of a channel, bed, bank, or bottom waterward of the ordinary high water line of
waters of the state including areas in which fish may spawn, reside, or through which they may
pass, and tributary waters with defined beds or banks, which influence the quality of fish habitat
downstream This definition includes watercourses that flow on an intermittent basis or which
fluctuate in level during the year and applies to the entire bed of such watercourse whether or not
the water is at peak level This definition does not include irrigation ditches, canals, stormwater
run-off devices, or other entirely artificial watercourses, except where they exist in a natural
watercourse that has been altered by humans.
Wetlands - Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and
duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of
vegetation adapted for life in saturated soil conditions Wetlands generally include swamps,
marshes, bogs, and similar areas Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally
created from non-wetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches,
grass-lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and
landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally
created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway Wetlands may include those
artificial wetlands intentionally created from non-wetland areas to mitigate the conversion of
wetlands For identifying and delineating a wetland, local government shall use the Washington
State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual
o
Wetland Classes, Classes of Wetlands, or Wetland Types - The descriptive classes of the wetlands
taxonomic classification system of the U S Fish and Wildlife Service (Cowardin, et al. 1979)
Wetland Edge - The boundary of a wetland as delineated based on the definitions contained in this
Chapter
o
- Page 56 -
MEMORANDUM
c
c
c
To
From
Date
Subj
City of Yelm
Community Development Department
Yelm Planning Commission -
Grant Beck, Director of Community Development~
April 8, 2005
Critical Areas Update Status
At the upcoming Planning Commission meeting, one of the agenda items is a chance
for the Planning Commission to discuss any comments received on the Critical Areas
Code update during the open house
Based on those comments, the next steps to complete the Critical Areas Code update
need to be discussed Options for how to proceed include
If comments received were fairly minor or technical In nature, the March 18 draft
of the Critical Areas Code update could be considered the hearing draft and the
Planning Commission public hearing can be scheduled for the regular meeting in
May
If the Planning Commission has identified areas of the March 18 draft of the
Critical Areas Code that require additional discussion, research, or redrafting, a
subcommittee of the Commission could be formed to help prepare a heanng draft
of the Code update In this case, it may be necessary to either hold a special
meeting in Mayor hold the public hearing on the Code update in June
I have also included in this packet for the Planning Commissions Information the draft
flood hazard regulations from Thurston County, which is also currently in the process of
updating it's Critical Areas Code This Chapter includes the County's proposed
regulations as they relate to High Groundwater areas I have also included the County
definition of a high groundwater area, as they specifically indicate that accurate
mapping has been a problem
Comments from Wilham A HashIm
~ April 4,2005
~
1 Bottom of Page 2 - The bottom lIne for the protectIOn of cntIcal areas WIll be that no
actIvIty or use shall be allowed that results In a net loss of the functIons or values of
cntIcal areas. How are you gOIng to Implement that gIVen a Walmart and a 1000 home
subdlvlSlon on top of cntIcal aqUIfer recharge areas? It sounds like a full blown SEP A
will be necessary for large developments m Yelm.
2 Page 6 - All reasonable use cntena (a-g) should apply, not one or more.
3 I want to see language about cumulatIve Impacts. For example, If an Impact assessment
of a cntIcal area were based on one house, the Impact would be mlmmal. However, an
Impact of 1000 houses would be dIsastrous. Please place cumulatIve effects language In
these draft ordInances.
4 Page 27 under CntIcal aqUIfer recharge areas-Please add a full range ofhusmess and
development types. It has been shown that household hazardous waste create more
Impact because of the ImpervIOus surfaces than most bUSInesses. How are you gomg to
deal wIth ImpervIOus surface and stormwater runoff m a CARA? What other types of
bUSIness should you address? My suggestIOn IS any that has a parkIng lot, roofs, streets,
and any other Infrastructure that allows stormwater to carry contamInants to a CARA.
c
5 Page 36 FIsh and Wildhfe HabItats - An Independent assessment was done after the
NASCAR fiasco to look at the potentIal for the Thurston HIghlands Area as a speCIal
habItat. The assessment found two plant speCIes that are hsted wIth DNR's Natural
Hentage Program. shore pIne and oak woodland. It would be advantageous for the CIty
ofyelm to survey those areas and set them aSIde NOW wIth a zomng ordInance so that a
developer knows pnor to any permIt apphcatIon.
6 Page 40 and elsewhere - Anywhere there IS language "when the admInIstrator
determmes " please follow wIth "after wntten documentatIOn from staff." ThIS
language WIll guarantee that no pohtIcal deCISIons are made WIth respect to land mIsuse.
7 SInce the CIty admIts that It overlays a cntIcal aqUIfer recharge area and other cntIcal
enVIronments, It would be an advantage to look at a dIverSIty of development types. For
example, low Impact development standards, smart growth standards, alternatIve future
standards, or other development patterns that are condUCIve to IneVItable growth over
senSItIve habItats. It seems to me to be more challengIng for staff and advantageous to
the CIty and ItS CItIzens than typIcal developer proposed developments.
8 ThIS Isn't a bad set of ordInances. Will you be rezomng the CItIes comprehensIve plan to
accommodate the findIngs and ordmances wlthm>
o
Public Comment
City of Yelm
Community Development Department
o
i) c F\ f,,- (\i\f'lrJlN \.:, c.-r!"I.I\~ S ~ ld", :
P\",.\2f1Si:.. )t:..x: (1\'1 /\i\i\<. Ht!) Q ,-\(V\€(,(\~ 4 fJ...(;Y',;J\;{G, r-(tt.~vl::l,':\l..'1
fL.cc:1Jc ~
A (',,€'A- s. . 1.
\C€.
~t _ r- - ~ -. - ("'0."1"'. "-" '( 0
'\\\F l-r~l:i....\,~rnl~ fu':c'l:.!.) Af-'CA,) "",'\1 riA')
f:; ;-). , I
1)'....\:' J
f:.. ( oj , '> ~ t, \,u \ IJ ( \. \J ~ ~ j ,J', E \11l:!1 G {'c v I.- N D V'i A i'f(', t; r- c A ~ t f.-)c..., 8! ;-(', i,H::
L ,\rJ G ,-' ~C: :c l f- \')~ e. tv t (,,'-.1 ( c:C' 2:- {).... i:;)' IV '- '\ r'\ V I' (~t:.<" S i1 t (, \~ L\ r-t. l 'Jf, '" J r-rrt'f'......
,; i\;:"'..;, 'IHt
^ - ....- .. ..-".. ._~ "'- ...-~ -,-
t.-v~__~_.____~._ I I L\.,. ,..-t_ r \: .....t.:: \" ~ ~ .at ')1 \:..
T.- ^
l t: "'-l',
j ^ ...."<. r ."1 ;.0
\ \..<.( Y \ ,oJ::, V '-.rY v L.l'" '~ir, \
I
L';dJ(l~ DclZS r.{:f) l.u.^,f'~E'r\EtJO 1ll1:H (iZv.tl0vJ-\'T'€'11.. Af'-~AS. nrt:
~~VIE:.~ \:'(<...t1fT t;t\:-,>
f -
('J '..; 1
f.) C1 PI....e ~ S
V., I L -+ L: f... L J t ([2'>(.;1 Pr'ftfl- 1'3. V f fO,-
-. l( ," if P 0
D \:,\' E.-~.u / It E' r.f\' T G 1.;'/2, S r.... c. ':, 'if.. i tit!) () t "\:.u f /1 f / J": L~: l rs. . t: T (
1
1-) d t (v'\ 'i c C' fv\!>I\, f f~"\S. 1..J \ '-....... r:; e l~n f f\; \...
\ ;0
-1 c. \S(L
\2.-c.VlI2W
,:--(- (-d'~
..... \
DA\J1. 0
Name
G i ~11.\d G-
POI!;' \11<1
Address
f-:A' , fJ'l tit,' v1 IT <i g )"/ G
~ I would like to receive email updates regarding the Cntlcal Areas Update
f... c, b l ~ + (i.; 1"-,1 c-\ tf e. eel'.'\,
I
email address
o
c
c
c
Frequently Flooded Areas
The designation of frequently flooded areas In the Cntlcal
Areas Code Draft IS based solely on the FEMA Flood Insurance Map
for Yelm I viewed the map recently, and It did not match what I've
seen dunng floods of recent years So I decided to learn more about
the flood Insurance rate maps Most of the following information I
retreived directly from FEMA's own web site, at fema gov
It turns out that the Flood Insurance Rate Maps are out of date-
by FEMA's own admiSSion Yelm's flood map IS part of the 700/0 of all
FEMA maps that are at least 5 years old The onglnal Nlsqually flood
map was computer modeled In 1982 The technology used In that
map predicted we would only get a flood the magnitude of the 1996
Nlsqually flood once every 300 years The reality is, Thurston County
has been declared a federal disaster area for flooding 11 times since
1972 That's an aV8r8a~ UI Ufle fibodlna disaster p.vp.rv ~ VP::4r~
-- . .. - - ., ./ - -.. -
So there's been a need to advance the sCience of Identlfymg
and mitigating flood hazards In this area of Washington, beyond just
meeting minimal federal requirements that are In place FEMA IS
trying to catch up, but admits they won't be able to Issue the next
generation In flood map technology for the Yelm area until 2009, due
to funding constraints
Furthermore, FEMA has realized that they will never catch up,
Without receiving cooperation and assistance from local authOrities In
IdentifYing flood hazard areas
Gone IS the attitude of the past, where FEMA developed the
map and the local authorities had to abide by It. For the last several
years, FEMA has Instead been offering incentives to local
governments that contribute what they know about local flood
hazards, In exchange for lowered flood insurance premiums The
vehicles for this synergistic process are the Cooperatlnq Technical
Communities and the Community Ratinq System The Cooperating
Technical Community is a partnershIp where, once a local authonty
meets baSIC technical and sCientific cntena, they become fully
Integrated Into FEMA's flood hazard mapping process ThiS program
prOVides the opportunity to Interject a tailored, local focus Into a
national program, thus where unique conditions may eXist, the
special approaches to flood hazard Identification that may be
necessary can be taken
The Community Rating System rewards communities that are
dOing more than meeting the minimum National Flood Insurance 0
Program reqUirements, to help their citizens prevent or reduce losses
from floods The Community Rating System provides inCentives, in
the form of reduced flood Insurance premiums, to participating
authontles that manage,among other things, areas of flood hazard
that are not mapped In the National Flood Insurance Plan maps
Credit towards reduced premiums IS given to activitIes that provide
Increased flood hazard protectIon against new development Such
actIvIties Include providing additional flood hazard data than what IS
shown on the present FEMA map, and mapping floodplains based on
sCientific techniques that exceed FEMA's gUidelines It IS FEMA's
desire to be supportive of those communities that would like to
Implement stncter land use regulations, to reduce the loss of property
and life
In t"'V"\\. .....""'",....""... I......"...........,,.._~.___ 1 l-_..__ ...1.___..____1 J,t__.L""rI_..__.L.-._
III lilY I~""'~II~ II I v 0;:;;;:) II \.l 0 lIVI I;:), I lIave UI~'-'VVCIl;::U lllCH IIIUI::>lUII
County Government IS the clear leader In this part of Washington for
advancing the sCience of flood hazard Identification Thurston Co
has been a Cooperating Technical Partner wIth FEMA since 2003,
and enrolled In the Community Rating Service since 2000 Thurston
Co was the first local authonty In the nation to achieve Class 5
status from FEMA. According to FEMA statIstics, Thurston County's 0
expertise puts it in the top 30/0 of all participants In the Community
Rating System Class 5 status entities landowners In special flood
hazard areas of unlcorporated Thurston County to a 25% discount on
flood Insurance Currently Yelm landowners on eqUivalent sites are
not entitled to any discount. The City of Yelm IS not presently enrolled
In the Community Rating System or the Cooperating Technical
Partnerships
Thurston County has aggressively mapped flood plain areas,
including known areas not on the FEMA map, and adopted new flood
regulations and programs supported by FEMA. A highlight of this
program are the High Groundwater Area Maps The maps show
areas near rivers, that flood approximately when the rivers flood, but
are not VISIbly connected to a river or stream at the surface level
These areas can be filled by a nver or stream at the sub-surface
level As such, the computer modeling necessary to simulate the
underlymg sOils and then predict floodmg In these areas IS far beyond
the capabilities of FEMA's computer programs Thus, high
groundwater areas do not appear on the flood Insurance maps since
the computer can't accept the data yet Nevertheless, these areas 0
'l:\~;':\t ft:,;,:, ',~-. ~ :~ ;',' ~"~J
o
exist and they have been photographed & verified For the forseeable
future, these flood hazard areas will have to be manually mapped, as
Thurston County has done
The next Critical Areas Code needs to comprehend future
condItions as best as possible The established vehicle for achieving
thIs is to use best available science As concerns frequently flooded
areas, the best available and nationally recognized sCience IS coming
from Thurston County I therefore recommend that the Planning
Commission adopt the Thurston County High Groundwater Area
Map, as applicable for section 1408 120 of the Critical Areas Code I
would also recommend Planning CommiSSion review of the Thurston
County 2005 Draft for their Critical Areas Code, In particular their "no
development zones" and "restricted development zones" associated
with high groundwater areas The work has already been done and
supported by FEMA In fact the next map Yelm will get In 2009 will be
',",,",110,..1 h" ccr.,,^ h,,+ Thll......+...."" ("""...+" ..,,11 h" +h" ,..I..,,,.,,,,,.., f.,.....,......... h.....h,...,.J
,..............'" ...,,~~~":-'Yl!-..\, ~~~~~!,,''''''3~~1 '-,~....~"'" HY ~~Ylll 1.1<"; ~II"'" \.4~~,y.~~!~ IVI'-'o.;;; 1J<:J1_'"IY
it as a Cooperating Technical Community A minimalist approach to
flooding and do nothing strategy will not help Yelm be prepared for
the future A reactive approach to flooding disasters Instead of a
proactive approach would certainly not be viewed as employmg best
available sCience
c
U.- ." ~--
. ~ i(t ~ :~-').< .!.J-'f'J/'-----<
- '-' .-~ ...C 6
'J) A v\ 1:> b \ E"f-,\N (-
c
II/P
J..I,)\:. NrI t' I U\ v
r LLU\) r' f) LJ)\'--l., ()
tl\\"- Il.l.tt fV\A \'
IV\U L \ I - 'i - ~T' ^/ " f:J'I r-f( E f-..-Cl
.~ flCC\J -1-/"_
i)i(,III1L
. f- N~i.;..) I
\) \iC)) (;N Co
r (2..c
, \......l'''''
'-
.- , )
;{~~ FEMA
~'>:~
American Samoa
Diu,.., '"
Ologega
<J"'" .
TutUlts
Guam & The
Northern Marianas
Salpan
I
Tinlanq
....... d Rota
.......
~uam ............
Alaska
~
Hawaii
,0
-........
~~~
.v
Puert(~~ico and
The V r!)in ISlandS." ....".,..
<-~ Virgin
'" L._~ -=- ~nd'
Pu~ rt,) Rico
/'.
Adopted
FY09
Previously
Adopted
f\
"----./
04080
r,"iIOO'''l
100 240 320{'\
U
J
I Area Conic
. a Albers Equa -
. . North AmerJc Tool
Projeclton, MA Sequencing
Data Source' FE ~
U
MHIP
"
l---
--~ ---
___~0i________._,.__~____ _._.___w____._..__....__.
,
~~~)4~Wl,
Executive Summary J
- . -- ._-~._-- - --'"'- -_.._~. . ."---- '~_..-.. ---7 "rv
--
-~-
c
~ :' ~l
Table ES-2. Planned Funding Levels by Region, FY04-FY08
Region FY04 Funding FY05 Funding FY06 Funding FYOi Fund;ng FY05 Fundir,g
1 54 440 [Inn S5 222. 000 85 661 nOD S~I 227 fino ~I';_~
2 59 4?~O ClU() $11 376 000 S12087 000 $1244 " C;( I ~, 1'! 4~1 i<ifl
3 $10030000 $12.0Cj6000 S 12852000 $13230 (MI $1 Jl2.u QI1(j
.1 $29 82,0 000 $35 856 000 $38 087 000 ~32.21::. 5(11.1 $.,(; ~1 50Ci
...
5 $14.280000 $17 1360no $182070no $18 7 J 2. '>C',i $18 ';t.iLjP(i
6 $21 000 000 $25.200.00U ~26.i75 :)OU l1")-- :;'1" r) 'inn ~ ~ !)~:'L..5('ii J
;v,~ ..AI,,: ,,iI,,
7 SP. 400 000 $10 080 OOG 5.10 7100CiO $11 tJ":::, OC!d 1.; 1 :J,~r} nOt!
'- --
& 55 6~O 00(1 (',. 76S 000 $7 iq1 OO~~ ~C2.::-rJi\ _I
,))') '" , .\ ,:. 1....,_1
? $12 i2D 000 $i454': GOO ~.15 as] 000 S'IE 'JOY "iV~ ~1h, .ii (ji I
-:.'j.
10 J.4 680 GOO 55 G16 000 55967 uuu 56 'i42.5Qn .:.'.) <' cr.c.\
''i.."p! .
Total $120000.000 $144,000.000 $153000,000 $157,500000 1157500 000
MHIP Identifies Current DFIRM Production Progress
ivlap Moderl11zatlon tloOli study projects are already In progress. FEMA IS monItorIng the on~oll1g
actl\ ities related to these projects. including digItal flood insurance rate map (Dr I Rr\f) production
and adoptIon. The MHIP prOVIdes information on the status of flood stud\ projects funded by
F'r 03 and FY04 dollars. Future MHIP updates \\Iil provide the status of projects funded by dollars
from F,\'05 and later years
c
Through the end of FY04 significant study efforts (tor 925 counties) have been funded FEtvI.A has
dIstrIbuted preliminary DFlRMs to communities in 207 counties COmll1Unltles in 104 counties
have adopted the final. effective DFI RMs. A II of these maps w IiI meet the standards establ ished b}
FE 1\.1 A. at the ti me the stud ies \\ ere funded. Some maps \\ ere al ready comp \eted and adopted be fore
FEMA developed the enhanced standards defined in sectlon 7 of this document. FEMA IS currenth
assessi ng ongoIng studies/maps that can be easi Iy unproved to meet the enhanced standards
Section of FY04 Production Report. provides additionalll1formatlon on OF I Rf\1 productiun and
adoption statistics.
MHIP Provides Mechanism for Forecasting and Sequencing DFIRM
Production
FEMA has forecasted map productIon lor flood maps funded through FYOS and completed through
F'\ 10 <production may taJ...e up to 2 years to complete) uSll1g data c()mpIled by FEt\.fA s RegIOnal
Offices. contractors. and other mappll1g partners. FEMA \vill review and update this data regularly
at the regional level and \\'I11 compile and evaluate the data at the national level The~.e regular
reviews WIll help FEMA evaluate its effectiveness 111 meetll1g Map !\.1oclernlzation production goals
and report on current progress. Section 5 FY05-FY 10 Production Forecast. otTers a detailed
deSCrIption of FEMA s process tor sequencing of tlood study projects to meet national goals and
provide reliable digital tlood hazard data for the Nation. Appendh. A shows the planned fi~,cal yedr
c
November 2004
E5-7
c
c
o
PRELIMINARY DRAFT
AMENDMENTS TO THE CRITICAL AREAS REGULATIONS
TCC 17 1 5.700
3/6/05
FLOODING AND CHANNEL MIGRATION HAZARDS
Note:
Plam text = eXIstmg regulatIon
Strike through = proposed deletIon to eXIstmg regulatIons
Underlme = proposed addItIon
Italic = staff comment
17 15 700
1715 710
17 15 720
1715 730
1 7 15 740
Purpose~
Apphcabihty
Approvable uses and actIvItIes
Standards for allowed uses and actIvItIes
S pectal reports
17 15 700 Purpose~. It IS the pohcy of Thurston County to accomphsh the followmg: The purposes
of thIS SectIon are as follows.
A. To IdentIfymg areas affected by natural floodmg and stream channel mIgratIon and mmImIze
the amount of development at nsk m such areas m order to protect human hfe and safety;
mmImIze damage to homes and places of bus mess, mInImIZe busmess mterruptIOns, aVOId or
mmImIze damage to pubhc facIhtIes and utIhtIes such as water and gas mams, electnc,
telephone and sewer lmes, roads and bndges, and to mmImIze the expendIture ofpubhc funds
for flood control prolects. rescue and rehef efforts, and repair of flood damage.
B To preserve natural flood control by retammg the capacIty offloodways to pass floodwaters
and assocIated debns and bv retammg the capacIty of floodplams to store flood waters.
stonU'.vater storage and drainage or stream flmv patterns,
C To restnct structures, facIlItIes, flood loss reductIon measures, gradmg, dredgmg, fillIng and
other development m areas sublect to floodmg that could mcrease flood heIghts or velocItIes.
(Adaptedfrom Floodplain Management. Higher RegulatolY Standards, FEMA Region 10,
2002 )
D
To control protect the quahty of water sustammg humans, fish, and manne shellfish, and
wIldhfe by aVOIdmg or mInImIzmg sIltatIOn and pollutIOn assocIated WIth floodmg by and by
prohibItmg or restnctmg uses m flood prone areas floodplams that pose sIgnIficant nsks to
water quahty tfwhen they are mundated. flooded and mamtam stream flows and stream
1
qualIty
E.
To mInImIZe dIsruptIOn of stream channel mIgratIon that forms fish and wIldlIfe habItat by
mInImIZIng streambank stabIlIzatIOn and constructIon of new structures that would be affected
by stream channel mIgratIOn.
o
F To maIntaIn the lInkages of the stream to the nutnent reserves In Its floodplaInS. (AdaptedJrom
Floodplal11 Management, Higher Regulatory Standards, FEMA ReglOn 10,2002)
To protect wetlands streams and fish or shellfish beanng ',vaters from turbIdIty and pollutIOn
and to maIntmn the assOCIated ',vildlIfe habItat; and
1715710
ApplIcabilIty
A. RIver, Lake, and Manne Flood Hazard Areas. TCC SectIOns 17.15 700-740 apply to all nver,
lake and coastal flood hazard areas wIthIn unIncorporated Thurston County IdentIfied on Flood
Insurance Rate Maps prepared by the Federal Insurance AdmInIstratIOn, as supplemented by
"The Flood Insurance Study for Thurston County," dated November 17, 1980, as amended.
( these maps and the referenced report shall be on tIle at the Ihurston County Development
ServIces Department).
B.
HIgh Ground Water Flood Hazard Areas. TCC SectIons 17.15.700-740 applIes to hIgh
ground water flood hazard areas as depIcted on the map entItled "High Ground water Flood
Hazard Areas," and aSSOCIated "No Development" and "Restncted Development" zones (see
SubsectIOn 17.15.730 E). A copy of thIS map shall be on file wIth the Thurston County
Development ServIces Department.
o
1 Map updatIng.
a. The DIrector of the Development ServIces Department rOption Water and
Waste Management Departmentl or hlslher deSIgnee shall penodlcalIy reVIew
and, as warranted, amend the HIgh Ground water Flood Hazard Areas Map to
reflect aVaIlable InfOrmatIOn that more accurately IdentIfies the areas sublect to
floodIng.
b. Prolect applIcants and landowners who dIspute the accuracy of the HIgh
Ground Water Flood Hazard Areas Map may submIt to the Development
ServIces Department an applIcatIOn for a map amendment and supportIng
InformatIon that IdentIfies the extent of the floodIng on the sublect property.
1.
Pnor to submIttIng an applIcatIOn for a map reVISIOn, the proponent
shall meet WIth the approval authonty who WIll IdentIfy the speCIfic
data and analYSIS that must be submItted WIth the applIcatIon. ThIS may
Include, but IS not lImIted to, detaIled topographIC maps, surface
draInage patterns IncludIng culvert and dItch locatIOns, hydrogeologIcal
and hydraulIc modelIng, statIstIcal or mathematIcal analYSIS, and other
data necessary to evaluate the applIcant's request.
o
TCC 17 15700
2
Draft: 03/06/05
I'l-~;':.I~,.; ',\.\
'"' "I ./,'. r'~'"
i' ~, .
;i,:;;'i'yjWl;
II.
All reqUIred hydrological studies shall be prepared by an engmeenng
geolOgIst or professIOnal engmeer lIcensed m the State ofWashmgton
With demonstrated expenence:' as appropnate, m hydrologic,
hydrogeologIc and hydraulIc analYSIS.
o
Ill. Notice regardmg any proposed map amendment shall be sent to property
owners m the VICInIty of the subJect sIte, as specIfied m Section
20.60.020 (2)( d ) (withm 300 feet in urban growth areas and witlun 500
feet outside of urban grOl1!th areas), and others that would be dIrectly
affected by the map amendment, as determmed by the approval
authonty. People recelvmg notice shall be gIVen twenty days to proVIde
relevant mformatIon for consIderatIOn by the approval authonty, i
consistent With SectIOn 20.60.020, and to request a publIc heanng m '
wntmg. If anyone submits a wntten request for a publIc heanng wlthm
the specified comment penod. the Development Service Department
shall refer the request for a map amendment to the Heanng Exammer for
a publIc heanng and decIsIOn, consistent With Chapter 20.60. '
IV.
The-approvai ai.lth6ntVshaii evahiate the mf6ITriatIOn submmed by the
applIcant, any member of the publIc, and all other avaIlable, relevant
mformatIOn. The approval authonty may consult, as necessary, With
technIcal experts, such as a hydroQeologlst or engIneenng geoloQlst
lIcensed In the State ofWashmgton. Such expects shall be hIred at the
applIcant's expense Based on thIS evaluation, the approval authonty
shall revise the HIgh Ground water Flood Hazard Areas Map If
warranted.
c
v. COPIes of all deCISIOns regardmg map amendments shall be maIled to the
applIcant and all members of the publIc who commented on the proposed
amendment or requested a COpy of the deCISIon. (DeCISIOns regardmg
map amendments may be appealed pursuant to Chapter 20.60.)
(Staff comment: The maps of high ground water hazard areas have been found
to be inaccurate in some mstances The proposed provision above proVIdes a
mechanism to challenge and correct mapping errors)
C. Channel MIgratIOn Hazard Areas.
1.:.
Mapped channel mIgratIOn hazard areas. TCC SectIOns 17.15.700-740 applIes to 100-
year channel mIgratIOn hazard areas dePIcted on the map entItled "Channel MIgratIon
Hazard Areas" on file With the Development ServIces Department. The Development
ServIces Department shall penodlcally update the map as the county delIneates or
accepts delineatIOns of 1 OO-year channel mIgration hazard areas pursuant to SubsectIon
17.15.710 C (2). (Staff comment: This map does not exist at present Under tIllS
approach, the county lVould map channel migration hazards as funding penn its and
compile the delineations prepared by applicants pursuant to this Section/
c
TCC 17 15700
3
Draft: 03/06/05
a.
If an applIcant or landowner dIsputes the accuracy of the Channel MIgratIon
Hazard Areas Map, they may submIt an applIcatIOn for a map amendment and
supportmg mformatIOn to the Development ServIces Department.
o
b Pnor to submIttmg an applIcatIon for a map reVISIon, the proponent shall meet
wIth the approval authonty who WIll IdentIfy the specIfic data and analysIs that
must be submItted wIth the applIcatIon, consIstent WIth SubsectIOn 17.15.710 C
(2) below The reqUIred data must be prepared by a qualIfied professIOnal
proficIent m fluVIal geomorphology (1 e., a person who possesses a graduate
degree m Geology or PhYSIcal Geography wIth speclahzatIon m fluvIal
geomorphology and has at least two years of professIOnal expenence).
c Ad]acent property owners shall be notIfied consIstent WIth SubsectIOn 17 15.710
B (1) (b) (m).
d The approval authorIty shall evaluate the mformatIon submItted by the
applIcant. any member of the publIc, and all other avaIlable, relevant
mformatIOn. The approval authorIty mav consult, as necessary, wIth a qualIfied
protessIOnal prohcient m tluvlal geomorphology ~uch consuitatIOn shall be at
the applIcant's expense. Based on thIS analYSIs. the approval authOrIty wIll
modIfy the Channel MIgratIon Hazard Areas Map If warranted.
e.
Comes of all deCISIOns regardmg map amendments shall be maIled to the
applIcant and all members of the publIc who commented on the proposed
amendment or requested a copy of the deCISIon. (DeCISIOns regardIng map
amendments may be appealed pursuant to Chapter 20.60.)
o
L Unmapped channel mIgratIon hazard areas. If the approval authOrIty detenmnes that a
proposed used along Type Sand F streams (now Type 1-3 streams) IS WIthIn an hlstonc
channel mIgratIon zone, based on reVIew oflIdar Imagery or aerIal photography, and the
100-year channel mIgratIon hazard area has not been mapped, the approval authonty
shall reqUIre the apphcant to determme If the 100~year channel mIgratIOn hazard area IS
on the SIte and. If so, IdentIfy ItS locatIon.
a. The determmatIOn as to whether the 100-year channel mIgratIOn hazard area
affects the subject property and, If so, ItS locatIOn shall be based on the findmgs
of a QualIfied profeSSIOnal profiCIent m flUVIal geomorphology USIng a relIable
methodology to detenmne channel mIgratIOn accepted by the Development
ServIces Department (e.g" as described m Forest PractIces Board Manual,
Standard Methods for IdentIfymg Channel MIgratIon Zones and Bankfull
Channel Features, dated 8/2001, as amended. or as described m "A Framework
for Delmeatmg Channel MIgratIOn Zones." Washmgton Department of
Ecology, 2003, as amended). Maps delIneatmg the 100-year channel mIgratIOn
hazard area shall be of a scale and format speCIfied by the Development
ServIces Department.
b
The followmg areas shall be conSIdered outSIde of the 100-year channel
mIgratIOn hazard area.
o
TCC 17 15700
4
Draft: 03/06/05
f\
o
o
"c~;il!;~'\4;,rt~t.~~f~':Fl~\fri!' J,"\'_~i, ~f' ~~: :'MS~~";~t~~L
1.
Areas separated from the stream channel by a legally establIshed
structure that the approval authonty, In consultatIon wIth a quahfied
prOfeSSIOnal, determInes ~Ill 'block channel mIgratIOn. ThIS may
Include, but IS not hmltedto, dIkes, levees, and pubhc roads that extend
above the 100-year flood elevatIon that are constructed to remaIn Intact
through a 100-year flood. ConstraInts to channel mIgratIon that do not
extend above the 100-year flood elevatIon do not necessarily restnct
channel mIgratIon and shall not be consIdered to hmlt channel mIgratIon
unless demonstrated otherwIse based on techmcal InformatIon. (Adapted
from WAC 173-26-221(3))
11. Areas separated from the stream channel by a geOlOgIC feature, such as a
rock outcrop, that the approval authonty determInes, In consultatIon wIth
a quahfied professIOnal, wIll stop channel mIgratIOn.
:\ny person seeking to determIne whether a proposed actIvIty or an area IS subject to
hIgh ground water flood hazard area regulatIons may request a determInatIOn from the
reYleW authorIty as described In SectIOns 17.15..1..lli1. and 17.16.875. (Addressed in
S"ectlon j 7-j 5 4UU) _n_____ ----
17.15. 860Speclal management areas HIgh ground water flood hazard areas resource
map. The reqUIrements of SectIOn 17.15.865 shall apply to lands depIcted on the
resource map entItled "High Ground \Vater Flood Hazard .^~reas Resource Map." .^.
copy of thIS map shall be on file v:Ith the Thurston County Development SerVIces
Department.
17 15720 Approvable uses and actIVItIes. Table 7-1 IdentIfies the land uses and actIVItIes that are
allowable In flood hazard areas (l.e., 100-year floodplaIns. floodways. hIgh ground water hazard areas,
and coastal flood hazard areas) and 100-year channel mIgratIon hazard areas. All land uses and
actIVItIes not allowed by Table 7-1 and/or the ShorelIne Master Program for Thurston RegIOn, as
amended, are prohibIted wIthin the flood and channel mIgratIon hazard areas regulated by thIS SectIon.
2
1.
2.
3.
4
5.
6.
C 7
These allowable uses and actIVItIes are sublect to.
The standards In SectIon 17 15.730,
The apphcable prOVISIons of thIS Chapter, see SectIon 17.15.820, RlPanan HabItat Areas,
The provlSlons ofTCC Chapter 14.38, Development In Flood Hazard Areas,
The reqUIrements of the apphcable zomng dIstnct;
The ShorelIne Master Program for the Thurston RegIOn, as amended,
Chapter 15.05 TCe. The Drainage DeSIgn and ErosIon Control Manual for Thurston County, as
amended, and
All other apphcable county, state, and federal regulatIons.
TCC 17 15700
5
Draft: 03/06/05
'0;;
Floodways tOO-year Channel High Ground Coastal
Floodplains Migration water Flood
Hazard Areas Hazard Hazard
Areas/RDZ Areas
Emeroencies
Emergency response \l (A,B) \l (A,B) \l (A,B) \l (A,B) \l (A,B)
Agricultural Activities
EXIStlllg and ongomg agnculture e (see SectIOn e (see Section ]7 15 !..-( see Section e !.
(e.li!., hortIculture activities inc1udmg 17 ]5 870, 870) ] 7 ] 5 870)
tillIng, dlsclng, planting, seeding, Important Habitats
harvesting, preparing soiL rotatinli! and Species)
crops and related activities}
New agncultural actIvItIes X ~(A,K, also see Y(A, K, also see ! e
Section 17 15 870) SectIOn 17 15 870)
ConversIOn from a low mtenslty e (A, also see e (A, also see ~(A, also see \l e
agncultural uses to a hwh llltenslty Section 17 15 870) Section 17 15 870) SectIOn 17 15 870)
mmcultural use
Ponds for livestock watering or rmsmg -e- X -e- X X -e- X ~
ii~;l. abu :Sl:C Ii~il iluicilt:'IIt:'~ - -
Drainaoe Ditches
Dramage ditch mamtenance-a€tWe ~ !...(C, see Section !...( see Section ] 7 ] 5 !...( see Section !...( see SectIOn !...(see Section
dt5ffi€.t ~ 17 IS 870) 870 1715 870 ] 7 15870). 17 IS 870)
ConstructIon of al!ricuItural X \l (A, also see Y (A, also see \l (A) -eX
dramage dItches Section 17 15 870) SectIon] 7 ] 5 870)
RoadslRailroads
Repair and mallltenance of e (A, C, also see e (A, also see SectIOn !. (A, also see e (A, E also !.
roads/raIlroad SectIOn] 7 15 870) 17 ] 5 870) Section ] 7 15 870) see Section
17]5 870)
Replacement of lawfully ~ (A, C, also see y. (A, also see Y (A, also see ! !.
establIshed roads/railroads withm Section] 7 15 870) Section 17 15 870) SectIOn 17 IS 870)
mamtamed, improved (paved or
ratlroad tracks) road nghts-of-way,
easements. or railroad pnsm
ExpanSIOn of roads \l (A,C,D, F also y. (0, F, see Section Y (A,F also see Y(A,E, F) Y(A,F)
see SectIOn 17 15 1715 870) SectIOn 17 ] 5 870)
870)
Construction of new roads \l (A,C,D F, also \l (A,D,F also see Y (A,D,F also see y"'(A, D,E, F, ~(A,D,G)
mcludmg pnvate access {leH see SectIOn ] 7 ] 5 Section] 7 15 870) Section 17 ] 5 870) G)
ulllmpro';ed_n;hts of way 870)
I 5;1. 5;1.
Mamtenance or repair ofbndge or \l (A, C, also see \l (A, also see Section y. (A, also see !. !...,(A, also see
culvert Section 17 15 870) 1715870) Section 17 15.870) SectIOn 17 15
870)
Replacement or expansIOn of \l (A,C, D, also see \l (A, D, also see Y (A, 0, also see !. Y( A, D, also
bndge or culvert Section 17 15 870) SectIOn 17 15 870) Section 17 15 870) see Section
1715870)
ConstructIon of a new bndge or \l (A, C, 0, F,G, \l (A,D, f,G, also see y. (A,D,G, also see y"'(A,E,F) Y.iA,D, also
culvert also see Section Section 17 15 870 ) Section] 7 15.870) see SectIOn
17 15.870 ) 17 ] 5 870)
Table 7-1
Allowable Uses and Activities in Flood and Channel Mioration Hazard Areas
o
o
. =
LEGEND
Permitted, subject to apphcable standards
Permitted subject to County review and approval under thiS Chapter
Prohibited
ApplIcable requirement under Section 17 15 730
o
\l=
x=
(A-ZZ) =
TCC 17 15700
6
Draft: 03/06/05
j i. J. ': 1
o
Floodways tOO-year Channel Hi!!.h Ground Coastal
Floodplains Mh!ration water Hazard Flood
Hazard Areas/RDZ Hazard
Areas Areas
Utilities I
I
Mamtenance, repaIr. or replacement of . . . . . I
utilItIes
UtilIty facilIty X V (A) X V(A,E,G) V I
Construction of new utilIty transmission V (A,C, also see V (A, also V (A,E, G) I
. (see Section I
lines, utilIty comdors, outsIde of eXlstmg Section 17 15 870) 17 15 870) see Section I
Improved roads and utilIty comdors- 17 15 870)
InstallatIon of new utilIty lInes and V (A, C also see V (A, also see V (A, also V (A,E,G also see V ({\, also
facilIties in improved roads and utilIty SectIon 17 15 Section see SectIOn SectIOn see I
comdors 870) 17 15.870) 17 15.870) 17 15.870) SectIon
17 15.870)
InstallatIon of utilIty seIVlce lines . (see SectIOn . . . .
I
17 15 870)
Recreation. Trails Water Access
PassIve and low Impact outdoor . (See Section . (See Section . (See Section . .
recreatIon actiVItIes (e.g.. bird watching, 17 15 870 (K)) 17 15 870 (K)) 1715 870
ABArRBtBriZ:8 boating, bicyclin~, ca~oeing, tishing. IK" .., ..
hlKmg, horseback riding. hunting. jogging.
photography swimming. and similar activities).
ConstructIOn of new trails trails/paths, V (A,C, F,G also V (A,G, also see V (A, G, also Y-(A,E,F,G) Y-(A,G,
elevated walkways, and associated see Section 17 15 Section 17 IS 870 see Section also see
facilIties- (interpretative site and viewmg 870 (K)) (K)) 17 IS 870 Section
platfonn) (K)) 17 IS 870
(K)))
ActIve recreatIOn facilItIes (e.g., swimmmg ~X V (A, G, also see V (A, G, also Y-(A,D,E,F,G, J) Y-(A,G,
access, public and private parks. day camps and Section 17 IS 870 see Section also see
campmg sites not including cabins) (K)) 17 IS 870 Section
(K)) 1715 870
, (K))
Mamtenance of publIc park facilItIes, . . . . .
traIls and developed recreatIon areas.
PedestrIan path or ConstructIOn of hand V (A, C, also see V (A, also see V (A, also see X V (A, See
launch boat sIte Section 17 15 870) Section 17 15 870) Section 17 15 Section
870) 17 15 870)
StaIr tower, staIrway or mechamcal 11ft ~X V (A, C, also see X X 'V (A, See
Section 17 15870) SectIOn
17 15 870)
Boat ramp or marIne railway and J;lX 'V (A, also see 'V (A, also see X 'V (A, See
associated vehIcle access Section 17 15 870) SectIOn I 7 15 Section
870) 1715870)
d'~i I
o
. =
LEGEND
PermItted, subJect to applIcable standards
PermItted subject to County revIew and approval under thIs Chapter
ProhibIted
Applicable reqUIrement under Section 17 15 730
V=
X
(A-ZZ) =
c
TCC 17 15700
7
Draft: 03/06/05
Floodways ] OO-year Channel High Ground Coastal II
Floodplains Migration water Hazard Flood
Hazard Areas Areas/RDZ Hazard
Areas
Structures and Accessorv Uses
Mamtenance or repair to nonconfonmng Y-(A,C,L) !JA,L) !....<A,L) !JA,E,G, L) !JA,L)
structure or associated use.
Agncultural buIldmg (not mcluomg X y (A,F,G, also .!.... (A,F,G,K) Y (A,E, F,G,K) X
farmhouses) see Section 17 15
870)
AlteratIon or expansIon of a Y-tA,C, L) Y-(A,L,N) Y-tA,L,N) Y-tA,E,G, J,L) Y-(A,L, J,
nonconformmg structure or appurtenance N)
co. _. C~_,1
IntenSIficatIOn of a nonconfonmng use X v (A,P) v (A,P) v (A, E, J K, P) v(A,P)
Replacement ofnonconformmg structure X v (A,N,a) Y (A,M,a) v (A, E,O) .YJ&.D
co -.- C~_:L reSIdence
Smgle family Construction of pnmarv X v (A,G, a) Y (A,G,a) Y-(A,E,G, 0) Y (A,GJ,O)
structures and associated reSIdence,
boathouse, decks, garages, and
~rrllrtf'nilnt ~tmrhlrf'~ on If'O"ill1ot~ of
record and lots m subdIVIsions
prelImmanlv approved prior to [the
effective date olthis ordinance7
ConstructIOn of accessory structures ~ v (A.G. M) (see Y (A,G,M) Y (A,E, G,M) Y
Section 17.15.870) (A,G.J,M)
MaIntenance or repair of an on-site YeA, S) Y (A, S) .!....(A, S) . (A,S) .!....(A, S)
sewage disposal system or dram field,
weB/pump (
ConstructIOn of a new well X v (A, S) X X X
SubdIVIsIons v (A,C,Q.R) v(A,Q) v (A.Q) v (A,E,Q) v (A,Qj
Cntlcal facll1tles--see Table [7] X ~X X ~X X
Public faCIlity except schools X ~X X ~X X
Public proiect of slgl1lficant Imoortance ~ ~X X ~X X
Stormwater Facilities
Maintenance/repair of a stonnwater Y-.- CA, T, also . (A,T, also see . (A,T , also see . .
conveyance system or detention/treatment see Section Section [7 [5.870) Section
faCIlIty [7 [5.870) 17 [5870)
ConstructIOn of stormwater ~X v (A,G,T also see v (A, G,T also v (A,G,T) ~
retention/treatment facihty Section [7 [5 870) see SectIOn
17 t 5 870)
ConstructIOn of temporary sediment ~X ~-.- (A,G,T ,also Y,(A, G,T, also Y-(A,G,T) y,(A,a,T)
control ponds see Section [7 [5 see SectIOn
.870) 17 [5.870)
ConstructIOn of surface water conveyance Y-(A, c,a, T, also Y-(A, a,T, also see Y,(A, a,T also Y-(A,G,T) Y-(A,a,T)
system see Section Section 17 [5 870) see SectIon
17 [5870) ]715870)
~
J
. =
LEGEND
Permitted, subject to applIcable standards
Penmtted subject to County review and approval under this Chapter
Prohibited
Apphcable reqUIrement under Section 17 15 730
o
v=
X
(A-ZZ) =
TCC 17 15700
8
Draft: 03/06/05
<'r:~"
,;&1
c
Floodways 100-year Channel High Coastal
Floodplains Migration Ground FloQd
Hazard Areas water Hazard
Hazard Ar~as
Areas/RDZ I
Vegetation Removal and
Maintenance
Forestry - Non conversIOn Class IV forest X V' (A,H) Y-(A,H) (See Y,(A,H) V' (A)
oractice 17 15 870).
VegetatIOn removal for enhancement Y-(A, I, also see . (A,I, also see Y-(A,I, also see
proiects 1715870) 17 15 870) 17 15.870)
Cleanng and gradmg/tnnber harvest In V' (A, G, also see Y-(A, G, also see Y-(A, G,H also see Y-(A, G, also Y-(A, G,
COll1unctlon with a development pr01ect 1715870 17 15 870) 17 15.870) see 17 15 870) also see
17 15 870)
Removal of noxious weeds . . . . .
Removal of mvaslve vegetatIOn ~ (A, also see V' (A, also see . (A, also see . .
17 15.870) 17 15 870) 17 15.870)
Removal of hazard trees V' (H ) V' (H) V' (H) V' (H) V' (H)
Management/removal of aquatic weeds Y-(A, also see N/A N/A N/A N/A
- -",-.......-=-~ - ,..,--'-- --- -- j 7 jj.37vl -- --- -,-- ~-'- ~ ~~ "--"-- - -- ,-
Mamtenance of lawns, landscapIng. golf . (A, also see . (A, also see . (A, also see . (A, also see . (A, also
courses, and cemetenes 17 15 870) 17 15 870) 1715870) 17 15.870) seel7 1587
0)
Gardening for personal consumptIOn . (A, also see . (A, also see . (A, also see . (A, also see . (A, also
17 15 870) 17 15 870) 17 15 870) 1715870) see
17 15 870)
Habitat Enhancement/Restoration
Habitat restoratIOn/enhancement Y-(A, C, also see Y..(A, also see Y-(A, also see Y-(A) Y-(A)
SectIOn 17 15 870) SectIOn 17 15.870) Section 17 15.870)
MItigation required bv the county V' (A,C) V' V' V' V' ,
Shoreline Stabilization
Nonstructural stabilizatIon V' (A,C, also see V' (A, also see Y..(A, also see Y-(A) V'
techniqueslbl oen gmeerin g Section 17 15870) Section 17 15 870) Section 17 15 870)
ShorelIne protective structures/annonng V' (A,C, also see V' (A, also see Y-A, also see Y-(A) V'
(e.g., bulkhead, gablOn, nprap, or wall) Section 17 15 870) Section 17 15 870) Section 17 15 870)
Slope stabilization or retaming wall (not a V' (A,C, also see V' (A, also see Y..(A, also see Y-(A) V'
bulkhead) Section 17 15 870) Section 17 15 870) Section 17 15.870)
Instream Projects
Stream relocation Y..(A, also see Y..(A, also see Y..(A, also see Y-(A)
Section 17 15 870) Section 17 15.870) Section 17 15.870)
Fish hatchery constructIOn and V' (A,C) V' (A, also see V' (A, also see Y-( <\) Y-(A)
maintenance Section 17 15.870) Section 17 15.870)
SCientIfic sampling . . . . .
Installation of stream flow and elevatIon ~(see 17 15 870) . . . .
~ges - - - -
MaIntenance or repaIr of eXistIng ~(see 17 15 870) . N/A . .
Instream structures - - -
Construction of new flow control Y-(A,C, R, also see Y..(A, R, also see Y..(A,R, also see Y-(A) X
facilIties/dams Section 17 15.870) Section 17 15 870) SectIOn 17 15 870)
ConstructIon of new flood protection Y-(A,C, R, also see Y..(A,R also see Y..(A,R, also see Y-(A) X
facilIties Section 17 15.870) Section 17 15 870) SectIOn 17 15.870)
Construction of new mstream structures Y..(A, also see N/A N/A Y-(A) N/A
not addressed above Section 17 15.870)
o
o
TCC 17 15700
9
Draft: 03/06/05
Floodways tOO-year Channel High Coastal (
Floodplains Migration Ground Flood
Hazard Areas water Hazard
Hazard Areas
Areas/RDZ
Lakes and Ponds
InstallatIOn of floats (e.g., a floatmg dock, YlA, C, also see K K N/A .
moonng buoy, navIgational aId, and Section 17 15 870) -
sWImmmg float)
Construction of pIers X X X N/A .
CreatIon of ponds pm'ate <1 acre (also X -.- YlA, also see YlA, also see .!...(A) .
Section 17 15 870) -
see agricultural ponds Section 17 15.870)
CreatIOn of a skI lake X V (A, also see YlA, also see .!...(A) .
Section 17 15 870) Section 17 15.870) -
Other Uses
Uses allowed m the appltcable zonmg K X X V A,E F,G) .
dlstnct/shorelme master program not -
Itsted elsewhere m thIS table
Antenna support structures regulated by K V V V (A,E, F)
Tr-t0 f"'1._._.._.."'^..,.... Tl ._1. 1"T"'l T.. ___ _ u_ -,
1 "-\.... \.....ualJlCi ,,-V.JJ 1'\..JU1,J, ..L .. "..... Y1 ......oJ
Asphalt plants X X X X X
Cemetenes X X X X X
Drillmg and testmg for reqUIred report or .!...(see SectIon .!...(see Section · see SectIon . (see . (see
engmeenng study 1715 870) 17 15 870) 17 15 870) SectIon Section
17 15 870) 17 15
870) r
Fences X . (see SectIOn · (see SectIOn . (see . l
17 15 870) 1715 870) SectIon
17 15 870)
Fill X Y' (A, F, also see Y' (A, F, also see Y' (A, F, also K
14.38050) 14.38050) see
14.38050)
Golf courses K Y' (see SectIOn Y' (see SectIOn Y' (A,E,F) Y'
1715 870) 1715 870)
Hazardous substances Y' (A, U) Y' (A,U) Y' (A,U) Y' (A,U) Y' (A,U)
Lawfully established existmg uses . . . . .
Mineral extraction Y'x Y'x X Y' X
Open space (e.g., cntlcal area tract) . . . . .
Research (e.g., educatIOn, sClenttfic, and . . . . .
SIte mvestigatlon)
SIgns (e.g., mterpretation, cntlcal area · (see Section . (see SectIOn . (see SectIOn . .
tract, and survey markers,) 1715 870 ) 1715870 ) 1715870 )
Wildltfe bhnd or nestmg structure . . . . .
)
)
. =
LEGEND
PermItted, subject to appltcable standards
PermItted subject to County review and approval under this Chapter
Prohibited
Appltcable requirement under SectIOn 17 15730
I
o
'1=
x=
(A-ZZ) =
TCC 17 15700
10
Draft: 03/06/05
c
o
~
G
;1 !
(Comment Floodplain Management, Higher Regulat01Y Standards, FEMA Region 10, 2002 Some
facilities if impacted by floodwaters could have a significant negative impact on emergency
response, water quality. or on special populations. Given this, it may be prudent to require certain
critical facilities like schools, fire/polzce stations. nursing homes, and chemical storage tanks to be
sited outside of the floodplain, or built with the lowest floor significantly above the base flood
elevation)
17 15 730 The follOWIng standards apply to uses and actIVItIes In flood and channel mIgratIon
hazard areas, as IndIcated In Table 7-1.
A. General ReqUIrements. The follOWIng reqUIrements apply, as applIcable, to all uses and
actIVItIes lIsted In Table 7-1.
1. Regulatory dIfferences. DIfferences In regulatIons because of the overlap of two or
more cntIcal areas or the ShorelIne Master Program for Thurston RegIOn (1990), as
::lmpnnpn ::lrp p{)vprnNi hv:J:CC ~p('.h{)n 17 1" ~()() f1,,,,n<: r IInthw 17 1)' OWl A 11
u J ~. - - - \.. - - --- - -- - - - - - / ~
uses and actIVItIes shall meet the reqUIrements that proVIde the most protectIOn to the
cntIcal areas Involved. Uses and actIVItIes are prohibIted If they are InCOnSIstent WIth
located WIthIn the shorelIne management JunsdIctIon pursuant to the ShorelIne
Master Program.
2.
ApplIcatIons. ApplIcatIons to undertake a use or actIVIty WIthIn a hIgh ground water
flood hazard area or a 100-year channel mIgratIOn hazard area shall contaIn all
InformatIon necessary to evaluate the proposed actIVIty, Its Impacts, ood Its
complIance WIth the provlSlons of the ordInance codIfied In thIS Chapter and, as
applIcable, TCC Chapter 14.38, Development In Flood Hazard Areas.
3.
HabItat degradatIon. All development In flood hazard areas and channel mIgratIon
hazard areas shall be deSIgned to aVOId habItat degradatIOn, conSIstent WIth SectIon
17.15.800, Important HabItat and SpeCIes. 4
4.
Increased floodIng. Development In flood hazard areas shall be deSIgned so It does
not Increase flood hazards, except as prOVIded for In thIS SectIon and TCC Chapter
14.38.
~
ShorelIne stabIlIzatIOn. The approval authonty shall deny proposed developments
and uses If s/he determInes that It would reqUIre structural flood hazard reductIon
measures at the tIme of constructIon/implementatIOn or anytIme thereafter, except as
proVIded for In SubsectIon 17 15.870, Important HabItats and SpeCIes.
(WAC 173-26-221 (3) (c) [Shoreline) Master programs shall implement the
following standards lvithin shoreline jurisdiction. New development or new uses in
shore/me jurisdictzon. mcluding the subdlvlslOn of land. should not be establzshed
when it would be reasonably foreseeable that the development or use would require
structural flood hazard reduction measures within the channel migration zone or
TCC 17 15700
11
Draft: 03/06/05
jloodway)
6
Preserve natural ground water flowlhyporhelc zone. ExcavatIon and development
shall not be allowed In the lOa-year floodplaIn of Type Sand F streams (currently
Type 1-3 streams) If the approval authonty determInes that It would cause
SIgnIficant dewatenng of the hyporheIc zone, the saturated zone located beneath and
adjacent to streams WIth subsurface flow between surface water and the water table,
block ground water flow or SIgnIficantly InhibIt recharge of the hyporhelc zone.
The approval authonty may reqUIre the applIcant to submIt data as necessary to
determIne If excavatIon, soIl compactIon, or ImpervIOUS surfaces assocIated WIth the
prOlect would cause SIgnIficant, detnmental dIsruptIon to the ground water system.
(Adapted from Floodplain Management, Higher Regulatory Standards, and FEMA
Region 10, 2002 )
o
(Comment: Floodplain Management, Higher RegulatOlY Standards, FEMA Region
10, 2002 "Disruptions to the hyporheic zone can negatively impact water jlow,
temperature, nutrient supply, and water quality The hyporheic zone is generally
above 'the grolitld v.Yiter level and serves as a ji/tei- jor nutrlenis and maintains high
water quality Floodplains provide course beds of alluvial sediments through l-~hich
these subsll1face river jlov.'s pass, much lIke a filter, contributing to habitat ")
B Emergency- Temporary AuthonzatIon.
The re\'le'.v approval authonty may verbally Issue temporary emergency 0
authonzatIOn for an actIVIty otherwIse requmng formal approval pursuant to thIS
SectIon to respond to ffif an emergency m a flood or channel mIgratIOn hazard area If
slhe determmes that.
the revIew authonty determInes that the followm; COndItIons are present
a. One or more of the follOWIng would likely occur If emergency authonzahon
were not granted.
threat to loss of human lIfe, or
ll. ef severe loss or damage of pnmary structures (e.g., dwellIngs and
places of bus mess mcludmg barns, but not mInor accessory structures
such as, but not lImIted to, tool and eqUIPment sheds, pottmg sheds,
dog houses, and tree houses), publIc roads, bndges and Infrastructure,
sole access pnvate roads, septIc systems, wells, or other essentIal
faCIlItIes, as determmed by the approval authOrIty;
!!1. SIgnIficant envIronmental degradatIOn (e.g., a structure at nsk of
floodIng contaInS hazardous matenals, that pose a contammatIon
hazard), or
IV.
[OPTION: hIgh value WIldlIfe habItat, such as wetlands assocIated
WIth streams, would be destroyedl, and
o
TCC 17 15700
12
Draft: 03/06/05
c
o
c
t'i'!t"~.;.v~:r~\",;' -,~ ;<'1:' ",.,,-, ;"C ~(
b
The antICIpated threat or loss lIstedm SubsectIon B l( a) above IS likely to
occur before authonzatIOn can be Issued or modIfied under the procedures
otherwIse reqUIred by thIS Chapter and other applIcable laws, and
c. The authonzed actIvItIes are the mImmum necessary to allevIate the
emergency, as determmed by the approval authonty.
2 Any emergency authonzatIon shall mcorporate, to the greatest extent practIcable and
feasible.. but not mconsIstent WIth the emergency sItuatIon, the standards and CrItena
reqUIred for nonemergency actIVItIes under thIs Chapter and shall
a. Be lImIted m duratIon to the tIme reqUIred to complete the authonzed
emergency actIVIty, not to exceed nmety days, and
b ReqUIre the restoration of any affected CntIcal Area and assocIated buffer
'Netland altered as a result of the emergency actIVIty wIthm thIS mnety-day
ne:r1nn f'xr.e:nt wne:n ~m()m tnnn tnf' mnptv n::lv<1 from tlw 1<:<:11:10('(' nftnn !
..1..1. " J
emcr.;cncy authonzatIOn IS the approval authonty determ10es that more time
wIll be needed reqUired to complete re:.;toratiofl tHe emer;;ency autnonzatlOH may be
extended to eOfl1plete thIS restoratlOR.
3
The Issuance of an emergency authOrIZatIOn by the county plannmg dIrector does not
preclude the need neceSSIty to obtam necessary reqUIred approvals from appropnate
federal and state authOrItIes.
4 The emergency authOrIzation may be termInated at any time WIthout notice upon
determ1OatIOn by the approval reVIew authOrIty that the actIon was not or IS no longer
necessary to protect human lIfe, ef property, or the enVIronment conSIstent WIth
SubsectIon B (1) above.
5. Followmg the emergency action, the owner/responsible party shall apply for all
reqUIred permIts and approvals reqUIred under thIS Chapter for nonemergency actIon.
C Development and Uses m Floodways. (Adaptedfrom state CTED model, 11/03)
Encroachments, mcludmg new constructIon, substantIal Improvements, fill and other
development, are prohibIted wIth10 deSIgnated floodways unless a regIstered profeSSIOnal
engmeer lIcensed m the State ofWashmgton demonstrates through hydrologIC and hydraulIc
analyses, performed m accordance WIth standard engmeenng practIces, that the proposed
prOlect will not result m an mcrease 10 flood levels dUrIng dIscharge of the base flood.
1. New constructIon. New constructIOn and substantial Improvements, as defined m
SubsectIon 14.38.020 shall comply WIth all applIcable flood hazard reductIon
proVISIOns m TCC Chapter 14.38.
2.
HabItat enhancement/restoratIOn. Prolects speCIfically deSIgned to protect, create, or
restore anadromous/natIve fish habItat may be allowed 10 or along Type Sand F
streams (currently Type 1-3 streams) WIthout the eng10eerIng analYSIS called for m
TCC 17 15700
13
Draft: 03/06/05
SectIon C above, If the approval authorIty determInes that the prolect WIll not
sIgmficantly obstruct flood flows or Increase flood elevatIons. If the effect of the 0
proposed prolect on floodIng IS In doubt, the approval authonty may reqUIre that a
qualIfied profeSSIonal In the field of hydraulIcs reVIew the proposed prolect
consIstent WIth SubsectIon C above, at the applIcant's expense. In order to determIne
If It will exacerbate floodIng. (Adapted from the state model IlI03 This allowance
for small projects is based upon FEMA Region 10 Floodplain Management, Higher
Regulat01Y Standards, 2 ed, 2001, and is not required by NFIP)
3 RecreatIOnal vehIcles.
a. RecreatIonal vehIcles parked m the floodway shall not be left unattended for
more than twenty-four consecutlve hours dunng the flood season, between
November 1 and March 15, and
b Travel traIlers parked In the floodway shall be lImIted to thIrty-five feet or
less In length. The wheels and tongue shall remaIn attached In place for ease
<lnrl T<ln.rl.hr nf PU<lf'l1<1f1nn PPrtTI<lnpnt <lrlrl.f1nn" tn tr<lupl tT<I.lpr" n<lrlrprl.n
_...._ ..._,........_...., .......~ _. ______w............. .... _..........__.._...._ ___..__.............. _...... _.._. _.. _.._...._...... ,......_........__ ___
the floodway are prohibIted.
4
OPTION: Flood season restnctIOns. The approval authonty may reqUIre that
temporary structures and hazardous matenals be removed from the flood way dunng
flood season (I.e., November I to March 15). If the approval authonty determInes
that floodIng IS ImmInent and the owner IS not present, s/he mav, at the owner's
expense, move the structure(s). ItS contents. and any vehIcles to hIgher ground.
o
(Comment FEMA Region 10 Floodplain Management, Higher Regulatorv
Standards, 2 ed., 2001 Recreational vehicles are required to either Be on the site
for fewer than 180 consecutive days, or Be fully licensed and ready for highway use,
on its l1heels or jacking system, is attached to the site only by quick disconnect type
utilities and security devices, and has no permanently attached additions,
The National Flood Insurance Program does not specify if the 180 days is the 1-tet or
dlY part of the year, it does not require the removal of temporary structures and
hazardous materials from the jloodway during the wet season. The proposed
standard above is intended to protect people, fish and wildlife from hazardous
materials that can wash into the rivers and streams duringjloods)
2:. NotIce. A notlce shall be filed WIth the deed of property In the floodway mdlcatIng
that ItS use IS sublect to these regulatlons (Chapter 17.15) and Chapter 14.38.
o
Bndges, Roads and Culverts. New bndges, roads and culverts shall be deSIgned to mmImlze
mterruptIOn of the downstream movement of wood and gravel. mImmlze fill, and allow
passage of 1 DO-year flood flows and assocIated debns (Adaptedfrom Pierce County Draft
4/03 and the CTED model 11 /03) such that the base flood elevatIon IS not mcreased by
more than one-foot ImmedIately upstream of the structure. Bndge pIers and abutments shall
not be placed m eIther the floodway or between the stream's ordmary hIgh water marks
o
Tee 17 15700
14
Draft: 03/06/05
c
c
c
""}" Jt" """-""l";-- "'(<"\"'''',i''~'~'''1'f.?if' "l(
t.!,
unless no feasible alternative placement eXIsts there IS no alternative placement and the
placement results m no more than O.2-foot mcrease In the backwater elevatIOn dunng the
100-vear flood a zero nse or full of the base flood elevatIOn and mInImIZeS habItat
degradatIOn. (was 6) (See SectIOn 17.15.870 regardIng road alignments m npanan habitat
areas) CrossIngs shall mInimize the potential for creatIng a dam In the floodplaIn and public
road crOSSIngs may not Increase the floodway elevation more than one foot Immediately
upstream of a crossmg; (was 7)
E
High Ground water Flood Hazard Areas. The follOWIng pertams to high ground water
hazard areas.
1. Flood elevations.
a. The base flood elevatIOn (BFE) for high ground water flood hazard areas
corresponds to the elevatIOn of the outer edge of the high ground water flood
hazard area. The map entitled "High Ground Water Flood Hazard Areas,"
dated 2004, as amended, depIcts the approxunate location of the high ground
_____ wHtpr f1000 hHz:mi :lreH'L[OPTTON Tnt" HcnIH]]or.Htlon oftnp ()Jlter eo~e of
the flood hazard area shall be determIned consistent with SubsectIOns E (4)
(a) and (b) below, as applIcable.l
b. The flood protection elevation (FPE), for the purposes of thIS SectIOn, IS the
elevation two feet above (vertically) the BFE.
2.
No development zone eNOZ). The NOZ IS an area extendIng fifty feet, measured on
a honzontal plane. from the outer edge of the high ground water hazard area or
extendIng to a ground elevatIOn two feet above the BFE, whichever is less. No
development IS allowed m the NOZ.
.1. Restncted development zone (RDZ). The RDZ extends from the outer edge ofNOZ
to a ground elevatIOn two feet above the BFE (the RDZ and BFE Will COinCide when
the NDZ IS based on elevatIOn) (see Figure 7-1), except:
a. OPTION: The approval authonty may exclude areas less than two feet In
elevatIon above the BFE from the RDZ If the applicant's registered
profeSSIOnal engmeer licensed In the State of WashIngton demonstrates that
due to draInage patterns (IncludIng the location and size of culverts and
ditches If present), topography, geologiC conditIOns, hydrology, distance from
the high ground water hazard area, or other relevant factors that the area
proposed to be removed from the RDZ will not flood. The approval authonty
may consult With an engineenng geologiSt. hydro geOlogIst, profeSSIOnal
engmeer, or other quahfied profeSSIOnal as necessary, at the applicant's
expense, to evaluate the floodmg potential of the area proposed to be
removed from the RDZ.
TCC 17 15700
15
Draft: 03/06/05
Fi2ure 7-1
o
Two feet above BFE BFE
~~J
RDZ NDZ
(50 feet)
~
,
High ground
water flood
hazard area
b OPTION: On slopmg parcels where the topography does not reach two feet
m elevatIon above the BFE before It falls In elevatIOn below the BFE. the
approval authorIty may set the outer boundary of the RDZ at the hIghest pomt
above the BFE (see FIgure 7-2). If the applIcant's regIstered profeSSIOnal
onn-tnocu..l'f"'oncooA 11"\ tha <;;:!tl'lta n..'lTnrh'n"\n-+nn rtOrY\r\T"I",t~"t.ot"'l ~l,n" +h.., ",....""",
....."t"'''.............. ........""'.....,......- ... "'-&.....1._ ........~.."" "'. "~...,~.l~jOO,."'-'lt ,.,.............v.....,".UL""'~ ...I........... Wi'" Ll.l'-'l.4
beyond has no or neglIgible rIsk of floodIng. The approval authorIty may
consult WIth an emnneenng geOlOgIst, hvdrogeolomst, profeSSIonal engmeer.
or other qualIfied profeSSIonal as necessary, at the applIcant's expense, to
evaluate the floodmg potentIal of the area proposed to be removed from the
RDZ.
Fi2ure 7-2
o
The slope falls
below the BFE
elevatIon
High pomt
above BFE
BFE
High ground
water hazard area
RDZ NDZ
(50 feet)
c. All new constructIOn proposed m the RDZ wlthm 300 of any deSignated high
grcnmd ',yater flood hazard area shall be 10 comphance shall comply with the
prOVISIons of thIS Section and TCC Subsection 14.38050 meet the flood
hazard area buildmg standards m Chapter! 1.38.050.
o
TCC 17 15700
16
Draft: 03/06/05
c
c
c
1:-
DehneatlOn of the BFE, NDZ, and RDZ.
a. Apphcants for development of an mdIvIdual resIdential lot shall submIt the
BFE, prepared by a licensed land surveyor, for reVIew and approval of the
BUlldmg OfficIal, consIstent WIth Tee SubsectIon 14.38.40, as follows.
OPTION. The apphcant's surveyor, m consultatIon wIth the BUlldmg
Official or deSIgnee, shall stake and flag the recommended hIgh
ground water edge m the field based on the High Ground Water Flood
Hazard Areas map (dated 2004, as amended), topography, aenal
photographs of flood events, and other relevant factors,
II After the BUlldmg OffiCIal determmes that the hIgh ground water
edge IS located correctly, the surveyor shall dePict the BFE, NDZ,
and RDZ on the SIte plan submItted to the BUlldmg Official for
reVIew and approval.
b.
Apphcants for a prolect not addressed m Subsection E (4)(a) above,
mc1udmg, but not lImIted to, commercial or mdustnal development,
reSIdentIal subdIVIsIOns/short subdIVIsIons and multifamily housmg prolects,
shall subrmt to the approval authonty hydrologIC and hydrogeologIC studIes
as necessary to delmeate the hIgh ground water flood hazard area, the BFE,
NDZ, and the RDZ.
F FIll. (Consider moving this SectiOn to TCC 14 38 050(5)) 5
HIgh ground water flood hazard areas.
a. No fill matenal may be placed wIthm a deSIgnated hIgh ground water flood
hazard area or NDZ, except unless It IS consIstent 'NIth Table _and meets all
standards of Subsection 11.38.050 and the follo'smg reqUIrements: EXIstmg
developed lots: to the mmImum extent necessary, as determmed by the
approval authonty, to elevate eXlstmg access roads servIng eXlstmg,
developed lots to the BFE. Any such fill matenal shall be stabIlIzed
consIstent WIth SubsectIOn 14.38.050 (A)( 5).
Only to Improve eXIstmg structures, addItions and dnvev;ay access.
b FIll may be used m the RDZ as follows.
l. The approval authonty may approve balanced cut and fill to the
mmImum extent necessary for constructIOn of an approved use lIsted
m Table 7-1, If a profeSSIOnal CIVIl engmeer lIcensed m the State of
Washmgton demonstrates that the fill or gradIng WIll not block
natural dramage or mcrease flood hazards.
II
EXIstmg undeveloped lots. FIll may be used to the mmImum extent
necessary, as determmed by the approval authonty, to construct an
TCC 17 15700
17
Draft: 03/06/05
road to access prImary structures If no alternatIve locatIon eXIsts for
the access road outsIde of the RDZ. The access road's surface shall be 0
constructed to an elevatIon equal to the BFE. bmldm:; area and
drIveway access. only.
111. OPTION: The approval authorIty may allow the road to be elevated
up to two feet above the BFE provIded culverts wIll be mstalled to
allow passage of water and the applIcant's professIOnal CIVIl engmeer
lIcensed m the State ofWashmgton demonstrates that floodIng will
not be mcreased off sIte.
IV. FIll materIal authOrIzed pursuant to thIS SectIon and any subsequent
stabIlIzatIOn shall be such that the fill IS stable dUrIng floodIng,
conSIstent WIth SubsectIon 14.38.050 (A)(5).
Ne'.v subdIVISIOns: prohibIted. Nev,' commerclOl, publIc faCIlitIes, Industnal,
multIfamIly development: No addItIonal standards.
d. Thurston County, other governmental agenCIes, and/or publIc utIlItIes may
obtaIn permIts to fill and/or grade m affected areas hIgh ground water flood
hazard areas and assocIated NDZ and RDZ If such work is part of an adopted to
COl:IRty plan to alleVIate ground water floodmg prOVIded.
1.
such work IS conSIstent WIth adopted Thurston County plans or part of
an approved SpeCIal Use QI.;,
o
11 a qualified profeSSIOnal engIneer licensed m the State ofWashmgton
demonstrates to the approval authOrIty's satIsfactIOn that such filling
and/or gradIng WIll not exacerbate floodmg and has a broad public
purpose.
2. Floodplam.
a. The approval authOrIty may approve balanced cut and fill wIthm the 100-year
floodplam, landward of the floodway, to the mmImum extent necessary for
constructIOn of an approved use lIsted m Table 7-1, If a qualified profeSSIOnal
engIneer lIcensed In the State ofWashmgton and a qualIfied wIldlIfe habItat
bIOlogIst demonstrate that there IS no other alternatIve method for
constructmg the proposed use and that such gradIng and fillIng WIll not block
stream SIde channels, Increase flood hazards, InhibIt channel mIgratIon or
degrade Important HabItats (see SectIon 17 15.800) (Adapted from
Floodplain Management, Higher Regulatory Standards, FEMA Region 10,
2002 and the state CTED model. 11/03)
(Comment: Floodplain Management, Higher Regulatory Standards, FEMA
Region 10, 2002 Injloodplain areas outside o/the riparian habitat area, 0
development could be permitted, but with limitations on such activities as
Tee 17 15700
18
Draft: 03/06/05
c
.,r!"~;.:}.. IN:{!IL:r
~'I,\t~;t-V\'t.,
fills, the amount of impervious surfaces, and removal of native vegetation.
Filling in the floodplain could be prohibited unless a qualified professional
certifies that the proposed fill "VI'lll not be harmful to fish, and will not block
channel migration.)
b.
GradIng and fillIng may be authonzed to form a lIvestock sanctuary,
consIstent WIth SubsectIon 17.15730 K (2).
3 Coastal flood hazard areas. FIll for structural support ofbUIldmgs IS prohibIted m
coastal hIgh hazard areas. (Adaptedfrom state model, 11/03)
G Cleanng and GradIng. (See TCC Chapter 14.20 regardIng gradIng reqUIrements and the
Stormwater and DraInage DeSIgn Standards for Thurston County, TCC Chapter 1505.)
Cleanng and gradmg wIthIn flood hazard areas, channel mIgratIon hazard areas. and In the
RDZ assocIated wIth hIgh ground water flood hazard areas IS allowed m cOfilunctlOn wIth a
use permItted pursuant to thIS chapter (see SectIon 17.15.870, Important HabItats and
SpeCIes) If It complIes wIth all of the followmg:
.L MmImIze c1eanng and gradmg. The cleanng and gradIng are the mInImUm
necessary to accommodate the permItted use. as determIned by the approval
authonty; and
o
c
2.
Preserve the InfiltratIon capacIty of the SIte. The SOlI dufflayer shall remam
undIsturbed to the maXImum extent practIcable. In areas that are dIsturbed dunng
constructIon but WIll not be covered by ImpervIOUS surfaces. the mOIsture-holdmg
capaCIty of the topsoil layer shall be mamtamed by mInImIZIng so11 compactIon. by
amendmg the SOlI WIth compost (conSIstent WIth SectIon 17.15.730 F. FIll) (adapted
from the state CTED model, 11/2003) [OPTION or by stnppmg, stockpIlIng and
reapplYIng the tOPSOIl] Where feasible and appropnate, as determmed by the
approval authonty. graded so11 shall be redIstributed to dIsturbed areas on the project
SIte. proVIded It does not Increase the flood elevatIon and complIes WIth other
applIcable prOVISIOns of thIS chapter and Chapter 14 38.
.1. Fencmg the c1eanng lImIts. The c1eanng lImIts shall be marked with a temporary
fence authonzed by the approval authonty.
4 TImIng. Cleanng and gradmg shall only occur between May 1 and October 1 (State
CTED model, 11/2003) The county may temporanly suspend gradIng dunng thIS
penod If exceSSIve ram fall could cause erOSIOn and sedImentatIon that would affect a
stream, wetland, or other water body. The county may allow c1eanng and gradmg
outSIde of thIS penod If all dramage WIll flow away from all potentIally affected
streams and wetlands and remam on SIte. (adaptedfrom Pierce County Draft, 4/03)
5.
Cleanng In channel mIgratIon hazard areas. See SectIon 17.15. 870 regardmg
c1eanng restnctIons m npanan management zones. (Comment: The draft rzparian
management zone restriction. "With the exception of agricultural uses, clearing on
lots or tracts larger than one-acre in the riparian management zone that lie WIthin or
19
Draft: 03/06/05
TCC 17 15700
100feet landward of a documented 100-year channel migration hazard area shall
not exceed thirty five percent of the lot or tract") 0
(Staff comment Retention of existing vegetation in the channel migration zone
It'ould slow the pace of channel migration and place less development at risk of
damage Retention of vegetation beyond the channel migration zone It'ould provide
forforested riparian area 'trhen the stream relocates)
H. Timber Harvest:
1. HIgh ground water flood hazard areas. Timber harvestIng IS prohibIted In hIgh
ground water hazard areas and assOCIated NDZ. Hazard trees may be removed In
these areas conSIstent WIth SubsectIon H(3) below.
(Staff Comment Scient((ic studies 6 at the v.,atershed scale indicate that retention of
trees reduces the amollnt of water contributing to swface water floodl1lg through
canopy interception/evapotranspiration, infiltration and storage in the forest's
rl1,rr/tnn (,"/lil lrJ1,nv riMA ,,,.l,,nn II...n fl"nnC" rYJ.n 'l"'nf rll"l1"'J......rn"f tI'11A/Hu..,.1'1 r/;lAf)/1f ,,,'rrfnv "rtofrrl-n
"."':IJ .-r ............. .-./...... ......,......, ....v.. .. ....... .., ............... -........ '........ .........,. "'-_,."' .,., .........0... ....... ...."'. ,.-......, ...r....,..,''''''''
In forests, more rainfall ends up as ground water than swface vvater runoff
Modeling of the Salmon Creek Basin, where extensive ground water flooding occurs,
revealed that basl1l-wide tree retentIOn would help reduce flooding in some areas but
not in others
The 300-foot wide tree retention areas surrounding high ground water hazard 0
areas required under the current regulations, and the proposed RDZ where flooding
could occur, may represent only a fraction of the area contributing to flooding In
some instances, ground water perched on a nearly impermeable till layer may spall
several square miles In wet years, the ground water table in the unconfined aquifer
may reach the point that it slllfaces at low points in the ground's swface In that
circumstance, the vegetation surrounding the low point has little bearing on the
flooding Rather than requiring tree retention in areas delineated to ident(fV It here
flooding is likely to occur, it may be better to identify the areas contributing to the
flooding (v.hich may span several miles), determine ((tree retention in those areas
would significantly reduce flooding, (e g based on hydrogeology, soils, tree
characteristics, etc), and, if so, consider reqlllring tree retention/planting
throughout the entire area contributing to flooding
The prim my rationale for retaining trees in the high ground water flood hazard area
and the adjacent NDZ is to minimize encroachment in the flood hazard areas An
alternative approach would be to allow clearing and installation of lawn/
landscaping in the high ground water hazard area/NDZ, provided it has the net
effect of increasing flood storage capacity This would allow greater use of the
infrequently flooded area but it might introduce fertilizer and pesticides to the
ground water when floodl1lg occurs)
In additIon to COR'lpIYlilg with the provislORS ofTCC Chapter 17.25, Forest Land Conversion, tImber 0
harvestinglremo-;al m ground water hazard areas aad assOCIated buffers as part of a develop meat
project shall COHlply witH the followmg requirements
TCC 17 15700
20
Draft: 03/06/05
c
o
c
";. ':1
r '~
V\),
Timber Rarvestmg within a designated l:lIgR grOl:lRd water flood hazard area and 'NltJ;un three hundred
feet from said area, shall be re','iewed fDr consistency With Forest Land Conversion standards Chapter
17.25 all harvesting shall be on a selectl','e basIs and sRall not exceed the use actlYlty standard III
+able
Timber harvestmg shall only OCCMr between June 1 October 31, wltR the exception of public utilities.
Timber harvesting shall be allowed only dMrmg the time frames as shown III Table. ThiS pronslOn IS
to IHsure that 'iegetatlon IS removed only dunng the dnest time of the year whlcR prOVides suffiCient
time to replace vegetation aad IHstall necessary erosIOn control measures required by SectIOn
15.05.010, bef-ore the wet season beglHs.
/\. ma~l1mum 50%, (by volume) of trees on site in subdl','lsions and 75~<' (by volume) of trees on site III
}ley, CommerCial, Public Facilities, Industnal, and Multi Family Development.
.^.ll timber harvesting apphcatlOns (Forest Land Conversion permits) shall reqmre a revegetatIOn plan
with trees and ground co','er plants that are capable of surnvlllg In saturated SOlis andlor hanng a
large uptaice of water tRroughout most of the year (ThiS type of vegetation will help to lower the
ground water table which will provide greater annual storage capacity dunng the wet season).
2
Channel mIgratIOn hazard areas See SectIOn 17.15. 870, Important HabItats and
SpeCIes.
'" -
::!..
I IaZai'd ti'~~S. Th~.dPPi'uvdl duthuiitv ilidV' aUth0iiLC Hie: cutlii1~ uflidL<t1 J lICC:S III
flood hazard and 1 OO-year channel mIgratIon hazard areas conSIstent WIth SectIon
17.15.870, Important HabItats and SpeCIes.
1
VegetatIOn Removal. Harvestmg of plants and plant matenals IS permItted m flood hazard
and channel mIgratIon hazard areas conSIstent WIth SectIon 17.15.870, Important HabItats
and SpeCIes and SectIon 17.15.900, Wetlands. 6,7
ImperVIOus sMrface coverage on all parcels or lots contamlng high ground water flood hazard areas or be
limited to the percentage of ImpervIOUS surface lot co','erage by Impervious surfaces, based upon the use, as
shown In Table
a. Smgle family reSidential: maximum 0[35% of lot.
b. New commerCial, pubhc facilities, Illdustnal, and multi family development: ma:umum of 50
65% of lot, based upon tree replacement plan.
c. Public Mtihtles: maximunl of 50% of lot.
(Staff commellf. Floodplain Management, Higher Regulatory Standards, FEMA Region 10,
2002 suggests "Creation of new impervious slllfaces shall not exceed 10 percent of the
surface area of the portion of the lot in the floodplain" based on studies of entire
watersheds In areas with porous, gravelly soils where infiltration is virtually
instantaneous and no runoff occurs, limiting impervious surface coverage provides no
protective effect. Conversely, on sites with less porous soils, increased impervious sUlface
results in increased runoff and downstream river flooding and erosion. 6)
When flooding occurs due to surfacing ground water, the ground is typically saturated.
Also, the ground water flooding the area may have entered the aquifer miles away from
the point it surfaces T7ll1s far, staff has found no scientific studies that clearly indicate that
a reduction in impervious surfaces within 300 feet of a high ground water flood area, as
currently required, has a significant effect on groundwater flooding)
TCC 17 15700
21
Draft: 03/06/05
L. BUIldmg Setbacks.
.L
Coastal flood hazard areas. Uses m all coastal flood hazard areas are shall be
allowed landward of the reach of mean hIgh tide, subject to the ProVISIons of Chapter
14.38. New construction, addItIons affixed to the sIde of an eXIstmg structure, and
substantIal Improvement of any structure WIth a crawl space may only be located
landward of a Ime two feet above the regulatory tIdal base flood elevatIon, conSIstent
WIth SectIon 17.15.800 and the Shorelme Master Program for Thurston RegIOn, as
amended.
o
All ne'N structures shall b@ set buck a mimmum of fifty feet from the boundary of any
designated high ground water flood hazard area. (addressed by the NDZ)
K. AgrICultural Uses and ActIVItIes. Agncultural uses and actIVItIes are permItted conSIstent
WIth SectIon 17.15.870, Important HabItats and SpeCIes, Chapter 14.38, and the followmg
reqUIrements.
Manure storage faCIlItIes. ConstructIOn and exoanSIOn of manure storage faCIlItIes
shall only be allowed In the 1 OO-year floodplam landward of the floodway If there IS
no alternatIve area on the SIte outSIde of the 100-year floodplam. Such facilIties are
prohibIted m hIgh ground water flood hazard areas and assocIated NDZ and RDZ.
ConstructIOn of lIvestock manure storage facIlIties shall be m complIance WIth a
farm management plan approved by the Thurston Conservation DIstnct, the
Washmgton State UmversIty (WSU)CooperatIve ExtensIOn Office, or the Umted 0
States Department of AgrICulture (USDA). The farm management plan shall
demonstrate that:
a. Flood storage compensation IS prOVIded,
b. SItmg and SIZIng do not Increase base flood elevations, and
c. The facIlIty WIll be located to mImmIze nsk from floodwaters and channel
mHrratIon.
2 LIvestock flood sanctuanes. ConstructIOn or expanSIOn of lIvestock flood sanctuanes
shall only be allowed m the 100-year floodplam, except hIgh ground water hazard
areas/NDZ/RDZ, If:
a. There IS no other SUItable area on the SIte outSIde the 100-year floodplam to
whIch lIvestock have access, and
b.
The facilIty IS constructed conSIstent WIth a farm management plan approved
by the Thurston Conservation DIstnct, the WSU Cooperative ExtensIOn
Office or the USDA. The farm management plan shall demonstrate offsettmg
flood storage compensation and that SIting and sIzmg do not mcrease base
flood elevatIOns.
o
TCC 17 15700
22
Draft: 03/06/05
c
c
c
. ~~~~.,,,,, l'.:;.i' ~
~ Ammal contamment areas.
a.
Feed lots, dames, stables, horse boardmg/traInIng, auctIOn facIlItIes, and
poultry raIsmg operatIOns and assocIated anImallblrd waste shall be located
out of the flood hazard area or, If that IS not possible, where they wIll be least
likely to be mundated dunng a flood.
b The uses lIsted m SubsectIon K (3)(a) above are prohibIted m hIgh ground
water flood hazard areas and assocIated NDZ and RDZ
L. Sm.;le Famlly ResIdence RepaIr, Mamtenance, AlteratIon, or ExpansIon of a Lawfully
EstablIshed Nonconformmg Structure ~Resldenc€. (l1'as Sunder 17 15 930) Nonconformmg
structures and uses shall only be mamtamed, altered or expanded consIstent wIth the
followmg:
1. AlteratIon wlthm eXlstmg footpnn1. AlteratIon, repaIr, and mamtenance of a
nonconformmg structure resIdence are allowed wlthm the eXlstmg bmldmg footpnnt
ofthe outSIde wall mcludmQ whIch mclude~ attached decks; porches; f+f' :mn p::!t1o"
(AdaptedJrom TCC Subsection 1438050 F ) However, wlthm the floodway,
repaIrs, reconstructIOn or Improvements to a structure shall not mcrease the !!found
floor area and the cost of repaIrs, reconstructIon or Improvement of a structure shall
not exceed fifty percent of the market value of the structure determmed eIther:
a.
before the repaIr, reconstructIon, or repaIr IS started, or
12.. If the structure has been damaged, and IS bemg restored, before the damage
occurred.
Work done on structures to comply wIth eXlstmg health, sanItary or safety codes or
to structures IdentIfied as hlstonc places IS not be sublect to the value lImIt above.
(Comment: Floodplain Management, Higher Regulatory Standards, FEMA Region
10, 2002 Construction or reconstruction of residential structures is prohibited within
designated jloodways, except for repairs, reconstruction, or improvements to a
structure which do not increase the ground floor area, and repairs, reconstruction
or improvements to a structure, the cost of l1hich does not exceed 50 percent of the
market value of the structure either, (A) before the repair, or reconstruction is
started, or (B) if the structure has been damaged, and is being restored, before the
damage occurred. Any project for improvement of a structure to correct existing
violations of state or local health, sanitary, or safety code specifications lvhiclz have
been identified by the local code enforcement official and which are the nll11imum
necessary to assure safe living conditions or to structures identified as historic
places shall not be included in the 50 percent.)
2.
VertIcal addItIon. Ne-ExpansIOn of the nonconformmg portIOn of a structure (l.e., the
portIOn of the structure m the flood or channel mIgratIon hazard area) IS prohibIted
allowed, WIth the exceptIon of a vertIcal addItIons to a nonconformmg reSidence or
nonconformmg portIOn of a r@~;Idenc6 consIstent WIth applIcable heIght regUlatIOns m
TCC 17 15700
23
Draft: 03/06/05
the ZOnIng dIstnct and the value lImIts specIfied m SubsectIOn L(1) above. However,
such addItIons shall not be cantilevered to extend beyond the eXIstmg structure's 0
footpnnt mto a flood or channel mIgratIon hazard area. IS allo'Ned up to current
heIght regulatIOns, provIded the addItIOn IS not cantIlevered to extend beyond the
eXIstmg footpnnt of the reSIdence mto the cntIcal area and/or buffer.
3 Enclosmg decks. porches, and patIos. Enclosmg eXIstmg, nonconformmg decks,
porches, or patIOS for use as lIvable space IS not permItted, unless the deck, porch, or
patIo IS already covered by an eXIstmg, permanent roof structure, as detenmned by
the approval authonty conSIstent WIth SubsectIon L (1 ) above.
4. ExpanSIOn of conformmg portIons of the structure. If only a portIon of the structure
IS nonconfonmng , that IS lIes wIthm a flood hazard area or NDZ cntIcal area or
reqUIred ~), expanSIOn of the conformmg portIOn of the structure IS permItted
proVIded the expanSIOn does not extend mto the flood hazard area, 1 DO-year channel
mIgratIon hazard cntIcal area or NDZ, reqUIred buffer conSIstent WIth Chapter
14.38
M. OPTION: Accessory structures.
EXIstmg, nonconformmg accessory structures WIth no bus mess occupancy may be
expanded m the 1 DO-year floodplam and channel mH~ratIon hazard areas landward of
the floodway and npanan habItat area (see SectIon 17 15. 870, Important HabItats
and SpeCIes), under the followmg condItIons.
a. The expanded structure IS not closer to the floodway and any documented
1 DO-year channel mHrratIon hazard than other eXIstmg structures on the SIte,
unless the applIcant demonstrates that the proposed locatIon has less nsk
from floodmg and channel mIgratIon and would have the least adverse
Impact of the aVailable alternatIves on any other cntIcal areas, and
o
Q The eXIstmg structure proposed for expanSIOn was not establIshed m the
flood hazard or 1 DO-year channel mIgratIon area as the result of a vanance or
reasonable use exceptIOn.
(Comment: Floodplain Management, Higher RegulatOlY Standards, FEMA Region
10, 2002 The minimum requirement of the NFlP treats any structure that willll1cur
improvements totaling more than 50% of the market value of the structure, as a nelV
structure - meaning the structure will need to be elevated above BFE Some
communities have reduced this 50% threshold, and have begun to track these
improvements over time (i e , structure must be elevated if they received flood
damage tvvo times over the past 10 years, of .vhich the cost to repair after each flood
equals 25% of the market value on average) Since 1997, NFlP policyholders can get
up to $20,000 to elevate their homes if they are determined to be substantially
damaged under the Increased Cost of Compliance provision of their flood policy)
2.
New accessory structures. New accessory structures are allowed, If conSIstent WIth
SectIon 17.15.870, Important HabItats and SpeCIes, as follows.
o
TCC 17 15700
24
Draft: 03/06/05
~'~t\-: l.! ~r, ;;j'i'-j~,,:!,-T-:O!;I\;_'
c
a.
Channel mIgratIon hazard areas. New'accessory structures are allowed m
100-year channel mIgratIon hazard areas, landward of the floodway, If:
1. An alternatIve locatIOn outsIde of the 100-year channel mIgratIOn
hazard area IS not aVaIlable onsIte; and
11. The structure IS located where It would be at least nsk of damage
from the mIgratmg channel, as determmed by the approval authonty
m consultatIon wIth a qualIfied professIOnal proficIent m fluvIal
geomorphology; and
!!1. The proposed structure wIll not make the total footpnnt of all eXIstmg
and proposed accessory structures on sIte exceedmg 20,000 square
feet. (SEPA threshold)
12 Floodplams. New accessory structures are allowed m 1 OO-year floodplams
hn(hv~ni of thf' f1oonw:w ~nn nn~n~n h~hlt~t ~rf'~ (<:"f".f' 17 1 'i ~no Tmnort~nt
. .
HabItat and SpecIes) provIded the constructIOn complIes WIth Chapter 14.38
and wIll not reqUIre emplacement of fill
~
RDZ. New accessory structures are allowed m the RDZ assocIated WIth hIgh ground
water hazard areas provIded there IS no locatIOn on the lot or tract to accommodate
the structure outSIde of the RDZ, as determmed by the approval authonty. Such
structures shall be constructed consIstent WIth Chapter 14.38
o
N Replacement or RelocatIon of Nonconformmg Structure Smgle FamIly ReSIdence
Replacement of a damaged or destroyed, legally establIshed nonconformmg structures
resIdence and/or related appurtenances may be allowed m the 100-year floodplam or
channel mIgratIOn hazard area landward of the floodway, or the NDZ pursuant to Tec
SubsectIOn 20 56 050 of thIS code, as amended, and all of the applIcable reqUIrements of
thIS Chapter and Chapter 1438, under the followmg CIrcumstances
1 No alternatIve outside of the hazard area. There IS not sufficIent bUIldable area on the
property outSIde of the flood hazard area, NDZ or 100-year channel mIgratIOn hazard
area to accommodate the structure, as determmed by the approval authonty.
Replacement of a nonconformmg, resIdentIal structure (excludmg those described m
subsectIOns and of thIs sectIOn and IS not permItted unless no bUIldable area
eXIsts on the property outSIde the cntIcal area and/or buffer, as determmed through
an admInIstratIve vanance under SectIon 17.15. 870720 and then
2.
AlternatIve locatIOn. If there IS no alternatIve outSIde of the hazard areaINDZ,
replacement could occur only be allo\ved wIthm the eXIstmg bUIldmg footpnnt..
unless the approval authonty determmes that an alternatIve locatIon would have less
nsk of damage from floodmg and channel mIgratIon and would not mcrease Impacts
to other cntIca1 areas. In that case, the approval authonty may allow a
nonconformmg structure proposed to be relocated/replaced to be placed on a part of
o
TCC 17 15700
25
Draft: 03/06/05
the SIte WIth less rIsk of damage from floodmg and channel mIgratlOn, conSIstent
WIth SectIon 17.15.870, Important HabItats and SpeCIes and other applIcable county 0
regulatIons.
~ RestoratlOn. The orIgmal bUlldmg SIte and other degraded areas ImmedIately
adjacent to the bUlldmg SIte shall be restored WIth vegetatIon as a condItIon of the
relocatIon. See SectIon 17.15 870 regardmg restoratlOn reqUIrements m Important
WildlIfe HabItats.
4 MobIle or manufactured home. A mobIle or manufactured home WIth nonconformmg
placement may be replaced WIth a new or Improved mobIle or manufactured home,
subject to the reqUlrements of thIS subsectIon, thIS Chapter, and other applIcable
county regUlatlOns, except SubsectIons N (1-3) above. ordmances. If the SIze of the
structure IS mcreased by more than five-hundred square feet, It shall confonn to
SubsectIons 17. I 5.730 N (1-3) above and the approval authOrIty may reqUIre that the
structure be relocated on the SIte where It would be at least rIsk of floodmg and
stream channel mIgratIon.
o Development of EXlstmg Lots EXlstmg lots may be developed as follows.
1 Floodplams.
a.
In tfle one-hundred-year floodplam~, a--HeW smgle-famIly resldence~ may be
constructed on a-Iot~ created m a subdIvIslOn If:
o
1. A complete applIcatlOn for prelImmary approval of the subdlvlslOn
was submItted before February 1, 1994, and
11 A complete applIcatIon for a bUIldmg permIt for the reSIdence was
eIther submItted before February 1, 1994 or wIthm five years of the
filIng of the final plat.
111. All other constructIon of new reSIdences, mcludmg farmhouses, m
the 1 DO-year floodplam IS prohibIted.
b. All new structures, facIlItIes, utIlItIes and appurtenances bUllt pursuant to
SubsectlOns 0 (1 )(a)(I) and (11) above shall be located out of the floodplam
unless there IS not suffiCIent bUlldable area, up to 5,000 square feet, on the
property outSIde of the flood plam to accommodate the structure, as
determmed by the approval authOrIty, Structures, utIlItIes, and related
appurtenances allowed In the 100-year floodplam shall be placed on the
hIghest, sUltable portIOn of the SIte, orIented parallel to flow, and SIted as far
from the water body and other CrItIcal areas as possible. (Adapted from state
CTED model, 11/03)2
c.
ConstructIon of new nonresIdentIal structures IS prohibIted In the 1 DO-year
floodplaIn except as proVIded for m thIS SectIon.
o
TCC 17 15700
26
Draft: 03/06/05
c
o
c
-;,,,,,~,,.-:-.- ~,",:,'~'.".r'\'''';
i'"
;~1!:;~~1~\
2.
Channel migration hazard areas. New structures and related utilIties and
appurtenances may be constructed on lots In Channel Migration Hazard Areas,
consistent with SectIOn 17.15.870, Important Habitats and Species, as follows. 2
~ A complete applIcatIOn for the short plat. or large lot subdiVISion, or
subdivIsIOn, as defined In Chapter 18 08, was submitted before r the effective
date of the ordinance)
b. If the lot has less than 5,000 square feet of bUildable area outside of the 100-
year channel migratIOn hazard area to accommodate the pnmary structure,
accessory structures, utilIties, related appurtenances and landscaping, the
approval authontv mav allow development to OCCUpy the hazard area to the
minImUm extent necessary to provIde a buIlding site totalIng 5,000 square
feet, provIded.
1. The structure and supporting Infrastruchlre shall be located out of the
1 ()f) ."a......... +1,,^r1.....1.....,'" 'O'V("locu.....+ nr< _....".H'rL~r1 +".... 11'.... C'ul....f"'''''r\h"..., 1 ~ 1 ~ "'7'lf\
.1.VV ,,,",,""I. .1.J.VV'-Al-'J.UJ.J.J."l"'/\.'-''''l-'L.L4JJJJ.V'J.'-''-''-A.1.VJ. .l.l.lUUUJ\.,.;VL.1VII .1./..1-1 I-IV
(N)where It WIlliS least likely to be affected by stream channel
mIgratIOn, consistent with the preservatIOn of Important habitats (See
Section 17.15.870).
11.
The approval authonty may authonze use of additIOnal space to the
minimum extent necessary to accommodate an onslte sewage disposal
system Ifthere IS no feasible alternative location. rOPTION The
approval authontv may reqUire the applIcant to demonstrate that due
to phYSical constraInts (e.g., topography, SOIl condItions, or the
configuration of the site), another site configuration would not allow
the development to occur Without IntrusIOn or WIth less IntrusIOn Into
the hazard area than the proposal.l Also see Article IV, The Rules
and Regulations of The Thurston County Board of Health Governing
Disposal of Sewage, as amended.
3. High ground water hazard areas.
a. Construction of dwellings, places of bus mess, and other structures, utilIties
and appurtenances IS prohibIted In hIgh ground water flood hazard
areas/NDZ. Such structures may be located In the RDZ (conSIstent With the
applIcable ZOning dlstnct) prOVided.
1. All new residentIal structures allowed In the RDZ shall be constructed
to have the lowest floor and mechanical support systems, such as
electncal, heatIng, ventilatIOn, plumbIng and aIr condition eqUipment,
and ducts and Insulation located two feet above the above the BFE,
11.
All new non-residential construction shall be elevated two feet above
the BFE consistent With the Flood Hazard Area BUildIng Standards In
TCC 17 15700
27
Draft: 03/06/05
Subsection 14.38.050 B(2), Non-ResIdentIal Construction, and
III.
Structures shall be located where they are least likely to be flooded.
o
[All residentIal structures withIn three hundred feet of a desIgnated hIgh ground
water flood hazard area shall have the lo\vest floor, mcludmg basement, elevated a
mmImum of two feet above the kno'.'m high ground '.'iater flood elevutIOn]
P. IntensIfication of nonconformmg use. IntensIfication of a legal, nonconformmg use IS
permitted provIded that the use IS con tamed wIthm the eXIstmg or lawfully establIshed
structure, or m an area that has been lawfully used to accommodate the activIty, and
provIded that It IS not dIfferent m kmd from the eXIstmg nonconformmg use, would not
cause mcreased harm to a CrItical area, exacerbate flood or channel migratIOn hazards,
[OPTION: or pose an mcreased rIsk of water contammatIon m the event the site IS
mundated WIth flood waters 1, as determmed by the approval authOrIty.
(Comment: Floodplain Management, Higher RegulatOl)' Standards, FEMA Region 10,
"'\J'\/)""'l\ .._. . i _._.~Tr ,... 1 '._..:'.' ,.,_ _....._ _...._~_1_ ...1__ 17_ _,__,.:.. .._.. __.__...... ...!__
':'vv.:.; .:>lIt;t;t::,)/tUfI,) 1) u tUt IlLt,) U UlIttUUUtt:: ,)ttt:: Uttt,)tut:: tf/t::jIUULIj/IUtft, ftt::H' LVf/.:>tiULlIVf/
should be directed to the non-jlood prone area of the parcel If there is no option but to
build in the jloodplam, a structure should be sited as far back avvayfrom the v.atercourse as
practicable Some commuJ1lties simp(v prohibit development in the jloodplain altogether
}vzth some exceptions for agricultural uses )
~
SubdIVISIOn of Land. DIvlSlons ofland created by subdIVISIOns, short subdIVISIOns, large lot
subdIVISIons, and bmdmg SIte plans (see TCC Chapter 18.08) shall comply WIth the
followmg:
o
(Comment: State CTED model 11 /03 FEMA's subdivlsion standards relate exc/usrvelv to
minimizl11gjlood losses to buildmgs and infrastructure in new subdlvisions that may be
platted in the jloodplain However, FEM4 's Fish-Flood ordinance strongly suggests that
new subdivisions be consistent with the need to maximize riparian ecosystems, allow for
channel migration, and preserve existlllg beneficial natural functions bv either not allowing
new subdil'lslOns injloodplains, or designl11g new subdlvisiOns to not allow buildable lots in
thejloodplain This is supported by a document prepared by the American Planning
Association, entitled SubdlvlslOn Design m Flood Hazard Areas, v.lllch was funded by
FEMA
Floodplain Management, Higher Regulatory Standards, FEMA Region 10, 2002 All too
often developments placed m thejloodplain are "islands" durl11g ajlood. This creates a
dangerous sztuatlOn for property owners tlying to cross jloodwaters by foot or by vehicle.
Thls island effect also places a burden on local emergency services that must evacuate
stranded homeowners To combat thls, a provision in the localjlood ordl11ance could
require that all developments have at least one exit route that will remain dry during a jlood
event)
MmImIze fIsk of damage All subdIVISIons shall be deSIgned and located conSIstent 0
v,'Ith the need to mmImIze flood damage (from 1438 050(4}(a)) WIthout new
Tee 17 15700
28
Draft: 03/06/05
o
c
c
;'--;,'\1~~'1f.'""" ~;~T .
structural flood protectIon. (Adapted from Floodplain Management, Higher
Regulatory Standards, FEMA Region 10, 2002)
2.
Access. Each lot shall be accessible by a road located outsIde of the 100-year
floodplaIn and any documented channel mIgratIon hazard area
3.
Mimmum bUIldable area. Each lot shall have at least rOPTION: 12,500 square feet
of bUIldable area If served by an on sIte sewage dIsposal system 1 or 5,000 square feet
or the mInImUm lot SIze, whIchever IS less, If served by sewerl outsIde of the 100-
year floodplaIn, hIgh ground water hazard area and NDZ, and 1 OO-year channel
mIgratIon hazard area (See SectIon 17.15.870, rIparIan management zone).
4
UtIlItIes. All subdIVISIOn/short subdIvIsIOn proposals and bIndIng sIte plans shall
ffiwe provIde for the locatIOn and constructIon of publIc utIlItIes and facIlItIes, such
as sewer, gas, electrIcal and water systems, located and constructed 10 a manner that
te mImmIze~ potentIal for flood damage, consIstent WIth Chapter 14 38 (from
14 38 050(4) (b)
5
DraInage All subdIvIsIOn proposals shall provIde for ffiwe adequate SIte draInage
provIded to reduce exposure to flood damage, ~detenmned by the approval
authorIty ifrom14 38 050(4) (c))
6.
Plat Map. See SectIOn 18.10.050, SubmIssIOn ReqUIrements, and SubsectIOn
18.16.020, SpecIfic ReqUIrements. (Comment: The bracketed language below will
be removed from this Section and incorporated in Title 18, Platting and Subdivisions
and applied to all subdivisions, short subdivisions and large lot subdivisions, as
appropriate)
[Base flood elevatIOn data for 100-year floodplaIns and hIl!h ground water hazard
areas, 1 OO-year channel mIgratIon hazard areas, and other cntIcal areas shall be
IdentIfied on the prelImInary and final plat. for all subdIvIsIOn proposals.
A note shall be placed on the plat IdentIfYIng any use restnctIons on IndlVlduallots
requIred pursuant to TCC Chapter 17.15 and IndIcatIng that future development may
be subject to reVIew for complIance WIth Chapter 14.38.]
A notIce shall be provIded on the face of all recorded subdIvIsIOns, short
subdIVISIons or bIndIng SIte plans and all deeds for any lots subject to flood or
channel mIgratIon hazards, as follows.
"Lots and structures located WIthIn flood hazard areas may be Inaccessible by
emergency vehIcles dunng flood events. ReSIdents and property owners should
take approPrIate advance precautIons." (Adapted from King County Draft 9/03)]
R.
Flood Hazard ReductIon. Flood hazard reductIon shall be conSIstent WIth SectIon 17 15.870,
Important HabItats and SpeCIes.
TCC 17 15700
29
Draft: 03/06/05
(Comment: WAC 173-26-221(3)(b) Flooding of rivers, streams, and other shorelines is a
natural process that is affected by factors and land uses occurring throughout the 0
tvatershed. Past land use practices have disrupted hydrological processes and increased the
rate and volume of run off thereby exacerbating flood hazards and reducing ecological
jimctions Flood hazard reduction measures are most effective .when integrated into
comprehensive strategies that recognize the natural hydrogeological and biological
processes of Hater bodies Over the long term, the most effective means of flood hazard
reduction is to prevent or remove development inflood-prone areas, to manage stormwater
'within the flood plain, and to maintain or restore river and stream systems' natural
hydrological and geomorphological processes
Structural flood hazard reduction measures, such as diking, even if effective in reducl11g
inundation in a portion of the watershed, can intensify flooding elselt here. Moreover,
structural flood hazard reduction measures can damage ecological jimctions crucial to fish
and wildlife species, bank stability, and water quality Therefore, structural flood hazard
reductLOn measures shall be avoided whenever possible. When necessary, they shall be
accomplished in a manner that assures no net loss of ecological jimctLOns and ecosvstem-
wide processes
(i) Where feasible, give preference to nonstructural flood hazard reduction measures
over structural measures
(iv) Assure that flood hazard protection measures do not result in a net loss of ecological
jimctions associated with the rivers and streams
(1~ Plan for and facilitate returning Ylver and stream corridors to more natural 0
hydrological conditions Recognize that seasonal flooding is an essential natural process
(vii) Local governments are encouraged to plan for and facilitate removal of artificial
restnctions to natural channel migratLOn, restoration of off channel hydrological
connections and return river processes to a more natural state where feasible and
appropriate.
WAC 173-26-221 (3) (c) (til) Place new structuraljlood hazard reduction measures
landward of the associated wetlands, and designated vegetation conservation areas,
except for actIOns that increase ecological functIOns, such as wetland restoratLOn, or
as noted below Provided that such jlood hazard reductIOn projects be authorized if it
is determined that no other alternative to reduce jlood hazard to existing
development is feasible. 171e need for, and analYSIS of feasible alternatives to,
structural improvements shall be documented through a geotechnical analysis
WAC 173-26-221 (3) (c) (iv) ReqUire that new structural publicjlood hazard
reduction measures, such as dikes and levees, dedicate and Improve public access
pathways unless public access improvements would cause unavoidable health or
safety hazards to the public, inherent and unavoidable securzty problems,
unacceptable and unmltigable significant ecological impacts, unavoidable conjlict
With the proposed use, or a cost that IS disproportionate and unreasonable to the 0
total long-term cost of the development.
TCC 17 15700
30
Draft: 03/06/05
c
c
c
t., 'lj'.
WAC 173-26-221 (3) (c) (v) Require that the removal of gravel for flood management
purposes be consIstent with an adopted flood hazard reduction plan and wzth this
chapter and allowed only after a biological and geomorphological study shows that
extraction has a long-term benefit to flood hazard reduction, does not result in a net
loss of ecological functions, and is part of a comprehensive flood management
solution. Shoreline Master Program Guidelines (WAC 173-26)
S
On-sIte Sewage Systems, Sewer ServIce Lmes, and Wells.
1 New or replacement on-sIte sewage systems, mdIvIdual wells, and sewer lInes
servIng an approved IndIVIdual use are allowed as specIfied In Table 7-1 If:
a. They comply wIth The Rules and RegulatIons of The Thurston County Board
of Health GovernIng DIsposal of Sewage, as amended. and
b. They are consIstent WIth Chapter 14.38. and
c. They are located to avoId Impamnent or contamInatIOn dunng floodIng; and
d.
An alternatIve locatIon IS not aVaIlable on-SIte outsIde of the hazard area
[OPTION. The approval authonty may reqUIre the applIcant to demonstrate
that due to phYSIcal constramts (e.g.. topography. sOlI condItIons. or the
configuratIOn of the SIte). another SIte 'configuratIon would not allow the
development to occur WIthout IntruSIOn or WIth less IntruSIOn mto the hazard
area than the proposal: and
e. Any sewage dIsposal system IS as far as possible from the mIgratmg channel,
and
f. They comply WIth SectIon 17 15.870. Important HabItats and SpeCIes.
(Comment: Floodplain Management. Higher Regulatory Standards, FEMA Region
10, 2002 New on-site sewage disposal systems are prohibited in the Riparian
Buffer Zone, the jloodway, in areas not yet mapped v"here there could be channel
migration. Septic systems are often destroyed when channels migrate resulting in
negative impacts to ~vater quality, and can intelfere with natural channel migration
processes Given this, many communities restrict the placement of septic systems
within the riparian buffer zone, jloodway, 1 a-year jloodplain, or some other setback
distance.)
2.
FaIlIng sewage dIsposal systems. FaIlIng onsIte sewage dIsposal systems shall be
remedIed conSIstent WIth The Rules and RegulatIons of The Thurston County Board
of Health GovernIng DIsposal of Sewage, as amended, Chapter 14.38, and, If
applIcable, SectIon 17.15.870, Important HabItats and SpeCIes.
Tee 17 15700
31
Draft: 03/06/05
T. Stormwater RetentIon, Treatment and Conveyance FaclhtIes.
.L
Maintenance and repaIr. MaIntenance and repair of eXisting stormwater retentIon,
detentIon, treatment, and conveyance systems IS permitted.
o
2 New stormwater facihtIes. New stormwater facIlitIes and swales proposed to store,
treat and/or convey stormwater may be constructed consistent With the Dramage
DeSign and ErOSIOn Control Manual for Thurston County, Chapter 15.05 TCe, as
amended and SectIon 17.15.870, Important Wildhfe Habitat.
3. Temporary sediment ponds Temporary sediment ponds are allowed In the RDZ
associated With high ground water hazard areas between March 16 and October 31.
Temporary ponds may be located In other flood and channel migratIon hazard areas
dunng thiS same tIme penod If they comply With Section 17.15.870. Important
Habitats and Species.
U Hazardous FaclhtIes and Matenals.
1.
Storage of hazardous matenal. Stora'ge of hazardous materials, sewage siurlge,
fertlhzers, pestiCides, herbiCides. or chemical or bIOlogical substances defined as a
hazardous/dangerous waste In Chapter 173-303 WAC, or any other substances,
sohds or hqUlds In quantItIes regulated by SectIOn 17.15.530, Table 5-2, shall be
stored where they are at least nsk of being Inundated With floodwater, consistent
With chapters 173-303 WAC and 173-360 W Ae, TCC Chapter 14.32, InternatIonal
Fire Code, and Article VI of the Rules and RegulatIOns of the Thurston County
Board of Health GovernIng N onpomt Source PollutIOn, 1994, as amended.
o
2 Temporary storage. The Development Services Department Director or deSignee
may reqUlre removal oftemporarv stagIng areas or stockpiles of eqUIPment,
matenals or substances In the floodway and/or floodplaIn between November 1 and
March 15 If s/he detenmnes such use or actIvity IS hazardous to the pubhc health,
safety or welfare.
(Comment: Floodplain Management, Higher Regulatory Standards. FEMA Region
10. 2002 Petroleum products, chemicals and other toxic substances located in the
floodplain not only leak during a flood causing health/ecological problems
Hazardous materials should be stored outside the floodplain. or, at a mi11lmum, be
elevated higher than the base flood elevation with expliCIt anchoring requirements)
17 15 740 FloodplaInS, streams, and v;etlands SpeCial reports. The follOWIng speCial reports
are reqUlred for uses and actiVItIes proposed to be located WithIn flood and channel migratIOn
hazard areas, Including the NDZ and RDZ associated With high ground water hazard areas. th€
vanous catcgones draInage and erosIOn control plan, topographic survey of the site plan, and flood
proofing certificatIon. If the sublect site contaInS a channel migratIon zone IdentIfied pursuant to
SectIOn 17.15.710 e, the apphcant shall submit a 100-year channel migratIon hazard area report.
AEvery applicatIOn [ar develapmeHt proposal [Dr a Groups A and B penmt V;hllch eontams a \:Ise or actInt)' subjeet to 0
Table 5 wlthlH a ORe hl:mdred year floodplalR, or a floodway shall pro';ide the [olloY/lag speeial reports:
TCC 17 15700
32
Draft: 03/06/05
c
o
c
'.,];:>1. '/"~q:P,,:T'~~-' ;i 't.P
'f~"I'~ ,;.;
17.15. 8701005 fleodplalRs, streams, and wetlands Special reports reqUirements. The follovimg describes the
reqUIrements of each special report:
A. DraInage and ErOSIOn Control Plan.
1 The applIcant shall submIt a DraInage and ErOSIOn Control Plan whIch ThIS plan
sflall addresses methods to mInImIZe erOSIOn and contaIn soIl wIthIn the project
boundanes dunng constructIon and to prOVIde for stormwater management from the
SIte and ItS surroundmgs dunng and after constructIOn, conSIstent WIth the The desl;n
standards for this plan are eontamed lI1 the Dramage DesIgn and ErOSIOn Control Manual
for Thurston County, Chapter 15 05 TCC, as amended.
B GradIng Plan.
1 The applIcant shall submIt a gradIng plan shall be submItted whIch ThIS plan shall
IdentI:fYIes the proposed development project Includmg the movement ofmatenal
on-SIte along wIth the proposed and eXIstIng contours of the SIte, and cross sectIOns
thereof.
2 ThIS report shall be prepared by a cIvIl engmeer lIcensed In the state of Washmgton,
conSIstent WIth the standards for thIS report are found In Chapter 70 of the
InternatIOnal BUIldmg Code, as amended. ThIS plaa shall be reVIewed by Tht1fSton CmIR!)'
deyelopment servIces department.
C
TopographIc Survey (This is addressed in TCC Chapter 14 38)
1 The applIcant shall submIt a topographIc survey ThIS survey shall be reqUIred when
the sublect property lIes wIthIn the one-hundred-year floodplaIn of any nver, lake,
wetland or manne waters wIthIn Thurston County pursuant to Chapter 14.38 TCC, as
amended, or wIthIn a hIgh ground water hazard area/NDZ/RDZ or In a 100-year
channel mIgratIon hazard area. The survey It-shall IndIcate the one-hundred-year
floodplam elevatIon above mean sea level of the SIte or BFE, as applIcable (see
SectIon 17.15.730 E) and the locatIon and first habItable floor elevatIon of any
proposed structures as reqUIred by TCC SubsectIOn 14.38 040, as amended or above
the BFE conSIstent WIth SectIons 17.15.730 E and 0 (3).
3 Except m hIgh ground water flood hazard areas, where elevatIOn data IS not
aVaIlable from the Flood Insurance Rate Maps the survey shall establIsh an
apprOXImate flood elevatIon based upon other sources of InformatIon as described In
TCC SectIOn 14 38 040, as amended. Ih Flood proofIng CertIfIcatIOn. (This is addressed
in TCC Chapter 14 38)
D Channel mIgratIon hazard area report. Unmapped channel mIgratIon hazard areas.
1
If the approval authonty determInes that a proposed prolect IS m an hIstone channel
mIgratIOn zone of a Type S or F stream (now Type 1-3 streams) and the 100-year
channel mIgratIon hazard area has not been mapped for the SIte, the applIcant shall
TCC 17 15700
33
Draft: 03/06/05
IdentIfy the locatIon of the 100-year channel mIgratIOn hazard area on the SIte as
follows.
o
a.
A detenmnatIOn as to whether the 1 OO-year channel mIgratIon hazard area IS
located on SIte and, If so, ItS locatIOn, shall be made by a QualIfied
profeSSIOnal profiCIent In flUYIal geomorphology (e.g., possess a graduate
degree In Geology or PhYSICal Geography WIth speCIalIzatIOn In flUVIal
geomorphology, and have at least two years of professIOnal expenence) usmg
a relIable methodology to determme channel mIgratIon accepted by the
Development ServIces Department (e g., as described In Forest PractIces
Board Manual, Standard Methods for IdentIfyIng Channel MIgratIOn Zones
and Bankfull Channel Features, dated 81200 I, as amended, or as described m
"A Framework for DelIneatIng Channel MIlZratIOn Zones." WashmlZton
Department of Ecology, 2003 as amended). Maps delIneatmg the 100-year
channel mIgratIOn zone shall be of a scale and format speCIfied by the
Development ServIces Department.
h
'Th" f",l1",,,,,...... "',.""',, "h",l1 h" ",,,,...,,,rl,,,.,,rl ","t",rl" ",fth" 1 nn_""",,. "'l-,,,......,,I
.I. .1..1._ ...'-.1.1..1....... .. .1..1..1.,..., _. ................... ....................... OJ '"' ...........,......v........._........... ....., _~.........__ ......... ............. .I. 'U' OJ , .............. _....._.........._...
mIgratIon hazard area.
h
Areas separated from the stream channel by a legally estabhshed
structure that the approval authonty, In consultatIon WIth a QualIfied
profeSSIOnal. determInes WIll block channel mIgratIon. ThIS may
mclude, but IS not lImIted to, dIkes and publIc roads that extend above
the I OO-year flood elevatIOn whIch are constructed to remam mtact
through a 100-year flood. Constramts to channel mIgratIOn that do not
extend above the 100-year flood elevatIon do not necessanly restrIct
channel mIgratIon and shall not be conSIdered to lImIt channel
mIgratIon unless demonstrated otherwIse based on SCIentIfic and
techmcal mformatIOn. (Adaptedfrom WAC 173-26-221(3))
o
11. Areas separated from the stream channel by a natural geologIC
feature, such as a rock outcrop, that the approval authonty, m
consultatIOn WIth a QualIfied profeSSIonaL determmes wtll stop
channel mIgratIon.
1. ThIS certification Ghall be req1:l1fed wRen a property lIes wlthm the one hundred year floodplam (flood hazard
zone) of aRY nver, lalce, pORd, wetland, or manne ,;vaters WithIn Thmston County.
2. It shall consist ora registered prof-esslOna1 engIneer's or architect's certificatIOn that a structure constructed
';..lthIn a flood hazard zone has met the floodproofing cntena ofTCC Section 11.3&.010 as amended
The revle,v authont)' may cHarge the applIcant for Its expeRses 1H prondIng the asslstaace described lFl sldbsectlons .^.
and B of thiS sectIOn above. (This item will be addressed in Section 17 15 400)
Speelal management areas l-hgh grouRd water flood hazard area staadards.
The fo11o':/lng performance standards _apply to those Mses and actiVities in Table/or topography v..hen earned 01:1t
Within a high groMIld water flood Hazard area. Where no performance standards are speCified have been developed for
the ldses and activItIes In Table _, the re'.-Iew a1:1thonty shall re'/Iew prOjects based upon the purposes and provIsions of 0
thiS chapter and SectIOn 11.3&.050, as amended. Special managemeat areas High ground ':Iater flood hazard area
renew standards. 6.AssIstance to applIcant and applicatIOns.
TCC 17 15700
34
Draft: 03/06/05
c
o
c
''i"i:'',1i'i:[~~'~l1~: '\-''T~'~'"'' '"f1";'~\. .j !'F:)>~{?,:
+,.;,
Special management areas HI;h grmmd '.vater flooq hazard area admlFllstratlve actlOHS. The county shall Issue a
decISIon for each lalla use applIcation Hlvolnng a lugh ground '.vater area In accordance with the applIcable Type I, II,
III, or IV n~yiew process described In Chapter 20.60. ,^.dmInlStratlve deCISions may be appealed pursuant to SectIOn
17,15.110. Special mana;ement areas Hi;h groufld water flood hazard area reasonable use exceptloH. ,'\flY property
o''vner may apply for a reasonable use exceptIOn pursuaHt to SectIOn 17.15. 870115 to allow a use or activit)' WithIn a
high ;round '.'/ater flood hazard area ,'.'hlch IS prohibited by thiS chapter, or for which approval has been defiled under
thiS chapter due to the 10catlOH of the Hse or actmt)' (redundant)
TYPE Of DEVHOP~IHJT
EXisting Single Family, New Single NeVi Single ~ ~
AdditlOAS, &. Fal1'1ily &. ~ Commercial, Public YtHtties
;\ccesso!)' StrHctures /\ccessory Residential faeilities,
~ Strueture on Su13t1ivlsioRs* Industnal, aRa
,^.CTIVITY E:'ostlRg Lots Multi Family
ST.^.t-1DARDS Development
+tmbef Penllllted P en11llt ed MaxlIllUm 50~;, Ma:-;inlulfl 75~;, by P enl1l tt ed
h ar... e~;t i n g by '.'olume of volume of trees OR
trees on site sire
+tmbef ,'\I1Y time ,\RY time JURe I October JURe I October ,\11'0' time
HarvestIng tllne of M M
yea!'
Replanting Ntme Ntme ,\s requIred by As required by As required
~ forest Land forest Lana by Forest
Conversion ConversIOn Penmt ha!J.6
~ COnyerSIOR
Pemttt
MaXimum 3S~/v of lot 35~/v of lot 35~/v of cach lot S9 (lS~<' of let, W%
111lperYIOUS based UpOR tree
5tiffaee -."
filling iR Only to IInpro\'e BuIlding area t-lot pen11ltted Must meet Builtling M u~;t meet
designates l'1igh eXisting structures, and dn;iev.ay Standards ~ 11.3S.050
ground water additions and aceess only; must ~11.38.050
flood Hazard arcas driveway access; IflHst meet ~ 11.38.050
meet ~ 11.3S.050
Setbacks from 50 feet or 110 c:Joser W-feet ~ 50 feet for all .^.s required
designated areas than existing structures and pm'ed by pel11llt
strH cttlres iIfeas
Building ReC:Ol11l11ended for Requm~d Required Required Reqlllrcd
standard" ~ additioRs
11.38.050
TCC 17 15700
35
Draft: 03/06/05
c
c
c
YELM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
APRIL 4, 2005 600 P M
YELM CITY HALL
John Thomson called the meeting to order at 6 00 P M
Members present: John Graver, John Thomson, Glen Cunningham, Everette Schirman, Greg Mattocks,
I
Carlos Perez, and Norm Allard
Staff' Grant Beck, Jim Gibson, and Gary Carlson
Members Absent: None
At 6 02 P M John Thomson welcomed the public to the open house on the Critical Areas Code update and
went off the record
At 7 35 P M John Thomson came back on the record to close the open house and to Adjourn the meeting
Beck, Community Development Director
John Thomson, Chair
Date
\
Yelm Planning Commission
April 4, 2005
Page 1
City of Yelm
l~
~
Planning Commission
AGENDA
CITY OF YELM PLANNING COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING
Monday,ApriI4,2005
6 00 P M
YELM CITY HALL
105 YELM AVE WEST
1 Call to Order and Roll Call
2 Open House - Critical Areas Code Update
(~
~ Enclosures are available to non-Commission members upon request.
It is the City of Yelm's policy to provide reasonable accommodations for people with
disabilities If you are a person with a disability in need of accommodations to conduct
business, or to participate in government processes or activities, please contact Agnes
Bennick, at 360-458-8404 at least four (4) working days prior to the scheduled event.
All Planning Commission meetings are audio taped For information on obtaining a
copy, please call the Community Development Department at (360) 458-3835
3 Adjourn
Next regular meeting shall be
Monday, April 18, 2005 - 4 00 P M
Yelm City Hall Council Chambers
c
c
YELM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MARCH 21,2005 400 P M
YELM CITY HALL
John Thomson called the meeting to order at 4 00 P m
Members present: John Graver, John Thomson, Glen Cunningham, Greg Mattocks, Carlos Perez, and
Norm Allard
Staff' Grant Beck, and Tami Merriman
Members Absent: Everette Schirman, unexcused
Motion No
Approval of Minutes.
05-07 MOTION MADE BY NORM ALLARD, SECONDED BY GREG MATTOCKS TO APPROVE THE
MINUTES FROM THE FEBRUARY 28, 2005 MEETING. MOTION CARRIED
Public Communications.
None
Public HearinQs.
None
c
Development Update.
Mr. Beck presented a power point presentation updating the Commission on development, public and
private, in the City over the past 3 to 10 years. The presentation included housing and plat information,
permits past and present, and photo's of projects in progress and completed
Mr. Beck explained how the City has met its growth management requirements in regards to housing and
density, and how development has occurred based on development regulations and design guidelines
Mr. Allard asked if the Commission could be updated more frequently on new, current, and completed
projects
Mr. Beck responded that he would include it future meetings, and would make sure the Planning
Commission was on the weekly permit update emaillist.
Other:
Mr. Beck informed the Commission of two large project applications received by the Community
Development Department. PACLAND submitted an application for Walmart, and Tahoma Terra LLC
submitted application for a Master Planned Community on 220 acres Mr. Beck suggested that the
Planning Commission create a subcommittee for each project, to review the application, and submit
comments to the Department from the Commission The subcommittee for the Tahoma Terra project shall
include John Graver and Norm Allard The subcommittee for the Walmart application shall include Carlos
Perez, Glen Cunningham, and Greg Mattocks.
Mr. Beck explained that the Planning Commission will hold an open house on Monday, April 4, 2005, at
6 00 PM to solicit comments from the Draft Critical Areas Ordinance update The open house has been
scheduled in the evening on request. Based on comments received at the open house will determine the
schedule for public hearing to receive testimony on the update
05-08 MOTION MADE BY GREG MATTOCKS, SECONDED BY CARLOS PEREZ TO ADJOURN MEETING
ADJOURNED AT 510 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
c
Tami Merriman, Assistant Planner
John Thomson, Chair
Date
Yelm Planning Commission
March 21, 2005
Page 1
I
I
City of Yelm
~
~
Planning Commission
AGENDA
CITY OF YELM PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, March 21, 2005
4 00 P M
YELM CITY HALL
105 YELM AVE WEST
-
1 Call to Order, Roll Call, Approval of Minutes
February 21,2005, minutes enclosed
2 Public Communications (Not associated with measures or topics for which public
hearings have been held or for which are anticipated)
3 Public Hearings - None
~ 4 Other
Development Update
Planning Commission Project Review Update
5 Adjourn
Enclosures are available to non-Commission members upon request.
It is the City of Yelm's policy to provide reasonable accommodations for people with
disabilities If you are a person with a disability in need of accommodations to conduct
business, or to participate in government processes or activities, please contact Agnes
Bennick, at 360-458-8404 at least four (4) working days prior to the scheduled event.
All Planning Commission meetings are audio taped For information on obtaining a
copy, please call the Community Development Department at (360) 458-3835
Next SPECIAL meeting shall be
Wednesday, April 4, 2005 - 6 00 P M
Yelm City Hall Council Chambers
Next regular meeting shall be:
Monday, April 18, 2005 - 4 00 P M
Yelm City Hall Council Chambers
o
~ p ..
o
o
o
City of Yelrn
Critical Areas Code Update
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
" (l
I.
c
Chapter 14 08
Critical Areas
1408010 General Provisions 1
1408020 Best Available Science. 3
1408030 Applicability, Exemption, and Exceptions 5
1408040 Allowed Activities 8
1408050 Critical Areas Review Process 11
1408060 Determination Process 15
1408070 Modifications and Variances 16
1408080 Unauthorized Critical Area Alterations and Enforcement 17
1408090 General Critical Area Protective Measures 18
1408100 Wetlands 19
1408110 Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas 27
1408 120 Frequently Flooded Areas 29
1408130 Geologically Hazardous Areas 33
1408140 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas 36
1408150 Definitions 44
0
c
I,
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
C 1408.010 General Provisions
A. Purpose
o
B
C
c
The purpose of this Chapter is to designate and classify ecologically sensitive and
hazardous areas and to protect these areas and their functions and values, while also
allowing for reasonable use of private property
This Chapter is to implement the goals, policies, guidelines, and requirements of the
Yelm Comprehensive Plan and the Growth Management Act, Chapter 36 70A RCW
Critical areas provide a variety of valuable and beneficial biological and physical functions
that benefit the City and its residents, and/or may pose a threat to human safety or to
public and private property
By limiting development and alteration of critical areas, this Chapter seeks to
a. Protect members of the public and public resources and facilities from injury, loss
of life, or property damage due to landslides and steep slope failures, erosion,
seismic events, volcanic eruptions, or flooding,
b Maintain healthy, functioning ecosystems through the protection of unique,
fragile, and valuable elements of the environment, including ground and surface
waters, wetlands, and fish and wildlife and their habitats, and to conserve the
biodiversity of plant and animal species,
c. Direct activities not dependent on critical areas resources to less ecologically
sensitive sites and mitigate unavoidable impacts to critical areas by regulating
alterations in and adjacent to critical areas, and
d Prevent cumulative adverse environmental impacts to water quality, wetlands,
and fish and wildlife habitat, and the overall net loss of wetlands, frequently
flooded areas, and habitat conservation areas.
The regulations of this Chapter are intended to protect critical areas in accordance with
the Growth Management Act and through the application of the best available science, as
determined according to WAC 365-195-900 through 365-195-925, and in consultation
with state and federal agencies and other qualified professionals.
This Chapter is to be administered with flexibility and attention to site-specific
characteristics, It is not the intent of this Chapter to make a parcel of property unusable
by denying its owner reasonable economic use of the property or to prevent the provision
of pUblic facilities and services necessary to support existing development and planned
for by the community without decreasing current service levels below minimum
standards
Authority
1 As provided herein, the Director of Community Development is given the authority to
interpret and apply, and the responsibility to enforce this Chapter to accomplish the
stated purpose
2. The City may withhold, condition, or deny development permits or activity approvals to
ensure that the proposed action is consistent with this Chapter
Relationship to Other Regulations
1 These critical areas regulations shall apply as an overlay and in addition to zoning and
other development regulations adopted by the City
2. When a property or development is subject to more than one critical area overlay or other
regulations apply to a development, the more restrictive shall apply
3 Compliance with the provisions of this Chapter does not constitute compliance with other
1
2.
3
4
5
6
~ Page 1 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18,2005
federal, state, and local regulations and permit requirements. The applicant is
responsible for complying with these requirements, apart from the process established in
this Chapter
Unless otherwise indicated in this Chapter, the applicant shall be responsible for the initiation,
preparation, submission, and expense of all required reports, assessment(s), studies, plans,
reconnaissance(s), peer review(s) by qualified consultants, and other work prepared in support of
or necessary to review the application
Interpretation
In the interpretation and application of this Chapter, the provisions of this Chapter shall be
considered to be the minimum requirements necessary, shall be liberally construed to serve the
purpose of this Chapter, and shall be deemed to neither limit nor repeal any other provisions
under state statute
E. Jurisdiction - Critical Areas
B
D
1 The City shall regulate all uses, activities, and developments within, adjacent to, or likely
to affect, one or more critical areas, consistent with the best available science and the
provisions herein
2. Critical areas regulated by this Chapter include.
a. Wetlands;
b Critical aquifer recharge areas,
c. Frequently flooded areas,
d Geologically hazardous areas, and
e Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas.
All areas within the City meeting the definition of one or more critical areas, regardless of
any formal identification, are hereby designated critical areas and are subject to the
provisions of this Chapter
Areas Adjacent to Critical Areas Subject to Regulation Areas adjacent to critical areas
shall be considered to be within the jurisdiction of these requirements and regulations.
Adjacent shall mean any activity located'
3
4
)
o
o
a. On a site immediately adjoining a critical area,
b A distance equal to or less than the required critical area buffer width and
building setback;
c A distance equal to or less than one-half mile (2,640 feet) from a bald eagle nest;
d. A distance equal to or less than three hundred (300) feet upland from a stream,
wetland, or water body;
e Within the floodway, floodplain, or channel migration zone, or
f A distance equal to or less than two hundred (200) feet from a critical aqUifer
recharge area.
F Protection of Critical Areas
Any action taken pursuant to this Chapter shall result in equivalent or greater functions and
values of the critical areas associated with the proposed action, as determined by the best
available science All actions and developments shall be designed and constructed to avoid,
minimize, and restore all adverse impacts. Applicants must first demonstrate an inability to avoid
or reduce impacts, before restoration and compensation of impacts will be allowed No activity or 0
use shall be allowed that results in a net loss of the functions or values of critical areas
- Page 2 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
o 1408020 Best Available Science
A. Protect Functions and Values of Critical Areas With Special Consideration to Anadromous Fish
Critical area reports and decisions to alter critical areas shall rely on the best available science to
protect the functions and values of critical areas and must give special consideration to
conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fish, such
as salmon and bull trout, and their habitat.
B Best Available Science to be Consistent With Criteria The best available science is that scientific
information applicable to the critical area prepared by local, state, or federal natural resource
agencies, a qualified scientific professional, or team of qualified scientific professionals that is
consistent with criteria established in WAC 365~195-900 through WAC 365-195-925
C Characteristics of a Valid Scientific Process In the context of critical areas protection, a valid
scientific process is one that produces reliable information useful in understanding the
consequences of a local government's regulatory decisions, and in developing critical areas
policies and development regulations that will be effective in protecting the functions and values
of critical areas To determine whether information received during the permit review process is
reliable scientific information, the administrator shall determine whether the source of the
information displays the characteristics of a valid scientific process. Such characteristics are as
follows.
Peer Review The information has been critically reviewed by other persons who are
qualified scientific experts in that scientific discipline The proponents of the information
have addressed the criticism of the peer reviewers Publication in a refereed scientific
journal usually indicates that the information has been appropriately peer-reviewed,
Methods. The methods used to obtain the information are clearly stated and
reproducible The methods are standardized in the pertinent scientific discipline or, if not,
the methods have been appropriately peer-reviewed to ensure their reliability and validity;
Logical Conclusions and Reasonable Inferences. The conclusions presented are based
on reasonable assumptions supported by other studies and consistent with the general
theory underlying the assumptions The conclusions are logically and reasonably derived
from the assumptions and supported by the data presented Any gaps in information and
inconsistencies with other pertinent scientific information are adequately explained;
Quantitative Analysis The data have been analyzed using appropriate statistical or
quantitative methods,
Context. The information is placed in proper context. The assumptions, analytical
techniques, data, and conclusions are appropriately framed with respect to the prevailing
body of pertinent scientific knowledge, and
References. The assumptions, analytical techniques, and conclusions are well
referenced with citations to relevant, credible literature and other pertinent existing
information.
D Nonscientific Information Nonscientific information may supplement scientific information, but it
is not an adequate substitute for valid and available scientific information Common sources of
nonscientific information include anecdotal Information, non-expert opinion, and hearsay
E. Absence of Valid Scientific Information. Where there is an absence of valid scientific information
or incomplete scientific information relating to a critical area leading to uncertainty about the risk
to critical area function of permitting an alteration of or impact to the critical area, the
administrator shall'
o
o
2.
3
4
5
6
1
Take a "precautionary or a no-risk approach," that strictly limits development and land
use activities until the uncertainty is sufficiently resolved, and
Require application of an effective adaptive management program that relies on scientific
methods to evaluate how well regulatory and nonregulatory actions protect the critical
2.
- Page 3 -
.'
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
area. An adaptive management program is a formal and deliberate scientific approach to 0
taking action and obtaining information in the face of uncertainty An adaptive
management program shall.
a. Address funding for the research component of the adaptive management
program,
b Change course based on the results and interpretation of new information that
resolves uncertainties, and
c Commit to the appropriate timeframe and scale necessary to reliably evaluate
regulatory and nonregulatory actions affecting protection of critical areas and
anadromous fisheries
o
o
- Page 4 -
o
o
o
I,
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
14.08030 Applicability, Exemption, and Exceptions
A. Applicability
1 The provisions of this Chapter shall apply to all lands, all land uses and development
activity, and all structures and facilities in the City, whether or not a permit or
authorization is required, and shall apply to every person, firm, partnership, corporation,
group, governmental agency, or other entity that owns, leases, or administers land within
the City No person, company, agency, or applicant shall alter a critical area or buffer
except as consistent with the purposes and requirements of this Chapter
2 The City shall not approve any permit or otherwise issue any authorization to alter the
condition of any land, water, or vegetation, or to construct or alter any structure or
improvement in, over, or on a critical area or associated buffer, without first ensuring
compliance with the requirements of this Chapter
B Exempt Activities and Impacts to Critical Areas.
All exempt activities shall use reasonable methods to avoid potential impacts to critical areas
Any incidental damage to, or alteration of, a critical area that is not a necessary outcome of the
exempted activity shall be restored, rehabilitated, or replaced.
C Exempt Activities.
The following developments, activities, and associated uses shall be exempt from the provisions
of this Chapter, provided that they are otherwise consistent with the provisions of other local,
state, and federal laws and requirements
1 Emergencies. Those activities necessary to prevent an immediate threat to public health,
safety, or welfare, or that pose an immediate risk of damage to private property and that
require remedial or preventative action in a timeframe too short to allow for compliance
with the requirements of this Chapter
Emergency actions that create an impact to a critical area or its buffer shall use
reasonable methods to address the emergency; in addition, they must have the least
possible impact to the critical area or its buffer The person or agency undertaking such
action shall notify the City within one (1) working day following commencement of the
emergency activity Within thirty (30) days, the administrator shall determine if the action
taken was within the scope of the emergency actions allowed in this Subsection
After the emergency, the person or agency undertaking the action shall fully fund and
conduct necessary restoration and/or mitigation for any impacts to the critical area and
buffers resulting from the emergency action in accordance with an approved critical area
report and mitigation plan The person or agency undertaking the action shall apply for
review, and the alteration, critical area report, and mitigation plan shall be reviewed by
the City in accordance with the review procedures contained herein. Restoration and/or
mitigation activities must be initiated within one (1) year of the date of the emergency,
and completed in a timely manner;
2. Operation, Maintenance, or Repair Operation, maintenance, or repair of existing
structures, infrastructure improvements, utilities, public or private roads, dikes, levees, or
drainage systems, that do not require construction permits, if the activity does not further
alter or increase the impact to, or encroach further within, the critical area or buffer and
there is no increased risk to life or property as a result of the proposed operation,
maintenance, or repair
3 Passive Outdoor Activities. Recreation, education, and scientific research activities that
do not degrade the critical area.
Exception - Essential Public Facilities
1 If the application of this Chapter would prohibit a development proposal for an essential
public facility the agency or utility may apply for an exception
D
~ Page 5 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18,2005
E.
2.
Exception Request and Review Process. An application for a exception shall be made to
the City and shall include a critical area report. The administrator shall act on the
exception request as part of the underlying permit approval based on the proposal's
ability to comply with public agency and utility exception review criteria. The decision on
the exception may be appealed pursuant to the appeal procedures of the underlying
permit or approval.
Exception Criteria.
a. There is no other practical alternative to the proposed development with less
impact on the critical areas;
b The application of this Chapter would unreasonably restrict the ability to provide
utility services to the public;
c. The proposal does not pose an unreasonable threat to the public health, safety,
or welfare on or off the development proposal site,
d The proposal attempts to protect and mitigate impacts to the critical area
functions and values consistent with the best available science, and
e The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulations and standards
5 Burden of Proof The burden of proof shall be on the applicant to show that the criteria
are met.
4
Exception - Reasonable Use
If the application of this Chapter would deny all reasonable economic use of the subject
property, the City shall determine if compensation is an appropriate action, or the
property owner may apply for an exception
2. Exception Request and Review Process An application for a reasonable use exception
shall be made to the City and shall include a critical area report. The administrator shall
prepare a recommendation to the Hearing Examiner based on the proposal's ability to
comply with reasonable use exception criteria.
3 Hearing Examiner Review The Hearing Examiner shall review the application and
conduct a public hearing The Hearing Examiner shall approve, approve with conditions,
or deny the request based on the proposal's ability to comply with all of the reasonable
use exception review criteria.
4 Reasonable Use Review Criteria. Criteria for review and approval of reasonable use
exceptions follow, one or more may apply'
a. The application of this Chapter would deny all reasonable economic use of the
property;
b No other reasonable economic use of the property has less impact on the critical
area,
c. The proposed impact to the critical area is the minimum necessary to allow for
reasonable economic use of the property;
d. The inability of the applicant to derive reasonable economic use of the property is
not the result of actions by the applicant after the effective date of this Chapter,
or its predecessor;
e.
The proposal does not pose an unreasonable threat to the public health, safety,
or welfare on or off the development proposal site,
The proposal will result in no net loss of critical area functions and values
consistent with the best available science, or
The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulations and standards.
,J
o
o
o
f
g.
- Page 6 -
;.'U~'!'
',{\(
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
o
E.
Burden of Proof The burden of proof shall be on the applicant to show the exception meets the
criteria for approval.
c
o
- Page 7 -
Review Draft
March 18,2005
14 08.040 Allowed Activities 0
A. Critical Area Report. Activities allowed under this Chapter shall have been reviewed and
permitted or approved by the City, but do not require submittal of a separate critical area report,
unless required previously for an underlying permit. The administrator may apply conditions to
the underlying permit or approval to ensure that the allowed activity is consistent with the
provisions of this Chapter to protect critical areas.
B Required Use of Best Management Practices. All allowed activities shall be conducted using the
best management practices, that result in the least amount of impact to the critical areas. The
City shall observe the use of best management practices to ensure that the activity does not
result in degradation to the critical area. Any incidental damage to, or alteration of, a critical area
shall be restored, rehabilitated, or replaced
C Allowed Activities The following activities are allowed:
1 Permit Requests Subsequent to Previous Critical Area Review Development permits
and approvals that involve both discretionary land use approvals, and construction
approvals if all of the following conditions have been met:
a. The provisions of this Chapter have been previously addressed as part of
another approval;
b There have been no material changes in the potential impact to the critical area
or buffer since the prior review;
c. There is no new information available that is applicable to any critical area review
of the site or particular critical area;
d The permit or approval has not expired or, if no expiration date, no more than five
years have elapsed since the issuance of that permit or approval; and
e Compliance with any standards or conditions placed upon the prior permit or 0
approval has been achieved or secured,
2. Modification to Existing Structures. Structural modification of, addition to, or replacement
of an existing legally constructed structure that does not further alter or increase the
impact to the critical area or buffer and there is no increased risk to life or property as a
result of the proposed modification or replacement, provided that restoration of structures
substantially damaged by fire, flood, or act of nature must be initiated within 18 months of
the date of such damage, as evidenced by the issuance of a valid building permit, and
diligently pursued to completion,
3 Activities Within the Improved Right-of-Way Replacement, modification, installation, or
construction of utility facilities, lines, pipes, mains, equipment, or appurtenances, not
including substations, when such facilities are located within the improved portion of the
public right-of-way or a City authorized private roadway except those activities that alter a
wetland or watercourse, such as culverts or bridges, or result in the transport of sediment
or increased stormwater; subject to the following'
a. Critical area and/or buffer widths shall be increased, where possible, equal to the
width of the right-of-way improvement, including disturbed areas, and
b Retention and replanting of native vegetation shall occur wherever pOSSible along
the right-of-way improvement and resulting disturbance,
4 Minor Utility Projects. Utility projects which have minor or short-duration impacts to
critical areas, as determined by the administrator in accordance with the criteria below,
and which do not significantly impact the function or values of a critical area(s), provided
that such projects are constructed with best management practices and additional
restoration measures are provided Minor activities shall not result in the transport of 0
sediment or increased stormwater Such allowed minor utility projects shall meet the
following criteria:
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
- Page 8 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
o
There is no practical alternative to the proposed activity with less impact on
critical areas;
b The activity involves the placement of a utility pole, street signs, anchor, or vault
or other small component of a utility facility; and
c. The activity involves disturbance of an area less than 75 square feet;
5 Public and Private Pedestrian Trails Public and private pedestrian trails, except in
wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, or their buffers, subject to the
following'
a. The trail surface shall meet all other requirements including water quality
standards set forth in the [locally adopted stormwater management regulations];
b Critical area and/or buffer widths shall be increased, where possible, equal to the
width of the trail corridor, including disturbed areas; and
c. Trails proposed to be located in landslide or erosion hazard areas shall be
constructed in a manner that does not increase the risk of landslide or erosion
and in accordance with an approved geotechnical report;
6 Select Vegetation Removal Activities. The following vegetation removal activities,
provided that no vegetation shall be removed from a critical area or its buffer without
approval from the administrator'
a. The removal of the following vegetation with hand labor and light equipment:
o
o
a.
b
i. Invasive and noxious weeds,
II English Ivy (Hedera helix),
iii Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor, R. procerus), and
iv Evergreen blackberry (Rubus laciniatus),
The removal of trees from critical areas and buffers that are hazardous, posing a
threat to public safety, or posing an imminent risk of damage to private property,
provided that:
The applicant submits a report from a certified arborist, registered
landscape architect, or professional forester that documents the hazard
and provides a replanting schedule for the replacement trees;
ii. Tree cutting shall be limited to pruning and crown thinning, unless
otherwise justified by a qualified professional. Where pruning or crown
thinning is not sufficient to address the hazard, trees should be removed
or converted to wildlife snags,
iii. All vegetation cut (tree stems, branches, etc.) shall be left within the
critical area or buffer unless removal is warranted due to the potential for
disease or pest transmittal to other healthy vegetation,
iv The landowner shall replace any trees that are removed with new trees
at a ratio of two replacement trees for each tree removed (2: 1) within one
(1) year in accordance with an approved restoration plan. Replacement
trees may be planted at a different, nearby location if it can be
determined that planting in the same location would create a new hazard
or potentially damage the critical area. Replacement trees shall be
species that are native and indigenous to the site and a minimum of one
(1) inch in diameter-at-breast height (dbh) for deciduous trees and a
minimum of six (6) feet in height for evergreen trees as measured from
the top of the root ball,
- Page 9 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18,2005
7
v If a tree to be removed provides critical habitat, such as an eagle perch,
a qualified wildlife biologist shall be consulted to determine timing and
methods or removal that will minimize impacts, and
vi Hazard trees determined to pose an imminent threat or danger to public
health or safety, to public or private property, or of serious environmental
degradation may be removed or pruned by the landowner prior to
receiving written approval from City provided that within fourteen (14)
days following such action, the landowner shall submit a restoration plan
that demonstrates compliance with the provisions of this Chapter
c. Measures to control a fire or halt the spread of disease or damaging insects
consistent with the state Forest Practices Act; Chapter 76 09 RCW, [and local
forest practices regulations if adopted] provided that the removed vegetation
shall be replaced in-kind or with similar native species within one (1) year in
accordance with an approved restoration plan, and
d Unless otherwise provided, or as a necessary part of an approved alteration,
removal of any vegetation or woody debris from a habitat conservation area or
wetland shall be prohibited;
Chemical Applications The application of herbicides, pesticides, organic or mineral-
derived fertilizers, or other hazardous substances, if necessary, as approved by the City,
provided that their use shall be restricted in accordance with state Department of Fish
and Wildlife Management Recommendations and the regulations of the state Department
of Agriculture and the U S Environmental Protection Agency;
Minor Site Investigative Work. Work necessary for land use submittals, such as surveys,
soil logs, percolation tests, and other related activities, where such activities do not
require construction of new roads or significant amounts of excavation In every case,
impacts to the critical area shall be minimized and disturbed areas shall be immediately
restored; and
Navigational Aids and Boundary Markers Construction or modification of navigational
aids and boundary markers
8
9
- Page 10 -
o
o
o
i~' : I
Chapter 1408 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
c
c
14.08.050 Critical Areas Review Process
A. Critical Areas Report - Requirements
1 Preparation by Qualified Professional. If required by the administrator, the applicant shall
submit a critical area report prepared by a qualified professional as defined herein
2. Incorporating Best Available Science. The critical area report shall use scientifically valid
methods and studies in the analysis of critical area data and field reconnaissance and
reference the source of science used The critical area report shall evaluate the proposal
and all probable impacts to critical areas in accordance with the provisions of this
Chapter
3 Minimum Report Contents. At a minimum, the report shall contain the following'
a. The name and contact information of the applicant, a description of the proposal,
and identification of the permit requested;
b A copy of the site plan for the development proposal including'
A map to scale depicting critical areas, buffers, the development
proposal, and any areas to be cleared, and
ii. A description of the proposed stormwater management plan for the
development and consideration of impacts to drainage alterations.
c. The dates, names, and qualifications of the persons preparing the report and
documentation of any fieldwork performed on the site,
d Identification and characterization of all critical areas, wetlands, water bodies,
and buffers adjacent to the proposed project area,
e. A statement specifying the accuracy of the report, and all assumptions made and
relied upon,
f An assessment of the probable cumulative impacts to critical areas resulting from
development of the site and the proposed development;
g. An analysis of site development alternatives including a no development
alternative,
h A description of reasonable efforts made to apply mitigation sequencing pursuant
to Mitigation Sequencing to avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts to critical
areas,
Plans for adequate mitigation, as needed, to offset any impacts, in accordance
with Mitigation Plan Requirements, including, but not limited to
a. The impacts of any proposed development within or adjacent to a critical
area or buffer on the critical area; and
b The impacts of any proposed alteration of a critical area or buffer on the
development proposal, other properties and the environment;
A discussion of the performance standards applicable to the critical area and
proposed activity;
Financial guarantees to ensure compliance, and
Any additional information required for the critical area as specified in the
corresponding chapter
Unless otherwise provided, a critical area report may be supplemented by or
composed, in whole or in part, of any reports or studies required by other laws
and regulations or previously prepared for and applicable to the development
proposal site, as approved by the administrator
k.
I.
m
o
- Page 11 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
B
Critical Area Report - Modifications to Requirements
Limitations to Study Area. The administrator may limit the required geographic area of
the critical area report as appropriate if'
a. The applicant, with assistance from the City, cannot obtain permission to access
properties adjacent to the project area, or
b The proposed activity will affect only a limited part of the subject site
2. Modifications to Required Contents The applicant may consult with the administrator
prior to or during preparation of the critical area report to obtain City approval of
modifications to the required contents of the report where, in the judgment of a qualified
professional, more or less information is required to adequately address the potential
critical area impacts and required mitigation
3 Additional Information Requirements. The administrator may require additional
information to be included in the critical area report when determined to be necessary to
the review of the proposed activity in accordance with this Chapter Additional
information that may be required, includes, but is not limited to
a. Historical data, including original and subsequent mapping, aerial photographs,
data compilations and summaries, and available reports and records relating to
the site or past operations at the site,
b Grading and drainage plans, and
c. Information specific to the type, location, and nature of the critical area.
Mitigation Requirements
The applicant shall avoid all impacts that degrade the functions and values of a critical
area or areas Unless otherwise provided in this Chapter, if alteration to the critical area
is unavoidable, all adverse impacts to or from critical areas and buffers resulting from a
development proposal or alteration shall be mitigated using the best available science in
accordance with an approved critical area report and SEPA documents, so as to result in
no net loss of critical area functions and values
2. Mitigation shall be in-kind and on-site, when possible, and sufficient to maintain the
functions and values of the critical area, and to prevent risk from a hazard posed by a
critical area.
3 Mitigation shall not be implemented until after City approval of a critical area report that
includes a mitigation plan, and mitigation shall be in accordance with the provisions of the
approved critical area report.
Mitigation Sequencing Applicants shall demonstrate that all reasonable efforts have been
examined with the intent to avoid and minimize impacts to critical areas. When an alteration to a
critical area is proposed, such alteration shall be avoided, minimized, or compensated for in the
following sequential order of preference
1 Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action,
2. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
implementation, by using appropriate technology, or by taking affirmative steps, such as
project redesign, relocation, or timing, to avoid or reduce impacts,
3 Rectifying the impact to wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded
areas, and habitat conservation areas by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected
environment to the historical conditions or the conditions existing at the time of the
initiation of the project;
4 Minimizing or eliminating the hazard by restoring or stabilizing the hazard area through
engineered or other methods,
C
D
- Page 12 -
o
o
o
"
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
o
E.
5 Reducing or eliminating the impact or hazard over time by preservation and maintenance
operations during the life of the action,
6 Compensating for the impact to wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently
flooded areas, and habitat conservation areas by replacing, enhancing, or providing
substitute resources or environments, and
7 Monitoring the hazard or other required mitigation and taking remedial action when
necessary
Mitigation for individual actions may include a combination of the above measures
Mitigation Plan Requirements When mitigation is required, the applicant shall submit for
approval by City a mitigation plan as part of the critical area report. The mitigation plan shall
include
F
Environmental Goals and Objectives The mitigation plan shall include a written report
identifying environmental goals and objectives of the compensation proposed and
including.
a. A description of the anticipated impacts to the critical areas and the mitigating
actions proposed and the purposes of the compensation measures, including the
site selection criteria, identification of compensation goals, identification of
resource functions, and dates for beginning and completion of site compensation
construction activities. The goals and objectives shall be related to the functions
and values of the impacted critical area,
b A review of the best available science supporting the proposed mitigation and a
description of the report author's experience to date in restoring or creating the
type of critical area proposed, and
c. An analysis of the likelihood of success of the compensation project.
d Performance Standards. The mitigation plan shall include measurable specific
criteria for evaluating whether or not the goals and objectives of the mitigation
project have been successfully attained and whether or not the requirements of
this Chapter have been met.
e Detailed Construction Plans. The mitigation plan shall include written
specifications and descriptions of the mitigation proposed, such as
i. The proposed construction sequence, timing, and duration,
ii. Grading and excavation details,
iji Erosion and sediment control features,
iv A planting plan specifying plant species, quantities, locations, size,
spacing, and density; and
v Measures to protect and maintain plants until established.
These written specifications shall be accompanied by detailed site
diagrams, scaled cross-sectional drawings, topographic maps showing
slope percentage and final grade elevations, and any other drawings
appropriate to show construction techniques or anticipated final outcome.
Monitoring Program The mitigation plan shall include a program for monitoring construction of
the compensation project and for assessing a completed project. A protocol shall be included
outlining the schedule for site monitoring (for example, monitoring shall occur in years 1, 3, 5, and
7 after site construction), and how the monitoring data will be evaluated to determine if the
performance standards are being met. A monitoring report shall be submitted as needed to
document milestones, successes, problems, and contingency actions of the compensation
project. The compensation project shall be monitored for a period necessary to establish that
1
o
o
- Page 13 .
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
G
performance standards have been met, but not for a period less than five (5) years
Contingency Plan. The mitigation plan shall include identification of potential courses of action,
and any corrective measures to be taken if monitoring or evaluation indicates project performance
standards are not being met.
Financial Guarantees. The mitigation plan shall include financial guarantees, if necessary, to
ensure that the mitigation plan is fully implemented
H
- Page 14 -
..
o
o
o
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
o 14.08.060 Determination Process
A. Determination The administrator shall make a determination as to whether the proposed activity
and mitigation, if any, is consistent with the provisions of this Chapter The administrator's
determination shall be based on the Review Criteria.
B Review Criteria
1 Any alteration to a critical area, unless otherwise provided for in this Chapter, shall be
reviewed and approved, approved with conditions, or denied based on the proposal's
ability to comply with all of the following criteria.
a. The proposal minimizes the impact on critical areas in accordance with Mitigation
Sequencing,
b The proposal does not pose an unreasonable threat to the public health, safety,
or welfare on or off the development proposal site,
c. The proposal is consistent with the general purposes of this Chapter and the
public interest;
d. Any alterations permitted to the critical area are mitigated in accordance with
Mitigation Requirements;
e The proposal protects the critical area functions and values consistent with the
best available science and results in no net loss of critical area functions and
values, and
f The proposal is consistent with other applicable regulations and standards.
2. The City may condition the proposed activity as necessary to mitigate impacts to critical
areas and to conform to the standards required by this Chapter
3 Except as provided for by this Chapter, any project that cannot adequately mitigate its
impacts to critical areas in the sequencing order of preferences shall be denied
Completion of the Critical Area Review The City's determination regarding critical areas
pursuant to this Chapter shall be final concurrent with the final decision to approve, condition, or
deny the development proposal or other activity involved
Appeals. Any decision to approve, condition, or deny a development proposal or other activity
based on the requirements of this Chapter may be appealed according to, and as part of, the
appeal procedure for the permit or approval involved
o
C
D
c
- Page 15 -
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
1408.070 Modifications and Variances 0
A. Modifications to the prescriptive standards for the protection of critical areas may be authorized
by the City The Site Plan Review Committee shall review the request and make a written finding
that the request meets or fails to meet the modification criteria as part of the underlying permit
approval.
B Modification Criteria. A modification may be granted only if the applicant demonstrates that the
requested modification includes the best available science and gives special consideration to
conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fish habitat.
C Variances from the standards of this Chapter may be authorized by the City in accordance with
the procedures set forth in Chapter 2.26 Yelm Municipal Code The Hearing Examiner shall
review the request and make a written finding that the request meets or fails to meet the variance
criteria.
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Variance Criteria. A variance may be granted only if the applicant demonstrates that the
requested action conforms to all of the criteria set forth as follows
Special conditions and circumstances exist that are peculiar to the land, the lot, or
something inherent in the land, and that are not applicable to other lands in the same
district;
2. The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant;
3 A literal interpretation of the provisions of this Chapter would deprive the applicant of all
reasonable economic uses and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and
zone of the subject property under the terms of this Chapter, and the variance requested
is the minimum necessary to provide the applicant with such rights,
4 Granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that
is denied by this Chapter to other lands, structures, or buildings under similar
circumstances,
5 The granting of the variance is consistent with the general purpose and intent of this
Chapter, and will not further degrade the functions or values of the associated critical
areas or otherwise be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the
property or improvements in the vicinity of the subject property;
6 The decision to grant the variance includes the best available science and gives special
consideration to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance
anadromous fish habitat.
E. Conditions May Be Required. In granting any modification or variance, the City may prescribe
such conditions and safeguards as are necessary to secure adequate protection of critical areas
from adverse impacts, and to ensure conformity with this Chapter
F Time Limit. A modification or variance shall be valid for the time period of the underlying permit
approval
G Burden of Proof The burden of proof shall be on the applicant to bring forth evidence in support
of the application and upon which any decision has to be made on the application.
D
- Page 16 -
o
o
.7;.iJi.."',,--i:--c'....f :-E"",_:.;-
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas Review Draft
March 18,2005
o 14.08080 Unauthorized Critical Area Alterations and Enforcement
A. When a critical area or its buffer has been altered in violation of this Chapter, all ongoing
development work shall stop and the critical area shall be restored. The City shall have the
authority to issue a stop work order to cease all ongoing development work, and order
restoration, rehabilitation, or replacement measures at the owner's or other responsible party's
expense to compensate for violation of provisions of this Chapter
B Requirement for Restoration Plan All development work shall remain stopped until a restoration
plan is prepared and approved by City Such a plan shall be prepared by a qualified professional
using the best available science and shall describe how the actions proposed meet the minimum
performance standards The administrator shall, at the violator's expense, seek expert advice in
determining the adequacy of the plan. Inadequate plans shall be returned to the applicant or
violator for revision and resubmittal.
Minimum Performance Standards for Restoration
c
E.
For alterations to critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, wetlands, and
habitat conservation areas, the following minimum performance standards shall be met
for the restoration of a critical area, provided that if the violator can demonstrate that
greater functional and habitat values can be obtained, these standards may be modified
a. The historic structural and functional values shall be restored, including water
quality and habitat functions,
b The historic soil types and configuration shall be replicated,
c. The critical area and buffers shall be replanted with native vegetation that
replicates the vegetation historically found on the site in species types, sizes, and
densities. The historic functions and values should be replicated at the location
of the alteration, and
d Information demonstrating compliance with the requirements for Mitigation Plans
shall be submitted to the administrator
2. For alterations to flood and geological hazards, the following minimum performance
standards shall be met for the restoration of a critical area, provided that, if the violator
can demonstrate that greater safety can be obtained, these standards may be modified
a. The hazard shall be reduced to a level equal to, or less than, the pre-
development hazard,
b Any risk of personal injury resulting from the alteration shall be eliminated or
minimized, and
c. The hazard area and buffers shall be replanted with native vegetation sufficient
to minimize the hazard.
Site Investigations The administrator is authorized to make site inspections and take such
actions as are necessary to enforce this Chapter The administrator shall present proper
credentials and make a reasonable effort to contact any property owner before entering onto
private property
Penalties. Any person, party, firm, corporation, or other legal entity convicted of violating any of
the provisions of this Chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor Each day or portion of a day
during which a violation of this Chapter is committed or continued shall constitute a separate
offense. Any development carried out contrary to the provisions of this Chapter shall constitute a
public nuisance and may be enjoined as provided by the statutes of the state of Washington The
City may levy civil penalties against any person, party, firm, corporation, or other legal entity for
violation of any of the provisions of this Chapter The civil penalty shall be assessed at a
maximum rate of $250 00 dollars per day per violation.
o
D
o
- Page 17 -
!'
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18,2005
1408090 General Critical Area Protective Measures 0
A. Critical Area Markers and Signs
The boundary at the outer edge of critical area tracts and easements shall be delineated
with permanent survey stakes, using iron or concrete markers as established by local
survey standards
2. The boundary at the outer edge of the critical area or buffer shall be identified with
temporary signs prior to any site alteration Such temporary signs shall be replaced with
permanent signs prior to occupancy or use of the site
3 These provisions may be modified by the administrator as necessary to ensure protection
of sensitive features or wildlife needs.
Financial Guarantee to Ensure Mitigation, Maintenance, and Monitoring
1 When mitigation required pursuant to a development proposal is not completed prior to
the City final permit approval, such as final plat approval or final building inspection, the
City shall require the applicant to post a financial guarantee in a form and amount
deemed acceptable by the City If the development proposal is subject to mitigation, the
applicant shall post a financial guarantee security in a form and amount deemed
acceptable by the City to ensure mitigation is fully functional
2 The bond shall be in the amount of one hundred and twenty-five percent (150%) of the
estimated cost of the uncompleted actions or the estimated cost of restoring the functions
and values of the critical area that are at risk, whichever is greater
3 The bond shall be in the form of a assignment of savings account in the City trust fund
4 Financial Guarantees shall remain in effect until the City determines, in writing, that the
standards bonded for have been met. Bonds or other security shall be held by the City
for a minimum of five (5) years to ensure that the required mitigation has been fully
implemented and demonstrated to function, and may be held for longer periods when
necessary
B
o
5 Depletion, failure, or collection of bond funds shall not discharge the obligation of an
applicant or violator to complete required mitigation, maintenance, monitoring, or
restoration.
6 Public development proposals shall be relieved from having to comply with the bonding
requirements of this Section if public funds have previously been committed for
mitigation, maintenance, monitoring, or restoration
7 Any failure to satisfy critical area requirements established by law or condition including,
but not limited to, the failure to provide a monitoring report within thirty (30) days after it is
due or comply with other provisions of an approved mitigation plan shall constitute a
default, and the City may demand payment of any financial guarantees or require other
action authorized by the City code or any other law
8 Any funds recovered pursuant to this Section shall be used to complete the required
mitigation.
B Critical Area Inspections Reasonable access to the site shall be provided to the City, state, and
federal agency review staff for the purpose of inspections during any proposal review, restoration,
emergency action, or monitoring period
o
- Page 18 -
~.'..l"
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
C 14.08.100 Wetlands
A. Designating Wetlands. Wetlands are those areas, designated in accordance with the Washington
State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual (1997), that are inundated or saturated by
surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal
circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation adapted for life in saturated soil conditions
All areas within the City meeting the wetland designation criteria in the Identification and
Delineation Manual, regardless of any formal identification, are hereby designated critical areas
and are subject to the provisions of this Chapter
B Wetland Ratings Wetlands shall be rated according to the Washington State Department of
Ecology wetland rating system found in the Washington State Wetland Rating System documents
or as revised by Ecology
Wetland Rating Categories
a. Category I Category I wetlands are those that meet one or more of the following
criteria:
I. Documented habitat for federal or state listed endangered or threatened
fish, animal, or plant species,
ii High quality native wetland communities, including documented category
I or II quality Natural Heritage wetland sites and sites which qualify as a
category I or II quality Natural Heritage wetland (defined in the rating
system documents),
iii. High quality, regionally rare wetland communities with irreplaceable
ecological functions, including sphagnum bogs and fens, estuarine,
wetlands, or mature forested swamps (defined in the rating system
documents), or wetlands of exceptional local significance.
Category II Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, US Fish and Wildlife
Services, and National Marine Fisheries Services documented habitats for state
listed sensitive plant, fish, or animal species,
i. Wetlands that contain fish or animal species listed as priority species by
the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, or plant species listed
as rare by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources,12
ii. Wetland types with significant ecological functions as determined by an
agency approved functional evaluation methodology that may not be
adequately replicated through creation or restoration,
c
b
o
iii Wetlands possessing significant habitat value based on a score of
twenty-two (22) or more points in the state Department of Ecology
habitat rating system, or
iv Documented wetlands of local significance
c. Category III Category III wetlands are those that do not satisfy category I, II, or
IV criteria, and with a habitat value rating of twenty-one (21) points or less
d. Category IV Category IV wetlands are those that meet one or more of the
following criteria.
Hydrologically isolated wetlands, as determined by the U S Army Corps
of Engineers Regulatory Branch that are less than or equal to one (1)
acre in size, have only one wetland class, and are dominated [greater
than eighty percent (80%) area cover] by a single, non-native plant
species (monotypic vegetation), or
Hydrologically isolated wetlands that are less than or equal to two (2)
acres in size, and have only one wetland class and greater than ninety
ii
- Page 19 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
C
percent (90%) a real cover of non-native plant species
2. Date of wetland rating. Wetland rating categories shall be applied as the wetland exists
on the date of adoption of the rating system by the local government, as the wetland
naturally changes thereafter, or as the wetland changes in accordance with permitted
activities. Wetland rating categories shall not change due to illegal modifications.
Mapping The approximate location and extent of wetlands are shown on the critical area maps
prepared by the Community Development Department. These maps are to be used as a guide
for the City, project applicants, and/or property owners, and may be continuously updated as new
critical areas are identified They are a reference and do not provide a final critical area
designation
The exact location of a wetland's boundary shall be determined through the performance of a
field investigation by a qualified professional wetland scientist applying the Washington State
Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual as required by RCW 36 70A.175
Activities Allowed in Wetlands The activities listed below are allowed in wetlands in addition to
those activities listed in, and consistent with, the provisions established in Allowed Activities, and
do not require submission of a critical area report, except where such activities result in a loss to
the functions and values of a wetland or wetland buffer These activities include
1 Conservation or preservation of soil, water, vegetation, fish, shellfish, and other wildlife
that does not entail changing the structure or functions of the existing wetland
2. The harvesting of wild crops in a manner that is not injurious to natural reproduction of
such crops and provided the harvesting does not require tilling of soil, planting of crops,
chemical applications, or alteration of the wetland by changing existing topography, water
conditions, or water sources
Drilling for utilities under a wetland provided that the drilling does not interrupt the ground
water connection to the wetland or percolation of surface water down through the soil
column Specific studies by a hydrologist are necessary to determine whether the ground
water connection to the wetland or percolation of surface water down through the soil
column is disturbed
~
o
o
o
D
3
4 Enhancement of a wetland through the removal of non-native invasive species. Weeding
shall be restricted to hand removal and weed material shall be removed from the site
Bare areas that remain after weed removal shall be re-vegetated with native shrubs and
trees at natural densities Some hand seeding may also be done over the bare areas
with native herbs
E. Critical Area Report - Additional Requirements for Wetlands.
1 Area Addressed in Critical Area Report. The following areas shall be addressed in a
critical area report for wetlands.
a. The project area of the proposed activity;
b All wetlands and recommended buffers within three hundred (300) feet of the
project area, and
c All shoreline areas, water features, floodplains, and other critical areas, and
related buffers within three hundred (300) feet of the project area.
2. Wetland analysis.
a. A written assessment and accompanying maps of the wetlands and buffers
within three hundred (300) feet of the project area, including the following
information at a minimum
i.
ii
Wetland delineation and required buffers,
Existing wetland acreage,
- Page 20 -
. 'i'.'" >. ,:\
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas Review Draft
March 18, 2005
c
iii Wetland category;
iv Vegetative, faunal, and hydrologic characteristics,
v Soil and substrate conditions,
vi Topographic elevations, at two-foot contours, and
VII A discussion of the water sources supplying the wetland and
documentation of hydrologic regime (locations of inlet and outlet
features, water depths throughout the wetland, evidence of recharge or
discharge, evidence of water depths throughout the year - drift lines,
algal layers, moss lines, and sediment deposits)
A discussion of measures, including avoidance, minimization, and mitigation,
proposed to preserve existing wetlands and restore any wetlands that were
degraded prior to the current proposed land use activity
A habitat and native vegetation conservation strategy that addresses methods to
protect and enhance on-site habitat and wetland functions
Functional evaluation for the wetland and adjacent buffer using a local or state
agency staff-recognized method and including the reference of the method and
all data sheets
e Proposed mitigation, if needed, including a written assessment and
accompanying maps of the mitigation area, including the following information at
a minimum
b
c
d,
F
Existing and proposed wetland acreage,
ii oVegetative and faunal conditions,
iii Surface and subsurface hydrologic conditions including an analysis of
existing and future hydrologic regime and proposed hydrologic regime for
enhanced, created, or restored mitigation areas,
iv Relationship within watershed and to existing waterbodies,
v Soil and substrate conditions, topographic elevations,
VI Existing and proposed adjacent site conditions,
vii Required wetland buffers (including any buffer reduction and mitigation
proposed to increase the plant densities, remove weedy vegetation, and
replant the buffers),
VIII Property ownership, and
ix. Associated wetlands and related wetlands that may be greater than three
hundred (300) feet from the subject project.
f A scale map of the development proposal site and adjacent area. A discussion
of ongoing management practices that will protect wetlands after the project site
has been developed, including proposed monitoring and maintenance programs.
g A bond estimate for the installation (including site preparation, plant materials
and installation, fertilizers, mulch, stakes) and the proposed monitoring and
maintenance work for the required number of years
h Chapter Notification All activity in critical area protection areas shall be
accompanied by a Chapter
Wetland Performance Standards - General Requirements
1 Activities may only be permitted in a wetland or wetland buffer if the applicant can show
o
o
- Page 21 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
that the proposed activity will not degrade the functions and functional performance of the 0
wetland and other critical areas
2. Activities and uses shall be prohibited in wetlands and wetland buffers, except as
provided for in this Chapter
3 Category I Wetlands Activities and uses shall be prohibited from Category I wetlands,
except as provided for in the public agency and utility exception, reasonable use
exception, and variance sections of this Chapter
4 Category II and III Wetlands
a. Water-dependent activities may be allowed where there are no practicable
alternatives that would have a less adverse impact on the wetland, its buffers and
other critical areas
b Where nonwater-dependent activities are proposed, it shall be presumed that
alternative locations are available, and activities and uses shall be prohibited,
unless the applicant demonstrates that:
i. The basic project purpose cannot reasonably be accomplished and
successfully avoid, or result in less adverse impact on, a wetland on
another site or sites in the general region, and
ji All alternative designs of the project as proposed, that would avoid or
result in less of an adverse impact on a wetland or its buffer, such as a
reduction in the size, scope, configuration, or density of the project, are
not feasible
Category IV Wetlands. Activities and uses that result in unavoidable and necessary
impacts may be permitted in Category IV wetlands and associated buffers in accordance
with an approved critical area report and mitigation plan, and only if the proposed activity
is the only reasonable alternative that will accomplish the applicant's objectives Full
compensation for the acreage and lo~s functions will be provided.
Wetland Buffers
5
o
6
a. Standard Buffer Widths The standard buffer widths presume the existence of a
relatively intact native vegetation community in the buffer zone adequate to
protect the wetland functions and values at the time of the proposed activity If
the vegetation is inadequate, then the buffer width shall be increased or the
buffer should be planted to maintain the standard width Required standard
wetland buffers, based on wetland category and land use intensity, are as
follows
b
Category I 300 feet
ii Category II 200 feet
iii. Category III 100 feet
iv Category IV 50 feet
Measurement of Wetland Buffers All buffers shall be measured from the
wetland boundary as surveyed in the field The width of the wetland buffer shall
be determined according to the wetland category and the proposed land use
The buffer for a wetland created, restored, or enhanced as compensation for
approved wetland alterations shall be the same as the buffer required for the
category of the created, restored, or enhanced wetland. Only fully vegetated
buffers will be considered Lawns, walkways, driveways, and other mowed or
paved areas will not be considered buffers.
Increased Wetland Buffer Widths. The administrator shall require increased
buffer widths in accordance with the recommendations of an experienced,
o
c.
- Page 22 -
\ i,
!\r 'f'.
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18,2005
o
o
o
d.
qualified professional wetland scientist, and the best available science on a case-
by-case basis when a larger buffer is necessary to protect wetland functions and
values based on site-specific characteristics. This determination shall be based
on one or more of the following criteria
i. A larger buffer is needed to protect other critical areas,
11 The buffer or adjacent uplands has a slope greater than fifteen percent
(15%) or is susceptible to erosion and standard erosion-control
measures will not prevent adverse impacts to the wetland, or
iii. The buffer area has minimal vegetative cover In lieu of increasing the
buffer width where existing buffer vegetation is inadequate to project the
wetland functions and values, implementation of a buffer planting plan
may substitute Where a buffer planting plan is proposed, it shall include
densities that are not less than three (3) feet on center for shrubs and
eight (8) feet on center for trees and require monitoring and maintenance
to ensure success. Existing buffer vegetation is considered "inadequate"
and will need to be enhanced through additional native plantings and (if
appropriate) removal of non-native plants when (1) non-native or
invasive plant species provide the dominant cover, (2) vegetation is
lacking due to disturbance and wetland resources could be adversely
affected, or (3) enhancement plantings in the buffer could significantly
improve buffer functions
Wetland Buffer Width Averaging The administrator may allow modification of the
standard wetland buffer width in accordance with an approved critical area report
and the best available science on a case-by-case basis by averaging buffer
widths. Averaging of buffer widths may only be allowed where a qualified
professional wetland scientist demonstrates that:
It will not reduce wetland functions or functional performance,
III. The wetland contains variations in sensitivity due to existing physical
characteristics or the character of the buffer varies in slope, soils, or
vegetation, and the wetland would benefit from a wider buffer in places
and would not be adversely impacted by a narrower buffer in other
places,
iv The total area contained in the buffer area after averaging is no less than
that which would be contained within the standard buffer; and
v The buffer width is not reduced to less than 75 percent (75%) of the
standard width or thirty-five (35) feet.
Buffer Consistency All mitigation sites shall have buffers consistent with the
buffer requirements of this Chapter
Buffer Maintenance Except as otherwise specified or allowed in accordance
with this Chapter, wetland buffers shall be retained in an undisturbed or
enhanced condition. Removal of invasive non-native weeds is required for the
duration of the mitigation bond
Buffer Uses. The following uses may be permitted within a wetland buffer in
accordance with the review procedures of this Chapter, provided they are not
prohibited by any other applicable law and they are conducted in a manner so as
to minimize impacts to the buffer and adjacent wetland.
Conservation and Restoration Activities Conservation or restoration
activities aimed at protecting the soil, water, vegetation, or wildlife
II Passive Recreation Passive recreation facilities designed and in
e
f
g
- Page 23 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
G
accordance with an approved critical area report.
Performance Standards - Compensatory Mitigation Requirements. Compensatory mitigation for
alterations to wetlands shall achieve equivalent or greater biologic functions Compensatory
mitigation plans shall be consistent with the state Department of Ecology Guidelines for
Developing Freshwater Wetlands Mitigation Plans and Proposals, 1994, as revised
Mitigation Shall Be Required in the Following Order of Preference.
a. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action
b Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
implementation, by using appropriate technology, or by taking affirmative steps to
avoid or reduce impacts.
c Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected
environment.
d Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance
operations
e Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute
resources or environments
Mitigation for Lost or Affected Functions. Compensatory mitigation actions shall address
functions affected by the alteration to achieve functional equivalency or improvement and
shall provide similar wetland functions as those lost, except when
a. The lost wetland provides minimal functions as determined by a site-specific
function assessment, and the proposed compensatory mitigation action(s) will
provide equal or greater functions or will provide functions shown to be limiting
within a watershed through a formal Washington state watershed assessment
plan or protocol; or
b Out-of-kind replacement will best meet formally identified watershed goals, such
as replacement of historically diminished wetland types
Preference of Mitigation Actions. Mitigation actions that require compensation by
replacing, enhancing, or substitution shall occur in the following order of preference
a. Restoring wetlands on upland sites that were formerly wetlands
b Creating wetlands on disturbed upland sites such as those with vegetative cover
consisting primarily of non-native introduced species. This should only be
attempted when there is a consistent source of hydrology and it can be shown
that the surface and subsurface hydrologic regime is conducive for the wetland
community that is being designed
c. Enhancing significantly degraded wetlands in combination with restoration or
creation Such enhancement should be part of a mitigation package that
includes replacing the impacted area meeting appropriate ratio requirements
Type and Location of Mitigation Unless it is demonstrated that a higher level of
ecological functioning would result from an alternate approach, compensatory mitigation
for ecological functions shall be either in-kind and on-site, or in-kind and within the same
stream reach, sub-basin, or drift cell Mitigation actions shall be conducted within the
same sub-drainage basin and on the site as the alteration except when the all of the
following apply'
2.
3
4
a.
There are no reasonable on-site or in-subdrainage basin opportunities or on-site
and in-subdrainage basin opportunities do not have a high likelihood of success,
after a determination of the natural capacity of the site to mitigate for the impacts
Consideration should include anticipated wetland mitigation replacement ratios,
buffer conditions and proposed widths, hydrogeomorphic classes of on-site
o
o
o
- Page 24 -
F
.~ ..,'
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
(\
~
5
wetlands when restored, proposed flood storage capacity, potential to mitigate
riparian fish and wildlife impacts (such as connectivity),
Off-site mitigation has a greater likelihood of providing equal or improved wetland
functions than the impacted wetland, and
Off-site locations shall be in the same sub-drainage basin unless.
Established watershed goals for water quality, flood or conveyance,
habitat, or other wetland functions have been established and strongly
justify location of mitigation at another site, or
II. Credits from a state certified wetland mitigation bank are used as
mitigation and the use of credits is consistent with the terms of the bank's
certification
Mitigation Timing Mitigation projects shall be completed with an approved monitoring
plan prior to activities that will disturb wetlands. In all other cases, mitigation shall be
completed immediately following disturbance and prior to use or occupancy of the activity
or development. Construction of mitigation projects shall be timed to reduce impacts to
existing fisheries, wildlife, and flora.
The administrator may authorize a one-time temporary delay, up to one-hundred-twenty
(120) days, in completing minor construction and landscaping when environmental
conditions could produce a high probability of failure or significant construction difficulties.
The delay shall not create or perpetuate hazardous conditions or environmental damage
or degradation, and the delay shall not be injurious to the health, safety, and general
welfare of the public. The request for the temporary delay must include a written
justification that documents the environmental constraints that preclude implementation
of the mitigation plan The justification must be verified and approved by the City and
include a financial guarantee.
Mitigation Ratios
a. Acreage Replacement Ratios. The following ratios shall apply to creation or
restoration that is in-kind, is on-site, is the same category, is timed prior to or
concurrent with alteration, and has a high probability of success These ratios do
not apply to remedial actions resulting from unauthorized alterations, greater
ratios shall apply in those cases. These ratios do not apply to the use of credits
from a state certified wetland mitigation bank. When credits from a certified bank
are used, replacement ratios should be consistent with the requirements of the
bank's certification The first number specifies the acreage of replacement
wetlands and the second specifies the acreage of wetlands altered
Category I 6-to-1
Category II 3-to-1
Category III 2-to-1
Category IV 1 5-to-1
b
c.
o
6
o
b Increased Replacement Ratio The administrator may increase the ratios under
the following circumstances
Uncertainty exists as to the probable success of the proposed restoration
or creation,
II. A significant period of time will elapse between impact and replication of
wetland functions,
Proposed mitigation will result in a lower category wetland or reduced functions
relative to the wetland being impacted, or
c.
- Page 25 ~
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18,2005
d.
The impact was an unauthorized impact.
o
H
7 Wetlands Enhancement as Mitigation
a. Impacts to wetland functions may be mitigated by enhancement of existing
significantly degraded wetlands, but must be used in conjunction with restoration
and/or creation. Applicants proposing to enhance wetlands must produce a
critical area report that identifies how enhancement will increase the functions of
the degraded wetland and how this increase will adequately mitigate for the loss
of wetland area and function at the impact site An enhancement proposal must
also show whether existing wetland functions will be reduced by the
enhancement actions
b At a minimum, enhancement acreage shall be double the acreage required for
creation or restoration The ratios shall be greater than double the required
acreage where the enhancement proposal would result in minimal gain in the
performance of wetland functions and/or result in the reduction of other wetland
functions currently being provided in the wetland.
c. Mitigation rations for enhancement in combination with other forms of mitigation
shall range form 6 1 to 3 1 and be limited to Class III and Class IV wetlands.
Performance Standards - Land Divisions The division, redivision, or adjusting of boundary lines
of land in wetlands and associated buffers is subject to the following
1 Land that is located wholly within a wetland or its buffer may not be subdivided
2. Land that is located partially within a wetland or its buffer may be subdivided provided
that an accessible and contiguous portion of each new lot is.
a. Located outside of the wetland and its buffer; and
b Meets the minimum lot size requirements of [locally adopted zoning dimensions]
3 Access roads and utilities serving the proposed subdivision may be permitted within the
wetland and associated buffers only if the City determines that no other feasible
alternative exists and when consistent with this Chapter
o
o
- Page 26 -
c
c
o
-":'
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
....It
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
14.08.110 Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas
A. Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas Designation. Critical aquifer recharge areas are those areas with
a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water as defined by Section 365-190-030
(2) WAC A critical aquifer recharge area has prevailing geologic conditions associated with
infiltration rates that create a high potential for contamination of ground water resources or
contribute significantly to the replenishment of ground water
B Designation of Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas The entire City of Yelm and its Urban Growth
Area is identified as a highly susceptible Critical Aquifer Recharge Area.
C Performance Standards - General Requirements
1 Activities may only be permitted in a critical aquifer recharge area if the applicant can
show that the proposed activity will not cause contaminants to enter the aquifer and that
the proposed activity will not adversely effect the recharging of the aquifer
2. The proposed activity must comply with the water source protection requirements and
recommendations of the US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington State
Department of Health, and the Thurston County Environmental Health Division
3 All new development, redevelopment, and small parcel development shall meet the water
quality requirements of the Stormwater Manual as adopted by the City of Yelm
D Performance Standards - Specific Uses
1 Storage Tanks. All storage tanks proposed to be located in a critical aquifer recharge
area must comply with local building code requirements and must conform to the
following requirements
a. Underground Tanks. All new underground storage facilities proposed for use in
the storage of hazardous substances or hazardous wastes shall be designed and
constructed so as to
i. Prevent releases due to corrosion or structural failure for the operational
life of the tank;
II Be protected against corrosion, constructed of noncorrosive material,
steel clad with a noncorrosive material, or designed to include a
secondary containment system to prevent the release or threatened
release of any stored substances, and
iii. Use material in the construction or lining of the tank that is compatible
with the substance to be stored.
b Aboveground Tanks. All new aboveground storage facilities proposed for use in
the storage of hazardous substances or hazardous wastes shall be designed and
constructed so as to.
i. Not allow the release of a hazardous substance to the ground, ground
waters, or surface waters,
II. Have a primary containment area enclosing or underlying the tank or part
thereof; and
iii. A secondary containment system either built into the tank structure or a
dike system built outside the tank for all tanks.
Vehicle Repair and Servicing
a. Vehicle repair and servicing must be conducted over impermeable pads and
within a covered structure capable of withstanding normally expected weather
conditions. Chemicals used in the process of vehicle repair and servicing must
be stored in a manner that protects them from weather and provides containment
2.
- Page 27 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18,2005
should leaks occur
b No dry wells shall be allowed in critical aquifer recharge areas on sites used for
vehicle repair and servicing Dry wells existing on the site prior to facility
establishment must be abandoned using techniques approved by the state
Department of Ecology prior to commencement of the proposed activity
3 Use of Reclaimed Water for Surface Percolation or Direct Recharge. Water reuse
projects for reclaimed water must be in accordance with the adopted water or sewer
comprehensive plans that have been approved by the state departments of Ecology and
Health
a. Use of reclaimed water for surface percolation must meet the ground water
recharge criteria given in Chapter 90 46 080( 1) and Chapter 90 46 01 O( 10) RCW
The state Department of Ecology may establish additional discharge limits in
accordance with Chapter 90 46 080(2) RCW
b Direct injection must be in accordance with the standards developed by authority
of Chapter 90 46 042 RCW
- Page 28 -
o
o
o
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
o 1408.120 Frequently Flooded Areas
A. Designation of Frequently Flooded Areas Frequently flooded areas shall include areas Identified
on the Flood Insurance Map(s) The Flood Insurance Maps are hereby adopted by reference,
declared part of this Chapter, and are available for public review at the City
B Flood Elevation Data. When base flood elevation data is not available (A and V zones), the
administrator shall obtain, review, and reasonably utilize any base flood elevation and floodway
data available from a federal, state, or other source, in order to administer this Chapter
C Maintenance of Records. Where base flood elevation data is provided through the Flood
Insurance Study or required through this Chapter, the administrator shall obtain and record the
flood elevation certificates of all new or substantially improved structures, and whether or not the
structure contains a basement. The administrator shall also maintain for public inspection all
records of floodplain hazards, certificates of flood proofing, and flood elevation data.
D Performance Standards - General Requirements. The following standards shall be adhered to in
all frequently flooded areas, except as otherwise provide for in this Chapter
1 Approval of work in a frequently flooded area. Prior to any clearing, grading, dumping,
drilling, dredging, filling, or the construction or reconstruction of any structure, the City
shall have approved through the underlying permit or through approval of a critical areas
report that the standards for development within a frequently flooded area have been
met.
2. No activity within a frequently flooded area shall increase the base flood elevation
E. Performance Standards - General Requirements
o
o
1
Structures Shall Be Located Outside the Floodplain All structures, utilities, and other
improvements shall be located on the buildable portion of the site out of the floodplain
unless there is no buildable site area out of the floodplain For sites with no buildable
area out of the floodplain, structures, utilities, and other improvements shall be placed on
the highest land on the site, oriented parallel to flow rather than perpendicular, and sited
as far from the watercourse and other critical areas as possible If the administrator
detects any evidence of active hyporheic exchange on a site, the development shall be
located to minimize disruption of such exchange
Methods That Minimize Flood Damage. All new construction and substantial
improvements shall be constructed using flood resistant materials and using methods
and practices that minimize flood damage
Utility Protection. Electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, air-conditioning equipment,
and other service facilities shall be designed and/or otherwise elevated or located so as
to prevent water from entering or accumulating within the components during conditions
of flooding
Elevation Certificate Following Construction Following construction of a structure within
the floodplain where the base flood elevation is provided, the applicant shall obtain an
elevation certificate that records the elevation of the lowest floor The elevation certificate
shall be completed by a surveyor or engineer licensed in the state of Washington and
shall be submitted to the City for recording
Anchoring
a. Anchoring Requirement. All new construction and substantial improvements
within the floodplain shall be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse, or lateral
movement of the structure
2.
3
4
5
b
Manufactured Homes. All manufactured homes placed within the floodplain must
be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse, or lateral movement and shall be
installed using methods and practices that minimize flood damage Anchoring
methods may include, but are not limited to, use of over-the-top or frame ties to
- Page 29 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18,2005
ground anchors
6 Fill and Grading. Fill and grading with the floodplain shall only occur after a
determination that the fill or grading will not block side channels, inhibit channel
migration, increase the base flood elevation, or be within a channel migration zone
Performance Standards - Specific Uses. Specific uses shall adhere to the following relevant
standards, in addition to the general standards
1 Residential Construction on lots created prior to 1999
a. Must be Above Base Flood Elevation. New construction and substantial
improvement of any residential structure shall have the lowest floor, including
basement, elevated one (1) foot or more above the base flood elevation
b Areas Below the Lowest Floor Fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor that
are subject to flooding shall only be allowed when designed to automatically
equalize hydrostatic flood forces on exterior walls by allowing for the entry and
exit of floodwaters Designs for meeting this requirement must either be certified
by a registered professional engineer or architect or must meet or exceed the
following minimum criteria.
A minimum of two (2) openings having a total net area of not less than
one (1) square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to
flooding shall be provided,
ii The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one (1) foot above
grade, and
iii Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, or other coverings or
devices provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of
floodwaters
c Manufactured Homes Must be Elevated. All manufactured homes to be placed
or substantially improved shall be elevated on a permanent foundation such that
the lowest floor of the manufactured home is elevated one (1) foot or more above
the base flood elevation and be securely anchored to an adequately anchored
foundation system to resist flotation, collapse, and lateral movement.
2. Divisions of Land
F
a.
All new divisions of land, including subdivisions, short subdivisions, boundary line
adjustments, binding site plans, and master planned communities shall not
create any building lot for commercial or residential purposes with any portion
within the floodplain
Floodplain areas shall be dedicated as open space
No infrastructure required for the subdivision with the exception of utility transport
lines idenfied by the appropriate utility capital facilities plan shall be located within
the floodplain.
Subdivisions and short subdivisions shall be designed to minimize or eliminate
flood damage and impacts to floodplain functions and values Public utilities and
facilities that are installed as part of such subdivisions, such as sewer, gas,
electrical, and water systems, shall be located and constructed to also minimize
flood damage and impacts to floodplain functions and values. SubdiviSions
should be designed using natural features of the landscape and should not
incorporate flood protection changes
Subdivisions and short subdivisions shall have adequate natural surface water
drainage to reduce exposure to flood hazards, and
Subdivisions and short subdivisions shall show the 1 OO-year floodplain, floodway,
o
o
o
b
c.
d
e
f
- Page 30 -
--I'. ....;
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
o
c
G
o
3
and channel migration zone on the preliminary and final plat and short plat maps
and designate such areas as "no build," when applicable
Nonresidential Construction on lots created prior to 1999
a. Above Base Flood Elevation New construction and substantial improvement of
any commercial, industrial, or other nonresidential structure shall either have the
lowest floor, including basement, elevated one foot (1) or more above the base
flood elevation, or, together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities, shall
Be flood proofed so that below one (1) foot or more above the base flood
level the structure is watertight with walls substantially impermeable to
the passage of water;
II Have structural components capable of resisting hydrostatic and
hydrodynamic loads and effects of buoyancy; and
iii. Be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the
design and methods of construction are in accordance with accepted
standards of practice for meeting provisions of this Subsection based on
their development and/or review of the structural design, specifications,
and plans.
b Areas Below the Lowest Floor Fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor that
are not floodproofed shall be designed to automatically equalize hydrostatic flood
forces on exterior walls by allowing for the entry and exit of floodwaters. Designs
for meeting this requirement must either be certified by a registered professional
engineer or architect, or must meet or exceed the following minimum criteria.
I. A minimum of two (2) openings having a total net area of not less than
one (1) square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to
flooding shall be provided,
ii. The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one (1) foot above
grade, and
iii. Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, or other coverings or
devices provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of
floodwaters
4 Utilities
a. Infiltration of Flood Waters. All new and replacement water supply systems shall
be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the systems.
b Sanitary Sewage Systems. New and replacement sanitary sewage systems
shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the
systems and discharges from the systems into flood waters
c. On-Site Waste Disposal Systems On-site waste disposal systems shall be
located to avoid impairment to them or contamination from them during flooding.
New on-site sewage disposal systems are prohibited within the floodplain
Uses and Activities Prohibited From Frequently Flooded Areas
1 Critical Facilities. Critical facilities are prohibited from frequently flooded areas to prevent
damage to such facilities, to avoid costs that will be incurred by the public, and to
maintain functionality of such facilities during flood events If such a prohibition is
unreasonable, an allowance for critical facilities in frequently flooded areas with the
following specific conditions.
a. Construction of new critical facilities shall be permissible within frequently flooded
areas if no feasible alternative site is available.
- Page 31 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
2.
b Critical facilities constructed within frequently flooded areas shall have the lowest
floor elevated three (3) feet or more above the level of the base flood elevation
(1 OO-year flood)
c Floodproofing and sealing measures must be taken to ensure that toxic
substances will not be displaced by or released into flood waters
d Access routes elevated to or above the level of the base flood elevation shall be
provided to all critical facilities to the extent possible
Wells Used for Potable Water Water wells shall be located on high ground and are
prohibited from being within the floodway
On-Site Sewage Disposal Systems. On-site sewage disposal systems are prohibited
from the floodway, the channel migration zone, and the ten-year floodplain elevation
3
- Page 32 -
o
o
o
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
o 14 08 130 Geologically Hazardous Areas
A. Designation of Geologically Hazardous Areas Geologically hazardous areas include areas
susceptible to erosion, sliding, earthquake, or other geological events They pose a threat to the
health and safety of citizens when incompatible development is sited in areas of significant
hazard. Such incompatible development may not only place itself at risk, but also may increase
the hazard to surrounding development and use.
B Designation of SpecifiC Hazard Areas
1 Erosion Hazard Areas Erosion hazard areas are at least those areas identified by the
U S Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service as having a
"moderate to severe," "severe," or "very severe" rill and inter-rill erosion hazard Erosion
hazard areas are also those areas impacted by shore land and/or stream bank erosion
and those areas within a river's channel migration zone
2. Landslide Hazard Areas. Landslide hazard areas are areas potentially subject to
landslides based on a combination of geologic, topographic, and hydrologic factors
They include areas susceptible because of any combination of bedrock, soil, slope
(gradient), slope aspect, structure, hydrology, or other factors Example of these may
include, but are not limited to the following'
a. Areas of historic failures
o
3
o
b
Areas with all three of the following characteristics.
i. Slopes steeper than fifteen percent (15%),
ii. Hillsides intersecting geologic contacts with a relatively permeable
sediment overlying a relatively impermeable sediment or bedrock, and
iii Springs or ground water seepage
Areas that have shown movement during the Holocene epoch (from ten
thousand years ago to the present) or that are underlain or covered by mass
wastage debris of that epoch,
Slopes that are parallel or subparallel to planes of weakness (such as bedding
planes, joint systems, and fault planes) in subsurface materials,
Slopes having gradients steeper than eighty percent (80%) subject to rock fall
during seismic shaking,
Areas potentially unstable because of rapid stream incision, stream bank erosion,
and undercutting by wave action,
Areas that show evidence of, or are at risk from snow avalanches,
c.
d
e
f
g.
h.
Areas located in a canyon or on an active alluvial fan, presently or potentially
subject to inundation by debris flows or catastrophic flooding, and
Any area with a slope of forty percent (40%) or steeper and with a vertical relief
of ten (10) or more feet except areas composed of consolidated rock. A slope is
delineated by establishing its toe and top and is measured by averaging the
inclination over at least ten (10) feet of vertical relief
Seismic Hazard Areas. Seismic hazard areas are areas subject to severe risk of damage
as a result of earthquake induced ground shaking, slope failure, settlement, soil
liquefaction, lateral spreading, or surface faulting One indicator of potential for future
earthquake damage is a record of earthquake damage in the past. Ground shaking is the
primary cause of earthquake damage in Washington The strength of ground shaking is
primarily affected by'
a. The magnitude of an earthquake,
I.
- Page 33 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
C
o
b The distance from the source of an earthquake,
c The type of thickness of geologic materials at the surface, and
d The type of subsurface geologic structure.
Mapping of Geologically Hazardous Areas.
1 The approximate location and extent of geologically hazardous areas are shown on the
adopted critical area maps
2. These maps are to be used as a guide for the City, project applicants and/or property
owners and may be continuously updated as new critical areas are identified. They are a
reference and do not provide a final critical area designation
Performance Standards - General Requirements
1 Alterations of geologically hazardous areas or associated buffers may only occur for
activities that:
a. Will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent properties
beyond pre-development conditions,
b Will not adversely impact other critical areas,
c Are designed so that the hazard to the project is eliminated or mitigated to a level
equal to or less than pre-development conditions, and
d Are certified as safe as designed and under anticipated conditions by a qualified
engineer or geologist, licensed in the state of Washington
Critical Facilities Prohibited Critical facilities shall not be sited within geologically
hazardous areas unless there is no other practical alternative
2.
3
Buffer Requirement. A buffer shall be established from all edges of landslide hazard
areas The size of the buffer shall be determined by the administrator to eliminate or
minimize the risk of property damage, death, or injury resulting from landslides caused in
whole or part by the development, based upon review of and concurrence with a critical
area report prepared by a qualified professional
a. Minimum Buffer The minimum buffer shall be equal to the height of the slope or
fifty (50) feet, whichever is greater
b Buffer Reduction The buffer may be reduced to a minimum of ten (10) feet
when a qualified professional demonstrates to the administrator's satisfaction
that the reduction will adequately protect the proposed development, adjacent
developments, and uses and the subject critical area.
c. Increased Buffer The buffer may be increased where the administrator
determines a larger buffer is necessary to prevent risk of damage to proposed
and existing development;
Alterations. Alterations of an erosion or landslide hazard area and/or buffer may only
occur for activities for which a hazards analysis is submitted and certifies that:
a. The development will not increase surface water discharge or sedimentation to
adjacent properties beyond pre-development conditions,
b The development will not decrease slope stability on adjacent properties, and
c. Such alterations will not adversely impact other critical areas,
Vegetation Retention. Unless otherwise provided or as part of an approved alteration,
removal of vegetation from an erosion or landslide hazard area or related buffer shall be
prohibited,
o
o
o
4
5
- Page 34 -
:\. ";.i ~ . ,." ..;
. ~ I' --,. "11":,
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
o
E.
c
o
6
Seasonal Restriction Clearing shall be allowed only from May 1 to October 1 of each
year provided that the City may extend or shorten the dry season on a case-by-case
basis depending on actual weather conditions, except that timber harvest, not including
brush clearing or stump removal, may be allowed pursuant to an approved forest practice
permit issued by the City or the Washington State Department of Natural Resources,
Utility Lines and Pipes. Utility lines and pipes shall be permitted in erosion and landslide
hazard areas only when the applicant demonstrates that no other practical alternative is
available The line or pipe shall be located above ground and properly anchored and/or
designed so that it will continue to function in the event of an underlying slide
Stormwater conveyance shall be allowed only through a high-density polyethylene pipe
with fuse-welded joints, or similar product that is technically equal or superior;
Point Discharges. Point discharges from surface water facilities and roof drains onto or
upstream from an erosion or landslide hazard area shall be prohibited
Division of Land The division of land in landslide hazard areas and associated buffers is
subject to the following
a. Land that is located wholly within a landslide hazard area or its buffer may not be
subdivided Land that is located partially within a landslide hazard area or its
buffer may be divided provided that each resulting lot has sufficient buildable
area outside of, and will not affect, the landslide hazard or its buffer
b Access roads and utilities may be permitted within the landslide hazard area and
associated buffers if the City determines that no other feasible alternative exists,
and
Prohibited Development. On-site sewage disposal systems, including drain fields, shall be
prohibited within erosion and landslide hazard areas and related buffers
7
8
9
- Page 35 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
14.08.140
Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas
A. Designation of Fish And Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas
Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas include
a. Areas With Which State or Federally Designated Endangered, Threatened, and
Sensitive Species Have a Primary Association
Federally designated endangered and threatened species are those fish
and wildlife species identified by the U S Fish and Wildlife Service and
the National Marine Fisheries Service that are in danger of extinction or
threatened to become endangered
ii State designated endangered, threatened, and sensitive species are
those fish and wildlife species native to the state of Washington identified
by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, that are in danger of
extinction, threatened to become endangered, vulnerable, or declining
and are likely to become endangered or threatened in a significant
portion of their range within the state without cooperative management or
removal of threats.
b State Priority Habitats and Areas Associated With State Priority Species. Priority
habitats and species are considered to be priorities for conservation and
management. Priority species require protective measures for their perpetuation
due to their population status, sensitivity to habitat alteration, and/or recreational,
commercial, or tribal importance Priority habitats are those habitat types or
elements with unique or significant value to a diverse assemblage of species A
priority habitat may consist of a unique vegetation type or dominant plant
species, a described successional stage, or a specific structural element. Priority
habitats and species are identified by the state Department of Fish and Wildlife
c. Naturally Occurring Ponds Under Twenty Acres Naturally occurring ponds are
those pondS under twenty (20) acres and their submerged aquatic beds that
provide fish or wildlife habitat, including those artificial ponds intentionally created
from dry areas in order to mitigate impacts to ponds. Naturally occurring ponds
do not include ponds deliberately designed and created from dry sites, such as
canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, temporary
construction ponds, and landscape amenities, unless such artificial ponds were
intentionally created for mitigation
d Waters of the State Waters of the state include lakes, rivers, ponds, streams,
inland waters, underground waters, salt waters, and all other surface waters and
watercourses within the jurisdiction of the state of Washington.
e Areas of Rare Plant SpeCies and High Quality Ecosystems. Areas of rare plant
species and high quality ecosystems are identified by the Washington State
Department of Natural Resources through the Natural Heritage Program
f Land Useful or Essential for Preserving Connections between Habitat Blocks and
Open Spaces
2. All areas within the City meeting one or more of these criteria, regardless of any formal
identification, are hereby designated critical areas and are subject to the provisions of this
Chapter and shall be managed consistent with the best available science.
3 Mapping The approximate location a,nd extent of habitat conservation areas are shown
on the critical area maps adopted by the City
Critical Area Report - Additional Requirements for Habitat Conservation Areas
1 Areas Addressed in Critical Area Report. The following areas shall be addressed in a
critical area report for habitat conservation areas
B
- Page 36 -
o
o
o
:" .,...~.",<'~. ",.....'"""''''1"..,\
Chapter 14 OS YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 1S, 2005
o
2.
a. The project area of the proposed activity;
b All habitat conservation areas and recommended buffers within three hundred
(300) feet of the project area, and
c. All shoreline areas, floodplains, other critical areas, and related buffers within
three hundred (300) feet of the project area.
Habitat Assessment. A habitat assessment is an investigation of the project area to
evaluate the potential presence or absence of designated critical fish or wildlife species
or habitat. A critical area report for a habitat conservation area shall contain an
assessment of habitats including the following site- and proposal-related information at a
minimum
3
a. Detailed description of vegetation on and adjacent to the project area and its
associated buffer;
b Identification of any species of local importance, priority species, or endangered,
threatened, sensitive, or candidate species that have a primary association with
habitat on or adjacent to the project area, and assessment of potential project
impacts to the use of the site by the species,
c A discussion of any federal, state, or local special management
recommendations, including Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife habitat
management recommendations, that have been developed for species or
habitats located on or adjacent to the project area,
d A detailed discussion of the direct and indirect potential impacts on habitat by the
project, including potential impacts to water quality;
e A discussion of measures, including avoidance, minimization, and mitigation,
proposed to preserve existing habitats and restore any habitat that was degraded
prior to the current proposed land use activity and to be conducted in accordance
with Mitigation Sequencing; and
f A discussion of ongoing management practices that will protect habitat after the
project site has been developed, including proposed monitoring and maintenance
programs.
Additional Information May Be Required When appropriate due to the type of habitat or
species present or the project area conditions, the administrator may also require the
habitat management plan to include.
a. An evaluation by an independent qualified professional regarding the applicant's
analysis and the effectiveness of any proposed mitigating measures or programs,
to include any recommendations as appropriate,
b A request for consultation with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
or the local Native American Indian Tribe or other appropriate agency; and
c. Detailed surface and subsurface hydrologic features both on and adjacent to the
site.
Performance Standards - General Requirements
1 Non-indigenous Species. No plant, wildlife, or fish species not indigenous to the region
shall be introduced into a habitat conservation area unless authorized by a state or
federal permit or approval
2. Mitigation and Contiguous Corridors. Mitigation sites shall be located to preserve or
achieve contiguous wildlife habitat corridors in accordance with a mitigation plan that is
part of an approved critical area report to minimize the isolating effects of development
on habitat areas, so long as mitigation of aquatic habitat is located within the same
aquatic ecosystem as the area disturbed
c
C
o
- Page 37 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
Approvals of Activities. The administrator shall condition approvals of activities allowed
within or adjacent to a habitat conservation area or its buffers, as necessary to minimize
or mitigate any potential adverse impacts. Conditions shall be based on the best
available science and may include, but are not limited to, the following
a. Establishment of buffer zones,
b Preservation of critically important vegetation and/or habitat features such as
snags and downed wood,
c Limitation of access to the habitat area, including fencing to deter unauthorized
access,
d Seasonal restriction of construction activities,
e Establishment of a duration and timetable for periodic review of mitigation
activities, and
f Requirement of a performance bond, when necessary, to ensure completion and
success of proposed mitigation.
4 Mitigation and Equivalent or Greater Biological Functions Mitigation of alterations to
habitat conservation areas shall achieve equivalent or greater biologic and hydrologic
functions and shall include mitigation for adverse impacts upstream or downstream of the
development proposal site. Mitigation shall address each function affected by the
alteration to achieve functional equivalency or improvement on a per function basis.
5 Approvals and the Best Available Science Any approval of alterations or impacts to a
habitat conservation area shall be supported by the best available science.
6 Buffers
3
Establishment of Buffers The administrator shall require the establishment of
buffer areas for activities adjacent to habitat conservation areas when needed to
protect habitat conservation areas. Buffers shall consist of an undisturbed area
of native vegetation or areas identified for restoration established to protect the
integrity, functions, and values of the affected habitat. Required buffer widths
shall reflect the sensitivity of the habitat and the type and intensity of human
activity proposed to be conducted nearby and shall be consistent with the
management recommendations issued by the Washington Department of Fish
and Wildlife Habitat conservation areas and their buffers shall be preserved in
perpetuity through the use of native growth protection areas and critical area
tracts
b Seasonal Restrictions When a species is more susceptible to adverse impacts
during specific periods of the year, seasonal restrictions may apply Larger
buffers may be required and activities may be further restricted during the
specified season
c. Habitat Buffer Averaging The administrator may allow the recommended habitat
area buffer width to be reduced in accordance with a critical area report, the best
available science, and the management recommendations issued by the
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, only if
It will not reduce stream or habitat functions,
II. It will not adversely affect salmonid habitat;
iii. It will provide additional natural resource protection, such as buffer
enhancement;
a.
IV
The total area contained in the buffer area after averaging is no less than
that which would be contained within the standard buffer; and
o
o
o
- Page 38 -
,lj;
,n"1/: ,Jr''''
Chapter 14 OS YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 1S, 2005
o
D
o
o
v The buffer area width is not reduced by more than twenty-five percent
(25%) in any location
Divisions of Land The subdivision and short subdivision of land in fish and wildlife
habitat conservation areas and associated buffers is subject to the following:
a. Land that is located wholly within a habitat conservation area or its buffer may
not be subdivided
b Land that is located partially within a habitat conservation area or its buffer may
be divided provided that the developable portion of each new lot and its access is
located outside of the habitat conservation area or its buffer and meets the
minimum lot size requirements
c. Access roads and utilities serving the proposed may be permitted within the
habitat conservation area and associated buffers only if the City determines that
no other feasible alternative exists and when consistent with this Chapter
Performance Standards - Specific Habitats
Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive Species
a. No development shall be allowed within a habitat conservation area or buffer with
which state or federally endangered, threatened, or sensitive species have a
primary association, except that which is provided for by a management plan
established by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife or applicable
state or federal agency
b Whenever activities are proposed adjacent to a habitat conservation area with
which state or federally endangered, threatened, or sensitive species have a
primary association, such area shall be protected through the application of
protection measures in accordance with a critical area report prepared by a
qualified professional and approved by the City Approval for alteration of land
adjacent to the habitat conservation area or its buffer shall not occur prior to
consultation with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife for animal
species, the Washington State Department of Natural Resources for plant
species, and other appropriate federal or state agencies.
c. Bald eagle habitat shall be protected pursuant to the Washington State Bald
Eagle Protection Rules (WAC 232-12-292) Whenever activities are proposed
adjacent to a verified nest territory or communal roost, a habitat management
plan shall be developed by a qualified professional Activities are adjacent to
bald eagle sites when they are within eight hundred (SOO) feet or within one half
mile (2,640 feet) and in a shoreline foraging area. The City shall verify the
location of eagle management areas for each proposed activity Approval of the
activity shall not occur prior to approval of the habitat management plan by the
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.
2. Riparian Habitat Areas. Unless otherwise allowed in this Chapter, all structures and
activities shall be located outside of the riparian habitat area.
a. Establishment of Riparian Habitat Areas Riparian habitat areas shall be
established for habitats that include aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems that
mutually benefit each other and that are located adjacent to rivers, perennial or
intermittent streams, seeps, and springs.
b A Riparian Habitat Area Width of 150 feet is established along Yelm Creek and
Thompson Creek, both Type 5, intermittent streams with low mass wasting
potential.
c. Increased Riparian Habitat Area Widths The recommended riparian habitat area
widths shall be increased, as follows.
7
- Page 39 -
Chapter 14 OS YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 1S, 2005
\. When the administrator determines that the recommended width is
insufficient to prevent habitat degradation and to protect the structure
and functions of the habitat area;
ii. When the frequently flooded area exceeds the recommended riparian
habitat area width, the riparian habitat area shall extend to the outer
edge of the frequently flooded area,
iii. When the habitat area is within an erosion or landslide hazard area, or
buffer, the riparian habitat area width shall be the recommended
distance, or the erosion or landslide hazard area or buffer, whichever is
greater
Riparian Habitat Area Width Averaging The administrator may allow the
recommended riparian habitat area width to be reduced in accordance with a
critical area report only if"
i. The width reduction will not reduce stream or habitat functions, including
those of nonfish habitat;
II The width reduction will not degrade the habitat, including habitat for
anadromous fish,
The proposal will provide additional habitat protection,
The total area contained in the riparian habitat area of each stream on
the development proposal site is not decreased,
The recommended riparian habitat area width is not reduced by more
than twenty-five percent (25%) in anyone location,
The width reduction will not be located within another critical area or
associated buffer; and
The reduced riparian habitat area width is supported by the best
available science
e Riparian Habitat Mitigation. Mitigation of adverse impacts to riparian habitat
areas shall result in equivalent functions and values on a per function basis, be
located as near the alteration as feasible, and be located in the same sub-
drainage basin as the habitat impacted
f Alternative Mitigation for Riparian Habitat Areas The performance standards set
forth in this Subsection may be modified at the City's discretion if the applicant
demonstrates that greater habitat functions, on a per function basis, can be
obtained in the affected sub-drainage basin as a result of alternative mitigation
measures.
d.
iii.
iv
v
vi.
vii
4 Aquatic Habitat. The following specific activities may be permitted within a riparian habitat
area, pond, lake, water of the state, and marine habitat or associated buffer
a. Clearing and Grading When clearing and grading is permitted as part of an
authorized activity or as otherwise allowed in these standards, the following shall
apply'
ii
Grading is allowed only during the dry season, which is typically
regarded as beginning on May 1 and ending on October 1 of each year,
provided that the City may extend or shorten the dry season on a case-
by-case basis, determined on actual weather conditions.
Filling or modification of a wetland or wetland buffer is permitted only if it
is conducted as part of an approved wetland alteration
The soil duff layer shall remain undisturbed to the maximum extent
o
o
o
jii
- Page 40 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
o
o
o
b
c
d
possible. Where feasible, any soil disturbed shall be redistributed to
other areas of the project area.
IV The moisture-holding capacity of the topsoil layer shall be maintained by
minimizing soil compaction or reestablishing natural soil structure and
infiltrative capacity on all areas of the project area not covered by
impervious surfaces
v Erosion and sediment control that meets or exceeds the standards set
forth in the [locally adopted stormwater management regulations] shall
be provided.
Shoreline Erosion Control Measures. New, replacement, or substantially
improved shoreline erosion control measures may be permitted in accordance
with an approved critical area report that demonstrates the following
I. Natural shoreline processes will be maintained The project will not
result in increased beach erosion or alterations to, or loss of, shoreline
substrate within one-quarter (1/4) mile of the project area.
ii The shoreline erosion control measures will not degrade fish or wildlife
habitat conservation areas or associated wetlands
iii. Adequate mitigation measures ensure that there is no net loss of the
functions or values of intertidal habitat or riparian habitat as a result of
the proposed shoreline erosion control measures
iv The proposed shoreline erosion control measures do not result in
alteration of intertidal migration corridors
Stream bank Stabilization Stream bank stabilization to protect new structures
from future channel migration is not permitted except when such stabilization is
achieved through bioengineering or soft armoring techniques in accordance with
an approved critical area report.
Roads, Trails, Bridges, and Rights-of-Way Construction of trails, roadways, and
minor road bridging, less than or equal to thirty (30) feet wide, may be permitted
in accordance with an approved critical area report subject to the following
standards.
There is no other feasible alternative route with less impact on the
environment;
ii.
The crossing minimizes interruption of downstream movement of wood
and gravel;
Roads in riparian habitat areas or their buffers shall not run parallel to the
water body;
Trails shall be located on the outer edge of the riparian area or buffer,
except for limited viewing platforms and crossings,
Crossings, where necessary, shall only occur as near to perpendicular
with the water body as possible,
Mitigation for impacts is provided pursuant to a mitigation plan of an
approved critical area report;
Road bridges are designed according to the Washington Department of
Fish and Wildlife Fish Passage Design at Road Culverts, 1999, and the
National Marine Fisheries Service Guidelines for Salmonid Passage at
Stream Crossings, 2000; and
Trails and associated viewing platforms shall not be made of continuous
iii.
iv
v
vi.
vii.
vii.
- Page 41 -
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
e
impervious materials
Utility Facilities. New utility lines and facilities may be permitted to cross
watercourses in accordance with an approved critical area report, if they comply
with the following standards.
Fish and wildlife habitat areas shall be avoided to the maximum extent
possible,
ii Installation shall be accomplished by boring beneath the scour depth and
hyporheic zone of the water body and channel migration zone, where
feasible,
iii. The utilities shall cross at an angle greater than sixty (60) degrees to the
centerline of the channel in streams or perpendicular to the channel
centerline whenever boring under the channel is not feasible,
iv Crossings shall be contained within the footprint of an existing road or
utility crossing where possible,
v The utility route shall avoid paralleling the stream or following a down-
valley course near the channel; and
vi. The utility installation shall not increase or decrease the natural rate of
shore migration or channel migration.
Public Flood Protection Measures New public flood protection measures and
expansion of existing ones may be permitted, subject to the City's review and
approval of a critical area report and the approval of a Federal Biological
Assessment by the federal agency responsible for reviewing actions related to a
federally listed species
Instream Structures Instream structures, such as, but not limited to, high flow
bypasses, sediment ponds, instream ponds, retention and detention facilities,
tide gates, dams, and weirs, shall be allowed only as part of an approved
watershed basin restoration project approved by the City and upon acquisition of
any required state or federal permits The structure shall be designed to avoid
modifying flows and water quality in ways that may adversely affect habitat
conservation areas.
o
o
h Stormwater Conveyance Facilities. Conveyance structures may be permitted in
accordance with an approved critical area report subject to the following
standards
No other feasible alternatives with less impact exist;
II Mitigation for impacts is provided,
III. Stormwater conveyance facilities shall incorporate fish habitat features,
and
iv Vegetation shall be maintained and, if necessary, added adjacent to all
open channels and ponds in order to retard erosion, filter out sediments,
and shade the water
On-Site Sewage Systems and Wells
i. New on-site sewage systems and individual wells may be permitted in
accordance with an approved critical area report only if accessory to an
approved residential structure, for which it is not feasible to connect to a
public sanitary sewer system
ii. Repairs to failing on-site sewage systems associated with an existing 0
structure shall be accomplished by utilizing one of the following methods
f
g
- Page 42 -
. t. ~ ~ : j;';,
Chapter 14 OS YMC - Critical Areas
~. t' .) ~
Review Draft
March 1S, 2005
c
that result in the least impact:
Connection to an available public sanitary sewer system,
Replacement with a new on-site sewage system located in a portion of
the site that has already been disturbed by development and is located
landward as far as possible, provided the proposed sewage system is in
compliance with local health regulations, or
Repair to the existing on-site septic system
c
o
- Page 43 -
Chapter 14 OS YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 1S, 2005
1408150
Definitions.
Words not defined in this Chapter shall be as defined in the City code, the Washington Administrative
Code, or the Revised Code of Washington Words not found in either code shall be as defined in the
Webster's Third New International Dictionary, latest edition
Adaptive Management - Adaptive management relies on scientific methods to evaluate how well
regulatory and non regulatory actions protect the critical area. An adaptive management program
is a formal and deliberate scientific approach to taking action and obtaining information in the face
of uncertainty
Alteration - Any human induced change in an existing condition of a critical area or its buffer Alterations
include, but are not limited to grading, filling, channelizing, dredging, clearing (vegetation),
construction, compaction, excavation, or any other activity that changes the character of the
critical area.
Anadromous Fish - Fish that spawn and rear in freshwater and mature in the marine environment. While
Pacific salmon die after their first spawning, adult char (bull trout) can live for many years, moving
in and out of saltwater and spawning each year The life history of Pacific salmon and char
contains critical periods of time when these fish are more susceptible to environmental and
physical damage than at other times The life history of salmon, for example, contains the
following stages upstream migration of adults, spawning, inter-gravel incubation, rearing,
smoltification (the time period needed for juveniles to adjust their body functions to live in the
marine environment), downstream migration, and ocean rearing to adults
Aquifer - A geological formation, group of formations, or part of a formation that is capable of yielding a
significant amount of water to a well or spring
Aquifer, Confined - An aquifer bounded above and below by beds of distinctly lower permeability than
that of the aquifer itself and that contains ground water under sufficient pressure for the water to
rise above the top of the aquifer
Aquifer Recharge Areas - Areas that, due to the presence of certain soils, geology, and surface water,
act to recharge ground water by percolation
Aquifer, Sole Source - An area designated by the U S Environmental Protection Agency under the Safe
Drinking Water Act of 1974, Section 1424(e) The aquifer(s) must supply fifty percent (50%) or
more of the drinking water for an area without a sufficient replacement available
Aquifer Susceptibility - The ease with which contaminants can move from the land surface to the aquifer
based solely on the types of surface and subsurface materials in the area. Susceptibility usually
defines the rate at which a contaminant will reach an aquifer unimpeded by chemical interactions
with the vadose zone media.
Aquifer, Unconfined - An aquifer not bounded above by a bed of distinctly lower permeability than that of
the aquifer itself and containing ground water under pressure approximately equal to that of the
atmosphere This term is synonymous with the term "water table aquifer"
Base Flood - A flood event having a one percent (1 %) chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given
year, also referred to as the 1 OO-year flood Designations of base flood areas on flood insurance
map(s) always include the letters A or V
Best Available Science - Current scientific information used in the process to designate, protect, or
restore critical areas, that is derived from a valid scientific process as defined by WAC 365-195-
900 through 925 Sources of the best available science are included in Citations of
Recommended Sources of Best Available Science for Designating and Protecting Critical Areas
published by the Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic
Development.
Best Management Practices (BMPs) - Conservation practices or systems of practices and management
measures that:
A. Control soil loss and reduce water quality degradation caused by high concentrations of
- Page 44 -
o
o
o
o
o
o
-.~~.~.------:r'"'.T.,~:-;'j"" _.
Chapter 14 OS YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 1S, 2005
nutrients, animal waste, toxics, and sediment;
B Minimize adverse impacts to surface water and ground water flow and circulation
patterns and to the chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of wetlands,
C Protect trees and vegetation designated to be retained during and following site
construction and use native plant species appropriate to the site for re-vegetation of
disturbed areas, and
D Provide standards for proper use of chemical herbicides within critical areas
Biodiversity - The variety of animal and plant life and its ecological processes and interconnections -
represented by the richness of ecological systems and the life that depends on them, including
human life and economies
Buffer or Buffer Zone - An area that is contiguous to and protects a critical area which is required for the
continued maintenance, functioning, and/or structural stability of a critical area
Compensation Project - Actions necessary to replace project-induced critical area and buffer losses,
including land acquisition, planning, construction plans, monitoring, and contingency actions.
Compensatory Mitigation - Replacing project-induced losses or impacts to a critical area, and includes,
but is not limited to, the following
Restoration - Actions performed to reestablish wetland functional characteristics and processes that have
been lost by alterations, activities, or catastrophic events within an area that no longer meets the
definition of a wetland
Enhancement - Actions performed to improve the condition of existing degraded wetlands so that the
functions they provide are of a higher quality
Preservation - Actions taken to ensure the permanent protection of existing, high-quality wetlands
Critical Aquifer Recharge Area - Areas designated by WAC 365-190-0S0(2) that are determined to have
a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water as defined by WAC 365-190-030(2)
Critical Areas - Critical areas include any of the following areas or ecosystems aquifer recharge areas,
fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, frequently flooded areas, geologically hazardous
areas, and wetlands, as defined in RCW 36 70A and this Chapter
Critical Area Tract - Land held in private ownership and retained in an open condition in perpetuity for the
protection of critical areas. Lands within this type of dedication may include but are not limited to,
portions and combinations of forest habitats, grasslands, shrub steppe, on-site watersheds, 100-
year floodplains, shorelines or shorelines of statewide significance, riparian areas, and wetlands.
Critical Facility - A facility for which even a slight chance of flooding, inundation, or impact from a hazard
event might be too great. Critical facilities include, but are not limited to, schools, nursing homes,
hospitals, police, fire and emergency response installations, and installations that produce, use,
or store hazardous materials or hazardous waste
Critical Species - All animal and plant species listed by the state or federal government as threatened or
endangered
Development - Any activity upon the land consisting of construction or alteration of structures, earth
movement, dredging, dumping, grading, filling, mining, removal of any sand, gravel, or minerals,
driving of piles, drilling operations, bulkheading, clearing of vegetation, or other land disturbance
Development includes the storage or use of equipment or materials inconsistent with the existing
use Development also includes approvals issued by the City that binds land to specific patterns
of use, including but not limited to, subdivisions, short subdivisions, zone changes, conditional
use permits, and binding site plans Development activity does not include the following
activities.
A.
Interior building improvements.
- Page 45 -
Review Draft
March 1S, 2005
B Exterior structure maintenance activities, including painting and roofing 0
C Routine landscape maintenance of established, ornamental landscaping, such as lawn
mowing, pruning, and weeding
D Maintenance of the following existing facilities that does not expand the affected area.
septic tanks (routine cleaning), wells, individual utility service connections, and individual
cemetery plots in established and approved cemeteries
Development Permit - Any permit issued by the City, or other authorized agency, for construction, land
use, or the alteration of land
Chapter 14 OS YMC - Critical Areas
Emergent Wetland - A wetland with at least thirty percent (30%) of the surface area covered by erect,
rooted, herbaceous vegetation extending above the water surface as the uppermost vegetative
strata.
Erosion Hazard Areas - At least those areas identified by the U S Department of Agriculture National
Resources Conservation Service as having a "severe" rill and inter-rill erosion hazard.
Exotic - Any species of plants or animals, which are foreign to the planning area.
Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas - Areas necessary for maintaining species in suitable
habitats within their natural geographic distribution so that isolated sub populations are not
created as designated by WAC 365-190-0S0(5) These areas include
A. Areas with which state or federally designated endangered, threatened, and sensitive
species have a primary association,
Habitats of local importance, including but not limited to areas designated as priority
habitat by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife,
Commercial and recreational shellfish areas,
Kelp and eelgrass beds,
Herring and smelt spawning areas,
Naturally occurring ponds under twenty (20) acres and their submerged aquatic beds that
provide fish or wildlife habitat, including those artificial ponds intentionally created from
dry areas in order to mitigate impacts to ponds,
Waters of the state, including lakes, rivers, ponds, streams, inland waters, underground
waters, salt waters, and all other surface waters and watercourses within the jurisdiction
of the state of Washington,
Lakes, ponds, streams, and rivers planted with game fish by a governmental or tribal
entity;
I State natural area preserves and natural resource conservation areas, and
J Land essential for preserving connections between habitat blocks and open spaces
Fish Habitat - Habitat that is used by fish at any life stage at any time of the year, including potential
habitat likely to be used by fish that could be recovered by restoration or management and
includes off-channel habitat.
B
C
D
E.
F
G
H
o
Flood or Flooding - A general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of normally dry
land areas from the overflow of inland waters and/or the unusual and rapid accumulation of runoff
of surface waters from any source.
Flood Insurance Map - The official map on which the Federal Insurance Administration has delineated
the areas of special flood hazards and include the risk premium zones applicable to the
community Also known as "flood insurance rate map" or "FIRM"
Flood Insurance Study - The official report provided by the Federal Insurance Administration that 0
includes flood profiles, the Flood Boundary-Floodway Map, and the water surface elevation of the
- Page 46 -
,
,
o
o
o
. ,-:----;'-~_,;_..........,.-""--.,~c 0'
Chapter 14 OS YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 1S, 2005
base flood
Floodplain - The total land area adjoining a river, stream, watercourse, or lake subject to inundation by
the base flood
Flood Protection Elevation - The elevation that is one (1) foot above the base flood elevation
Floodway - The channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land area that must be reserved
in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the surface water elevation
more that one (1) foot. Also known as the "zero rise f100dway "
Forested Wetland - A wetland with at least thirty percent (30%) of the surface area covered by woody
vegetation greater than twenty (20) feet in height that is at least partially rooted within the
wetland.
Frequently Flooded Areas - Lands in the floodplain subject to a one percent (1 %) or greater chance of
flooding in any given year and those lands that provide important flood storage, conveyance, and
attenuation functions, as determined by the administrator in accordance with WAC 365-190-
OSO(3) Frequently flooded areas perform important hydrologic functions and may present a risk
to persons and property Classifications of frequently flooded areas include, at a minimum, the
100-year floodplain designations of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the
National Flood Insurance Program
Functions and Values - The beneficial roles served by critical areas including, but are not limited to, water
quality protection and enhancement; fish and wildlife habitat; food chain support; flood storage,
conveyance and attenuation, ground water recharge and discharge, erosion control, wave
attenuation, protection from hazards, historical, archaeological, and aesthetic value protection,
educational opportunities, and recreation These beneficial roles are not listed in order of priority
Critical area functions can be used to help set targets (species composition, structure, etc.) for
managed areas, including mitigation sites
Geologically Hazardous Areas - Areas that may not be suited to development consistent with public
health, safety, or environmental standards, because of their susceptibility to erosion, sliding,
earthquake, or other geological events as designated by WAC 365-190-0S0(4) Types of
geologically hazardous areas include. erosion, landslide, seismic, mine, and volcanic hazards
Ground Water - Water in a saturated zone or stratum beneath the surface of land or a surface water
body
Ground Water Management Area - A specific geographic area or subarea designated pursuant to
Chapter 173-100 WAC for which a ground water management program is required
Ground Water Management Program - A comprehensive program designed to protect ground water
quality, to ensure ground water quantity, and to provide for efficient management of water
resources while recognizing existing ground water rights and meeting future needs consistent
with local and state objectives, policies, and authorities within a designated ground water
management area or subarea and developed pursuant to Chapter 173-100 WAC
Ground Water, Perched - Ground water in a saturated zone is separated from the underlying main body
of ground water by an unsaturated rock zone
Growth Management Act - RCW 36 70A and 36 70B, as amended.
Habitat Conservation Areas - Areas designated as fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas.
Habitats of Local Importance - These areas include a seasonal range or habitat element with which a
given species has a primary association, and which, if altered may reduce the likelihood that the
species will maintain and reproduce over the long-term. These might include areas of high
relative density or species richness, breeding habitat, winter range, and movement corridors.
These might also include habitats that are of limited availability or high vulnerability to alterations
such as cliffs, talus, and wetlands. (WAC 365-190-030)
Hazard Areas - Areas designated as frequently flooded areas or geologically hazardous areas due to
- Page 47 -
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
potential for erosion, landslide, seismic activity, mine collapse, or other geological condition 0
Hazardous Substances - Any liquid, solid, gas, or sludge, including any material, substance, product,
commodity, or waste, regardless of quantity, that exhibits any of the physical, chemical, or
biological properties described in WAC 173-303-090 or 173-303-100
High Quality Wetlands - Those wetlands that meet the following criteria.
A. No, or isolated, human alteration of the wetland topography;
B No human-caused alteration of the hydrology or the wetland appears to have recovered
from the alteration,
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
C Low cover and frequency of exotic plant species,
D Relatively little human-related disturbance of the native vegetation, or recovery from past
disturbance,
E. If the wetland system is degraded, it still contains a viable and high quality example of a
native wetland community; and
F No known major water quality problems
Historic Condition - Condition of the land, including flora, fauna, soil, topography, and hydrology that
existed before the area and vicinity were developed or altered by human activity
Hydric Soil - A soil that is saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to
develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part. The presence of hydric soil shall be determined
following the methods described in the Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation
Manual
Hydrologic Soil Groups - Soils grouped according to their runoff-producing characteristics under similar
storm and cover conditions Properties that influence runoff potential are depth to seasonally
high water table, intake rate and permeability after prolonged wetting, and depth to a low
permeable layer Hydrologic soil groups are normally used in equations that estimate runoff from
rainfall, but can be used to estimate a rate of water transmission in soil There are four hydrologic
soil groups
Low Runoff potential and a high rate of infiltration potential,
Moderate Infiltration potential and a moderate rate of runoff potential;
Slow Infiltration potential and a moderate to high rate of runoff potential, and
High Runoff potential and very slow infiltration and water transmission rates.
Hydrophytic Vegetation - Macrophytic plant life growing in water or on a substrate that is at least
periodically deficient in oxygen as a result of excessive water content. The presence of
hydrophytic vegetation shall be determined following the methods described in the Washington
State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual
Hyporheic Zone - The saturated zone located beneath and adjacent to streams that contains some
portion of surface waters, serves as a filter for nutrients, and maintains water quality
Impervious Surface - A hard surface area that either prevents or retards the entry of water into the soil
mantle as under natural conditions prior to development or that causes water to run off the
surface in greater quantities or at an increased rate of flow from the flow present under natural
conditions prior to development. Common impervious surfaces include, but are not limited to,
rooftops, walkways, patiOS, driveways, parking lots or storage areas, concrete or asphalt paving,
gravel roads, packed earthen materials, and oiled macadam or other surfaces which similarly
impede the natural infiltration of stormwater
In-Kind Compensation - To replace critical areas with substitute areas whose characteristics and
functions closely approximate those destroyed or degraded by a regulated activity It does not
mean replacement "in-category "
- Page 48 -
o
o
o
o
o
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
Isolated Wetlands - Those wetlands that are outside of and not contiguous to any 1 OO-year floodplain of
a lake, river, or stream and have no contiguous hydric soil or hydrophytic vegetation between the
wetland and any surface water
Infiltration - The downward entry of water into the immediate surface of soil.
Inter-Rill - Areas subject to sheet wash
Joint Aquatic Resource Permits Application - A single application form that may be used to apply for
hydraulic project approvals, shoreline management permits, approvals of exceedance of water
quality standards, water quality certifications, coast guard bridge permits, Washington State
Department of Natural Resources use authorization, and U S Army Corps of Engineers permits
Landslide Hazard Areas - Areas that are potentially subject to risk of mass movement due to a
combination of geologic landslide resulting from a combination of geologic, topographic, and
hydrologic factors These areas are typically susceptible to landslides because of a combination
of factors including bedrock, soil, slope gradient, slope aspect, geologic structure, ground water,
or other factors.
Mitigation - Avoiding, minimizing, or compensating for adverse critical areas impacts. Mitigation, in the
following sequential order of preference, is:
A. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action,
B Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
implementation, by using appropriate technology, or by taking affirmative steps, such as
project redesign, relocation, or timing, to avoid or reduce impacts,
C Rectifying the impact to wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, and habitat
conservation areas by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment to
the conditions existing at the time of the initiation of the project;
D Minimizing or eliminating the hazard by restoring or stabilizing the hazard area through
engineered or other methods,
E. Reducing or eliminating the impact or hazard over time by preservation and maintenance
operations during the life of the action,
F Compensating for the impact to wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, and habitat
conservation areas by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or
environments, and
G Monitoring the hazard or other required mitigation and taking remedial action when
necessary
Mitigation for individual actions may include a combination of the above measures
Monitoring - Evaluating the impacts of development proposals on the biological, hydrological, and
geological elements of such systems, and assessing the performance of required mitigation
measures throughout the collection and analysis of data by various methods for the purpose of
understanding and documenting changes in natural ecosystems and features, including gathering
baseline data.
Native Vegetation - Plant species that are indigenous to the area in question
Native Growth Protection Area (NGPA) - An area where native vegetation is preserved for the purpose of
preventing harm to property and the environment, including, but not limited to, controlling surface
water runoff and erosion, maintaining slope stability, buffering, and protecting plants and animal
habitat;
Natural Waters - Waters, excluding water conveyance systems that are artificially constructed and
actively maintained for irrigation.
Non-conformity - A legally established existing use or legally constructed structure that is not in
- Page 49 -
Chapter 14 OS YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 1S, 2005
.
.
o
compliance with current regulations.
Non-indigenous - See "Exotic."
Off-Site Compensation - To replace critical areas away from the site on which a critical area has been
impacted
On-site Compensation - To replace critical areas at or adjacent to the site on which a critical areas has
been impacted
Out-of-Kind Compensation - To replace critical areas with substitute critical areas whose characteristics
do not closely approximate those destroyed or degraded It does not refer to replacement "out-
of-category "
Perched Ground Water - See "Ground Water, Perched"
Permeability - The capacity of an aquifer or confining bed to transmit water It is a property of the aquifer
or confining bed and is independent of the force causing movement.
Porous Soil Types - Soils, as identified by the National Resources Conservation Service, U S
Department of Agriculture, that contain voids, pores, interstices, or other openings which allow
the passing of water
Practical Alternative - An alternative that is available and capable of being carried out after taking into
consideration cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of overall project purposes, and has
less impacts to critical areas
Primary Association Area - The area used on a regular basis by, is in close association with, or is
necessary for the proper functioning of the habitat of a critical species Regular basis means that
the habitat area is normally, or usually known to contain a critical species, or based on known
habitat requirements of the species, the area is likely to contain the critical species. Regular
basis is species and population dependent. Species that exist in low numbers may be present
infrequently yet rely on certain habitat types.
Priority Habitat - Habitat type or elements with unique or significant value to one or more species as
classified by the state Department of Fish and Wildlife A priority habitat may consist of a unique
vegetation type or dominant plant species, a described successional stage, or a specific structural
element.
Qualified Professional - A person with experience and training in the pertinent scientific discipline, and
who is a qualified scientific expert with expertise appropriate for the relevant critical area subject
in accordance with WAC 365-195-905(4) A qualified professional must have obtained a B S or
BA or equivalent degree in biology, engineering, environmental studies, fisheries,
geomorphology, or related field, and two years of related work experience
A. A qualified professional for habitats or wetlands must have a degree in biology and
professional experience related to the subject species.
B A qualified professional for a geological hazard must be a professional engineer or
geologist, licensed in the state of Washington
C A qualified professional for critical aquifer recharge areas means a hydrogeologist,
geologist, engineer, or other scientist with experience in preparing hydrogeologic
assessments.
Reclaimed Water - Municipal wastewater effluent that has been adequately and reliability treated so that
it is suitable for beneficial use Following treatment it is no longer considered wastewater
(treatment levels and water quality requirements are given in the water reclamation and reuse
standards adopted by the state departments of Ecology and Health)
Repair or Maintenance - An activity that restores the character, scope, size, and design of a serviceable
area, structure, or land use to its previously authorized and undamaged condition Activities that 0
change the character, size, or scope of a project beyond the original design and drain, dredge, fill,
flood, or otherwise alter critical areas are not included in this definition.
- Page 50 -
o
,
.
Chapter 14 OS YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 1S, 2005
o Restoration - Measures taken to restore an altered or damaged natural feature including
A. Active steps taken to restore damaged wetlands, streams, protected habitat, or their
buffers to the functioning condition that existed prior to an unauthorized alteration, and
B Actions performed to reestablish structural and functional characteristics of the critical
area that have been lost by alteration, past management activities, or catastrophic
events.
Rills - Steep-sided channels resulting from accelerated erosion. A rill is generally a few inches deep and
not wide enough to be an obstacle to farm machinery Rill erosion tends to occur on slopes,
particularly steep slopes with poor vegetative cover
Riparian Habitat - Areas adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contain elements of both
aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems that mutually influence each other The width of these areas
extends to that portion of the terrestrial landscape that directly influences the aquatic ecosystem
by providing shade, fine or large woody material, nutrients, organic and inorganic debris,
terrestrial insects, or habitat for riparian-associated wildlife Widths shall be measured from the
ordinary high water mark or from the top of bank if the ordinary high water mark cannot be
identified. It includes the entire extent of the floodplain and the extent of vegetation adapted to
wet conditions as well as adjacent upland plant communities that directly influence the stream
system Riparian habitat areas include those riparian areas severely altered or damaged due to
human development activities
River - See "Watercourse"
Scientific Process - A valid scientific process is one that produces reliable information useful in
understanding the consequences of a decision The characteristics of a valid scientific process
are as follows
A. Peer Review The information has been critically reviewed by other qualified scientific
experts in that scientific discipline.
B Methods The methods that were used are standardized in the pertinent scientific
discipline or the methods have been appropriately peer-reviewed to ensure their reliability
and validity
C Logical Conclusions and Reasonable Inferences The conclusions presented are based
on reasonable assumptions supported by other studies and are logically and reasonably
derived from the assumptions and supported by the data presented
D Quantitative Analysis. The data have been analyzed using appropriate statistical or
quantitative methods.
E. Context. The assumptions, analytical techniques, data, and conclusions are
appropriately framed with respect to the prevailing body of pertinent scientific knowledge
F References The assumptions, techniques, and conclusions are well referenced with
citations to pertinent existing information
Scrub-Shrub Wetland - A wetland with at least thirty percent (30%) of its surface area covered by woody
vegetation less than twenty (20) feet in height as the uppermost strata.
Section 404 Permit - A permit issued by the U S Army Corps of Engineers for the placement of dredge
or fill material or clearing in waters of the United States, including wetlands, in accordance with 33
USC ~ 1344 Section 404 permits may also be for endangered species consultation They
require a consultation under Section 7 of the Federal Endangered Species Act.
Seeps - A spot where water oozes from the earth, often forming the source of a small stream
Seismic Hazard Areas - Areas that are subject to severe risk of damage as a result of earthquake-
induced ground shaking, slope failure, settlement, or soil liquefaction
Significant Portion of its Range - That portion of a species range likely to be essential to the long-term
c
c)
- Page 51 -
.
G
Review Draft
March 1S, 2005
survival of the population in Washington 0
Soil Survey - The most recent soil survey for the local area or county by the National Resources
Conservation Service, U S Department of Agriculture
Special Flood Hazard Areas - The land in the floodplain within an area subject to a one percent (1%) or
greater chance of flooding in any given year Designations of special flood hazard areas on flood
insurance map(s) always include the letters A or V
Special Protection Areas - Aquifer recharge areas defined by WAC 173-200-090 that require special
consideration or increased protection because of unique characteristics, including, but not limited
to
Chapter 14 OS YMC - Critical Areas
A. Ground waters that support an ecological system requiring more stringent criteria than
drinking water standards,
B Ground water recharge areas and wellhead protection areas that are vulnerable to
pollution because of hydrogeologic characteristics, and
C Sole source aquifer status
Sole Source Aquifer - See "Aquifer, Sole Source"
Species - Any group of animals classified as a species or subspecies as commonly accepted by the
scientific community
Species, Endangered - Any fish or wildlife species that is threatened with extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of its range and is listed by the state or federal government as an endangered
species
Species of Local Importance - Those species of local concern due to their population status or their
sensitivity to habitat manipulation, or that are game species
Species, Priority - Any fish or wildlife species requiring protective measures and/or management
guidelines to ensure their persistence as genetically viable population levels as classified by the
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, including endangered, threatened, sensitive,
candidate and monitor species, and those of recreational, commercial, or tribal importance
Species, Threatened - Any fish or wildlife species that is likely to become an endangered species within
the foreseeable future throughout a significant portion of its range without cooperative
management or removal of threats, and is listed by the state or federal government as a
threatened species
Stream - See "Watercourse"
Sub-drainage Basin or Subbasin - The drainage area of the highest order stream containing the subject
property impact area. Stream order is the term used to define the position of a stream in the
hierarchy of tributaries in the watershed. The smallest streams are the highest order (first order)
tributaries. These are the upper watershed streams and have no tributaries of their own When
two first order streams meet, they form a second order stream, and when two second order
streams meet they become a third order stream, and so on
Substantial Damage - Damage of any origin sustained by a structure whereby the cost of restoring the
structure to its before damaged condition would equal or exceed fifty percent (50%) of the market
value of the structure before the damage occurred
Substantial Improvement - Any repair, reconstruction, or improvement of a structure, the cost of which
equals or exceeds fifty percent (50%) of the market value of the structure either before the
improvement or repair is started, or if the structure has been damaged and is being restored,
before the damage occurred
Unavoidable - Adverse impacts that remain after all appropriate and practicable avoidance and
minimization have been achieved
- Page 52 -
o
o
0.
Chapter 14 08 YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 18, 2005
Vulnerability - The combined effect of susceptibility to contamination and the presence of potential
contaminants.
Water Table - That surface in an unconfined aquifer at which the pressure is atmospheric. It is defined
by the levels at which water stands in wells that penetrate the aquifer just far enough to hold
standing water
Water Table Aquifer - See "Aquifer, Unconfined."
Water Typing System - Waters classified according to WAC 222-16-031 as follows.
A Type 1 Water - All waters, within their ordinary high-water mark, as inventoried as
"shorelines of the state" under Chapter 90 58 RCW and the rules promulgated pursuant
to Chapter 90 58 RCW, but not including those waters' associated wetlands as defined in
Chapter 90 58 RCW
Type 2 Water - Segments of natural waters that are not classified as Type 1 Water and
have a high fish, wildlife, or human use These are segments of natural waters and
periodically inundated areas of their associated wetlands, which.
Are diverted for domestic use by more than one hundred (100) residential or
camping units or by a public accommodation facility licensed to serve more than
ten (10) persons, where such diversion is determined by the Washington State
Department of Natural Resources to be a valid appropriation of water and only
considered Type 2 Water upstream from the point of such diversion for 1,500 feet
or until the drainage area is reduced by fifty percent (50%), or whichever is less,
2. Are diverted for use by federal, state, tribal, or private fish hatcheries Such
waters shall be considered Type 2 Water upstream from the point of diversion for
1,500 feet, including tributaries if highly significant for protection of downstream
water quality;
3 Are within a federal, state, local, or private campground having more than thirty
(30) camping units: Provided, that the water shall not be considered to enter a
campground until it reaches the boundary of the park lands available for public
use and comes within one hundred (100) feet of a camping unit;
4 Are used by fish for spawning, rearing or migration Waters having the following
characteristics are presumed to have highly significant fish populations.
a. Stream segments having a defined channel twenty (20) feet or greater
within the bankfull width and having a gradient of less than four percent
(4%)
o
c
o
B
C
b Lakes, ponds, or impoundments having a surface area of one (1) acre or
greater at seasonal low water; or
5 Are used by fish for off-channel habitat. These areas are critical to the
maintenance of optimum survival of fish This habitat shall be identified based on
the following criteria.
a. The site must be connected to a fish bearing stream and be accessible
during some period of the year; and
b The off-channel water must be accessible to fish through a drainage with
less than a five percent (5%) gradient.
Type 3 Water - Segments of natural waters that are not classified as Type 1 or 2 Waters
and have a moderate to slight fish, wildlife, and human use These are segments of
natural waters and periodically inundated areas of their associated wetlands which.
Are diverted for domestic use by more than ten (10) residential or camping units
or by a public accommodation facility licensed to serve more than ten (10)
persons, where such diversion is determined by the Washington State
- Page 53 -
Chapter 14 OS YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 1S, 2005
D
Department of Natural Resources to be a valid appropriation of water and the
only practical water source for such users. Such waters shall be considered to
be Type 3 Water upstream from the point of such diversion for 1,500 feet or until
the drainage area is reduced by fifty percent (50%), whichever is less, or
Are used by fish for spawning, rearing, or migration The requirements for
determining fish use are described in the State Forest Practices Board Manual,
Section 13 If fish use has not been determined
a. Waters having the following characteristics are presumed to have fish
use
Stream segments having a defined channel of two (2) feet or greater
within the bankfull width in Western Washington, or three (3) feet or
greater in width in Eastern Washington, and having a gradient of sixteen
percent (16%) or less,
ii Stream segments having a defined channel or two (2) feet or greater
within the bankfull width in Western Washington, or three (3) feet or
greater within the bankfull width in Eastern Washington, and having a
gradient greater than sixteen percent (16%) and less than or equal to
twenty percent (20%), and having greater than fifty (50) acres in
contributing basin size in Western Washington or greater than 175 acres
contributing basin size in Eastern Washington, based on hydrographic
boundaries,
iii. Ponds or impoundments having a surface area of less than one (1) acre
at seasonal low water and having an outlet to a fish stream, and
iv Ponds of impoundments having a surface area greater than one half
(0 5) acre at seasonal low water
b The Washington State Department of Natural Resources shall waive or
modify the characteristics in (a) of this Subsection where
i. Waters have confirmed, long-term, naturally occurring water quality
parameters incapable of supporting fish,
ii. Snowmelt streams have short flow cycles that do not support successful
life history phases of fish. These streams typically have no flow in the
winter months and discontinue flow by June 1, or
iii. Sufficient information about a geomorphic region is available to support a
departure from the characteristics in (a) of this Subsection, as
determined in consultation with the Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife, Washington State Department of Ecology, affected tribes, and
interested parties.
Type 4 Water - All segments of natural waters within the bankfull width of defined
channels that are perennial nonfish habitat streams Perennial streams are waters that
do not go dry any time of a year of normal rainfall. However, for the purpose of water
typing, Type 4 Waters include the intermittent dry portions of the perennial channel below
the uppermost point of perennial flow If the uppermost point of perennial flow cannot be
identified with simple, nontechnical observations (see State Forest Practices Board
Manual, Section 23), then Type 4 Waters begin at a point along the channel where the
contributing basin area is.
At least thirteen (13) acres in the Western Washington coastal zone (which
corresponds to the Sitka spruce zone defined in Franklin and Dyrness, 1973),
2. At least fifty two (52) acres in other locations in Western Washington, or
3 At least three hundred (300) acres in Eastern Washington
2.
- Page 54 -
.6
o
o
o
,
c
o
c
1/,. 0,
Chapter 14 OS YMC - Critical Areas
Review Draft
March 1S, 2005
Type 5 Waters - All segments of natural waters within the bankfull width of the defined
channels that are not Type 1, 2, 3, or 4 Waters These are seasonal, nonfish habitat
streams in which surface flow is not present for at least some portion of the year and are
not located downstream from any stream reach that is a Type 4 Water Type 5 Waters
must be physically connected by an above-ground channel system to Type 1, 2, 3, or 4
Waters.
Watercourse - Any portion of a channel, bed, bank, or bottom waterward of the ordinary high water line of
waters of the state including areas in which fish may spawn, reside, or through which they may
pass, and tributary waters with defined beds or banks, which influence the quality of fish habitat
downstream This definition includes watercourses that flow on an intermittent basis or which
fluctuate in level during the year and applies to the entire bed of such watercourse whether or not
the water is at peak level This definition does not include irrigation ditches, canals, stormwater
run-off devices, or other entirely artificial watercourses, except where they exist in a natural
watercourse that has been altered by humans.
Wetlands - Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and
duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of
vegetation adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps,
marshes, bogs, and similar areas. Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally
created from non-wetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches,
grass-lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and
landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally
created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway Wetlands may include those
artificial wetlands intentionally created from non-wetland areas to mitigate the conversion of
wetlands. For identifying and delineating a wetland, local government shall use the Washington
State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual
E.
Wetland Classes, Classes of Wetlands, or Wetland Types - The descriptive classes of the wetlands
taxonomic classification system of the U S Fish and Wildlife Service (Cowardin, et al 1979)
Wetland Edge - The boundary of a wetland as delineated based on the definitions contained in this
Chapter
- Page 55 -
o
C)
o
.
"
~
p
" ;"-.
'....~" tI
,~, It
'~~)
-~:,/
l i'
Geologic Hazard Areas
'/
( I
\\ ~;'~:=~,
\ \1',/1,. .....~.....
\~ft J ".} '\\ /"" --.._
,~/ ~v ~ \\ .... ,...........
_~ - r.~v~ ~'<;>.fJ ,~/;..<-j \\ .///0,#
,~ ~ ~.to ~>?~\'~~~s~
~1~ Sf"e~ ' ....--,;'
ILE:(~AVE~E 4' ~'I'o, l"~<.,. ,.--:;>,--'"
Ii.$- '<(C> $.$' y:-:.....-
i" ~...;':) .I'{' /i/"
a" It'
,f II
l \\
'it,
,\
\\
,I
II
II
II
~\
\~"
',\
11
"
II
\~\
I'
1\
( )
I I
I I
I I
I I
I'
\ \
City of Yelm
CSologMmll'd leas
o Steep Slopes
D Landslide Hazard
Erosion Hazard
~i
~'
S
.,
a!i
Ii
~l
~ ~
City of }'elm
Commrmitv Development Departmen.t
P.O. Box 479
YeJm, WA 98597
360.458.3835
360.458.3144 FAX
cdd@ci..velm.wa.lI.s
I
r
f
!
~
:1-
'TO
"
~
~. '"",,''''' ~ ,,,m,
w I14R elSE
, ~
o $,_ 5" Q.s">'yC'~1
''8> 1:'/ w '~o\....I'('
1 R .)~ t (
.'{' ~"~
r o.
;g '\.~
o
Si
f
\--.
,
,
!l3RD>AVESE
\
,
'\
\
,
\
/'
/
/
:'.'0
''''~c
V
f
"
~
o
City of Yelm
.,
@i
~:
3; I;
~; i~
~, i
118THA,VESE
o
lir
/ ~
fj. '
/ "
ff;
II -~
\ \ /---
\ \ . "7---:::;'-..
\ ril/ '">. .....................
,. ft.) , '"
, ,_..... ./J ",'" " ,.....-....
~i'~ <!of; ~'" \\ /,.......,-
~~ ~! v<,f>"-~,p >t-u" \\ ///-.;
::- _ ;8 ~,.~,. ~{o<?- ~1''1>\'~__'''''.I/:~
'~ ~..,' ~~~" .....-,/
. ~ 1., 4' ,s4; ".'7~~ _-0-.....
ILE;(~":~~E t; ~,':;".s~ ,/"__/
~! --.' -, l ,,,,""' .. ~(C'roS" /"/
::: J ,,,,,<:J,, of: 1/
l ~8"o<:$' 1/
,0 II
.p I I,
I'
\t,
"
~
\I
1\
P
II
\\~
" \
II
II
1\
\\
\\
I )
I (
( I
}h II
.,,\ I I
~,~ \ I
. 6. 'I, \\
V,; '-;""~\ \\
'f J r,ry~'~I\
" ,/" '~, \ \,
I i f'F '\. '\,
=- ."'~r';;'--C-=I' 0"., ~_ '\,.
':11 j " .'~
h:1A 1/ ~\
, ;/
I
./
\_10TI-fi\\lES€ 1 I\OTl-lAVESE
~(, ~ II -
,i ~
i ----7/-_
, 1/ ............
l/( "'"
I \ '....
\ .....,.....
Frequently Flooded Areas':
I
\ :~~
'.....~, If
,~, n
'::'~-J)
City of }'elm
Commlmit.v Del1elopment Department
P.O. Box 479
Yelm. WA 98597
360.458.3835
360.458.3144 FAX
cddui...."elm.wa,u.s
\
.~
~
,'1!>
r
!
I
l~7
"~/
1'&
J! i u"."
Sf' '" _~o_se
/ (
I
!
L..
I '
93RDAVESE
//
.,
c,
~~
/
/
/
"
$
!(
o
"\
;:7
o
City of Yelm
t.,
0,
~'
;!i
l'aTH AVE SE
~i
~i
~!
"
(j
o
""
r::r
;.."
{l
c:.
'~~" f
'~'I
, /,
'-...."":.
p
Wetlands
City of Yelm
Community DelJe/opment Department
P.O. Box 479
Yelm, WA 98597
360.458.3835
360.458.3144 FAX
cddiEci..'velm.wa.lls
,~
-",,~1
~~~
\
" tJ
s
'I-
f?
~
1$
.-
,~
.~
c
o
(\
~
YELM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
FEBRUARY 28, 2005 4 00 P M
YELM CITY HALL
Glen Cunningham called the meeting to order at 4 00 P m
Members present: John Graver, Glen Cunningham, Greg Mattocks, Carlos Perez, Norm Allard
and Everette Schirman
Staff. Grant Beck, and Tami Merriman
Members Absent: John Thomson, excused
Motion No
Approval of Minutes.
05-03 MOTION MADE BY NORM ALLARD, SECONDED BY JOHN GRAVER TO APPROVE THE
MINUTES FROM THE JANUARY 24, 2005 MEETING MOTION CARRIED.
Public Communications.
None
Public Hearings. GMA Consistency Review
Worksession. GMA Consistency Review:
Mr. Cunninaham opened the public hearing at 4 02 p m and called for a staff report.
Mr. Beck gave a brief overview of the open house held at the January 24, 2005 meeting, and the
results recommended by the subcommittee that reviewed those comments Mr. Beck stated that
the consistency review of the Comprehensive Plan shows that the City is in compliance with the
State GMA, with the exception of the Critical Areas Ordinance Mr. Beck gave a proposed
schedule for the review and update of the Critical Areas Ordinance
Mr. Beck then responded with the subcommittee's response to the comments made at the open
house The responses are based on subject matter In regards to stormwater, Mr. Beck
confirmed that the City is in compliance with the State Stormwater Regulations The City's of
Olympia, Tumwater and Lacey are reviewing the 2001 stormwater manual for adoption per state
requirement. The City of Yelm is reviewing it as well, even though it is not required, to see what
parts if any of the new manual may be appropriate for the City of Yelm and its soils The main
differences in the 1992 and 2001 manual is the options for treating stormwater, and the size of
retention required The 2001 manual allows for new technology in the treatment of stormwater
This is due to the soils in different areas that do not have good filtration rates and must treat more
water in a faster amount of time Many of these new technologies are very costly and high
maintenance For Yelm and its main users, the cost and high maintenance requirements may not
be a good fit. Yelm has extremely good soils for infiltration Using the infiltration rates of the
2001 manual would require much larger retention facilities (storm ponds), when they are not truly
needed here
High ground water and stream buffer issues will be a part of the critical areas ordinance update
Thurston County is currently reviewing their high ground water regulations, and the City will
review their findings to help identify if and when high ground water regulations should be applied
within the City, as well as information just released from the state regarding best available
science
The comments regarding sewer treatment and the release of pharmaceutical chemicals into
ground water was brought up as a concern for essential public facilities Although this concern
does not really apply to the essential public facilities portion of the Comprehensive Plan, it may
Yelm Planning Commission
February 28, 2005
Page 1
c
c
c
best be addressed through State or Federal legislation that regulates the operation of sewer and
waste systems
Mr. Beck discussed the different classifications of land described in GMA. The GMA lists land
classifications as resource (agricultural/timber/mining), rural, and urban The GMA requires Cities
to plan for urban growth by providing for urban growth areas (UGA) around the existing city Iimit~
Land within the City and UGA may be currently used as resource land, however, is slated for
urban growth, and not considered as resource land of long term commercial significance
Mr. CunninQham called for questions from the Council
Carlos Perez asked about the cost of the newer technologies, and who bears the burden of these
costs
Mr. Beck responded that the cost would be carried by homeowners associations, citizens, and
private development. The City does not have the manpower to follow up with these groups to
assure that they would maintain the higher maintenance type of systems
Mr. CunninQham asked if there was any public comment. Seeing none, Mr. CunninQham closed
the hearing at 430
05.04 MOTION MADE BY NORM ALLARD, SECONDED BY EVERETTE SCHIRMAN TO FORWARD
TO CITY COUNCIL THE DETERMINATION OF GMA CONSISTENCY, WITH A SCHEDULE TO
UPDATE THE CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE. ALL WERE IN FAVOR, MOTION CARRIED
Other:
Mr. Beck requested the Commission nominate a Chair and Vice Chair for 2005
The Commission unanimously agreed to keep John Thomson as Chair for 2005
05.05 Norm Allard nominated Glen Cunningham as Vice Chair, Everette Schirman seconded the
nomination, all were in favor
05.06 MOTION MADE TO ADJOURN MEETING ADJOURNED AT 4 40 P M
Respectfully submitted,
Tami Merriman, Assistant Planner
John Thomson, Chair
Date
Yelm Planning Commission
February 28,2005
Page 2
c
City of Yelm
c
c
Planning Commission
AGENDA
CITY OF YELM PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, February 28,2005
4 00 P M
YELM CITY HALL
105 YELM AVE WEST
1 Call to Order, Roll Call, Approval of Minutes
January 24, 2005, minutes enclosed
2 Public Communications (Not associated With measures or tOpiCS for whIch public
hearings have been held or for which are antIcipated)
3
Public Hearings
None
4 GMA Consistency Review
5 Other
6 Adjourn
Enclosures are available to non-Commission members upon request.
It IS the City of Yelm's policy to provide reasonable accommodations for people With
disabilities If you are a person with a disability in need of accommodations to conduct
business, or to participate in government processes or activities, please contact Agnes
Bennick, at 360-458-8404 at least four (4) working days prior to the scheduled event.
All Planning Commission meetings are audio taped For information on obtaining a
copy, please call the Community Development Department at (360) 458-3835
Next regular meeting shall be:
Monday, March 21, 2005 - 4 00 P M
Yelm City Hall Council Chambers
1\
o
City of Yelm
c
c
Community Development Department
105 Yelm Avenue West
POBox 479
Yelm, WA 98597
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
YELM PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE Monday, February 28, 2005, 4 00 p.m
PLACE Council Chambers, City Hall, 105 Yelm Ave West, Yelm Washington
PURPOSE Public Hearing to receive comments on the City's review of the
Comprehensive Plan and whether it remains consistent with the policies of
the Growth Management Act.
The Yelm Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to receive comments on whether the
Yelm Comprehensive Plan remains consistent with the policies of the Growth Management Act,
as amended by the Washington State Legislature and interpreted by the Growth Management
Hearings Boards and Courts The Planning Commission held an open house on this matter on
January 24, 2005 The staff consistency analysis and a report from a subcommittee of the
Planning Commission is available at www.ci.velm.wa.us or for public review during normal
business hours at the City of Yelm, 105 Yelm Ave West, Yelm Washington For additional
information, please contact Grant Beck at (360) 458-3835
Testimony may be given at the hearings or through any written comments. Comments
must be received by the close of the public hearing. Such written comments may be
submitted to the City of Yelm at the address shown above or mailed to City of Yelm, PO
Box 479, Yelm WA 98597
The City of Yelm provides reasonable accommodations to persons with disabilities If you need
special accommodations to attend or participate in this hearing, call the City Clerk, Agnes
Bennick, at (360) 458-8404, at least 4 days before the meeting
'1
S Bennick, City Clerk
DO NOT PUBLISH BELOW THIS LINE
Published in the Nisqually Valley News Friday, February 18, 2005
Posted in Public Areas Friday, February 18, 2005
c
c
c
City of Yelm
Community Development Department
MEMORANDUM
To Yelm Planning Commission
From Grant Beck, Director of Community Development
Date February 18, 2005
Subj Consistency Review - Report from subcommittee
The Planning Commission formed an ad-hoc subcommittee at it's January 24, 2005,
speCial meeting to review the comments and questions raised regarding the
Comprehensive Plan consistency review Members of the subcommittee were Norm
Allard, John Graver, and Greg Mattocks
The subcommittee met on February 2, 2005, and reviewed comments received at the
open house and submit to the full Commission the following report.
Critical Areas
The consistency review indicated that the Yelm Comprehensive Plan needs to be
updated to Include provisions for the use of best available science in the protection of
critical areas ThiS issue was also addressed by Ed Wiltsie during the open house and
Bill Hashim via email comments
The following dates have been tentatively scheduled for the Critical Areas update
Open House with Planning Commission
Planning Commission public hearing
City Council public hearing
March 21 , 2005
April 18, 2005
May 25,2005
The Planning Commission meets at 4 00 PM in the City Council Chambers on the third
Monday of the month The City Council meeting may change if the Planning
Commission is not able to make a recommendation after the public hearing due to
public comments raised during the hearing
1992 Stormwater Manual
The fact that Yelm is uSing an 'outdated' stormwater manual was raised by Ed Wiltise
and has been oft repeated Yelm is using the 1992 Stormwater Design Manual
published by the Washington Department of Ecology, which is legal, appropnate, and
consistent with the polices of the Growth Management Act and the Yelm
ComprehenSive Plan
c
o
o
The requirement to adopt a stormwater management program begins with requirements
of the Endangered Species Act and the listing of salmon The State of Washington was
required by the ESA to protect salmon habitat, part of which required stormwater
controls The Washington Department of Ecology has been slowly implementing these
requirements, first In the urban areas in central Puget Sound (phase J) and more
recently in less urban areas (Olympia, Lacey, Tumwater, and their urban growth areas)
Yelm is not located In either a phase I or" implementation area The 2001 stormwater
manual and the most recent updates were prepared by the Washington Department of
Ecology for those jurisdictions reqUIred to have a National Pollution Discharge
Elimination Permit (NPDES)
According to the Washington State Department of Ecology, the Stormwater
Management Manual for Western Washington is not a regulation and does not have any
mdependent regulatory authority and It does not establish new environmental regulatory
requirements or standards The Manual IS a guidance document whIch provides local
governments with a set of stormwater management practices to assist in the design of
stormwater site plans Local government staff may use the Manual as a reference for
developing stormwater requirements for new development.
Although they are phase " communities, Olympia, Lacey, Tumwater, and
unincorporated Thurston County withIn the urban growth areas of those cities currently
utilize stormwater manuals based on the same 1992 Stormwater Manual that the City of
Yelm has adopted Those jurisdictions, along with City of Yelm staff, are currently
reviewing the 2001 Stormwater Manual for possible adoption in compliance with the
phase" rules At the time that update is complete, the City of Yelm will deCide whether
to update it's stormwater manual or continue utiliZing the 1992 Manual
High Ground Water
Mr Wiltsie also indicated that the Critical Areas Code should restnct development Within
300 feet of areas mapped by Thurston County as potential high ground water areas as
part of the flood hazard areas regulations
Critical Areas Codes are required to address frequently flooded areas Thurston County
is the only County required to adopt a critical areas code that regulates high
groundwater flooding areas as a frequently flooded area The reason Thurston County
regulates high groundwater as a flood hazard area is the result of the 1996 floods
throughout the County
The County IS currently updating it's critical areas code and is reviewing how these
areas are regulated, and the City will be coordinating with Thurston County to determine
how and whether the two critical areas codes will have the same regulations
February 18, 2005
Page 2 of 4
c
c
(\
o
Stream Buffers
It was noted by Ed Wiltsie that the current stream buffers are not sufficient to protect
Fish and Wildlife resources along Thompson and Yelm Creeks as the buffers do extend
outside the floodplain In certain locations This specific issue will be addressed as part
of the Critical Areas update as discussed above
Health Impacts to Groundwater
The issue of whether Yelm's sewage treatment system adequately treats certain
chemicals and drugs before discharge of treated effluent into the groundwater was
raised by Ed Wiltsie and Nadja Galadram under the GMA heading of EssentIal Public
Facilities The Act requires that development regulations establish rules for essentIal
public facIlities so that service providers can be assured in the future of being able to
locate these facilities which are required to serve urban development. The Act requires,
In other words, that the City be able to expand it's sewer treatment plant in order to
accommodate the 20 year planned population growth and not force development into
the rural areas because urban services can not be provided
This issue, therefore, does not really relate to the essential public facilities goals of the
GMA and Comprehensive Plan The only place within the policies of the Act that thIs
issue may fit is In the cntical areas section (potential impacts to a critical aquifer
recharge area) This issue may be reviewed during the Critical areas update, but a
review of best available science information from the Washington Department of
Ecology and the Department of Health would indicate that this Issue is beyond the
current state of science and may best be addressed through State or Federal legislation
regulating the operation of water and sewer systems
Resource lands
Bill Hashim, in an emall, raised the Issue of resource lands within the City and it's urban
growth area Specifically, the Dragt farm was identified as a historical farm Mr
Hashim indicated that the Growth Management Act considers agricultural lands natural
resource lands of concern
Although correct that the Act requires Counties to protect agricultural lands from
Incompatible (urban) land uses, by definition there can be no agricultural or resource
lands within the City limits or an urban growth area The Act establishes three
categones of land uses resource (timber, agricultural, and mineral extractIon), urban,
and rural Rural lands have been characterized by the Growth Management Hearings
Board to be the 'left over meatloaf in the GMA refrigerator', meaning they accommodate
all the land uses that are neither urban or resource-related The Growth Board has
further indicated that one of the key purposes of rural lands is to buffer resource lands
from Incompatible uses
February 18 2005
Page 3 of 4
c
c
c
According to the Act, "Agricultural land" means land primarily devoted to the commercIal
production of horticultural, viticultural, floricultural, dairy, apiary, vegetable, or animal
products or of berries, grain, hay, straw, turf, seed, Christmas trees not subject to the
excise tax imposed by RCW 84 33 100 through 8433 140, finfish in upland hatcheries,
or livestock, and that has long-term commercial significance for agricultural
production
"Long-term commercial significance" includes the growing capacity, productivIty, and
sOil composition of the land for long-term commercial production, in consideration with
the land's proximity to population areas, and the possibility of more intense uses
of the land
Nothing In the Act indicates that agricultural activities may not take place withIn rural or
urban lands, just that if agncultural uses are located within these areas they are not of
long-term commercial significance and therefore may not be designated as resource
lands
February 18, 2005
Page 4 of 4
o
c
c
Grant Beck
From billha [billha@ywave com]
Sent: Sunday, January 30,20051006 AM
To Grant Beck
Cc. Ed Wiltsie
Subject: RE Planning Commission Open House
Grant
Have you developed a time frame for when you would like to have a critical areas ordinance in place?
From: Grant Beck [mailto grantb@ci yelm wa us]
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 10 09 AM
To. billha@ywave.com
Subject: Planning Commission Open House
Bill -
We missed you at the Planning Commission open house last night regarding the GMA Consistency Review Knowing that
you have been interested in this process, r wanted to let you know that the Planning Commission established a sub-committee
to review the comments received and prepare a report back to the full Commission. The subcommittee may meet as early as
next week, so any written comments regarding the consistency report should be submitted to the Community Development
Department as soon as possible in order for the committee to be able to respond.
Email comments will also be provided to the committee
Thanks,
Grant
*******************************
Grant Beck, Director
City ofYelm
Community Development Department
POBox 479
Yelm, WA 98597
360 458.8408
360 458.3144 (FAX)
grantb@\iyelm.wa.us
2/18/2005
c
Grant Beck
From billha (billha@ywave com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 11 13 AM
To Grant Beck
Subject: RE. Planning Commission Open House
Grant
I was home with the flu-still am
Here are my concerns
1 The consistency review correctly identified Critical Areas Ordinances need to be developed using
BAS OK, now what. This should have been done by December 1, 2004 and in the meantime, the
old comp plan still applies.
2 The consistency review stated that there are no natural resource lands of concern I disagree
The old Dragt Farm is both historical and rich in agricultural abundance GMA considers
agricultural lands natural resource lands of concern
Bill
C From: Grant Beck [mailto grantb@ci yelm wa us]
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 10 09 AM
To: billha@ywave com
Subject: Planning Commission Open House
BiIl-
We missed you at the Planning Commission open house last night regarding the GMA Consistency Review
Knowing that you have been interested in this process, I wanted to let you know that the Planning Commission
established a sub-committee to review the comments received and prepare a report back to the full Commission.
The subcommittee may meet as early as next week, so any written comments regarding the consistency report
should be submitted to the Community Development Department as soon as possible in order for the committee to
be able to respond.
Email comments will also be provided to the committee
Thanks,
Grant
*******************************
c
Grant Beck, Director
City o[Yelm
Community Development Department
POBox 479
Yelm, WA 98597
360458.8408
3604583144 (FAX)
grantb@civelm.wa.us
1/25/2005
c
c
c
YELM PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
JANUARY 24, 2005 4 00 P M
YELM CITY HALL
John Thomson called the meeting to order at 4 08 P m
Members present: John Thomson, Don Carney, Norman Allard, Greg Mattocks, Glen
Cunningham, and John Graver
Staff. Grant Beck, and Tami Merriman
Members Absent: Everette Schirman, unexcused
Motion No
Approval of Minutes:
05-01 MOTION MADE BY GLEN CUNNINGHAM, SECONDED BY JOHN GRAVER TO APPROVE
THE MINUTES FROM THE AUGUST 30, 2004 MEETING. MOTION CARRIED
Public Communications.
None
Public HearinQs.
None
Worksession. GMA Consistency Review.
Mr. Beck gave a history of the Growth Management Act, and the reason for consistency review
The consistency review is required to establish whether changes are needed to the overall plan
Staff reviewed the Comprehensive Plan and found that in most areas of the plan, the goals and
policies are being met, and they are adequate for the needs and growth of Yelm
One area that was found to be lacking is the Critical Areas Ordinance The State requires that
resource lands be protected through Best Available Science The Critical Areas Ordinances need
updated to reflect state requirements
Mr. Thompson asked in anyone in the audience had comments or questions for the Planning
Commission
Mr. Ed Wiltsie stated that the City is still using the 1992 DOE stormwater manual, which is out of
date DOE has adopted a new manual, which has now been updated twice Mr Wiltsie feels the
City has city-wide high ground water flooding which is not protected by our flood zone ordinance
Mr Wiltsie handed out a map that shows the high ground water flooding and states that the City
should follow Thurston Counties regulations of no building in the 300 foot HGW buffer Mr
Wiltsie feels that our creeks are not protected by our ordinances Mr Wiltsie also warned the City
that medications and chemicals are entering our ground water through our waste water treatment,
and that within 10 years we will have high concentrations of ibuprofen and prozac in our drinking
water Mr Wiltsi said, in conclusion that Walmart would be a blight to this town, that the City
should negotiate with Walmart for a non-competition clause
Mr. David Berinq asked if Yelm is using Best Available Science at this time?
Mr. Beck responded that through our environmental review, we are using the best data that is
available to us at this time
Nadia Galadram informed the Commission that she is qualified to provide information on the
chemicals entering our drinking water and how bioremediation is effecting the reproduction
capabilities of fish
Yelm Planning Commission
Janua!)' 24,2005
Page 1
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. Wiltsie suggested the Commission request that City Council adopt an emergency moratoriurt,
on all new development within the City until the Commission can update its Critical Areas I
Ordinance I
I
I
Mr. Wiltsie wondered why the Commssion didn't feel that 188,000 sq ft. of retail qualifies as I
different than expected in our Comprehensive Plan and that it justifies and emergency review ofl
the Comprehensive Plan
Mr. Beck responded that the Community Development Department does not feel an emergency
moratorium is appropriate as the Comprehensive Plan and Vision Plan identifies the need for
zoning for big box retail for 10 years
Dr. Greqorv May asked the Commission of there is a way to regulate the size of commercial
buildings in the City
Mr. Beck responded that it is possible through the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process
Mr. Thomson stated that it is the Planning Commissions duty to review existing plans and
recommend changes and updated
Dr. May asked what the proper procedure is to request a moratorium
Mr. Beck responded that an emergency moratorium can only be issued by City Council
1-
!
o
Mr. Wiltsie stated that our Comprehensive Plan and Development Regulations do not address
high ground water flooding and couldn't we have an emergency moratorium in place until we 0
have these regulations 0
Erika Fehr asked if any of this was in connection with the new freeway coming through
connecting to 1-5?
JOY Adams asked what Walmart was going to do to make sure we have adequate police
protection Doubling our retail space will increase our crime rate
Mr. Thomson then asked the Commission if they had any questions Being none, the
Commission ended the open house
Mr. Beck requested that the Commission form a subcommittee to go over the items brought forth
in this public review, and report back to the commission at the next meeting The subcommitte~
members will be Norm Allard, Greg Mattocks, and John Graver I
I
I
Mr. Beck updated the Commission on City projects The Mayor will be interviewing applicants f~r
the vacant Commission position The City has hired a Lobbyist for the 510 Yelm Loop I
I
I
,
I
I
I
05-02 MOTION MADE BY GREG MATTOCKS, SECONDED BY NORM ALLARD TO ADJOURN
MOTION CARRIED, MEETING ADJOURNED AT 5 12 P.M
Respectfully submitted,
Tami Merriman, Assistant Planner
John Thomson, Chair
Date
Yelm Planning Commission
January 24, 2005
Page 2
Q
o
o
VISITOR SIGN IN SHEET
o
Please sIgn m and mdIcate If you wIsh to be added to the Plannmg CommIssIOn Emml lIst to reCeIve future agendas
and mmutes
All Planmng CommIssIOn meetmgs are audIO taped. For mformatIOn on obtammg a copy please call the Yelm
Commumty Development Department at (360) 458-3835
MEETING
DATE
TIME
LOCATION
Yelm Plannmg CommIssIOn
January 24,2005
4 00 PM
Yelm CIty Hall
Name & Address
Email
List?
Email Address
,N Cl.J ?<... C7 ti / t\. c.YY' a )>~
po ~ 1119
o
ll:l"
o
.'1 Ct I c\d r" a yY1 ~ e y- {J..(' I-e - Ce)yv1
~... 'f Sa.",~.,~ 'Be, J..(( ('iZu.i~:' <)
~_I....",,- ~"'-"~" .~~\\. Si.\~ ~ '7 ~~
~ Jr,_ \.~'Dl~~\?8fq4(,\~~ tt)~ q~S1Cp
~eC)~~~u)~e.Q.~
o
o
o
VISITOR SIGN IN SHEET
o
Please sIgn m and mdIcate If you wIsh to be added to the Planmng CommIssIOn Emml lIst to reCeIve future agendas
and mmutes
All Plannmg CommIssIon meetIngs are audIO taped. For InfOrmatIOn on obtaInmg a copy please call the Yelm
Commumty Development Department at (360) 458-3835
MEETING
DATE
TIME
LOCATION
Yelm Plannmg CommIssIOn
January 24, 2005
4 00 PM
Yelm CIty Hall
Name & Address
B M' kQ
C Ov~ ~
, $'
F ....e. k.-f f' 0 t@, D X 1 q '2"
t&1l5 7J1lJ.JY Cr?E ~
EmaIl
List?
o
121
E;ZI
o
o
o
o
o
Email Address
a
o
,~6.~ l/z){/~:S(fF Page 1 ofl
or..n . JH1 i/
<p? l;
"Thurston County Map Output Page
Thurston Count
o
Disclaimer Thurston County makes every effort to ensure that tl1lS map is a true and
accurate representation of the work of County government. However the County and all
related personnel make no warmntv expressed of implied, regarding the accuraC\
completeness or convenience or anv information disclosed 011 this map. Nor does the County
accept liability for any damage or injury caused b\, the use of this map.
To the fullest extent permissible pursuant to applicable law Thurston County disclaims all
warranties, express or implied, including, but 110t limited to implied warranties of merchant
ability data fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infnngements of proprietary rights.
Under no circumstances. including. but not limited to. negligence, sball Tburston Lounty bc
liable for any diree!' indirect. inCidental. special or consequentl3l damages that result fnJm
the use of or the inabilit, to use, Thurston Lountv materials
.1.EG~NQ
~'{, ,
.~" M8Ji9t Road.s
Flqod ~~
~ Roads
Water'~es
Streams
c.rdJ
~c:n
~
"
~.
ContoUrs'
Z9nl~g
Th,11I"'. to~),,' rO 2003 Thurston COllnty ticoData Center
!:icoD;"!.!.::,l:' B1dg #4, Rm 205, 921 Lakeridge Dr SW
Ccntcr;.4. "
~'.' Olympia, WA 98502-6052
"- ......,
. .."
,l ....-.....i
Wet.l~d5
'~l
Cltl~
.~;,
I
.,
Wethind Buffers ~
it",'r,dJ: .IParc:e19
,<.;~.
c
http.llgeomap 1 geodata.orgl serv letl com,esn esnmap.Esnmap ?ServlceN ame=cadastralov &
1/24/2005
Page 1 of 1
o
Thurston Co-unt
o
~
t
.' >\
Disclaimer' Thurston County makes everv effort to ensure that this map is a true [tilL!
accurate representation ()fthe work of LOllnt\' government. However the loullt\' and all
related personnel makt' no warrantv expressed or implied, regarding the aCC.uracv
completeness or convenience of any information disclosed on this map, Nor does the County
accept liability for any dmnage or injurv caused b\, the use of this map
To the fullest extent permissible pursuant to applicable law Thurston Lountv disclaims all
warranties, express Of implied, Including, but not limited to implied warranlies of merchant
ability data fitness for a particular purpose, and (lon-infringements of proprietar\ rights.
Under no circumstances. including, hut not limited to, negligence, shall Thurston COllllt)' be
liable for an\' direct. indirect, incidental, special or consequential damages that result from
the use 01 or the inahilit\' 10 use, Thurston County linllerials
LEGENp.o
,/"Yf
~
Major R~ads
Flood Z(Jnos
Roads
water Bodies
Streams
c@
QrJ n,'
..-\ .
.r
Cities
~
Contours
Z~ning
ThnrslOl1;
(;l'jJDntii'J
Cen!c;':;;:"
:{) ~UO, Thurston Lounty GenData Center
B1dg #4, Rm 205, 921 Lakeridge Dr SW
Olympia. W A 98502-6052
,.' \._r ":
.
..........'-'
Wetlands
Wetland 'Buffers
Parcels
c
file.l/C \DOCUME~ 1 \Ed\LOCALS~ 1 \Temp\382PF2GA.htm
1/24/2005
USGS Fact Sheet FS-027-02, Pharmaceuticals, Hormones, and Other OrganIc Wastewate Page 1 of 4
t~ cP CJt'>') r:sO Wi+( C-iS/t3
llz,y/~ r
o
Pharmaceuticals, Hormones, and Other Organic
Wastewater Contaminants in U.S. Streams
USGS Fact Sheet FS-027-02 (PDF [372k])
June 2002
A recent study by the Toxic Substances Hydrology Program of the US. Geological Survey (USGS)
shows that a broad range of chemicals found in residential, industrial, and agricultural wastewaters
commonly occurs in mixtures at low concentrations downstream from areas of intense urbanization
and animal production. The chemicals include human and veterinary drugs (including antibiotics),
natural and synthetic hormones, detergent metabolites, plasticizers, insecticides, and fire retardants.
One or more of these chemicals were found in 80 percent of the streams sampled Half of the streams
contained 7 or more of these chemicals, and about one-third of the streams contained 10 or more of
these chemicals. This study is the first national-scale examination of these organic wastewater
contaminants in streams and supports the USGS mission to assess the quantity and quality of the
Nations water resources. A more complete analysis of these and other emerging water-quality issues
is ongoing
c
Pharmaceuticals, hornwnes, and other
organic wastewater contaminants were
measured in 139 streams during 1999 and
2000.
c
Background: ChemIcals, used everyday In homes, Industry and agnculture, can enter the enVIronment
In wastewater These chemicals Include human and vetennary drugs (including antibiotics), hormones,
detergents, dISInfectants, plastICIzers, fire retardants, InsectICIdes, and antIOXIdants. To assess whether
these chemIcals are entenng our Nation's streams, the TOXIC Substances Hydrology Program of the US
Geological Survey (USGS) collected and analyzed water samples from 139 streams In 30 states dunng
http.//toxics.usgs gov/pubsIFS-027 -02/index.html
1/24/2005
o
c
c
USGS Fact Sheet FS-027-02, PharmaceutIcals, Hormones, and Other Orgamc Wastewate Page 2 of 4
1999 and 2000 Streams were sampled that were consIdered susceptible to contamInatIOn from various
wastewater sources, such as those downstream from Intense urbaruzatIOn or lIvestock productIon. Thus,
the results of thIS study are not considered representative of all streams
Household chemicals can enter streams
through wastewater discharges. A
wastewater treatment facility near Atlanta,
Georgia, is shown above. (Photograph by
Daniel J Hippe, U.S. Geological Survey)
Although each of the 95 chemicals IS used extensIvely, there IS lIttle InformatIon about the extent or
occurrence of many of these compounds In the environment. Some may be Indicators of certaIn classes
of contamInatIOn sources, such as lIvestock or human waste, and some have human or environmental
health ImplIcatIOns. The results of this study are a startIng pOInt for InvestigatIon of the transport of a
WIde range of orgamc wastewater contamInants In the Nation's waters
New laboratory methods were developed In several USGS research laboratories to provide the analytical
capabilIty to measure concentrations of95 wastewater-related organic chemicals In water Umform
sample-collectIOn protocols and field and laboratory qualIty-assurance programs were followed to
ensure that results are comparable and representative of actual stream conditIons.
Findings: One or more chemicals were detected In 80 percent of the streams sampled, and 82 of the 95
chemicals were detected at least once Generally, these chemicals were found at very low concentratIOns
(in most cases, less than I part per bIllIon) Mixtures of the chemicals were common, 75 percent of the
streams had more than one, 50 percent had 7 or more, and 34 percent had 10 or more.
http.//toXlcs.usgs gov /pubs/FS-027 -02/index.html
1/24/2005
USGS Fact Sheet FS-027-02, Pharmaceuticals, Hormones, and Other Orgamc Wastewate
Page 3 of 4
o
DElE0110N FREQUEtlCY, IN PEROENT
00 81 74 E:a 66 64 ro <l8 45 M. :rl 32 29 'Zl 24
3.0
I I I I
-
I I~ I r
.
cc
w
I-
::i
cc 2.5
w
Q..
(f)
2:
-<
~ 2.0
o
a:
2
2:
~ 1.5
z-
o
~
a: 10
Iz
w
()
z
8 0.5
...J
~
o
I-
c
o Cy Cy
:$ f2 s: ~ 11911 /J!.2,p ~jJ, 11 ~ ~
l;? ff f% ~ $..fi If E .[ ~ <:: .EO ~ if ~
J!} 0 ~ $.s i! l!,Q.". ~ f 0 Jj iJ1 r.8
Cl)glt1.!fi1~~~Jf ~g;lf>
~t; i! sJ:: <.: "<.- fg ~ z. '" a:
:;:;::~Cy lP "" <t-<r"
j!~ It i
~ ~ ~ ~
<:: ~ ...
:F q !
EXPLANA110N
~
Ma xirnurn \Ia 1U3
7Sfl pe rcen1i1a
Madian
2Sfl pe rcen1i1a
Min irrn rn \Ia lue
'M:axirnurnv.alues notst.:Jwn;
~ 1Oi:ls 18.3
IIbrple5cr\11:bn dn.gs: 17.4
Ceelgent metal:oJites. 55.6
Plasw izelS' 17.4
Antbbti:s: 3.6
Fragra n::es' 4.3
Steroids, nonprescription drugs, and an
insect repeUent were the three chemical
groups most commonly detected in
susceptible streams. Detergent metabolites,
steroids, and plasticizers generaUy were
found at the highest concentrations.
The most frequently detected chemtcals (found m more than half of the streams) were coprostanol (fecal
sterOl d), cholesterol (plant and animal steroid), N-N-dtethyltoluamtde (insect repellent), caffeme
(sttmulant), triclosan (anttmtcrobtal dtsmfectant), tn (2-chloroethyl) phosphate (fire retardant), and 4-
nonylphenol (nomomc detergent metaboltte) SterOlds, nonprescnptlOn drugs, and msect repellent were
the chemical groups most frequently detected. Detergent metabohtes, sterOlds, and plasttCIZers generally
were measured at the highest concentrations.
o
Human and environmental effects: Knowledge of the potential human and enVtronmental health
effects of these 95 chemtcals tS htghly vaned, dnnkmg-water standards or other human or ecolOgical
http.l/toxtcs.usgs gov/pubsIFS-027 -02/index.html
1124/2005
o
o
c
USGS Fact Sheet FS-027-02, PharmaceutIcals, Hormones, and Other Orgaruc Wastewate Page 4 of 4
health cntena have been estabhshed for 14 Measured concentratiOns rarely exceeded any of the
standards or cntena. ThIrty-three are known or suspected to be honnonally actIve, 46 are
pharmaceutIcally actIve LIttle is known about the potentIal health effects to humans or aquatic
orgarusms exposed to the low levels of most of these chemIcals or the mIxtures commonly found m thIS
study
Veterinary pharmaceuticals used in animal
agriculture can enter streams through
runoff or infiltration. A swine facility near
the South Fork Iowa River, Iowa, is shown
above. (Photograph hy Doug Schnoebelen,
U.S. Geological Survey)
Significance of findings: ThIS study suggests that mIxtures of pharmaceutIcals, hormones, and other
wastewater contammants can occur at low concentratiOns m streams that are susceptible to vanous
wastewater sources It provIdes methodology and guIdance for future momtonng and assessment of
these types of envIronmental contammants, and estabhshes the needed foundation for settIng pnonbes
for further study of sources, pathways and effects.
Future directions: Further analyses of these data, mcludmg relatIOnships to specIfic source types, are
ongoIng. The TOXIC Substances Hydrology Program IS conducting research on the occurrence of orgamc
wastewater chemicals m susceptible wells and dnnlang-water sources across the nabon, assessments of
antibiOtICS and antibIOtic-reSIstant bactena, the IdentIfication of wastewater IndIcators, and the
development of new laboratory analytIcal capabihtIes, mcludmg sediment and fish tIssue
Additional information: These findings are based on "PharmaceutIcals, hormones, and other orgamc
wastewater contammants m US streams, 1999-2000 A nabonal reconnaIssance," an artIcle pubhshed
In the March 15, 2002 Issue of Environmental SCIence & Technology, v 36, no 6, pages 1202-1211
Data are presented m a compamon USGS report, "Water-quahty data for pharmaceutIcals, hormones,
and other organic wastewater contamInants in U S streams, 1999-2000" (USGS Open-File Report 02-
94). These and other reports, data, and maps can be accessed on the Internet at http.//tOXICS.USgs.gov
Herbert T Buxton and Dana W Kolpin
Contact for additional information:
Herb Buxton
TOXIC Substances Hydrology Program
412 NatIOnal Center, 12201 Sunrise Valley Dr
Reston, VA 20192
http.//toxics.usgs.gov/pubsIFS-027-02/index.html
1/24/2005
p'; CSIRO Land and Water - Web streamed Video
\ --l.A>-O &-<7 0 o<r5 7--~ . r' Page 1 of 2
1/ 1,. "lo-vCf~ ~ W;11L /l::;
o
Webstreamed video
Site Map I Feedback I Contacts I Home
land and Water
Darnla Kolpsn: US
Geological Survey
Environmental Side
Effects Symposium
Plenary lecture:
"Pharmaceuticals, fOCs, and
Other Organic
Wastewater Contaminants in
Water Resources of the usn
20 September 2004
SEARCHml
l--__.~..._......_____._ j
Advanced Search
Research Priorities
News, Events and Jobs
About Us
Doing Business with Us
Click on an option (left) to view the video
presentation.
Our Research
Publications
Please ensure you have the relevant
software installed and note.
Education Resources
c
>> CSIRO On-Line
PowerPoint Presentation
Windows Media:
[300k I 56k]
Mac QuickTime:
[56k] (24 MB download)
. Only Windows Media Player files
can be web streamed. QuickTime
files need to be downloaded before
they will play, therefore we have
only provided a 56k version
. For 56k version viewing we suggest
you temporarily make your screen
resolution 800x600 - resolution
higher than that will show a small
screen
Image Gallery
Links
Since 1998, the U S Geological Survey (USGS) has been developing
analytical capabilities to measure pharmaceuticals and other organic
wastewater contaminants (OWCs) in the environment.
Currently, the USGS can analyse more than 140 OWCs using a variety of
LCIMS and GCIMS techniques. To date, over 500 samples from across the
United States, representing a wide range of climatic and hydrologic
conditions, have been analysed for OWCs.
Some of the most frequently detected compounds included cholesterol
(plant and animal steroid), DEET (insect repellent), caffeine (stimulant),
triclosan (antimicrobial disinfectant), and tri(2-chloroethyl)phosphate (fire
retardant) Prescription pharmaceuticals and antibiotics also have been
commonly detected at ng/L concentrations
o
There is now substantial evidence that some of these compounds impact on
the health of wildlife, influencing hormonal and reproductive functions.
Dana's seminar will cover research by the U S Geological Survey's Toxic
Substances Hydrology Program.
Early research focused on broad-scale reconnaissance studies, providing
the first nationwide data on the occurrence of OWCs in water resources of
http.l/www clw cSlro.au/vldeo_html/danako1pm.html
1/24/2005
o
c
c
.:; CSIRO Land and Water - Web streamed Video
Page 2 of2
the United States. These results documented that OWCs are commonly
present in streams and, to a lesser extent, aquifers, particularly at sites that
are immediately downstream or down gradient of contaminant sources.
Detection of multiple OWCs was common, with as many as 38 OWCs being
found in a single water sample These results indicate that synergistic or
additive effects from mixtures of OWCs will need to evaluated.
Subsequent research focused on sources of OWCs and their fate and
transport. Samples from municipal wastewater treatment plants and animal
waste storage lagoons indicate that both human and animal waste can be
sources. Early results indicate that concentrations of OWCs generally
increase as the percent of streamflow derived from municipal discharges
increases. Recent research has shown that bed sediment can also act as a
reservoir of pharmaceuticals and other OWCs to the environment.
This address was the plenary lecture for the Environmental Side Effects
Symposium held 20 September 2004 at CSIRO Discovery Centre, Canberra
Last Updated 23 September, 2004
Use of this web site and information available from it Is subject to our Legal Notice and Disclaimer
and Privacv Statement
http.//www clw cSlro.aulvldeo_html/danakolpm.html
1/24/2005
. Amencan Chenucal SOCIety. Environmental Science & Technology Hot ArtIcle
, '^ -^ 1'00 O~~ vvy(1 (...'rS1 C!:'"
~v '-\.. e-O
V '2- '-{ /?OD5 .---
,\C5 PUBLICATIONS
weu qU,lun'. /IlC;"I~1r .K,'.
c
EnVIronmental SCIence & Technology
Web Release Date: March 15,2002
10 1021/esOl1055j S0013~936X(Ol)Ol055-0
Copynght @ 2002 Amencan Chemical Society.
Pharmaceuticals, Hormones, and Other
Organic Wastewater Contaminants in
U.S. Streams, 1999-2000: A National
Reconnaissance
Dana -w: Kolpin, Edward T. Furlong, Michael T. Meyer,
E. Michael Thurman, Steven D. Zaugg, Larry B. Barbel',
and Herbert T. Buxton
c
US Geological Survey, 400 S ClInton Street, Box 1230, Iowa
City, Iowa 52244, US GeolOgical SUlVey, Box 25046, MS 407,
Denver, Colorado 80225-0046, U.S Geological Survey, 4500 SW
40th Avenue, Ocala, Flonda 34474, US Geological Survey, 4821
Quail Crest Place, Lawrence, Kansas 66049; U S GeologIcal
Survey, Box 25046, MS 407, Denver, Colorado 80225-0046, U S
GeolOgIcal Survey, 3215 Manne Street, Boulder, Colorado 80303,
US Geologtcal Survey, 810 Bear Tavern Road, West Trenton,
New Jersey 08628
o
The continued exponential growth in human populatIon has created
a corresponding increase in the demand for the Earth's limited
supply of freshwater Thus, protecting the Integnty of our water
resources is one of the most essential envlfonmental issues of the
21 st century Recent decades have brought increasing concerns for
potentIal adverse human and ecolOgical health effects resulting
from the production, use, and disposal of numerous chemicals that
offer Improvements In industry, agriculture, medical treat ment,
and even common household conveniences. Research has shown
that many such compounds can enter the envlfonment, disperse,
and perSIst to a greater extent than first anticipated. Some
compounds, such as pestIcIdes, are IntentIOnally released In
measured applications. Others, such as mdustnal byproducts, are
released through regulated and unregulated industrIal discharges to
water and au resources Household chemicals, pharmaceuticals,
and other consumables as well as biogenic hormones are released
directly to the enVIronment after passing through wastewater
treatment processes (vIa wastewater treatment plants, or domestIc
septic systems), which often are not designed to remove them from
the effluent. Vetennary pharmaceuticals used in anImal feeding
http.l/pubs.acs orglhotartcl/estlesOl1055Lrev.html
Page 1 of2
1/24/2005
o
c
c
. Amencan Chemical SocIety. EnVironmental SCIence & Technology Hot Arttcle
operations may be released to the environment wIth ammal wastes
through overllow or leakage from storage structures or land
applIcation. As a result. there are a Wide vanety of transport
pathways for many different chemIcals to enter and persIst in
envIronmental waters.
[Abstract In html] [Full text In html] [Full text In PDF]
See accompanYIng OnlIne News artIcle
A nonprofit organization with a membership olmore than 159,000 chemists and
chemical engineers, the American Chemical Society publishes scientific journals
and databases, convenes major research conferences, and provides educational,
science policy and career programs in chemistry Its main offices are in
Washington, D c., and Columbus, Ohio.
More Hot Articles from ES& T
Journal Home Page
Copyright @ 2002 American Chemical Society
http.//pubs.acs.orglhotartcl/est/esOll055jJev.html
Page 2 of 2
1/24/2005
c
City of Yelm
c
o
Planning Commission
AGENDA
CITY OF YELM PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, January 24, 2005
400PM
YELM CITY HALL
105 YELM AVE WEST
1 Call to Order, Roll Call, Approval of Minutes
August 30,2004, minutes enclosed
2 Public Communications (Not associated with measures or tOpiCS for which public
heanngs have been held or for which are anticipated )
3
Public Heanngs
None
4 GMA Consistency Review
5 Other
6 Adjourn
Enclosures are available to non-Commission members upon request.
It is the City of Yelm's policy to provide reasonable accommodations for people with
disabilities If you are a person with a disability in need of accommodations to conduct
business, or to participate in government processes or activities, please contact Agnes
Bennick, at 360-458-8404 at least four (4) working days prior to the scheduled event.
All Planning Commission meetings are audio taped For information on obtaining a
copy, please call the Community Development Department at (360) 458-3835
Next regular meeting shall be:
Monday, February 28, 2005 - 4 00 P M
Yelm City Hall Council Chambers
o
c
o
City of Yelm
Community Development Department
MEMORANDUM
To
Yelm Planning Commission , /'
Grant Beck, Director of Community Developmen~
December 15, 2004
From
Date
Subj
GMA Consistency Review
The Growth Management Act requires periodic review of the Comprehensive Plan in
order to ensure that it remains compliant with the GMA. Although some jurisdictions
have taken the opportunity to revisit the basic policy directions in the comprehensive
plan, the City of Yelm is simply reviewing its plan to ensure it is consistent with the
GMA, including updates to the GMA by the Legislature
The review process includes three basic steps review relevant plans and regulations,
analyze the need for revisions, and adopt an appropriate resolution if compliance is
found or amendments are needed for compliance
The policies and regulations to review include those for'
. Urban densities
. Urban growth areas
. Critical areas
. Natural resource lands
. Essential public facilities
. Affordable housing for all Income levels
· Transportation, including levels of service and concurrency
· Public facilities and services to meet future needs
. Shoreline Master Program
The City of Yelm has approached the consistency review as an evaluation of the
policies and regulations listed above to ensure they remain consistent with the Growth
Management Act rather than a reconsideration of the polices themselves
Included in this review is an analysis of all new requirements of the Growth
Management Act that have been adopted by the legislature since 1994
c
c
o
Urban Densities
GMA Goal - Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities
and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner [RCW 36 70A.020 (1)]
GMA Goal - Reduce the inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling,
low-density development [RCW 36070A020 (2)]
GMA Requirement - Provide a range of urban densities and land uses Urban being
development which is incompatible with natural resources or rural lands and require
urban services such as community water and sewer systems
GMA Requirement - Provide minimum densities of four units per acre
Yelm Comprehensive Plan Policies
The Yelm Comprehensive Plan manages sprawl within the unincorporated portion of the
Urban Growth Area by limiting development to one home to 5 acres until annexation
and urban services are provided The Comprehensive Plan includes future zoning of
the unincorporated UGA to establish urban densities upon annexation
The Yelm Comprehensive Plan provides for residential densities ranging from 4 units
per acre to 14 units per acre in residential districts Within the higher density districts, a
range of housing types is allowed A residential component is allowed as part of a
mixed use development in most commercial districts
Yelm Development Regulation Requirements
The Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Code establish the following areas with the
area of the Yelm UGA that is incorporated
Density
(unitslaross acre)
District Residential Allowed Minimum I Maximum Area
Low Density Residential SFD/Duplex N/A 4 471
Moderate Densitv Residential Up to a 60lex 3 6 463
Hiqh Densitv Residential Multi-Familv 6 14 127
Central Business District Multi-Familv 6 16 57
Commercial Multi-Family (60% of N/A 16 386
a mixed use
development)
Heavy Commercial Multi-Family (60% of N/A 16 33
a mixed use
development)
Large Lot Commercial Multi-Family (60% of N/A 16 56
a mixed use
December 15 2004
Page 2 of 16
c
c
o
development)
Industrial N/A 190
Open Space/Institutional N/A 118
Master Planned Community Any type consistent N/A N/A 1,555
with Comprehensive
Plan
Analysis
The Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code clearly allow and require urban level
densities Recent development trends have seen an achieved density of approximately
6 units per acre within developments providing single family dwelling lots Infill within
the central business district has been occurring with many duplex units on urban lots
Conclusions
Yelm's Comprehensive Plan and Development Regulations are consistent with the
Growth Management Act.
December 15 2004
Page 3 of 16
c
c
o
Urban Growth Areas
GMA Goal - Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public
facilities and services eXist or can be provided in an efficient manner [RCW
36 70A.020 (1)]
GMA Requirement - Define growth areas that include the cities and their
adjacent urban and urbanizing lands The growth areas must provide adequate
areas and densities to accommodate the urban growth expected for them in the
succeeding twenty years
GMA Requirement - The adequacy of these growth areas be re-evaluated and
adjusted If needed at least every seven years, five in those counties required to
prepare buildable lands reports
GMA Requirement - Cities and counties are obliged to conduct their planning
using population forecasts that are consistent with those developed for their
county by the Office of Financial Management. This means that the forecasts
used by each county must fall Within the range of the High, Intermediate, and
Low OFM series
Yelm Comprehensive Plan Policies
The Yelm Comprehensive Plan identifies the urban growth area and based the size of
the UGA on the OFM population forecast.
The unincorporated Yelm Urban Growth Area is managed as an 'urban reserve' with
residential densities of one home per 5 acres until the property is annexed to the City
and urban services become available
Yelm/Thurston County Development Regulation Requirements
Pursuant to the County-wide planning policies and the policies of the Comprehensive
Plan, Thurston County has zoned the residential areas of the unincorporated Yelm
Urban Growth Area as Residential 1/5, which allows a density of one unit per five acres,
which preserves the ability to redevelop at urban densities upon annexation and the
provision of urban services
Analysis
Thurston County and all the cities and towns delegated population forecasting
and bUildable lands analysis to the Thurston Regional Planning Council
In its County-Wide Planning Policies, Thurston County determines what forecast
to use within the OFM range by relYing on the forecasts of the Thurston Regional
Planning Council Likewise, the County relies on TRPC to determine realistiC
allocations, In consultation with the Cities
December 15 2004
Page 4 of 16
c
The most recent TRPC forecast was completed in 1999 The most recent OFM
forecasts were released in January 2002, incorporating information from the 2000
Census For Thurston County, the OFM Intermediate Series forecast is virtually identical
to the 1999 TRPC Medium Scenario-it differs by one percent or less in each of the
forecast years
Because the TRPC and OFM forecasts for Thurston County are consistent, it is also not
necessary to re-evaluate the population growth allocation targets for Yelm until Thurston
County's UGA review based on the Buildable Lands analysis
Conclusions
The Yelm Urban Growth Area is consistent with the requirements of the Growth
Management Act
c
c
December 15 2004
Page 5 of 16
c
c
c
Critical Areas
GMA Goal - Critical areas include the following areas and ecosystems (a) Wetlands,
(b) areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water; (c) fish and
wildlife habitat conservation areas, (d) frequently flooded areas, and (e) geologically
hazardous areas" [RCW 36 70A030 (5)]
GMA Goal - Protect the environment and enhance the state's high quality of life,
including air and water quality, and the availability of water " [RCW 36 70A020 (10)]
GMA Requirement - Protect environmentally sensitive areas with development
regulations
GMA Requirement - Critical Areas Codes should incorporate "Best Available Science"
(BAS), with special consideration to measures needed to protect or enhance
anadromous fisheries
Yelm Comprehensive Plan Policies
The Yelm Comprehensive Plan at Chapter 12 provides policies that relate to the
environment. The policies note that Yelm contains limited critical areas which include a
critical aquifer recharge area, the floodplains associated with Yelm and Thompson
Creeks, and limited wetlands primarily associated with Yelm and Thompson Creeks
The policies do not reference the use of best available science
Yelm Development Regulation Requirements
The Yelm Critical Area Code, Chapter 1408 YMC was first adopted in 1995, but has
seen no major changes since that time It does address the major requirements of the
Growth Management Act, however it does not utilize best available science in the
establishment of wetland buffers or stream buffers
Because of the nature of Yelm and Thompson Creeks, they are intermittent 'prairie'
streams that have no in-stream flow much of the year, the floodplain regulations are
typically more stringent and serve as the actual stream buffers
The City conducted a comprehensive assessment of Yelm Creek and it's associated
floodplain in 2001 The Yelm Creek Comprehensive Flood Hazard Management Plan
contains analysis of the causes of flooding along Yelm Creek as well as identifying
projects which both reduce flood hazard and restores habitat.
Yelm participated in the adoption of the Nisqually Watershed Management Plan (WRIA
11), which contains a number of goals and policies related to managing the Nisqually
watershed in a comprehensive manner
The City has adopted a wellhead protection program as part of its Comprehensive
Water System Plan update, whicih provides a policy basis for the adoption of wellhead
December 15 2004
Page 6 of 16
c
c
protection standards This document is adopted by reference in the Comprehensive
Plan
Analysis
The state Office of Community Development adopted new rules for what constitutes
best available science in 2000 and Yelm has not updated its regulations
The Comprehensive Plan should be amended to include a policy that critical areas
regulations be based on best available sCience
The Critical Areas Code needs to be updated to bring it into compliance
Conclusions
The Yelm Critical Areas Code should be updated to comply with the best available
science requirements of the Growth Management Act in the areas of wetland and
stream buffers
The Yelm Creek Comprehensive Flood Management Plan and it's recommendations
should be adopted as an appendix to the Comprehensive Pan
The Nisqually Watershed Management Plan should be adopted as an appendix to the
Comprehensive Plan
o
December 15 2004
Page 7 of 16
o
c
o
Resource Lands
GMA Goal - Natural resource industries Maintain and enhance natural resource-based
industries, including productive timber, agricultural, and fisheries industries Encourage
the conservation of productive forest lands and productive agricultural lands, and
discourage incompatible uses" [RCW 36 70A.020 (8)]
GMA Requirement - Classify and protect farm, forestry, and mining areas from
incompatible development. The guidelines for classifying natural resource lands are
based on whether the land is currently in such uses, and whether the lands have long-
term commercial significance Long term commercial significance includes a
consideration of the proximity of urban, suburban, or rural settlements Thus these
provisions are focused mainly on rural areas substantially devoted to farming, forestry,
and mining
GMA Requirement - Lands designated for long-term natural resource use must be
protected from the adverse impact of development on or near the resource lands
Yelm Comprehensive Plan Policies
As there are no resource lands of long term commercial significance within the
Yelm Urban Growth Area, Thurston County has not designated any resource
lands within 5 miles of the Yelm Urban Growth Area
Yelm Development Regulation Requirements
N/A
Analysis
Resource lands of long-term commercial significance are not found in urban
areas, although the City and County have coordinated through the County Wide
Planning Policies to ensure that the urban area has no impact on such lands
within the County
Conclusions
The Yelm Comprehensive Plan is consistent with the requirements of the Growth
Management Act relating to resource lands
December 15 2004
Page8of16
o
c
o
Essential Public Facilities
GMA Goal - Essential public facilities include those facilities that are typically difficult to
site, such as airports, state education facilities and state or regional transportation
facilities as defined In RCW 4706 140, state and local correctional facilities, solid waste
handling facilities, and in-patient facilities including substance abuse facilities, mental
health facilities, group homes, and secure community transition facilities as defined in
RCW 71 09020" [RCW 36 70A.200]
GMA Requirement - Include a process to identify and site essential public facilities, in
both their comprehensive plan and their development regulations
GMA Requirement - No local comprehensive plan or development regulation may
preclude the siting of essential public facilities
GMA Requirement - Provide for the siting of secure community transition facilities
Yelm Comprehensive Plan Policies
Chapter 9 of the Yelm Comprehensive Plan provides a policy framework for the
locatIon of both local and state wide essential public facilities
Additionally, elements of the Comprehensive Plan include the Essential Public
Facilities Comprehensive Plan, the Comprehensive Water Plan, the
Comprehensive Sewer Plan, and the Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Yelm Development Regulation Requirements
The Yelm Zoning Code allows essential public facilities in all zoning distncts in
the City provided they are consistent with capital facilities plans for the service
provider The ZOning Code was amended in 2002 to provIde for the location of
secure community transitional facilities Within Yelm
Analysis
The Compressive Plan and Zoning Code both allow for the siting of essential
public facilities, Including secure community transitional facilities The CIty may
consider an amendment to the Zoning Code to streamline the permitting process
for essential public facilitIes that are Identified in an approved Capital Facilities
Plan
Conclusions
The Yelm Comprehensive Plan is consistent with the Growth Management
requirements for the siting of essential public facilities, although the City may consider
streamlining the approval process for facilities identified in an adopted Capital Facilities
Plan
December 15, 2004
Page 9 of 16
o
Affordable Housing
GMA Goal - Encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments
of the population of this state, promote a variety of residential densities and housing
types, and encourage preservation of existing housing stock.
GMA Requirement - Include a housing element in their comprehensive plans which
. Includes an inventory and analysis of existing and projected housing needs,
. includes a statement of goals, policies, objectives, and mandatory provisions for
the preservation, improvement, and development of housing, including single-
family residences,
. identifies sufficient land for housing, including, but not limited to, government-
assisted housing, housing for low-income families, manufactured housing,
multifamily housing, and group homes and foster care facilities, and
. makes adequate provisions for existing and projected needs of all economic
segments of the community" (RCW 36 lOAOlO)
C Yelm Comprehensive Plan Policies
The required inventory of existing housing and analysis of projected housing needs is
located in Chapter Four of the Yelm Comprehensive Plan This chapter projects the
need for affordable h.ousing and establishes policies that promote such housing through
encouraging a variety of housing types and densities and conserving and improving the
existing housing stock and neighborhoods
The housing inventory is somewhat out of date, but the projections are still valid, as
verified by the latest buildable lands report from the Thurston Regional Planning
Council, as noted in the urban growth area section
Yelm Development Regulation Requirements
The Yelm Zoning Code allows a range of housing densities from 4 units per acre
to 16 Units per acre in a range of housing styles from single family dwellings to
multi-family The Code also allows manufactured housing on any residential lot
and contains provisions for the siting of new manufactured housing communitIes
Analysis
Although the Inventory of housing should be updated with the latest census
information and the buildable lands report from the Thurston Regional Planning
Council, the Comprehensive Plan and Development Regulations do allow and
promote affordable housing in Yelm
c
December 15 2004
Page10of16
o
The amount of affordable housing that the City of Yelm and Thurston County
targets to provide IS stili valid as it IS a function of the population distnbution as
part of the population forecasts As noted before, the latest Information from the
US Census and the Thurston Regional Planning Council validate the population
forecasts in the original Comprehensive Plan
Conclusions
The Comprehensive Plan IS consistent with the provisIons of the Growth
Management Act as they relate to affordable housing The housing inventory
should be updated with more current Information that is available now
c
c
December 15 2004
Page 11 of16
c
c
o
Transportation
GMA Goal - Encourage efficient multimodal transportation systems that are based on
regional priorities and coordinated with county and city comprehensive plans
GMA Requirement - A transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan which
. includes land use assumptions used in estimating travel
. estimates local traffic impacts on state-owned transportation facilities
. identifies facility and services needs, including an inventory of facilities, level of
service standards (LOS), specific actions needed to bring into compliance any
local facilities that are below the relevant LOS, forecasts of traffic for at least ten
years, and identification of state and local system needs to meet current and
future demands
. includes a multi-year financing plan, including a discussion of what to do if
probable funding falls short of identified needs
. promotes intergovernmental coordination efforts
. identifies demand-management strategies
GMA Requirement - Adopt concurrency regulations These regulations prohibit
approval of new development unless there will be adequate transportation facilities to
accommodate them concurrent with the development.
Yelm Comprehensive Plan Policies
The Comprehensive Plan at Chapter six adopts the level of service for the street system
with the Yelm Urban Growth Area Adopted as part of the Comprehensive Plan, as
exhibits and appendices are the Regional Transportation Improvement Plan, which was
updated by the Thurston Regional Planning Council in 2004 and the Yelm
Comprehensive Transportation Plan, which was updated in 2001
The land use assumptions used for travel forecasting are found in Chapter 3, Land Use
Along with the land use assumptions of the other jurisdictions in Thurston County, they
form the basis for the travel demand modeling of the TRPC Regional Transportation
Plan (RTP) This county-wide model is used by all the local jurisdictions, which all use
each others' land use plans and zoning to define a common and integrated county-wide
set of modeling assumptions The RTP addresses freeways, major arterials, collectors,
and transit service This modeling also addresses impacts of local traffic on state
facilities, such as State Route 507 and State route 510 in Yelm
The inventory of facilities is found in the Comprehensive Transportation Plan The
accepted level of service standards are listed in the policies of the plan There are no
local facilities currently failIng to meet their adopted level of service
December 15 2004
Page 12 of 16
c
Intergovernmental coordination is accomplished mainly through using a common area-
wide transportation planning program, the Regional Transportation Plan
Yelm Development Regulation Requirements
Chapter 1540 Yelm Municipal Code contains concurrency requirements for the
transportation system A traffic facilities charge is required for all new
development, as IS street frontage improvements and off-site improvements
attnbutable to Impacts from a proposed development.
The City annually adopts a six-year transportation improvement plan, based on
the Transportation Comprehensive Plan
Conclusions
The Comprehensive Plan IS consistent with the transportation requirements of
the Growth Management Act
c
c
December 15 2004
Page13of16
o
c
c
Public Facilities
GMA Goal - Ensure that those public facilities and services necessary to support
development shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the development
is available for occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below
locally established minimum standards
GMA Requirement - Identify facility needs, the costs to provide them, and how to
finance them The Capital Facilities Element of the Plan must include
. An inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities, showing the
locations and capacities of the capital facilities,
. a forecast of the future needs for such capital facilities,
. the proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital facilities,
. at least a six-year plan that will finance such capital facilities within projected
funding capacities and clearly identifies sources of public money for such
purposes, and
. a requirement to reassess the land use element if probable funding falls short of
meeting existing needs and to ensure that the land use element, capital facilities
plan element, and financing plan within the capital facilities plan element are
coordinated and consistent. Park and recreation facilities shall be included in the
capital facilities plan element.
Yelm Comprehensive Plan Policies
The Yelm Comprehensive Plan at Chapter 5 Identifies public facilities, including
mUnicipal sewer and water infrastructure, private utilities such as natural gas and
telephone, and schools Further, the Comprehensive Plan adopts as Appendices
the following documents, which contain inventories and improvement plans for
the specific utility
. Yelm Comprehensive Water Plan, amended in 2002
. Yelm Comprehensive Sewer Plan
. Yelm Parks Plan
Chapter 10 of the Comprehensive Plan is the Capital Facilities Plan
Yelm Development Regulation Requirements
Annual capital facility planning and budgeting Implements the policies of the
Comprehensive Plan as they relate to public facilities
December 15 2004
Page 14 of 16
c
Analysis
The City has adopted concurrency management as Chapter 15 40 YMC This
chapter reqUires a finding of concurrency for sewer, water, parks, and schools
before a development may be approved
The Parks Plan and the Capital FacIlities Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan
should be updated The City is working towards adopting a Comprehensive
Reclaimed Water Plan
Conclusions
The Yelm Comprehensive Plan IS consIstent with the provisions of the Growth
Management Act relating to public facilities
c
c
December 15 2004
Page 15 of 16
c
o
c
Shoreline Master Program
GMA Requirement - The goals of the Shoreline Management Act are adopted as goals
of the Growth Management Act. The goals and policies of the local Shoreline Master
Programs to be part of local GMA comprehensive plans The regulations of the local
Shoreline Master Programs are also considered by state law to be development
regulations of the local communities
GMA Requirement - Adoption or amendment of Shoreline Master Programs must also
be conducted pursuant to the Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90 58), rather than the
Growth Management Act (RCW 36 70A)
GMA Requirement - The State Department of Ecology has issued guidelines for
updating and amending local Shoreline Master Programs Thurston County and the
cities within must update their Shoreline Master Programs by a deadline of 2011
Yelm Comprehensive Plan Policies
The Comprehensive Plan at Chapter 12 indicates that Yelm Creek should not be
designated a shoreline of the state and that the Centralia power canal should Neither
the City or Washington Department of Ecology has initiated a review of these two water
bodies to determine If they are appropriately designated
Yelm Development Regulation Requirements
Yelm has adopted the Shoreline Master Program for the Thurston RegIon,
adopted in 1990 Yelm Creek IS the only shoreline of the state identified wIthIn
the Yelm Urban Growth Area
Conclusions
The Comprehensive Plan IS currently consistent with the reqUIrements of the
Growth Management Act as they relate to shorelines, as updates to the
Shoreline Master Program are not due until 2011 The City should request the
Department of Ecology review Yelm Creek to determIne If It meets the minimum
flows for a shoreline of the state
December 15 2004
Page 16of16
LlJ:>
o
Growth Management Act Amendments 1995-2004
The Growth Management Act (GMA) m Washmgton has been amended numerous tImes smce Its ongmal
adoptiOn m 1990 To help local governments m evaluatmg whether thelf adopted plans and development
regulatiOns "are complying with" the GMA, Growth Management ServIces at the Department of Commumty,
Trade, and EconomIc Development has developed the followmg hst of recent amendments. ThIs hst
summanzes amendments made by the LegIslature, between 1995 and 2004, to Chapter 36 70A and 36 70B of
the RevIsed Code ofWashmgton. The chapter IS commonly known as the Growth Management Act (GMA)
Each amendment IS hsted below, by code number and tItle, accordmg to the year of adoptiOn, and mcludes a
bnef descnptiOn.
Please note This list has been prepared as a technical assistance tool to assist local governments in their
update process under RCW 36 70A.130(1) and is not intended to provide a definitive explanation or
interpretation ofGMA amendments While other related statutes also help implement the GMA, amendments to
them are not included in this document.
o 2004
RCW 36.70A-Military installations
ESSB 6401: PROTECTING MILITARY INSTALLATIONS FROM ENCROACHMENT OF
INCOMPATIBLE LAND USES
. LegIslative findmgs recognIze the Importance of the Umted States military as a Vital component of the
Washmgton State economy, and It IS Identified as a pnonty of the state to protect the land surroundmg our
military mstallatIOns from mcompatible development.
. Comprehensive plans, development regulations, and amendments to either should not allow development m the
vlcmlty of a milItary mstallatIOn that IS mcompatible with the mstallatIOn's ability to carry out ItS miSSIOn
reqUIrements.
. A consultatIon procedure IS establIshed whereby counties and cities must notify base commanders dunng the
process of adoptmg or amending comprehensive plans or development regulatIOns that will affect lands adjacent
to the mstallatIOns.
RCW 36.70A .070-Rural development
ESHB 2905. MODIFYING PROVISIONS FOR TYPE 1 LIMITED AREAS OF MORE INTENSIVE
RURAL DEVELOPMENT
. Any development or redevelopment wlthm one category of eXlstmg "limited areas of more intensive rural
development" (LAMIRDs) must be pnnclpally designed to serve the eXlstmg and projected rural populatIOn.
· Buildmg Size, scale, use, or mtenslty of the LAMIRD development or redevelopment must be consistent with the
character of the eXlstmg areas.
· Development or redevelopment may mclude changes m use from vacant land or a previously eXlstmg use If the
C new development conforms to certam reqUIrements.
an
Growth Management Act Amendments 1995-2004
RCW 36.70A.I06---Development regulations
SHB 2781 CHANGING PROVISIONS RELATING TO EXPEDITED STATE AGENCY REVIEW
OF DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
· Proposed changes to development regulatIons by JunsdIctIons that plan under the Growth Management Act
(GMA) can receIve expedIted reVIew by the Department ofCommumty, Trade, and EconomIc Development and
be adopted ImmedIately thereafter, If tImely comments regardmg GMA complIance or other matters of state
mterest can be provIded.
o
RCW 36.70A.11O--National historic reserves
SSB 6367. PROTECTING THE INTEGRITY OF NATIONAL HISTORICAL RESERVES IN THE
URBAN GROWTH AREA PLANNING PROCESS
· The eXIstmg reqUIrement that CItIes and countIes must mclude areas and denSItIes suffiCIent to permIt the urban
growth projected for the succeedmg 20-year penod does not apply to those urban growth areas contamed totally
wIthm a natIonal hIstoncal reserve.
· When an urban growth area IS contamed totally wIthm a natIOnal hIstoncal reserve, a CIty may restnct denSItIes,
mtensItIes, and forms of urban growth as It determmes necessary and appropnate to protect the phYSIcal, cultural,
or hIstonc mtegnty of the reserve
RCW 36. 70A.I77-AgricuIturalland use
SB 6237. PROVIDING NONAGRICULTURAL COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL USES THAT SUPPORT
AND SUSTAIN AGRICULTURAL OPERATIONS ON DESIGNATED AGRICULTURAL
LANDS OF LONG-TERM SIGNIFICANCE
· AgrIcultural zomng can allow accessory uses that support, promote, or sustam agrIcultural operatIOns and
productIon, mcludmg compatible commerCIal and retail uses that mvolve agrIculture or agrIcultural products or
prOVIde supplemental farm mcome.
o
RCW 36.70A.367-Industrialland banks
SSB 6534. DESIGNATING PROCESSES AND SITING OF INDUSTRIAL LAND BANKS
· The reqUIrements for mcludmg master planned locatIons wIthm mdustnalland banks and for sItmg speCIfic
development projects are separated so that deSIgnatIOn of master planned locatIons may occur dunng the
comprehensIve planmng process before a speCIfic development project has been proposed.
· Some of the current cntena for desIgnatmg a master planned locatIOn wIthm an mdustnalland bank may be
delayed until the process for sItmg speCIfic development projects wIthm a land bank occurs.
· DesIgnatmg master planned locations wIthm an mdustnalland bank IS conSIdered an adopted amendment to a
comprehensIve plan, and approval of a speCIfic development project does not reqUIre any further amendment to a
comprehensIve plan.
RCW 36.70B.080--Growth management timelines
HB 2811 MODIFYING LOCAL GOVERNMENT PERMIT PROCESSING PROVISIONS
· EXIstmg reqUIrements for tImely and predIctable procedures for processmg permIt applIcatIOns by local
governments are clanfied.
· For the "buildable lands" JunsdIctIOns, performance reportmg reqUIrements are remstated and changed to an
annual baSIS. A report on the projected costs of thIS reportmg WIth recommendatIOns for state fundmg must be
proVIded to the Governor and the LegIslature by January 1,2005
o
2
May, 4, 2004
o
o
o
Growth Management Act Amendments 1995-2004
RCW 36.70-Manufactured housing
SB 6476: DESIGNATING MANUFACTURED HOUSING COMMUNITIES AS NONCONFORMING USES
. ElImmatIon of eXlstmg manufactured housmg commumtIes on the basIs of theIr status as a nonconfonmng use IS
prohibIted.
SSCR 8418 CREATING A JOINT SELECT LEGISLATIVE TASK FORCE TO EVALUATE
PERMITTING PROCESSES
. A Jomt select legIslatIve task force IS establIshed to make recommendatIOns regardmg penmttmg processes by
January 1, 2006, after evaluatmg local development regulatIOns of selected JunsdlctIons among the "buildable
lands" countIes and theIr cItIes over 50,000
. The task force IS composed of the chaIrs and rankmg mmonty members ofthe Senate CommIttee on Land Use
and Planmng and the House Local Government CommIttee. The Governor will be mVlted to partICIpate and form
a "Five Comers Task Force."
. An adVISOry commIttee IS also establIshed to aSSIst the task force and IS composed of the Department of
Commumty, Trade, and EconomIC Development, the Department of Ecology, the Office of Regulatory
ASSIstance, a county, a CIty, the busmess commumty, the envIronmental commumty, agnculture, labor, the
property nghts commumty, the constructIon mdustry, ports, and federally recogmzed IndIan tribes.
2003
RCW 36 70A (SSB 5602) Growth management plannmg
CONCERNING THE ACCOMMODATION OF HOUSING AND EMPLOYMENT GROWTH UNDER LOCAL
COMPREHENSIVE PLANS
. A new section is added to the Growth Management Act (GMA) requmng countIes and cItIes subject to the GMA to ensure
that, taken collectively, actions to adopt or amend theIr comprehensIve plans or development regulations proVIde suffiCient
capacity ofland SUItable for development WIthIn theIr junsdlctlOns.
. The requirement for sufficient capacIty refers to accommodatIng a junsdlctlOn's allocated housing and employment growth as
adopted in the applIcable countyWIde plannIng polICIes and consIstent WIth the 20-year populatIOn forecast from the Office of
FInanCIal Management.
RCW 36 70A070 (SSB 5786) Rural development
CLARIFYING THE SCOPE OF INDUSTRIAL USES ALLOWED IN RURAL AREAS UNDER GMA
. Industnal "uses" are permItted under the Growth Management Act In both Industrial and mIxed-use areas In certaIn types of
LImIted Areas of More IntenSive Rural Development (LAMIRDs).
. Industrial uses within specified LAMIRDs are not reqUIred to be principally designed to serve the eXIstIng and projected rural
population in order to be lawfully zoned.
RCW 36 70All 0 (SHB 1755) AnnexatIon
CREATING ALTERNATIVE MEANS FOR ANNEXATION OF UNINCORPORATED ISLANDS OF TERRITORY
· Creates an alternatIve method of annexation allOWIng junsdlctlOns subject to the "buildable lands" review and evaluatIOn
program of the Growth Management Act (GMA) to enter Into interlocal agreements to annex qualIfyIng temtory meeting
specific contIguIty reqUIrements.
· Creates an alternatIve method of annexatIon allOWIng countIes subject to the "buildable lands" revIew and evaluatIon
program of the GMA to enter Into Interlocal agreements WIth multIple municipalItIes to conduct annexatIOn electIOns for
qualIfying territory contIguous to more than one City or town.
RCW 36 70A280 (SB 5507) Growth management boards
CLARIFYING WHO HAS STANDING REGARDING GROWTH MANAGEMENT HEARINGS BOARD HEARINGS
3
May, 4, 2004
Growth Management Act Amendments 1995-2004
· The reqUIrement under the Growth Management Act for "partIcipatIOn" standing before a Growth Management Heanngs 0
Board IS that a petItIOner must have partIcipated orally or In writIng before the local government.
· An addItIOnal reqUIrement to obtaIn "partIcIpatIon" standIng IS added and provIdes that only Issues "reasonably related" to
Issues that the aggrieved person previously raIsed at the local level can be consIdered by the Board.
RCW 36 70A.367 (SB 5651) Land banks
AUTHORIZING LAND BANKS IN CERTAIN COUNTIES WITH LOW POPULATION DENSITIES
· The Industnal land bank program under the Growth Management Act is amended to provide that countIes meetIng certaIn
geographIc requirements are eligible for the program based on populatIon denSIty cntena, rather than unemployment cntena.
· Clanfies that Jefferson and Clallam counties are elIgible for the program under thIS provisIOn.
RCW 36 70A.450 (HB 1170) Day-care faCIlItIes
LIMITING RESTRICTIONS ON RESIDENTIAL DAY -CARE FACILITIES
· A county cannot zone agaInst or otherwIse prohibIt the use of a residentIal dwelling as a family day-care facilIty in a
reSidentIal or commercIal zone.
· The county can reqUIre the family day-care facility to comply with safety and lIcenSIng regulatIons and zonIng condItIOns
that are Imposed on other dwellings in the same zone.
RCW 36 70A.480 (ESHB 1933) ShorelIne and growth management
INTEGRATING SHORELINE MANAGEMENT ACT AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT PROVISIONS
· The goals of the growth management act, IncludIng the goals and polIcies of the shorelIne management act set forth, continue
to be lIsted Without pnonty
· ShorelInes of stateWide sIglllficance may Include critical areas as designated by the GMA, but shorelInes of statewide
slglllficance are not cntlcal areas Simply because they are shorelInes of stateWIde slglllficance.
· WithIn shorelIne ]unSdlctIOn, cntlcal areas will be protected by the ShorelIne Master Program and regulations will be
reviewed for complIance with the ShorelIne Management Act. However, SMP regulatIOns must proVIde a level of protectIon 0
of cntIcal areas at least equal to that provided by the county or CIty'S adopted or thereafter amended cntIcal areas ordInances.
RCW 90 58 080 (SSB 6012) CodIfymg Shorelme Rules
· The Department of Ecology (DOE) may adopt amendments to the shorelInes gUIdelines no more than once per year and the
amendments must be related to techlllcal, procedural, or complIance Issues. * ESHB 1769 was Incorporated In ItS entirety
Into SSB 6012
· A staggered statutoI)' schedule for the update of shorelIne master programs, runnIng from 2005 to 2014 and eveI)' seven
years after the InItIal deadlIne, IS established.
· Limits on grants from DOE to local governments for master program reviews are removed and new reqUIrements for the
receIpt of such grants are created.
o
4
May, 4, 2004
Growth Management Act Amendments 1995-2004
o
2002
RCW 36 70AOll FIndIngs-Rural lands
Added a new sectIOn contaInIng legislatIve finds to support the amendment to the rural element reqUIrements In
RCW 36 70A070
RCW 36 70A020 PlannIng goals
Amended the economic development goal to add the underlIned words.
Encourage economic development throughout the state that IS consistent with adopted comprehensIve plans,
promote economIC opportumty for all citIzens of thIS state, especIally for unemployed and for dIsadvantaged
persons, promote the retentIon and expansIon of eXIstIng busInesses and recruItment of new busInesses,
recogmze regIOnal dIfferences ImpactIng economIc development opportumtIes, and encourage growth In areas
expenencIng InsufficIent economIC growth, all withIn the capacIties ofthe state's natural resources, public
servIces, and publIc facIlItIes.
Amended the open space goal to simplIfy the language and add a reference to recreatIonal faCIlItIes. It formerly
read as follows.
Encourage the retentIon of open space and development of recreatIonal opportumtIes, conserve fish and wIldlIfe
habItat, Increase access to natural resource lands and water, and develop parks.
It now read as follows.
RetaIn open space, enhance recreatIonal opportumtIes, conserve fish and wIldlIfe habItat, Increase access to
natural resource lands and water, and develop parks and recreatIOn faCIlItIes.
c
RCW 36.70A.070 Comprehensive plans-Mandatory elements
Amended the reqUIrements for the rural element of comprehensIve plans to (I) authonze lImIted expansIOn of
small-scale busInesses In the rural area, and (2) authonze new busInesses In the rural area to use sItes prevIOusly
occupied by rural busInesses.
Amended the hOUSIng element to reqUIre the Inventory of hOUSIng needs to Include the number of hOUSIng umts
necessary to manage projected populatIon growth.
Amended the capItal facIlItIes element to reqUIre the InclUSIOn of parks and recreatIOn facilItIes.
ReqUIred comprehensIve plans to Include an economIC development element and a parks and recreatIOn
facIlitIes element, If money to Implement these reqUIrements IS appropnated by the LegIslature.
RCW 36.70A.I03 State agencies required to comply with comprehensive plans
Amended to cross-reference new prOVISIons for sitIng secure commumty transItIon facIlItIes for sex offenders.
RCW 36.70A.130 Comprehensive Plans-Review Amendments
Amended the deadlInes for reVIeWIng and updatIng comprehensive plans and development regulatIons adopted
under the GMA and clanfied the reqUIrements relatIng to the reviews and updates.
RCW 36.70A.200 Siting of essential public facilities-Limitation on liability
Clanfied that the deadlIne for adoptIng a process for SItIng secure commumty transItIOn faCIlItIes for sex
offenders must be adopted by September I, 2002, even though deadlInes for GMA reVIews and updates were
changed In amendments to RCW 36 70AI30
Exempted noncomplIance WIth September I, 2002, deadlIne from challenge before the Growth Management
Heanngs Boards and from economIC sanctIons under the GMA's enforcement proVIsIOns.
c
5
May, 4, 2004
Growth Management Act Amendments 1995-2004
RCW 36.70A.367 Major industrial developments-Master planned locations
Estabhshed a pIlot program authonzIng the desIgnatIOn of Industnalland banks outsIde urban growth areas If
specIfied reqUIrements are satIsfied.
o
2001
RCW 36.70A.I03 State agencies required to comply with comprehensive plans
Authonzed DSHS to SIte and operate a Special CommItment Center and a secure commumty transItIon facIhty
to house persons condItIonally released to a less restnctIve alternatIve on McNeIl Island. The state's authonty
to SIte an essentIal pubhc facIhty under RCW 36 70A.200, In conformance wIth comprehensIve plans and
development regulatIOns, IS not affected, and wIth the exceptIon of these two facihtIes, state agenCIes must
comply wIth those plans and regulatIons.
RCW 36.70A.200 Siting of essential public facilities
Added "secure commumty tranSItIOn facihtIes" (as defined In RCW 71 09020) to the hst of essentIal pubhc
facihtIes typIcally dIfficult to SIte. Each CIty and county planmng under RCW 36 70A.040 IS reqUIred to
estabhsh a process, or amend ItS eXIstIng process, for IdentIfymg and SItIng essentIal pubhc facIlItIes, and to
adopt and amend ItS development regulatIOns as necessary to provIde for the SItIng of secure commumty
tranSItIOn facihtIes. Local governments are reqUIred to complete thIS no later than the deadhne set m RCW
36 70A.130 Any CIty or county not planmng under RCW 36 70A.040 IS reqUIred to estabhsh a process for
SItIng secure commumty tranSItIon facIhtIes and amend or adopt development regulatIons necessary to provIde
the SItIng of these facIlItIes. 0
RCW 36.70A.367 Major industrial developments - Master planned locations
Extended deadlIne for countIes ehgible to use the Industnalland bank authonty Currently, Grant County and
LewIs County satIsfy all three cntena. UntIl December 2002 ehgible countIes may estabhsh a process for
desIgnatIng a bank of no more than two master planned locatIons for major Industnal actIvIty outSIde a UGA.
Ehgible countIes must meet statutory cntena ImtIally speCIfied for the authonty termInatIng on December 1999
RCW 36.70B.080
2000
RCW 36.70A.520
Allows countIes planmng under RCW 36 70A.040 to authonze and desIgnate natIOnal hIstonc towns that may
constItute urban growth outSIde UGAs, If speCIfied condItIons are satIsfied. A GMA county may allocate a
portIOn of ItS 20-year populatIOn prOjectIOn to the natIOnal hIstonc town to correspond to the projected number
of permanent town resIdents.
RCW 36.70A.040 Who must plan - Summary of requirements - Development regulations must
implement comprehensive plans
Added language statIng that for the purposes of beIng reqUIred to conform to the reqUIrements of the GMA, no
county IS reqUIred to Include In ItS populatIOn count those persons confined In a correctIOnal facIhty under the
jUnSdIctIon of the state Department of CorrectIOns that IS located m the county
o
6
May, 4, 2004
o
o
o
Growth Management Act Amendments 1995-2004
1999
RCW 36.70A.035 Public participation - Notice provisions
Added "school dlstncts" to lIst of entItIes and affected mdlvlduals to be provIded wIth notIce of comprehensIve
plan/development regulatIOn amendment.
1998
RCW 36.70A.040 Who must plan - Summary of requirements - Development regulations must
implement comprehensive plans
Added the reqUIrement for CItIes or countIes to amend the transportatIOn element to be m complIance WIth
Chapter 47 80 RCW no later than December 31, 2000
RCW 36.70A.060 Natural resource lands and critical areas - Development regulations
The reqUIrement for notIce on plats and permIts Issued for development actIvItIes near deSIgnated resource
lands expanded to actIvItIes wlthm 500 feet, mstead of 300 feet, of the resource lands. The notIce for mmeral
lands IS reqUIred to mclude mformatIOn that an applIcatIOn mIght be made for mmmg-relatmg actIvItIes. (From
the Land Use Study CommISSIon recommendatIOns bill.)
RCW 36.70A.070 Comprehensive plans - Mandatory elements
ReqUIred CItIes or countIes to mclude level of servIce standards for state hIghways m local comprehensIve
plans, m order to mom tor the performance of the system, to evaluate Improvement strategIes, and to faCIlItate
coordmatIOn between the county's or CIty'S SIx-year street, road, or transIt program and the Washmgton State
Department of TransportatIOn's (WSDOT) SIx-year mvestment program. Inventones of transportatIOn are
reqUIred to mclude state-owned transportatIOn facilItIes.
RCW 36.70A.131 Mineral resource lands - Review of related designations and development regulations
Added a new sectIOn to the GMA. A county or CIty IS reqUIred to take mto consIderatIon new mformatIOn
aVaIlable smce the adoptIOn of ItS deSIgnatIons/development regulatIOns, mcludmg new or modIfied model
development regulatIons for mmeral resource lands prepared by the Washmgton Department of Natural
Resources (DNR), CTED, or the Washmgton ASSOCIatIOn of CountIes.
RCW 36.70A.200 Siting of essential public facilities
Added state or regIOnal facilItIes and servIces of state-wIde sIgmficance as defined m subsectIon (7) of HB 1487
(defimtIon located m Chapter 4706 RCW per thIS amendment) Includes among others, are hIgh speed rail,
mter-clty hIgh speed ground transportatIOn, the ColumbIa/Snake naVIgable nver system, etc
RCW 36.70A.210 County-wide planning policies
Added "transportatIon facIlItIes of state-wIde sIgmficance" to the mlmmums that county-wIde planmng polIcIes
shall address.
RCW 36.70A.360 Master planned resorts
Master planned resorts expressly authonzed to use capItal facIlItIes, utilItIes, and servIces (includmg sewer,
water, stormwater, secunty, fire suppressIOn, and emergency medIcal) from outSIde servIce provIders. Any
capItal facilItIes, utilItIes, and servIces provided on-sIte are lImIted to those meetmg the needs of master planned
7
May, 4, 2004
Growth Management Act Amendments 1995-2004
resorts. Master planned resorts are reqUIred to bear the full costs related to servIce extensIOns and capacIty
mcreases dIrectly attributable to the resorts.
o
RCW 36.70A.367 Major industrial developments
Authonzed addItional countIes (LeWIs, Grant, and Clallam) to establIsh mdustnalland banks for two master
planned locatIOns by December 31, 1999 Extended sunset date for Clark and Whatcom countIes to December
31, 1999
RCW 36.70A.395 Environmental planning pilot projects
Techmcal correctIOns to elImmate references concernmg reports to the LegIslature that are no longer necessary
or have expIred.
RCW 36.70A.460 Watershed restoration projects - Permit processing - Fish habitat enhancement
project
A fish habItat enhancement project meetmg the cntena of thIS law not subject to local government permIts,
mspectIOns, or fees. Such projects, when approved and a hydraulIc permIt has been Issued, are not reqUIred to
complete a substantIal development permIt under the SMA. FISh habItat enhancement projects that meet the
cntena of thIS act are conSIdered to be consIstent WIth local shorelme master programs.
1997
RCW 36.70A.030 Definitions
· Defimtlon of "urban growth" was amended to expand lIsted mcompatible pnmary uses ofland to mclude
the followmg' rural uses, rural development, and natural resource lands deSIgnated pursuant to RCW
36.70A.170. AddItionally, the followmg was added. A pattern of more mtense rural development, as
proVIded m RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d), IS not urban growth.
o
· The followmg terms "rural character," "rural development," and "rural governmental servIces" are defined.
· The followmg: or "urban servIces" IS added to the defimtlon of "urban governmental servIces." (ESB 6094
amendments. )
RCW 36.70A.035 Public participation - Notice provisions
· Added the reqUIrement for GMA countIes and CIties to adopt procedures for notIfymg property owners and
other affected or mterested partIes of proposed amendments to comprehenSIve plans and development
regulations. The procedures generally follow the notice reqUIrements currently m the State EnVIronmental
PolIcy Act (SEPA) (ESB 6094 amendments.)
· Added the reqUIrement that a county or CIty consldenng an amendment to a comprehenSIve plan or a
development regulation needs to allow for publIc comment on the proposed change before adoptIOn. (ESB
6094 amendments.)
RCW 36.70A.070 Comprehensive plans - Mandatory elements
ProVISIOns that shall apply to the rural element are speCIfied. (ESB 6094 amendments.)
o
8
May, 4, 2004
o
c
c
Growth Management Act Amendments 1995-2004
RCW 36.70A.ll0 Comprehensive plans - Urban growth areas
Deleted the followmg text from subsectIon (2) "urban growth areas" and added "and each CIty wIthm the
county" to the followmg: based on OFM proJectIOns," the county and each CIty wIthm the county shall
mclude areas and densItIes sufficIent to permIt the urban growth that IS projected "(ESB 6094 amendme,nts.)
I
RCW 36.70A.130 Comprehensive plans - Review - Amendments
· Added 2002 reVIew reqUIrement language to the GMA. No later than September 1, 2002, and at least every
five years thereafter, a county or CIty shall take actIOn to reVIew and, If needed, reVIse ItS comprehensIve
land use plan and development regulatIons to ensure that the plan and regulatIons are complymg WIth the
reqUIrements of thIS chapter. The reVIew and evaluatIOn reqUIred by thIS subsectIOn may be combmed WIth
the reVIew reqUIred by subsectIon (3) of thIS sectIon. (ESB 6094 amendments.)
. Changed to allow for the amendment of the capItal faCIlItIes element of the comprehensIve plan If It occurs
concurrent WIth the adoptIOn/amendment of a county/cIty budget.
RCW 36.70A.165 Property designated as greenbelt or open space - Not subject to adverse possession
Added a new sectIOn to the GMA. Adverse posseSSIOn IS prohibIted on property desIgnated as open space to a
publIc agency or homeowner's aSSOCIatIOn. (ESB 6094 amendments.)
RCW 36.70A.177 Agricultural lands - Innovative zoning techniques
Added a new sectIon to the GMA. It allows a vanety of mnovatIve zomng technIques m desIgnated agnculture
lands oflong-term commerCIal sIgmficance. (ESB 6094 amendments.)
RCW 36.70A.215 Review and evaluation program
Created the Buildable Lands Program. SIX Western Washmgton countIes and the cItIes located wIthm theIr
boundanes are to establIsh a momtonng and evaluatIon program to determme If the actual growth and
development IS conSIstent WIth what was planned for m the county-wIde plannmg polICIes and comprehensIve
plans. Measures, other than expandmg UGAs, must be taken to correct any mconsIstencIes. (ESB 6094
amendments. )
RCW 36.70A.270 Growth management hearings boards - Conduct, procedure, and compensation
Amended subsectIOn (7) It amends the boards' procedures for dIstributIOn ofmles and deCISIOns to follow the
AdmmIstratIve Procedures Act, Chapter 3405 RCW, specIfically mcludmg the proVIsIOns ofRCW 34.05.455
governmg ex parte commumcatIOns. (ESB 6094 amendments.)
RCW 36.70A.290 Petitions to the growth management hearings boards - Evidence
Amended thIS sectIon as follows. The board shall render wntten decIsIOns artIculatmg the baSIS for ItS holdmgs.
The board shall not Issue adVISOry OPImons on Issues not presented to the board m the statement of Issues, as
modIfied by any preheanng order (ESB 6094 amendments.)
RCW 36.70A.295 Direct judicial review
Added a new sectIOn to the GMA. The supenor court IS allowed to dIrectly reVIew a petItIon for reVIew, If all
partIes to a case before a board agreed to dIrect reVIew m the supenor court. (ESB 6094 amendments.)
RCW 36.70A.300 Final orders
9
May, 4, 2004
Growth Management Act Amendments 1995-2004
Changed to allow the board to extend the tIme for IssUIng a declslOn beyond the 180-day penod currently
provIded by the GMA to allow settlement negotIatIons to proceed If the partIes agree to the extenSlOn. The
boards may' (1) allow up to 90-day extenslOns that may be renewed, (2) estabhsh a comphance schedule that
goes beyond 180 days for a plan or development regulatIon that does not comply WIth the GMA If the
compleXIty of the case JustIfies It; and (3) reqUIre penodlc updates on progress towards comphance as part of
the comphance order (ESB 6094 amendments.)
o
RCW 36.70A.302 Determination of invalidity - Vesting of development permits - Interim controls
Clanfied WhICh permIts mvahdlty orders apply to (ESB 6094 amendments.)
RCW 36.70A.320 Presumption of validity - Burden of proof - plans and regulations
Burden shIfted to the petItIoner to demonstrate that any actlOn by a respondent IS not m comphance WIth the
reqUIrements of the GMA. The board IS reqUIred to find comphance unless It determmes that the actlOn by the
state agency, county, or CIty IS clearly erroneous m VIew of the entIre record before the board and m hght of the
goals and reqUIrements of the GMA. (ESB 6094 amendments.)
RCW 36.70A.3201 Intent - Finding -1997 c 429~20(3)
Added a new sectlOn to the GMA. Local comprehenSIve plans and development regulatlOns reqUIre countIes
and CItIes to balance pnontIes and conSIder local CIrcumstances. The ultImate responsiblhty for plannmg and
Implementmg a county's or CIty'S future rests WIth that commumty The boards are to apply a more deferentIal
standard of reVIew to actlOns of countIes and CItIes than the prevlOUS "preponderance of the eVIdence" standard
(ESB 6094 amendments.)
RCW 36.70A.330 Noncompliance 0
Changed to enable board to modIfy a comphance order and allow addItIonal tIme for comphance m appropnate
CIrcumstances. The board IS dIrected to take mto account a county's or CIty'S progress toward comphance m
makmg ItS declslOn as to whether to recommend the ImposltlOn of sanctIons by the Governor (ESB 6094
amendments. )
RCW 36.70A.335 Order of invalidity issued before July 27, 1997
Added a new sectlOn to the GMA. A county or CIty subject to an order ofmvalidity Issued pnor to the effectIve
date of the act may request the board to reVIew ItS order m hght of the changes to the mvahdlty prOVlSlOns. If
requested, the board IS reqUIred to rescmd or modIfy an order to make It conSIstent WIth the act's changes.
(ESB 6094 amendments.)
RCW 36.70A.362 Master planned resorts - Existing resort may be included
Added a new sectlOn to the GMA. CountIes plannmg under the GMA may mclude some eXlstmg resorts as
master planned resorts under a GMA proVISIon that allows countIes to permIt master planned resorts as urban
growth outSIde ofUGAs. An "exlstmg resort" IS defined as a resort that was m eXIstence on July 1, 1990, and
developed as a sIgmficantly self-contamed and mtegrated development that mcludes vanous types of
accommodatlOns and faclhtIes.
RCW 36.70A.367 Major industrial developments - Master planned locations
Authonzed an addItIonal county (Whatcom), m consultatlOn WIth ItS CItIes, to estabhsh a process for deslgnatmg
land to be m an mdustnalland bank, accordmg to certam condItIons.
o
10
May, 4, 2004
Growth Management Act Amendments 1995-2004
o
RCW 36.70A.500 Growth management planning and environmental review fund - Awarding of grants-
Procedures
The Department of Commumty, Trade, and EconomIC Development (CTED) IS dIrected to encourage
partIcIpatIOn m the grant program by other publIc agencIes through the provIsIon of grant funds. CTED IS
reqUIred to develop the grant cntena, momtor the grant program, and select grant recIpIents m consultatIOn WIth
state agencIes partlclpatmg m the grant program. Grants from the plannmg and envIronmental reVIew fund are
to be proVIded for proposals desIgned to Improve the project reVIew process and whIch encourage the use of
GMA plans to meet the reqUIrements of other state programs. (ESB 6094 amendments.)
1996
RCW 36.70A.070 Comprehensive plans - Mandatory elements
Added "general aVIatIOn aIrports" to subsectIon (6)(i) relatmg to reqUIred sub-elements of a transportatIon
element as defined by thIS sectIOn.
RCW 36.70A.270 Growth management hearings boards - Conduct, procedure, and compensation
Boards are reqUIred to publIsh theIr decIsIOns and arrange for reasonable dIstributIOn of them. The
AdImmstratIve Procedures Act (AP A) IS to be used for the boards' procedures, unless It
conflIcts WIth RCW 36 70A. The AP A also IS to be used to determme whether a board member or heanng
exammer will be dIsqualIfied.
(\ RCW 36.70A.280 Matters subject to board review
\J Clanfied who may file petItIOns wIth the boards (i.e., standmg)
RCW 36.70A.30S Expedited review
New sectIOn added from SSB 6637 Courts are to expedIte reVIews on mvalIdlty determmatIOns made by the
boards. Heanngs on the Issues are to be scheduled wlthm 60 days of the date set for submlttmg the board's
record.
RCW 36.70A.367 Major industrial developments - Master planned locations
The GMA was amended to allow a pIlot project to desIgnate an urban mdustnal bank outSIde UGAs. A county
IS allowed to establIsh the pilot project If It has a populatIOn of more than 250,000 and If It IS part of a
metropolItan area that mcludes a CIty m another state wIth a populatIOn of more than 250,000 (Clark County)
The urban mdustnalland banks are to conSIst of no more than two master planned locatIOns. PnorIty IS to be
gIven to locatIOns that are adjacent to or m close prOXImIty to a UGA. The same cntena are to be met that are
reqUIred under the eXlstmg major mdustrIal development process m the GMA, except that speCIfic busmesses to
locate on the sIte(s) need not be IdentIfied ahead of the desIgnatIOn. The pIlot project termmates on December
31, 1998
RCW 36.70A.SI0 General aviation airports.
General aVIatIOn aIrports were added to the lIst of Items that all local governments must mclude m the land use
elements of theIr comprehensIve plans. General aVIatIon aIrports mclude all aIrports m the state (I.e., publIc use
facIlItIes) There are currently a total of 129 aIrports that are classIfied as "general aViatIOn." AdoptIOn and
amendment of comprehensIve plan prOVIsIOns and development regulatIOns under thIS chapter affectmg general
C aVIatIon aIrports are subject to RCW 36 70.547
11
May, 4, 2004
Growth Management Act Amendments 1995-2004
1995
o
RCW 36.70A.030 Definitions
A definItIOn of "wetlands" added to the Shorelme Management Act (SMA) that IS IdentIcal to the defimtIon
under the Growth Management Act (GMA) Excluded from the wetlands defimtIons under both acts are
wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unmtentIOnally created as the result of road constructIon.
RCW 36.70A.040 Who must plan - Summary of requirements - Development regulations must
implement comprehensive plans
Changed the percentage of populatIon mcrease reqUIred to tngger plannmg under the GMA from 10 percent to
17 percent for a ten-year penod for counties wIth a populatIOn of 50,000 or more.
RCW 36.70A.070 Comprehensive Plans - Mandatory elements
· Added the followmg underhned text m subsectIOn (5) The rural element shall permIt appropnate land uses
that are compatible WIth the rural character of such lands and provIde for a vanety of rural densItIes and
uses and may also provIde for clustenng, densIty transfer, deSIgn gUIdehnes, conservatIon easements, and
other InnovatIve technIqUeS that wIll accommodate rural uses not charactenzed by urban growth.
· Changed the word "recogmzmg" to "ensunng" for what the housmg element must do as noted m the act
" ensunng the vItahty and character of estabhshed resIdentIal neighborhoods." Added "mandatory
provIsions" and "smgle-famIly resIdences" to the followmg" mclude a statement of goals, pohcIes,
obJ ectIves, and mandatory prOVISIOns for the preservatIOn, Improvement, and development of housmg,
mcludmg smgle-fmmly resIdences. 0
RCW 36.70A.ll0 Comprehensive Plans - Urban growth areas
Changed to allow countIes to deSIgnate urban growth areas (UGAs) outsIde of CIties. A UGA determmatIon
may mclude a reasonable land market supply factor and shall permIt a range of urban denSItIes. The term "m
general" was added to the GMA statement that mdIcates urban servIces are to be proVIded by CItIes.
RCW 36.70A.130 Comprehensive Plans - Review
. Added language that dIrects CItIes and countIes to broadly dIssemmate to the pubhc, a publIc particIpatIOn
program.
· Added the prOVISIOn that amendments may be consIdered more than once a year under the followmg
CIrcumstances. (1) emergency comphance WIth a growth management hearmgs board order, (2) the mItIal
adoptIOn of a subarea plan, and (3) the adoptIOn or amendment of a Shorelme Master Program accordmg to
chapter 9058 RCW
. Added the reqUIrement of pubhc particIpation to the emergency amendment process already permItted by
the GMA and added resolutIOn of a growth management heanngs board (board) or court order as an
amendment permItted outsIde of the comprehenSIve plan amendment cycle. (ESHB 1724 amendments.)
RCW 36.70A.140 Comprehensive Plans - Ensure public participation
· Added the reqUIrement of a pubhc partIcIpation program that Identifies procedures. Local governments
must also proVIde pubhc partIcIpation that IS effective when respondmg to a board order of mvahdIty 0
(ESHB 1724 amendments.)
12
May,4,2004
o
o
c
Growth Management Act Amendments 1995-2004
RCW 36.70A.172 Critical areas - Designation and protection - Best available science to be used
New sectIon added to the GMA that clarIfied the state's goals and polIcIes for protectmg cntIcal areas functIOns
and values. Local governments are reqUired to Include the "best avaIlable SCIence" In developIng pohcIes and
development regulatIons to protect the functIOns and values of cntIcal areas as defined In the GMA and must
gIve special consIderatIon to preservIng or enhanCIng anadromous fishenes. (ESHB 1724 amendments.)
RCW 36.70A.175 Wetlands to be delineated in accordance with manual
Washmgton Department of Ecology (Ecology) dIrected to adopt by a rule a manual for the delIneatIOn of
wetlands regulated under the SMA and GMA. The manual IS based on the 1987 U S Army Corps of EngIneers
and the U S EnVIronmental ProtectIOn Agency manual as amended through January 1, 1995
RCW 36.70A.280 Matters subject to board review
Added shorelIne master programs or amendments adopted under chapter 9058 RCW, as subjects for board
reVIew (ESHB 1724 amendments.)
RCW 36.70A.290 Petitions to growth management hearings boards - Evidence
EstablIshed the pubhcatIon date for a shorelIne master program or amendment to be the date when the shorelIne
master program or amendment IS approved/dIsapproved by Ecology
RCW 36.70A.300 Final orders
. Added shorelme master program and amendments to final order procedures.
. Determmed that a findIng of non-complIance will not affect the valIdIty of comprehensIve
plans/development regulatIOns. IndIcated the parameters of an mvalIdIty determInatIOn by the boards,
IncludIng vestIng Issues.
RCW 36.70A.320 Presumption of validity
Added that the shorelIne element of a comprehensIve plan and applIcable development regulatIOns adopted by a
CIty or county are governed by Chapter 90 58 RCW and not presumed valId upon adoptIOn m the same manner
as comprehensIve plan/development regulatIOns In general. (ESHB 1724 amendments.)
RCW 36.70A.330 Noncompliance
. Added InvalIdIty text. The board IS allowed to reconsIder ItS final order and decIde: (a) If a determInatIOn
of InvalIdIty has been made whether to rescInd or modIfy ItS determInatIOn as provIded by RCW
36 70A.300(2), or (b) If no InvalIdIty determmatIon has been made whether to Issue a determInatIOn as
provIded by RCW 36 70A.300(2)
. Added language that a person WIth standIng may partIcIpate In a heanng of complIance/noncomplIance
(ESHB 1724 amendments.)
RCW 36.70A.365 Major industrial developments
CountIes plannIng under the GMA allowed to establIsh, In consultatIon WIth cItIes, a process for authonzIng the
sItmg of maJor Industnal developments outsIde UGAs. Such a development may be approved If certam cntena
are met.
13
May, 4, 2004
Growth Management Act Amendments 1995-2004
RCW 36.70A.385 Environmental planning pilot projects
Changed references from the "Department of Commumty Development" to "department."
o
RCW 36.70A.450 Family day-care provider's home facility - City may not prohibit in residential or
commercial area
Changed the agency responsible for certlfymg that a famIly day-care provIder's facilIty provIdes a safe
passenger loadmg area, from the Washmgton State Department ofLlcensmg to the Office of Child Care PolIcy
of the state, Department of SocIal and Health ServIces.
RCW 36.70A.460 Watershed restoration projects - Permit processing - Fish habitat enhancement
project
DIrected the Washmgton ConservatIOn COImmssIOn to develop a smgle applIcatIOn process by whIch all
permIts for watershed restoratIOn projects may be obtamed by a sponsonng agency for Its project, to be
completed by January 1, 1996 Each agency IS reqUIred to name an office or offiCIal as a deSIgnated reCIpIent of
project applIcatIOns and mform the commISSIOn of the deSIgnatIOn. All agencIes of state and local government
are reqUIred to accept the smgle applIcatIOn developed by the commISSIOn.
RCW 36.70A.470 Project review - Amendment suggestion procedure - Definitions
Added a new sectIOn to the GMA that mtegrated project and envIronmental reVIew to be conducted under the
newly created proVIsIons of Chapter 36 70B RCW
RCW 36.70A.480 Shorelines of the state
Added a new sectIon to the GMA, whIch states that: (I) the goals and polIcIes of the SMA become one of the 0
goals of the GMA under 36 70A.020, and (2) the goals and polIcIes of a Shorelme Master Program for a
county/cIty are reqUIred to become an element of the JUrISdIction's comprehensIve plan. All other portIons of
the Shorelme Master Program mcludmg regulatIOns are reqUIred to become part of the county's or CIty'S
development regulatIons. AddItIonally, ShorelIne Master Programs are to contmue to be amended/adopted
under the procedures of the SMA (Chapter 9058 RCW)
RCW 36.70A.481 Construction - Chapter 347, Laws of 1995
Added the above new sectIOn to the GMA, whIch states that nothmg m RCW 36 70A.480 (shorelInes of the
state) shall be construed to authonze a county or CIty to adopt regulatIOns applIcable to shorelands as defined m
RCW 90.58 030 that are mconslstent WIth the prOVISIOns of Chapter 90 58 RCW (ESHB 1724 amendments.)
RCW 36.70A.490 Growth management planning and environmental review fund - Established
Added the above new sectIon to the GMA. Moneys m the fund are reqUIred to be used to make grants to local
governments for the purposes set forth m RCW 43.21 C 031 (ESHB 1724 amendments.)
RCW 36.70A.500 Growth management planning and environmental review fund -
Awarding of grants - Procedures
Added the above new sectIon to the GMA. EstablIshed procedures for dlspersmg funds. (ESHB 1724
amendments. )
Chapter 36.70B RCW
Regulatory reform bill to streamlIne permlttmg procedures m the state. (ESHB 1724 amendments.)
o
14
May, 4, 2004
c
o
c
c
Technical Bulletin 1.2
GMA Updates:
Level of Review and Revision for Counties and Cities "Fully Planning"
under the Growth Management Act
Key Issue
According to a schedule establIshed by RCW 36 70A.130( 4), each CIty and county m
Washmgton must take actIon to reVIew and, If needed, reVIse Its comprehenSIve plan
and development regulatIons to ensure they comply with the Growth Management Act
(GMA) The needed level of reVIew and reviSIon will be different in different places,
depenchng on local factors, such as when the jurischctIOn adopted ItS plan and
regulatIons ThIS bulletin will provIde guidance, based on current statutes, for
determining the appropnate level of review and revision for local governments that are
"fully planning" under the act. (See attached GMA map)
Discussion
Generally, local plans and regulatIons should be updated, as necessary, to reflect local
needs, new data, and current laws. While updates can be done on a contmumg basis,
they must occur in a delIberate manner every seven years accorchng to a schedule
establIshed by RCW 36 70A.130(4)
The schedule for when the first update must be completed for these "fully plannmg"
counties and the CItIes wIthm them is the following:
· December 1, 2004 - Clallam, Clark, Jefferson, King, Kitsap, PIerce, Snohomish,
Thurston, and Whatcom countIes
· December 1, 2005 - Island, LeWIS, Mason, San Juan, and Skagit countIes
· December 1, 2006 - Benton, Chelan, Douglas, Grant, KittItas, Spokane, and
Ya1a.ma countIes
· December 1,2007 - ColumbIa, Ferry, Franklm, Garfield, PacIfic, Pend Oreille,
Stevens, and Walla Walla countIes
ThIS delIberate GMA Update process mcludes four basic steps (1) establIsh a publIc
partiCIpation program that identIfies procedures and schedules for the reVIew, evaluatIOn,
and possible reVISIOn process, (2) reVIew of relevant plans and regulatIons, (3) analysis
of need for revisions, and (4) adoptIOn of an appropriate resolutIon and/or amendments.
Questions about these steps are discussed below
September 6, 2002
j
What are the relevant plans and regulatIOns to reVIew and evaluate?
The statute does not exempt any portion of a comprehensive plan or development 0
regulatIon from being subject to reVIew and evaluatIOn. Cntical areas ordinances and an
analysIs of the populatIOn allocated to a CIty or county from the most recent ten-year
populatIon forecast by the Office of FinanCIal Management (OFM) are specIfically lIsted
[RCW 36 70A.130(1)(b)] However, local governments may use common-sense factors
m determimng the level of review, takIng mto account when the plan and regulations
were adopted. (See "How Much RevIew Should be Done?" below)
At a nummum, the policIes and regulatIOns that most local governments should reVIew
mclude those fof'
· Urban densItIes
· Urban growth areas
· Critical areas
· Natural resource lands (espeCIally countIes)
· Rural lands, densIties, and uses (countIes only)
· Essential publIc facilItIes
· Affordable housing for all income levels (espeCIally CItIes)
· TransportatIOn, mcludmg levels of servIce and concurrency
· PublIc faCIlItIes and servIces to meet future needs
· Shorehnes (if applicable)
Each jurisdIction should deterrrune whether ItS plan and regulations are affected by any
amendments made to the GMA after the junsdICtIon adopted ItS comprehensive plan or
development regulations [see the Washmgton State Department of Commumty, Trade
and Econonuc Development's (CTED) "List of GMA Amendments by Year"] For
many local governments, thIS includes cntIcal areas. The GMA was amended in 1995 to
reqUIre that local poliCIes and regulations for cntIcal areas mclude the best aVallable
SCIence and gIve specIal consIderatIOn to the protectIon of anadromous fisheries. [See
RCW 36 70A.172(1)] No substantlal amendments were made to the GMA regarchng
natural resource lands. However, the state supreme court m two deCISIOns has
emphaSIzed the Importance of desIgnatmg and conserving agnculturallands of long-term
commerCIal SIgnIficance and has clarified the defimtIons to be used. 1 CountIes (and, if
applIcable, CItles) should reVIew theIr deSIgnatIOns and regulations to conserve natural
resource lands of long-term commercial SIgnificance m light of these deCISIons.
o
In adchtIOn, local governments are encouraged to consider emergmg local and regIonal
needs, changes to state and federal laws, and theIr own progress toward meetmg GMA
goals. (See RCW 36 70A.020 for GMA goals.)
What about populatIOn assumptIOns?
The state OFM prOVIdes 20-year populatIOn forecasts, expressed m a range from hIgh to
low, on a county-by-county basis. Local comprehensIve plans must be based on the
o
1 King County v Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board, 142 Wn.2d 543, 14 P.3d 133 (2000); City of Redmond v
Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board, 136 Wn.2d 38, 959 P.2d 1091 (1998).
2 September 6, 2002
OFM forecasts The last time OFM Issued its 20-year forecast was m January 2002.
c
RCW 36 70A.130(1)(b) specIfically says that the reVIew and evaluatIOn process must
mclude an analysis of the population allocated to a city or county from the most recent
ten-year populatIOn forecast by OFM. RCW 36 70A 130(3) requires that counties m
collaboration with the cities wlthm the county should evaluate their urban growth areas
(UGAs) WIthin ten years of adoptmg theIr plan and thIS evaluatIOn process can be
combmed with the reVIew and evaluatIOn process required by RCW 36 70A.215 WhIle
includmg an evaluation of UGAs probably makes sense for most jUnSdlctIOns, It is not
required unless the Update deadline and UGA evaluation comcIde in the same year
CTED Techmcal Bulletm 1.3 provides more detailed guidance on thIS Issue.
How much reVIew should be done?
c
The level of reVIew can be abbreVIated or lengthy, based on certam common-sense
factors. For example, a jurisdiction may use an abbreviated review process if it has
recently (since September 2000) adopted or significantly amended its plan and
regulations to be consistent with the GMA. An abbreVIated process assumes that
recently adopted plans and regulations already comply WIth the GMA, except as a
heanngs board or court has found otherwIse, and that attention can be focused Instead on
portIons of the plan and regulations that were adopted pnor to September 2000, along
WIth any portIOns that a heanngs board or court has determined to be non-complIant.
Many towns and cities do not contaIn any "natural resource lands of long-term
commerCIal sIgmficance" and, consequently, WIll not have regulatIOns to review for such
lands.
What local analYSIS is needed?
A local government must determine whether its existmg comprehensive plan and
development regulations meet GMA reqUirements To help WIth the analYSIS, CTED has
developed a list of questions ("GMA Update. Issues to ConSIder When RevIewmg
ComprehensIve Plans and Development RegulatIOns") WhICh identIfies key pomts of
analysis for commumtles to consider Plans and regulations WhICh were adopted or
significantly amended smce 2000 to comply with the GMA may need only a minimal
analYSIS for GMA complIance by the GMA Update deadlIne
If a junsdictIon has a rulmg in effect from eIther a growth management hearings board or
a court of law findIng non-complIance WIth the GMA, the junsdIctIon should be sure to
mcorporate the ruling into ItS analysis. Any preVIOUS comment letters from CTED and
other state agenCIes regarding conSIstency of a jUnsdIctIOn' s plan and development
regulatIOns WIth the GMA also should be considered. (CopIes of offiCIal agency
comment letters may be obtamed upon request from CTED) CTED also has developed
two detaIled checklIsts (one for comprehensIve plans and one for development
regulatIOns) which local governments may use m comparing theIr plans and regulations
WIth speCIfic GMA reqUirements.
c
In additIOn, jUnSdICtIOnS should conSIder whether the comprehenSIve plan is Internally
conSIstent (e.g., that the Land Use and Transportation elements support each other) and
3
September 6, 2002
../
that the development regulations are consIstent with and Implement the comprehensIve
plan. The GMA reqUIres such consistency [See RCW 36 70A040(4) and 36 70A070 ]
o
Each jurisdiction's analysIs must mclude appropnate publIc process and should be
documented m the publIc record, reflecting consIderatIon of the assumptIOns, facts,
analysIs, and conclusions
If the analysis shows that the eXlstmg plan or regulatIOns do not comply with current
GMA reqUIrements, the JunsdlctIOn must take the next step by developmg substItute or
revised language that wIll meet GMAgoals and reqUIrements. Vanous techmcal
assIstance matenals are aVaIlable from CTED and other state agencIes.
What should be adopted?
RCW 36 70A.130(1) requires countIes and citIes to "take legIslatIve actIOn" to detenmne
whether or not to revise a plan or regulation. "LegIslatIve actIon means the adoptIOn of a
resolutIOn or ordmance followmg the notIce and publIc heanng md1catmg at a mlmmum,
a find1ng that a reVIew and evaluatIon has occurred and Identlfymg the reVISIons made,
or that a reVlSlon was not needed and the reasons therefore" Only the local legIslatIve
authonty can reVIse the comprehensIve plan and development regulatIOns, and the action
that must be taken to do so IS the adoptIOn of an ordinance or resolution.
Depend1ng on the outcome of its review and analysis, each local government should
adopt one of the followmg by the deadlme establIshed for ItS junsdictIon m 0
RCW 36 70A130(4)
. A resolution find1ng that, based on careful conSIderatIOn of the facts and law, the
jurisd1ctIOn's comprehenSIve plan and development regulations comply WIth the
GMA and the jurisd1ction has met its update reqUIrement under RCW
3670A.130(1),
. An amendment (or amendments) to the local comprehenSIve plan and/or
development regulatIOns, so that the plan and regulatIOns comply WIth the GMA, or
. A combmatIon of both Items above.
[CTED cannot waive or extend ajunsd1ctIon's Update deadlIne.]
In fact, "fully planning" cItIes and counties must complete GMA Update reqUIrements
accord1ng to the establIshed schedules to be considered in complIance WIth the GMA.
Only those countIes and cities in complIance with these schedules wIll be elIgIble to
receive funds from the PublIc Works Trust Fund or the Centenmal Clean Water account
(RCW 36 70A130(7)) To receIve preference for grants and loans subject to the
proVISIOns of RCW 43 155 050, "fully planning" countIes and cities must also be m
compliance WIth theIr establIshed Update schedule However, a local government that
has made signIficant progress on ItS Update process, but IS not able to adopt all needed
reVISIons by theIr Update deadlme, would be prudent m takmg steps to demonstrate good
faith and progress. In such cases, the followmg mtenm steps are recommended. (a) 0
adopt by the Update deadlme, a resolutIon that documents the local progress already
made and contaIns a schedule for completmg the Update, and (b) contmue movmg ahead
4 September 6, 2002
~
as quickly as possible to be m full compliance wIth the GMA. [Please note, however,
that followmg these intenm steps does not relIeve a local government of Its Update
requirements, nor does It necessanly mean that a local government will be eligible for
state grants and loans.]
c
All draft and adopted plans and regulations, including amendments, must be submitted to
CTED accordmg to RCW 36 70A.I06 All adopted resolutIOns regardmg the GMA
Update also should be submitted to CTED
Can a lunsdiction's adopted resolution or amendments be appealed to a heanngs board?
The short answer is that a person or orgamzatIOn wIth standing probably could appeal a
junsdIctIOn's resolutIOn or regulatory amendment to a hearings board, based on an
argument that the resolutIOn or amendment does not comply wIth the GMA. However, a
jurisdiction that has followed a good process for reviewing and revIsing its development
regulatIOns reduces legal risks considerably
What If a lunsdIctIOn does not adopt either a resolution or a set of amendments to its
plan and development regUlatIOns?
c
If not adoptmg eIther an appropnate resolution or regulatory amendment, a jUnSdIctIOn
will be lIsted m CTED data as not in compliance with the GMA Update reqUIrement
[I.e., RCW 36 70A.030(1)] and also would be vulnerable to a "failure to act"
determmatIOn by a heanngs board. Any amendment to ajUnSdICtIon's comprehensive
plan or development regulations IS appealable to a heanngs board by a person wIth
standmg.
Can a lunsdIctIOn complete Update reqUIrements pnor to theIr deadlme?
A jUnsdIctIOn can complete the Update process pnor to their deadlme if they complete
the process in the manner as descnbed above and If they have completed the process on
or after January 1, 2001 The deadlme for theIr next update would then become seven
years from the deadlme for theIr junsdictIOn as reqUIred by RCW 36 70A.130(4)
Contact
For more mformatIOn, contact the CTED regional planner for your area or the Growth
Management Services at (360) 725-3000, or by maIl at POBox 48350, OlympIa,
Washington 98504-8350 GMA Update mformation wIll also be posted periodIcally on
the followmg Web site. www oed. wa.gov/growth.
See GMA map on next page.
c
5
September 6, 2002
.J
o
Washington State Counties Planning under the GMA
o
D Counties Fully Planning under GMA
Counties Planning for Critical Areas and
Natural Resource Lands only under GMA
o
6
September 6, 2002
o
c
c
Technical Bulletin 1.3
GMA Updates: Using Population Data
Key Issue
Accordmg to a schedule established by the RCW 36 70A.130(4), each CIty and county m
Washmgton must take actIOn to reVIew and, If needed, reVIse Its comprehensive plan and
development regulatIOns to ensure they comply wIth the Growth Management Act
(GMA) [See RCW 36 70A.130(1)] Because the deadlInes for GMA Updates and
reVIew of urban growth areas (UGAs) are not always concurrent, many JunschctIOns are
wrestling wIth when and how to mcorporate the Office of Financial Management's
(OFM) population forecasts Issued m January 2002 mto meetmg the Update reqUIrement.
The Update reqUIrement also now requires that counties and cities fully planmng under
GMA mclude an analysis of the population allocated to a CIty or county from the most
recent ten-year populatIOn forecast by OFM m their Update. CountIes and cities will
also need to decIde whether thIS analYSIS WIll mclude a reVIew of ItS UGA as required by
RCW 36 70A.30(3) This bulletm IS mtended to assist cities and counties that are "fully
plannmg" under the GMA. It WIll prOVIde guidance, based on current statutes, for usmg
populatIOn data m the Update process.
Discussion
For many jurisdictions, the upcoming GMA planning reqUIrements present complex
tInung challenges. One of the challenges IS how to use populatIOn data m meetmg the
deadlmes ahead.
What are the deadlmes ahead?
Two key deadlines, as follows, are commg up for all counties and CIties fully planmng
under the GMA.
· GMA Update Accorchng to a schedule established by the RCW 36 70A.130( 4), and
every seven years thereafter, counties and CItIes must review and reVIse theIr plans
and regulations.
· Urban Growth Area ReVIew' At least every ten years, jurisdIctIOns must review
UGAs, mcluding denSIties, pursuant to RCW 36 70A.130(3) and make changes If
needed. The statute states. "The county comprehensive plan designatmg urban
growth areas, and the denSItIes permItted m the urban growth areas by the
comprehensIve plans of the county and each CIty located within the urban growth
areas, shall be revised to accommodate the urban growth projected to occur in the
county for the succeeding 20-year penod."
September 6, 2002
These two deadlines are not necessarily concurrent. WhIle the GMA Update deadlme 0
clearly applIes to all junschctlons, the UGA ReVIew deadlme appears to be tnggered by
the imtIaI adoptIon of a comprehenslVe plan under the GMA and takes effect ten years
after the comprehensIve plan adoptIOn. If followmg adoptIOn a growth management
heanngs board (GMHB) has found the majonty of ajUnsdictIOn's UGAs out of
compliance, then the deadlIne for evaluatIOn of UGAs becomes ten years from the date
that the GMHB finds the majority of a jurischctIOn' s UGAs m complIance Thus, if a
county adopted a comprehenslVe plan in 1995, its deadlme to make any necessary
adjustments to UGAs and densitles to reflect projected urban growth IS 2005, l.e , ten
years after the Imtlal comprehensIve plan was adopted. WhIle combmmg the GMA
Update and UGA Review processes may not be required, It certainly may make sense
and be more efficient for some jUnschctIOns.
A thIrd key deadline, as follows, applIes only to the countles of Snohonush, Kmg,
PIerce, K1tsap, Thurston, and Clark and the citIes wlthm theIr borders. (These are the
jurischctions subject to the "buildable lands" statute, RCW 36 70A.215) Only a nummal
chSCUSSIOn of thIS deadline IS included here The Buildable Lands Program Guidelines,
available from the Washmgton State Office of Community Development's Growth
Management Services, contams detaIled information.
Buildable Lands EvaluatIOn By September 1, 2002, and every five years
thereafter, affected junsdIctions must complete an evaluation of certaIn data,
mcluchng whether there is suffiCIent SUItable land to accommodate the county-
WIde populatIOn prOjectIOn. The statute also requires junsdIctIOns "to adopt and
Implement measures" if necessary to mcrease conSIstency based on the
evaluatIOn. ThIS ImplementatIOn step would occur after the evaluatIOn IS
complete and may be combined WIth the Urban Growth Area ReVIew under
RCW 36 70A.130(3) No specific deadline IS Identified m the statute.
o
What is the reqUIrement for population data?
OFM proVIdes 20-year populatIOn forecasts, expressed m a range from hIgh to low, on a
county-by-county baSIS. Each county consults with ItS cities and allocates the projected
populatIOn projectIOn among the county and CItIes Sometlmes thIS collaborative process
IS speCIfied in a county's countY-WIde planmng polIcies. The collaboratIve process IS
very Important, though sometimes difficult and tlme-consunung.
Local comprehensIve plans must be based on the OFM forecasts. The last tIme OFM
Issued a 20-year forecast was In January 2002.
It should be noted that once countles and CItIes change the populatIOn projections In their
comprehensIve plans, It IS not just UGAs and denSIties within them they may have to
change. New population data will dnve other possible adjustments, for example, to
plans for transportation, water and sewer, and parks.
Since the deadlIne for updatmg GMA plans and regulatIOns does not comclde WIth the
o
2
September 6, 2002
G
deadline for evaluating UGAs for some jurisdIctIOns, local governments have d1scretIOn
and flexIbIhty to decIde how to handle OFM populatIOn projections m theIr Update
process. RCW 36 70A.130(1)(b) does reqUire counties and cities to mclude an analysis
of the population allocated to a CIty or county from the most recent ten-year populatIOn
forecast by OFM in their Update.
What are the local options for usmg populatIOn forecasts m the GMA Update process?
Local governments have three basic options, as follows, for using populatIOn forecasts m
theIr GMA Update processes. They may choose the one that IS most sUitable for their
situatIon, dependmg m part on how the junsd1ctIOns are approachmg the Update process
and how much the populatIOn projectIOns for a county have changed. Some vanatIOns,
of course, may be possible for each of the basIc options listed below
r"\
U
. Continue with existing county-wide population projections.
ThIS option could be used by counties whose GMA Update deadhne occurs before ItS
next deadhne for a UGA Review A county and the citIes withm It could retaIn theIr
eXIstmg population forecast allocations during theIr GMA Update process, assummg
these allocatIOns are consIstent WIth OFM's prevIous forecast and wIth the county-
WIde planmng policIes. JunsdIctions choosing this optIOn would not lInmed1ately
reallocate the populatIOn projections, nor would they immediately mcorporate the.
latest OFM forecast into either their plans or, under RCW 36 70A.130(3), their UGA
ReVIew Instead, the new population allocation for indiVIdual jUnsd1ctIOns, along
with an evaluatIOn of UGAs and densities, would occur after the GMA Update IS
completed, but pnor to the local deadhne for the UGA ReVIew However, counties
and citIes choosmg thIS option would need to discuss in theIr updated plan how the
new populatIOn projections and future county population allocatIOns rmght affect
theIr plan and include a strategy for mcorporating the new population projectIOns and
county population allocations in their plan.
· Use the new OFM county-wide population forecasts.
U smg the new populatIOn forecasts appears to tngger the reqUirement for a reVIew of
UGAs and densIties, pursuant to RCW 36 70A.130(3) Therefore, thIS optIOn would
involve performmg the GMA Update and UGA Review concurrently
In deciding how to spread the county-wide growth among existing countIes and
CIties, the county, m collaboration with the cities within the county, will need to
allocate the new population forecasts among the jurisdictions. The usual
requirements for pubhc process and conSIstency WIth other laws still apply
c
· Develop county's own population projections and reallocate county population
based on these projections.
Counties, m cooperatIon WIth cities wIthm the county, could develop theIr own
population prOjectIOns so long as the projections are based on rehable sources of
mformatIOn and consistent with other GMA reqUirements. A county and its CIties
that use thIS approach would then proceed with. (a) implementing the county process
to "divide up" or allocate the population projection among the respective
jUnsd1ctIOns, and (b) evaluatmg theIr UGAs and denSIties as part of theIr GMA
Update process. Therefore, thIS optIOn also would involve performmg the GMA
3
September 6, 2002
Update and UGA RevIew concurrently Jurisdictions that use this approach
should be aware that their population projections and OFM's should be
substantially consistent; if not, they should consult with OFM on the differences.
On the rare occasion that OFM and a county do not agree on the population
forecasts for that county, a county can appeal OFM's population forecast to a
GMHB.
If a lunsdIction does a UGA RevIew, what Issues should be consIdered?
Here are some questIOns and resources to consider when undertakIng a UGA RevIew
that mcludes population data, pursuant to RCW 36 70A.130(3)
Counties. What IS the percentage of growth that has occurred smce adoptIOn of the
comprehensIve plan m rural areas compared to urban areas? Is thIS consIstent with the
targets m your comprehensIve plan or county-wide planmng polIcies? What residential
densItIes are allowed m rural areas and unincorporated UGAs? How much land IS
devoted to each type of densIty? Do these densIties need to be revised to meet adopted
growth targets for urban and rural areas?
Cities. What IS the average urban density withm your CIty? Withm your umncorporated
UGA? What mechamsms have you used to encourage urban densItIes withm your CIty?
Are these densItIes consIstent with targets established m your comprehensIve plan? Do
these densIties need to be revIsed to meet any adopted growth targets m the county-wIde
planmng polIcIes and to meet your population allocatIOn?
Resources aVaJ.lable from Growth Management ServIces.
· Buildable Lands Program Guidelines, Department of Commumty, Trade
and Econormc Development, June 2000
· The Art and SClence of Designating Urban Growth Areas, Part II Some
Suggestions for Criteria and Densities, Department of Commumty, Trade and
Econormc Development, March 1992.
· Keeping the Rural Vision. Protecting Rural Character and Planning for
Rural Development, Department of Commumty, Trade and Econormc
Development, June 1999
· Predicting Growth and Change in Your Communities, A Guide to Subcounty
Populatzon Forecasting, Department of Commumty, Trade and Econormc
Development, June 1995
Contact
For more information, contact the managmg director or a regIOnal planner for Growth
Management ServIces, Washmgton State Department of Community, Trade and
Econormc Development, at (360) 725-3000 or by mail at POBox 48350, Olympia,
Washmgton 98504-8350 If you have a question about OFM populatIOn forecasts,
contact Theresa Lowe, Office of FinanCIal Management, at (360) 902-0588 GMA
Update information will also be posted pen odic ally on the following Web sIte
www ocd. wa.gov/growth.
4
September 6, 2002
o
o
o
o
c
o
Technical Bulletin 1.4
GMA Updates:
Optional Processes for Review and Revision of Comprehensive Plans
and Development Regulations under the Growth Management Act
Key Issue
Accordmg to a schedule establIshed by RCW 36 70A.130(4), each CIty and county m
Washmgton must take legislatIve action to reVIew and, If needed, reVIse Its
comprehensIve plan and development regulatIOns to ensure they comply with the
Growth Management Act (GMA) For citIes and countIes planmng under the GMA for
cntlcal areas and natural resource lands only, thIS update process must be completed for
theIr polIcIes and development regulatIOns regardmg cntlcal areas and natural resource
lands. (See attached GMA map)
Citles and countIes may use a vanety of publIc processes to fulfill this reqUlrement. The
needed level of reVIew and reVlSlon also will vary, dependmg on local factors, such as
when the Junsd1ction adopted its most recent plan and regulatIOns.
ThIS bulletm from the Growth Management Services (GMS) program provides
guidance, based on current statutes, for local governments to determme the appropriate
publIc process and level of review and reVlSlon. Please also refer to the GMS
publIcatIOn Frequently Asked Questwns Regarding GMA Updates for more specIfic
mformation on some aspects of thIS process
Discussion
Generally, local plans and regulatIOns should be updated, as necessary, to reflect local
needs, new data, and current laws. Many citIes and countles consIder amendments to
comprehensIve plans annually or bIannually, and amend theIr development regulatIOns
on a continumg baSIS. However, local plans and regulatIOns must be revIewed and, if
needed, revIsed in a delIb~rate and comprehensIve manner every seven years according to
a schedule establIshed by RCW 36 70A.130(4)
Deadlines
RCW 36 70A.130(4) sets the deadlines for each county and its cities to complete the first
seven-year update.
· December 1, 2004 - Clallam, Clark, Jefferson, Kmg, KItsap, PIerce, Snohomish,
January 15,2004
Thurston, and Whatcom countIes
· December 1, 2005 - CowlItz, Island, Lewis, Mason, San Juan, SkagIt, and
Skamania countIes
· December 1, 2006 - Benton, Chelan, Douglas, Grant, KIttitas, Spokane, and
Yakima countIes
· December 1, 2007 - Adams, Asotm, ColumbIa, Ferry, FranklIn, Garfield, Grays
Harbor, Khckitat, Lmcoln, Okanogan, PacIfic, Pend OreIlle, Stevens,
WahkIakum, Walla Walla, and WhItman countIes
o
A JunsdIctIon can complete the update process prior to their deadline The deadline for
theIr next update would then become seven years from the deadlme for the junsdictIOn
set m RCW 36 70A.130( 4) For countIes and cItIes with a December 1, 2004, deadlme,
the first seven-year update can occur no earlIer than January 1,2001 [RCW
3670A.130(6)]
Three basic actions required
ThIS delIberate, seven-year GMA Update process reqUIres three baSIC actIOns by the local
government:
(1) establIsh a publIc partIcIpatIOn program that Identifies procedures and schedules
for the reVIew, evaluation, and possIble reVISIon process,
(2) reVIew relevant plans and regulatIOns and analyze whether there IS a need for
revIsions, and
(3) take legIslatIve actIOn.
It IS important that each of these actIOns be explicitly affirmed by the local government's
legislatIve body as havmg been accomplIshed m accordance wIth RCW 36 70A.130, both
to comply wIth the statute and to set tIme and subject matter llInitS for possible
challenges.
o
SuggestIons for determimng the appropnate local process for carrymg out each of these
three actions are discussed below Some example processes are mcluded at the end of
this bulletin.
1. EstablIshmg a publIc participatIOn program
Each CIty or county IS required by RCW 36 70A.130(2)(a) to establIsh a publIc
partIcipation program that identifies procedures and schedules for comprehensIve plan
updates. (This reqUIrement applIes to all plan amendments, including the seven-year
update process.)
In establIshmg a publIc partIcIpatIOn program for its seven-year update process, a CIty or
county must ensure the following:
· NotIce of the update process is broadly and effectIvely dIssemmated (RCW
36 70A.035),
· The notIce Identifies the procedures and schedules by whIch updates WIll be
considered, mcludIng both of the remaming actIOns needed to complete the seven- 0
year update, and
2
January 15,2004
o
c
-.
o
. The program provides for early and contmuous publIc participatIOn (RCW
3670A140)
One way for a county or CIty to complete thIS requirement would be to publish a
complete public participatIOn program or schedule at the begmnmg of the update process.
However, it IS not required that a city or county establish the entIre schedule at the
begmning of the process, as long as a public partIcIpation program IS establIshed, wIth
effective notice provided, for the remammg actions needed to complete the seven-year
update
It IS also Important to note that jurisdictIOns can adjust the publIc partIcIpatIOn program
as needed to best meet the intent of the reqUlrement for public partIcIpatIOn. RCW
36 70A140 notes that "errors m exact complIance wIth the establIshed program and
procedures shall not render the comprehensIve land use plan or development regulatIOns
mvalId If the spirit of the program and procedures is observed." For example, if an
established publIc partIcipatIOn program mcluded one publIc hearing on all actIOns
havmg to do wIth the seven-year update process, the program could be adjusted later to
provIde adchtIOnal publIc hearings to accommodate strong public interest.
2. RevIewmg relevant plans and regulatIOns and analyzmg the need for revisIOns
Counties and cItIes not planning under RCW 36 70A040 must reVIew and evaluate theIr
polIcIes and development regulatIOns governing critical areas and natural resource lands.
CountIes and cItIes planning under RCW 36 70A040 must reVIew and evaluate all
comprehensIve plan provisIOns and development regulatIOns adopted under the OMA.
The statute does not exempt any portion of a comprehensive plan or any development
regulation from bemg subject to reVIew and evaluation. However, local governments
may use common-sense factors in determining the level of reVIew, takmg into account
when the plan and regulations were adopted and whether and how the OMA has been
amended m the mtervenmg time (see OMS' Technical Bulletins 1.2 and 1 3 for more
gUldance on thIS tOpIC)
The purpose of each jUnSdIctIOn reviewing its comprehensIve plan and development
regulations is to determIne whether they are in compliance WIth the OMA. To help with
the analysis, the OMS program has developed a lIst of questions (GMA Update. Issues to
Conszder When Reviewing Comprehensive Plans and Development Regulations) that
identifies key pomts of analysis for commumtIes to consider OMS also has produced
two checklIsts (Comprehensive Plan Checklist and Development Regulations Checklist)
to aSSIst cIties and counties m completmg theIr reVIews.
~.
The review and analYSIS should include at least the followmg:
· Each junsdictIOn should determIne whether ItS plan and regulatIOns are affected
by any amendments made to the OMA after the jurisdiction adopted ItS
comprehensIve plan or development regulatIOns (see the OMS publicatIOn, GMA
Amendments 1995 - 2003)
· Local governments are encouraged to consider emerging local and regional needs,
changes to state and federal laws, and their own progress toward meetmg OMA
goals. (See RCW 36 70A.020 for OMA goals.)
· Each local government should review the most recent population projectIOns from
3 January 15,2004
~
the Washington State Office of FinanCIal Management (OFM) to ensure that Its
comprehensive plan provIdes for the jurisdIctIOn's abIlIty to accommodate its
projected growth m populatIOn and employment conSIstent WIth county-wide 0
planmng polICIes.
. If a JurisdIctIOn has a rulIng m effect from either a growth management heanngs
board or a court of law findmg non-complIance with the GMA, the jUnschctIOn
should be sure to mcorporate the ruling mto its analysIs.
. Any preVIOUS comment letters from the Washington State Department of
Commumty, Trade and EconOmIC Development (CTED) and other state agencies
regarding conSIstency of a jUnSdIctIOn' s plan and development regulations WIth
the GMA also should be considered. (CopIes of offiCIal agency comment letters
may be obtamed upon request from GMS )
. JunsdictIOns should conSIder whether the comprehensIve plan IS mternally
conSIstent (e.g., that the Land Use and TransportatIon elements support each
other) and that the development regulatIOns are consistent WIth and Implement the
comprehensive plan. The GMA requires such conSIstency [See RCW
36 70A.040(4) and 36 70A.070 ]
The process used to complete the analysIs must proVIde for the followmg:
. An appropnate public process that provides notIce to the publIc and to affected
and interested state agencies far enough m advance to allow them to comment on
the results of the review and analYSIS (see Example processes for seven-year
GMA update at the end of thIS bulletm)
. LegIslative action by the legislative body of the cIty or county (adoptIon of a 0
resolutIon or orchnance followmg notIce and a public heanng, at a mImmum)
finding that the review and analYSIS were completed In accordance WIth RCW
36 70A.130 and documenting the assumptions, facts, analYSIS, and conclusIOns.
The findIngs for the legIslatIve actIon should clearly state the conclusions reached
regarchng which, if any, plan prOVIsIons and/or regulatIons WIll be revIsed, and that the
remaining comprehensIve plan proVISIons and development regulations are currently In
compliance with the GMA and do not need reviSIOn. The legIslatIVe action could be
taken immediately upon completion of the reVIew and analysis, or in conjunction with
the legIslative actIon for actIOn #3 below (see Example processes for seven-year GMA
update at the end of thIS bulletm)
Takmg legIslative action immedIately upon the conclusion of the reVIew and analysIs
starts the clock running on any appeal of the scope of review Withm 60 days after the
legIslative action, someone who has partICIpated m the jUnschctlon's reVIew and
evaluation process could bnng a challenge before the growth management heanngs
board allegIng that the jurisdIction IS out of complIance WIth the GMA If it does not
amend a specified sectIon of ItS comprehenSIve plan or development regulatIons.
However, such a challenge could not be brought after the 60-day appeal period has
passed, such as dunng the amendment phase of the update program (baSIC actIon #3
below) Of course, the statute does not require the legIslatIVe actIon to be taken
Immechately after completIon of the reVIew and analYSIS, and any jUnschctIon may
choose mstead to Include a finchng that the reVIew and analysis was completed as part of 0
ItS legIslative action for #3 below
4
January 15, 2004
o
3. Take legislative action
If the analysIs has identified provlSlons of the eXIstmg plan to be revised, the jurischctIOn
must take the next step by developing substitute or revIsed language to meet GMA goals
and requirements. Vanous techmcal assistance matenals are avaIlable from CTEn and
other state agencIes (see www cted.wa.gov)
Because thIS IS the final actIon cIties and counties must take m fulfillmg the seven-year
update reqUirement of RCW 36 70A.130, there are a number of scenanos to consIder (see
Example processes for seven-year GMA update at the end of this bulletm)
a) Some jUnschctIOns have already establIshed a regular program for pen odic
amendments to theIr plan (e.g., on an annual or biannual baSIS) For these
jUnsdictIOns, the process of adoptmg reVISIons Identified for the seven-year
update should be combined with the annual or bIannual amendment process
RCW 36 70A.130(2)(a) prohibits conSIderatIOn of comprehensIve plan
amendments more frequently than once per year; therefore a CIty or county may
not amend its plan under a seven-year update process and a separate annual or
bIannual process within the same year
c
b) For jurisdictions WIth lnruted resources and sIgnIficant amendments to theIr plans
and regulations, it may be necessary to complete the amendments m several
phases, perhaps over more than one year In some cases, each of these
amendments wIll be adopted through a separate ordinance or resolutIOn by the
jUnSdIctIOn's legislatIve body If this process IS used, a publIc heanng should be
conducted on each ordinance or resolution. It should be clearly IdentIfied in the
public hearing notice and In the finchngs of each ordmance or resolution that the
amendments are part of the seven-year update process. GMS recommends that
the final legislative actIOn taken upon completion of the entire seven-year update
process clearly references all preVIously adopted amendments and Includes a
finding that, taken all together, these actIOns fulfill the reqUirements of RCW
36 70A.130 ThIS final legIslative action must occur pnor to the deadlIne.
establIshed for the jUnSdICtIon m RCW 36 70A130(4)
c) If all amendments to the comprehensIve plan and development regulations to
fulfill the seven-year update reqUirement are to be adopted sImultaneously, they
must be adopted by legislative action of the legIslative body of the CIty or county
(a resolution or ordmance followmg notice and a public hearing, at a minimum)
The resolution or ordinance should include finchngs that refer to preVIOUS
legislative actions that were part of the seven-year update process (e.g.,
resolutions to complete actions #1 and #2 above), and a finding that the
jurischctIOn has completed its seven-year update reqUirement under RCW
36 70A.130
c
d) If the final legIslative action IS bemg combmed WIth the reVIew and analYSIS
action (#2 above), the orchnance or resolution should include specific findings
that the reVIew and analYSIS have been completed. The findings should mclude a
descnptIon of the reVIew and analysis that was conducted and whIch
5
January 15.2004
comprehenSIve plan provlSlons and development regulatIOns are currently m ~
compliance with the GMA and do not need revision, and whIch plan provIsions
and/or regulatIOns are being revIsed (see Example processes for seven-year GMA 0
update at the end of thIS bulletm)
e) If the reVIew and analysis conclude that the city or county completely meets all
GMA reqUIrements and no amendments to the comprehensIve plan or
development regulatIOns are necessary, it must stlll take legIslatIve actIOn. Its
legIslatIve body must adopt an ordinance or resolutIOn mcludmg specific findmgs
that the reVIew and analysIs have been completed and the plan and regulatIOns do
not need revIsion. It should also mclude a findmg that the jUnSdlctIOn has
completed its seven-year update reqUIrement under RCW 36 70A.130
Submittal of documents to CTED
Each jurisdiction must notify CTED of ItS mtent to adopt amendments to ItS plan or
regulatIOns at least SIxty days pnor to final adoption, accordmg to RCW 36 70A.106 All
adopted plans and regulatIOns, mcludmg amendments, must be transIDltted to CTED All
adopted resolutIOns regarding the GMA Update also should be transIllitted to CTED, so
that CTED data can accurately reflect the jUnsmctIOn'S fulfillment of the update
reqUIrement. TransIDlttal w1l1 allow the state to know that the GMA update was
completed by the junsmction in comphance wIth the RCW 36 70A.030 ThIS w1l1 aVOId
possIble delays m grants or other consequences because of a lack of accurate
informatIOn.
Cities or counties that do not complete seven-year updates before the deadline
o
A jurismction that has not completed the three basIc actIOns described above by the
deadline set m RCW 36 70A.130(4) would be vulnerable to a "fallure to act" petitlon to a
growth management heanngs board.
CTED cannot waive or extend ajunsmctIOn's update deadline. Cities and countles must
complete the seven-year update reqUIrement according to the estabhshed schedule to be
consIdered m compliance with the GMA. Only those counties and cltles in compliance
WIth these schedules will be ehgible to receIve funds from the Public Works Trust Fund
or the Centenmal Clean Water account (RCW 36 70A.130(7)) or to receIve preference
for grants and loans subject to the proVISIOns of RCW 43 155 050
If a local government has made SIgnificant progress on its update, but IS not able to adopt
all needed reviSIOns by theIr update deadhne, It would be prudent to take steps to
demonstrate good faith and progress. In such cases, CTED recommends the local
junsdictIOn (a) adopt, by the update deadlme, a resolution that documents the local
progress already made and containing a schedule for completing the update, and (b)
contmue moving ahead as qUIckly as possible to be in full comphance WIth the GMA.
Followmg these mtenm steps does not reheve a local government of its update
reqUIrements or Immunize it from a fallure-to-act challenge, nor does it necessanly mean
a local government will be eligible for state grants and loans. 0
6
January 15,2004
o
Potential appeals of seven-year update actions to a growth management hearings
board
A person or orgamzation with legal standing could appeal ajunsmction's resolution(s) or
ordmance(s) adopted during the seven-year update process to a growth management
heanngs board. A petltIOn for review by a hearings board potentIally could be filed on
each of the three basic actions needed to complete the seven-year update. However, a
jUnSdlctIOn can consIderably reduce ItS nsk of appeal by completmg each of the three
basic actIOns described above and taking legislatlve actIOn that clearly documents the
process followed for each actIOn, as well as the findmgs and conclusIOns of each actIOn.
As mentIOned above, the jUnSmctIOn has the optlon to take legislatlve actIOn Immemately
upon completion of each mdivldual step in the update process, or in a smgle, combmed
leglslatlve action affifIDlng all steps in the update process are complete. One advantage
of tak1ng separate legIslative actIOn immemately upon completIOn of each step in the
update process IS any appeal of each actIOn must occur wlthm SIxty days of ItS adoptlon
and pubhcatIOn. Therefore, It IS possible for the junsdiction to learn of any appeals-and
perhaps resolve them-before proceemng with the next update actlon.
GMS IS prepanng example ordinances that may be useful to local governments m
developing local ormnances for theIr legIslative actIOn(s) When completed, they will be
posted on our webslte at www cted.wa.gov/growth)
c
Contact
For more mformatIOn, contact the GMS regIonal planner for your area at (360) 725-3000,
or by mall at POBox 42525, OlympIa, Washmgton 98504-2525 GMA Update
informatIOn IS also posted on the following Web site www cted.wa.gov/growth.
o
7
January 15,2004
Washington State Counties Planning under the GMA
D Counties Fully Planning under GMA
Counties Planning for Critical Areas and
Natural Resource Lands only under GMA
8
January 15,2004
o
o
o
Example processes for seven-year GMA update
o
The examples below are summanes of some of the processes that could be used by jurisdictions to
complete their seven-year update requirements under RCW 36 70A.130 Other processes could also be
used. These are included here to provIde aSsIstance to local governments establishing theIr own local
process
A. Example WIth a smgle leglslatlve action.
1 Estabhsh and advertIse public partICIpation program.
2. Staff or consultant conducts review of entlre comprehensive plan and development regulatIOns
and analysis of needed reVlSlons based on GMA compliance.
3 Local government leglslatlve body approves work program for reVISIOns, If necessary, to
comprehensive plan and development regulatIOns
4 Needed reVISIons are completed and adopted by ordinance or resolutIOn of legislative body
followmg pubhc notlce and heanng, at a mimmum. Adopting ordinance or resolutIOn mcludes
findmgs detaihng that the local government:
· estabhshed ItS pubhc partIcipatIOn program,
· revIewed ItS entlre comprehensive plan and development regulatIOns,
· detefIDlned WhICh reVlSlons to ItS plan and regulatIOns were needed (and why other
proVISIOns of the plan and regulatIOns md not need revision),
· IS adoptmg the needed reVISIOns, and
· has completed its seven-year update reqUIrement under RCW 36 70A.130
c
B Example WIth legislatlve action immemately followmg each step
o
1 Estabhsh pubhc partICIpation program by adoptIOn of resolutIOn by leglslatlve body
2. Conduct reVIew of entIre comprehensIve plan and development regulatIOns and invite pubhc
mput.
3 Analyze plan and regulatIOns for needed reVISIons based on GMA comphance.
4 AdvertIse and conduct at least one pubhc heanng asking for pubhc comments on the results of
the reVIew and analYSIS of the plan and regulatIOns. Public notlce of the heanng states
explicitly that the heanng WIll be the final opportumty for comment on what plan provIsions
and regulatIOns should be revIsed.
5 Upon completion of the public heanng, legIslative body adopts resolution finding that the local
government has
· revIewed Its entlre comprehensIve plan and development regulatIOns,
· provided pubhc opportunity to comment on the review and suggest needed reVlSlons of the
plan and regulations,
· determined WhICh revisions to ItS plan and regulatIOns were needed (and why other
provlSlons of the plan and regulations dId not need reviSIOn), and
· established a work program for the needed reVISIons.
6 Needed reVIsions are completed and adopted by ormnance or resolution of leglslatlve body
Ormnance or resolutIOn mcludes finmngs detallmg that the local government:
. followed ItS estabhshed its public participatIOn program,
· is adoptmg the needed reVISIons, and
· has completed its seven-year update requirement under RCW 36 70A.130
9
January 15,2004
C Example wIth phased completIOn of reVISIOns to comprehenSIve plan and development regulatIOns
1 Complete steps 1 - 3 of Example A or 1 - 5 of Example B above 0
2. Work program detalls the schedule for completmg needed reVISIOns m phases, clearly statmg
each phase IS part of the revIsions needed for the reqUIred seven-year update and w1l1 be
adopted separately
3 As each revIsion or package of reVISIOns IS completed, it is adopted by ordmance or resolutIOn
of the legislative body Ormnance or resolutIOn mcludes finmngs that the local government
has
· followed its estabhshed its pubhc partIcIpatIOn program and
· IS adoptmg the revisions as part of the seven-year update reqUIrement under RCW
36 70A.130
4 When adopting the final revisIOns, the legislatlve body adopts an ormnance or resolutIOns that
includes the finmng m the preVIOUS step, and also includes findings that reference all previous
ordinances/resolutions adopting reVISIons, and that the local government has completed Its
seven-year update reqUIrement under RCW 36 70A.130
o
o
10
January 15, 2004
~
~
o
o
o
GMA Update:
Issues to Consider When Reviewing
Comprehensive Plans and Development Regulations
The Washmgton State Department ofCommumty, Trade and EconomIC Development (CTED)
and state agencIes that reVIew and comment on comprehensIve plans and development
regulatIOns have prepared the followmg set of questIOns. Its purpose IS to help gUIde
Washmgton countles and cltles wIth the reqUIred reVIew and evaluatIOn, and If necessary, the
reVISIOn of comprehensIve plans and development regulatlons for consIstency WIth the Growth
Management Act (GMA), as reqUIred by RCW 36 70A.130(l) Each county's deadlme for any
needed changes IS hsted m RCW 36 70A.130 These questlons have been deSIgned to help local
planners, elected offiCIals, plannmg commISSIons, and CItIzens focus on key aspects of CIty and
county comprehensIve plans and development regulatlons that may need reVIew due to (a)
amendments to the GMA smce the adoptIOn of local plans or regulatIOns, (b) other new laws or
events, such as Endangered SpeCIes Act hstmgs, that mIght Impact local plans or regulatIOns, and
(c) the availabihty of new data or Ideas that may be mcorporated mto plans or regulatIOns to
strengthen them.
These questIOns are not an exhaustlve hst. CTED, WIth help from state agenCIes, has also
prepared supplemental matenals that mclude' checkhsts for companng comprehensIve plans and
development regulatIOns WIth baSIC reqUIrements of the GMA, a chronologIcal order of the
amendments to the GMA smce 1995, and a summary of statutory plannmg deadlmes related to
the GMA. Other technIcal aSSIstance matenals are also aVailable on CTED's Web SIte
www cted. wa.gov/growth as they become aVailable
Please call growth management staff at CTED at (360) 725-3000 If you need further mformatIOn
on the GMA update reqUIrement or If you have questIOns about the resources hsted below
Questions shown in italics are not necessarily a requirement of the GMA. They may reflect other
laws or state-recommended approaches
Part A: Changes to the Growth Management Act
The questIOns m thIS sectlon relate to new reqUIrements, based on key amendments made to the
GMA smce 2001
Best Available Science
. Have you reVIewed your cntlcal areas ordmances to see If they mcorporate the best aVailable
SCIence and speCIal conslderatlon for anadromous fishenes as reqUIred by RCW 36 70A.172?
. DId you Identlfy sources of the best aVailable SCIence used to develop your cntlcal areas
regulatIOns? (ThIS should be mcluded m the record compIled dunng the adoptIOn of your
ordmance. )
. Does your comprehensIve plan have pohcIes that gIve gUIdance to your cntlcal areas
regulatIOns and are those pohcIes based on best aVailable SCIence?
~
(-
Resources include:
· Growth Management Act - Procedural Criteria for Adopting Comprehensive Plans and
Development Regulations - Chapter 365-190 WAC and Chapter 365-195 WAC, 2003
· RCW 36 70A.020(10), RCW 36 70A030(5), (9), and (20), RCW 36 70A060;
RCW 36 70A.170; RCW 36 70AI72, RCW 36 70A175
· Citations of Recommended Sources of Best Available Science for Designating and Protecting
Critical Areas, Washmgton State Department ofCommumty, Trade and EconomIC
Development, 2002
· Wetlands Rating System for Eastern Washington or Wetlands Rating System for Western
Washington, Washmgton State Department of Ecology, 1991 and 1993
· Stream Typmg (WAC 222-16-030), Washmgton State Department of Natural Resources
The Pnonty HabItats and SpeCIes Program (PHS), Washmgton Department ofFIsh and
Wildhfe - www wa.gov/wdfiv/hab/phspage htm
o
Essential Public Facilities
· Have you adopted a process for sItmg "secure commumty tranSItIOn faCIlItIes" conSIstent
WIth the statutory reqUIrements and rules apphcable to these facIhtIes?
· Have you adopted a process m your pohcIes and regulatIons for the IdentIficatIon and SItIng
of transportatIOn facIlItIes of statewIde or regIOnal sIgmficance?
Resources include:
· 3 ESSB 6151, Chapter 12, Laws of2001, E2
· RCW 36 70A040(7), RCW 36 70A.200
· Growth Management Act - Procedural Criteria for Adopting Comprehensive Plans and
Development Regulations - Chapter 365-190 WAC and Chapter 365-195 WAC, 2003
· Coordinating Transportation and Growth Management Planning (1998 Legislation
HB 1487 - "Level of Service Bill"), Washmgton State Department of TransportatIOn and
Washmgton State Department ofCommumty, Trade and EconomIC Development
o
General Aviation Airports
· Do your comprehenSIve plan and development regulatIOns have proVISIOns to dIscourage the
sItmg of mcompatible uses adjacent to general aVIatIOn airports?
· Have plans and regulatIOns been filed WIth the AVIatIon DIVISIon of the Washmgton State
Department of TransportatIon? Does your plan allow the SItIng and expanSIOn of general
aVIatIOn airports accordmg to your proVISIOns for sItmg essential pubhc facIlItIes and state
reqUIrements?
· Do your comprehensive plan and development regulations regulate noise and height hazards
associated with airports?
· Do land use and zoning designations in and adjacent to airports take the risk of aircraft
accidents into consideration?
Resources include:
· Airports and Compatible Land Use Planning An Introduction for Decision Makers,
AViatIOn DIVISIOn, Washmgton State Department of TransportatIOn, 1999
o
2
December 5, 2003
~
o
o
o
. AViatIon DIvIsIon, Washmgton State Department of TransportatIOn -
www wsdot. wa.gov/aviation - (360) 651-6306
. RCW 35A63.270; RCW 36 70.547, RCW 36 70A510
Integrating Environmental Review with the Permit Process
. Have you adopted regulatIons that mtegrate your envIronmental reVIew process WIth your
permIt process?
Resources include:
. Project Consistency (Chapter 365-197 WAC), Washmgton State Department of Commumty,
Trade and EconomIC Development, 2001
. State Environmental Policy Act Rules (Chapter 197 -11 WAC)
. SEP A Handbook - Washmgton State Department of Ecology -
www ecy wa.gov/programs/sea/sepalhandbk. htm
. RCW 36 70B
. Good examples of ordmances that mtegrate envIronmental reVIew WIth the permIt process are
aVailable by callmg the Washmgton State Department ofCommumty, Trade and EconomIC
Development at (360) 725-3000
Natural Resource Lands of Long-Term Commercial Significance
(Generally Applies Only to Counties)
. Do your regulatIons mclude the reqUIrement that all plats, short plats, development permIts,
and buildmg permIts wIthm 500 hundred feet of agncultural, forest, or mmerallands oflong-
term commerCial sIgmficance contam the notIce that the subject property IS wIthm or near
deSIgnated natural resource land on whIch commercIal actIVItIes may occur that are not
compatible wIth reSIdentIal development for certam penods of hmIted duratIOn? Do these
notIces for mmerallands also mform that an apphcatIOn mIght be made for mmmg-related
actIVItIes, mcludmg mmmg, extractIon, washmg, crushmg, stockpihng, blastmg, transportmg,
and recyclmg of mmerals?
. Have you assumed regulatory authority over Class IV forest practices regulated by local
government, including development on land within an urban growth area, as required under
RCW 76 09 240? Do your regulations equal or exceed State Forest Practice resource
protection rules and regulations for these forest practice activities?
. Have you reVIewed your deSIgnated mmeral resource lands and your development
regulatIOns for mmeral resource lands, takmg mto account new data?
Resources include:
. King County vs Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board, et ai,
142.WN2d543,2000
. RCW 36 70A020(8), RCW 36 70A030(2), (8), (10), and (11), RCW 36 70A060(1),
RCW 36 70A.131, RCW 36 70A.170; RCW 36 70AI77
. Growth Management Act - Procedural Criteria for Adopting Comprehensive Plans and
Development Regulations - Chapter 365-190 WAC and Chapter 365-195 WAC, 2003
(WAC 365-195-210; WAC 365-195-400; WAC 365-195-825)
3
December 5, 2003
p
Shoreline Master Programs
· Have you revIewed your Shorelme Master Program for consIstency WIth the other elements 0
of your comprehensIve plan and wIth your development regulatIOns?
· Are your "shorehne enVIronment deSIgnatIOns" consIstent WIth your zonmg?
· Have you made any reVISIOns to your Shorelme Master Program usmg the new shorelme
gUldehnes If applIcable?
Resources include:
· Washmgton State Department of Ecology - www ecy wa.gov/watershed/index.html
· Shoreline Guidelines (Chapter 173-26 WAC), subject to possible reVISIOns by the
Washmgton State Department of Ecology
· RCW 36 70A.480
Transportation
· Have you worked with your regional transportatlOn planning organization to designate
levels of service on highways that are not of statewide significance?
· Have you mcorporated the levels of servIce set by the Washmgton State Department of
TransportatIOn for hIghways of stateWIde sIgmficance and ehmmated these hIghways from
your concurrency management system?
· Does your plan mclude an mventory of state transportatIon facIlItIes m your JUrISdIctIOn's
area?
· Have you estImated the traffic Impacts to state-owned facIlItIes resultmg from your land use
assumptIons?
o
Resources include:
· Your Community's Transportation System A Transportation Element Guidebook,
Washmgton State Department ofCommumty, Trade and EconomIC Development, 1993
· Coordinating Transportation and Growth Management Planning (1998 Legislation
HB 1487 - ' Level of Service Bill"), Washmgton State Department of TransportatIOn and
Washmgton State Department ofCommumty, Trade and EconomIC Development
· RCW 36 70A020(3), RCW 36 70A.070(6), RCW 36 70A200, RCW 4706 140
· Growth Management Act - Procedural Criteria for Adopting Comprehensive Plans and
Development Regulations - Chapter 365-190 WAC and Chapter 365-195 WAC, 2003
(WAC 365-195-320; WAC 365-195-340; WAC 365-195-510; WAC 365-195-835,
WAC 365-195-840)
Urban Growth:
· Have you analyzed all actIOns to adopt or amend comprehensIve plans or development
regulatIOns proVIde suffiCIent capaCIty of land SUitable for development?
Resources include:
SSB 5602 (2003)
o
4
December 5, 2003
o
o
o
Part B: New Laws, Events, or Endangered Species Listings
That Might Affect Your Plan or Regulations
The questIOns m thIS sectIOn address some recent events and laws that may affect local plans or
regulatIOns.
Endangered Species Act
. Have species listings under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) affected your land use
assumptions, capital facilities planning, and your permit process? If so, how?
. If your jurisdiction is affected by an ESA 4(d) rule, are the requirements of a 4(d) rule, if
applicable, incorporated into your comprehensive plan policies, your development
regulations, and your critical areas ordinance?
. Will your jurisdiction need new capital facilities (e g , new infrastructure, water, and
wastewater utilities) to comply with ESA? Have they been included in the Capital Facilities
Element of your plan?
. Will your stormwater regulations or clearing and grading ordinances need to be updated to
protect fish habitat?
Resources include:
. Washmgton Department ofFIsh and Wildhfe - wwwwagov/wdfiv/hab/phspage htm
. Governor's Salmon Recovery Office - www governor wa.gov/gsro/default.htm
Natural Hazard Mitigation
. Have you considered adopting a Natural Hazard Reduction Element for your comprehensive
plan?
. In addition to the critical areas that are required to be designated and protected by the
GMA, has your jurisdiction considered designating other hazard areas, such as
wildland/urban inteiface areas vulnerable to wildfires?
. Have you used the best available science to limit the siting of essential public facilities in
known hazardous areas?
. Did you consult with your local emergency coordinator when designating critical areas
ordinances?
Resources include:
. Optional Comprehensive Plan Elementfor Natural Hazard Reduction, Washmgton State
Department of Commumty, Trade and EconomIC Development, 1999
Part C: Areas Where Local Plans and Regulations
Might Need Strengthening
The followmg questIOns address key components of local plans and regulatIOns that may need
strengthenmg to reflect new data or Ideas conSIstent WIth the GMA.
5
December 5, 2003
Capital Facilities
· Has your concurrency ordmance or other mechamsms been effectIve m provIdmg pubhc
facihtIes and servIces concurrent WIth development?
· Does your plan IdentIfy lands useful for pubhc purposes?
o
Resources include:
· Making Your Comprehensive Plan a Reality A Capital Facilities Preparation Guide,
Washmgton State Department ofCommumty, Trade and EconomIC Development, 1993
· RCW 36 70A.020(12), RCW 36 70A030(12), (13), (16), and (19), RCW 36 70A070(3),
RCW 36 70120; RCW 36 70A150
· Growth Management Act - Procedural Criteria for Adopting Comprehensive Plans and
Development Regulations - Chapter 365-190 WAC and Chapter 365-195 WAC, 2003
(WAC 365-195-040(3), WAC 365-195-200(13) and (16), WAC 365-195-210,
WAC 365-195-315, WAC 365-195-430; WAC 365-195-510; WAC 365-195-835)
Critical areas
· Do you have pohcIes m your comprehensIve plan for IdentIfymg and protectmg cntIcal
areas?
· Do your development regulatIOns protect cntIcal areas?
Resources include:
· See the resources lIsted under "Best AVailable SCIence" m Part A of thIs document.
Essential Public Facilities
· Do your plans and regulatIOns proVIde for the IdentIficatIon and sItmg of essentIal pubhc
facIlItIes?
o
Resources include:
. RCW 36 70A200
· Growth Management Act - Procedural Criteria for Adopting Comprehensive Plans and
Development Regulations - Chapter 365-190 WAC and Chapter 365-195 WAC, 2003
(WAC 365-195-340; WAC 365-195-840)
Housing
· Do your county-wIde plannmg pohcIes and your plan have targets or objectIves for provIdmg
affordable housmg SUIted to the vanous mcome levels of people who hve or work m your
commumty?
· What strategy and mechamsms do you have for achIevmg these targets?
· How has your plan and development regulatIOns proVIded for group homes, foster care
facIlItIes, accessory dwelhng umts, and manufactured housmg m accordance WIth the GMA,
Washington Laws Against Discrimination (RCW 4960222-225), and the Federal Fair
Housing Act as amended (42 USC 3602 et seq)?
· Does your plan mclude a housmg mventory and analysIs of future needs?
o
6
December 5, 2003
c
o
o
Resources include:
· Assessing Your Housing Needs A Practical Guide to Preparing a Housing Needs
Assessment under CHAS and GMA Requirements, Washmgton State Department of
Commumty, Trade and EconomIC Development, 1992
· Housing Your Community A Housing Element Guide, Washmgton State Department of
Commumty, Trade and EconomIc Development, 1993
· Affordable Housing Techniques, MumcIpal Research and ServIces Center, 1992
· "Group Homes m Washmgton State, QuestIOns and Answers," Washmgton Department of
SOCial and Health ServIces and Washmgton State Department ofCommumty, Trade and
EconomIc Development
· "Accessory Dwellmg Umt Ordmance Study and RecommendatIOns," Washmgton State
Department of Commumty, Trade and EconomIc Development, State BUIldmg Code
Council, 1994
· "New Daycare SItmg PreemptIve LegIslatIOn," ASSOCiatIOn ofWashmgton CItIes, 1994
· "Jomt Statement of the Department of JustIce and the Department of Housmg and Urban
Development on Group Homes, Local Land Use, and the FaIr Housmg Act," 1999
· RCW 36 70A020(4), RCW 36 70A070(2), RCW 36 70A200(1), RCW 3670400;
RCW 36 70A.410; RCW 36 70A.450; RCW 43 63A215
· Growth Management Act - Procedural Criteria for Adopting Comprehensive Plans and
Development Regulations- Chapter 365-190 WAC and Chapter 365-195 WAC, 2003
(WAC 365-195-310; WAC 365-195-860)
Monitoring
· Does your jurisdiction have a method for monitoring how well your comprehensive plan
policies, development regulations, and other implementation techniques are achieving your
comprehensive plan's goals and the goals of the GMA?
· Does your comprehensive plan and development regulations define a process for amending
your plan?
· Does your plan define an "emergency" for the purpose of amending your plan or
development regulations?
· Is the plan amendment process coordinated among the county and cities within a county?
Resources include:
· RCW 36 70A100; RCW 36 70A.106, RCW 36 70A130
· Growth Management Act - Procedural Criterza for Adopting Comprehensive Plans and
Development Regulations - Chapter 365-190 WAC and Chapter 365-195 WAC, 2003
(WAC 365-195-865)
Natural Resource Lands (Generally for Counties)
· Does your comprehensIve plan have pohcIes for conservmg natural resource lands and
encouragmg natural resource mdustnes?
· Do your development regulatIOns conserve natural resource lands and encourage natural
resource mdustnes?
7
December 5, 2003
Resources include:
. See the resources hsted under "Natural Resource Lands of Long-Term CommerCIal
SIgmficance" m Part A of thIs document.
o
Population
. Does your plan mdIcate the populatIOn for whIch It IS plannmg and IS thIS projectIon used
consIstently m the plan?
. Is the populatIon growth projected m your comprehensIve plan consIstent WIth the
Washmgton Office of FmancIal Management forecast for your county or the county's
subcounty allocatIon of that forecast? If not, what IS your ratIonale for usmg another figure?
. For countIes. What IS the percentage of county-wIde populatIon growth that IS allocated for
urban growth areas? Is thIS allocatIon conSIstent WIth GMA goals of encouragmg urban
growth m urban areas, reducmg sprawl, and ensunng that pubhc facihtIes and servIces are
effiCIently proVIded?
Resources include:
. Washmgton Office of FmancIal Management, Theresa Lowe, by phone at 360-902-0588
. The Art and Science of Designation Urban Growth Areas, Part II Some Suggestions for
Criteria and Densities, Washmgton State Department ofCommumty, Trade and EconomIC
Development, 1992
. Predicting Growth and Change in Your Communities A Guide to Subcounty Population
Forecasting, Washmgton State Department ofCommumty, Trade and EconomIC
Development, 1995
o RCW 36 70A.020(1) and (2), RCW 36 70A020(12), RCW 36 70A070 (second sentence), 0
RCW 36 70A070(1), RCW 36 70AIlO(2)
Public Participation
. Has your junsdIctIon estabhshed and dIstributed mformatIOn on methods for CItIzens to
partICIpate m the land use plannmg and permIt process?
Resources include:
. RCW 36 70A020(11), RCW 36 70A035, RCW 36 70A.140; RCW 36 70B
. Growth Management Act - Procedural Criteria for Adopting Comprehensive Plans and
Development Regulations - Chapter 365-190 WAC and Chapter 365-195 WAC, 2003
(WAC 365-195-600)
. A Bottom's Up Primer, A Guide to Citizen Participation, Washmgton State Department of
Commumty, Trade and EconomIC Development, 1991
. Towards Managing Growth, A Guide to Community Visioning, Washmgton State Department
ofCommumty, Trade and EconomIC Development, 1991
Rural (Counties Only)
. Do the comprehenSIve plan and development regulatIOns proVIde for rural denSItIes and uses
on rural lands?
o
8
December 5, 2003
c
o
o
Resources include:
. Defining Rural Character and Planningfor Rural Lands A Rural Element Guide,
Washmgton State Department ofCommumty, Trade and EconomIC Development, 1994
. Keeping the Rural Vision. Protecting Rural Character and Planningfor Rural Development,
Washmgton State Department ofCommumty, Trade and EconomIC Development, 1999
. RCW 36 70A030(14) and (16), RCW 36 70A070(5)
. Growth Management Act - Procedural Criteria for Adopting Comprehensive Plans and
Development Regulations - Chapter 365-190 WAC and Chapter 365-195 WAC, 2003
(WAC 365-195-330)
Subdivision Regulations
. Do your subdIVIsIOn regulatIOns encourage urban growth m urban growth areas and
dIscourage sprawl?
. Are your subdIVIsIOn regulatIOns conSIstent WIth supportmg an effiCIent transportatIOn
system and other appropnate mfrastructure?
. Are your subdIVIsIOn regulatIOns conSIstent WIth your comprehenSIve plan and the GMA?
Resources include:
. Model Code Provisions Urban Streets and Subdivisions, Washmgton State Department of
Commumty, Trade and EconomIc Development, 1998
. RCW 36 70A030(7), RCW 58 17 020; RCW 58 17 060; RCW 58 17 090; RCW 58 17 092,
RCW 58 17 100; RCW 58 17 110; RCW 58 17 140; RCW 58 17 180; RCW 58 17.330
. Growth Management Act - Procedural Criteria for Adopting Comprehensive Plans and
Development Regulations - Chapter 365-190 WAC and Chapter 365-195 WAC, 2003
Transportation
. What transportatIOn demand strategIes do you have and have they been effectIve?
. Have you deSIgnated levels of servIce for local artenals and, If apphcable, transIt routes?
. Do you have ordmances for transportatIon concurrency, conSIstent WIth RCW
3670A070(6)(b)?
Resources include:
. Your Community's Transportation System A Transportation Element Guidebook,
Washmgton State Department ofCommumty, Trade and EconomIC Development, 1993
. RCW 36 70A020(3), RCW 36 70A070(6), RCW 36 70A200; RCW 36 70A.420; RCW
36 70A.430; RCW 4706 140
. Growth Management Act - Procedural Criteria for Adopting Comprehensive Plans and
Development Regulations - Chapter 365-190 WAC and Chapter 365-195 WAC, 2003
[WAC 365-195-825(4)]
Urban Growth
(Note. By defimtlOn, urban growth areas means all unIncorporated areas so deSIgnated by a
county and all mcorporated CItIes and towns.)
. Do your urban growth areas (incorporated or not) prOVIde for achlevmg urban denSItIes,
servIces, and uses?
9
December 5, 2003
. Do your pohcIes and regulatIOns encourage urban growth m urban areas and reduce sprawl?
If so, IS your urban growth area appropnately sIzed for the populatIOn projectIOn wIthm the 0
plannmg penod?
. Is there a coordmated approach to plannmg for development m urban growth areas,
espeCially among adjacent jUnSdIctIOns?
Resources include:
. 171e Art and Science of Designating Urban Growth Areas Part IL Some SuggestlOns for
Criteria and Densities, Washmgton State Department of Commumty, Trade and EconomIC
Development, 1992
. "AppendIX A Measures to AchIeve Growth ObjectIves," Buildable Lands Program
Guidelines, Washmgton State Department ofCommumty, Trade and EconomIC
Development, 2000
. RCW 36 70A020(1) and (2), RCW 36 70A030(17) and (18), RCW 36 70A.110;
RCW 36 70A210(3)
. Growth Management Act - Procedural Criteria for Adopting Comprehensive Plans and
Development Regulations - Chapter 365-190 WAC and Chapter 365-195 WAC, 2003
(WAC 365-195-335)
Water Quality and Quantity
. Does your jurisdiction have water rights to support your plan's projected 20-year growth or
a strategy to obtain them?
. Does your stormwater regulations incorporate the Washington State Department of
Ecology's manualfor your region? 0
. Forjurzsdictions in the Puget Sound basin, have you implemented the stormwater, habitat,
shellfish, and on-site sewage programs of the 2000 Puget Sound Water Quality Management
Plan through your comprehensive plan, your critical areas ordinance, your development
regulations, and the Capital Facilities Element of your plan?
Resources include:
. Puget Sound ActIOn Team - www psat. wa.gov/Publications/Publications htm
. Stormwater Management Manualfor Western Washington, Volumes I-IV
Washmgton State Department of Ecology (also www ecy wa.gov)
. RCW 36 70A070(1), RCW 36 70A070(3)
. Growth Management Act - Procedural Criteria for Adopting Comprehensive Plans and
Development Regulations - Chapter 365-190 WAC and Chapter 365-195 WAC, 2003
(WAC 365-195-735, WAC 365-195-800)
o
10
December 5, 2003
o
GMA Update: Issues to Consider
When Reviewing and Evaluating Critical Areas Regulations and
Natural Resource Lands Designations
Growth Management ServIces at the Washmgton State Department ofCommumty, Trade and
EconomIC Development (CTED) has prepared thIS lIst of questIOns WIth aSSIstance from state
agenCIes that reVIew and comment on regulatIOns to protect cntIcal areas and deSIgnate natural
resource lands of long-term commerCial sIgmficance. Its purpose IS to provIde technIcal
aSSIstance to Washmgton's ten countIes and the CItIes wIthm them that are plannmg only for
cntIcal areas and resource lands under the Growth Management Act (GMA) m meetmg the
update reqUIrement m RCW 36 70A.130(1) ThIS statute reqUIres these CItIes and countIes to
reVIew, evaluate, and, If necessary, reVIse theIr regulatIOns to protect cntIcal areas and deSIgnate
natural resource lands oflong-term commercial sIgmficance Each county's deadlIne for any
needed changes IS hsted m RCW 36 70A.130
The questIOns below are deSIgned to help local planners, elected offiCIals, plannmg commISSIOns,
and CItIzens focus on the on key Issues as they undertake the update process. (Note Italicized
items are not necessarily requirements of the GMA, but some may relate to requirements of other
state or federal laws)
c
These questIOns are not an exhaustIve hst. CTED, WIth help from state agenCIes, has also
prepared other supplemental matenals, such as a checklIst for development regulatIOns (outlmmg
the baSIC reqUIrements of the GMA) SectIOns of the checkhst deal WIth cntIcal areas
regulatIOns' reqUIrements. Other technIcal aSSIstance matenals also are aVailable on CTED's
Web SIte. www cted. wa.gov/growth
Please call growth management staff at CTED at (360) 725-3000 If you need further mformatIon
on the Update reqUIrement or If you have questIons about the resources hsted below
General Review Issues
. Have you surveyed and IdentIfied all the types of cntIcal areas that occur m your
jUnSdIctlOn? These areas mclude wetlands, fish and wIldhfe habItat areas, areas WIth a
cntIcal rechargmg effect on aqUIfers used for potable water, fish and wildhfe habItat
conservatIOn areas, frequently flooded areas, and geologIcally hazardous areas.
. Have you assembled all current and relevant maps and data relatmg to cntIcal areas and
natural resource lands aSSOCiated WIth your county?
. Have you reVIewed your cntIcal areas ordmance to ensure they.
(a) ProVIde deSIgnatIOn cntena for cntIcal areas that occur m your jUnSdIctlOn, and
(b) ProVIde protectIOn of the functIOns and values of your deSIgnated cntIcal areas?
. Have you reVIewed your deSIgnatIOns for agnculture, forest, and mmeral resource lands of
long-term commerCial sIgmficance? Are resource lands bemg conserved and are there
opportumties for deslgnatmg new resource lands to serve future natural resource needs? Are
o resource lands deSIgnatIOns conSIstent WIth the GMA?
· Has your JunsdIctIOn dIstributed mformatIOn on methods for cItIzens to partIcIpate m the
reVIew, evaluatIOn, and reVISIon, If necessary, of your ordmances for cntIcal areas and
natural resource lands?
o
Resources include:
· RCW 36 70A.020(8) and (10), RCW 36 70A030(5), (7), (8), (9), (10), (11), and (20),
RCW 36 70A050; RCW 36 70A.060; RCW 36 70A131, RCW 36 70A170;
RCW 36 70A.175, RCW 36 70AI77
· Growth Management Act - Procedural Criteria for Adopting Comprehensive Plans and
Development Regulations - Chapter 365-190 WAC and Chapter 365-195 WAC, 2003
(Chapter 365-190 WAC)
Best Available Science
· Have you revIewed your cntIcal areas ordmances to see If they mcorporate the best aVailable
SCIence and specIal consIderatIOn for anadromous fishenes as reqUIred by RCW 36 70Al72?
o Does your ordmance IdentIfy and CIte sources of the best available SCIence mcludmg current
mappmg and other data as well as studIes used to develop management recommendatIOns m
your cntIcal areas regulatIOns? ThIS mformatIOn should be mcluded In the record compIled
dunng the adoptIOn of your ordmance conSIstent WIth WAC 365-195-915
Resources include:
· RCW 36 70A172
· Critical Areas Assistance Handbook, Protecting Critical Areas Within the Framework of the
Washington Growth Management Act, Washmgton State Department of Commumty, Trade
and EconomIc Development, 2003
· Growth Management Act - Procedural Criteria for Adopting Comprehensive Plans and
Development Regulations - Chapter 365-190 WAC and Chapter 365-195 WAC, 2003
(Chapter 365-195-900 through 925)
· Citations of Best Available Science for Designating and Protection Critical Areas,
Washmgton State Department ofCommumty, Trade and EconomIc Development, 2001
· Wetlands Rating Systemfor Eastern Washington or Wetlands Rating System for Western
Washington, Washmgton State Department of Ecology, 1991 and 1993
· Stream Typmg (WAC 222-16-030), Washmgton State Department of Natural Resources
· The Pnonty HabItats and SpeCIes Program (PHS), Washmgton Department ofFIsh and
Wildhfe - www wa.gov/wdfiv/hab/phspage htm
o
Ideas for Strengthening Your Regulations
Forest practices
· Have you considered using your critical areas regulations as minimum standards for those
Class IV forest practices regulated by local government? (See RCW 76 09 240)
o lfso, have those regulations been approved by the Washington State Department of Natural
Resources for use in regulating forest practices?
Endangered Species Act
· Is your jurisdiction affected by an ESA 4(d) rule?
o
December 5, 2003
Page 2
o
c
o
. If applicable, are the requirements of a 4(d) rule incorporated into your critical areas
ordinance?
Resources include:
. Washmgton Department ofFIsh and Wildhfe - wwwwa.gov/wdfw/hab/phspage.htm
. Governor's Salmon Recovery Office - www governor wa.gov/gsro/default.htm
Monitoring
. Does your jurisdiction have a method for monitoring how well your natural resource lands
and critical areas ordinances and other implementation techniques are protecting critical
areas?
. Does your comprehensive plan and development regulations define a process for amending
your regulations as new information and data becomes available?
. Has your jurisdiction adopted an "adaptive management" policy and program? WAC 365-
195- 920 provides guidance on criteria for addressing inadequate scientific information.
Natural hazard mitigation
. In addition to the critical areas that are required to be designated and protected by the
GMA, has your jurisdiction considered designating other hazard areas, such as
wildfire/urban interface areas vulnerable to wildfires?
. Have you used the best available information and data to determine that regionally
important public facilities (hospitals, schools, landfills, etc.) not be allowed to locate in
known hazardous areas?
. Did you consult with your local emergency coordinator when designating critical areas
ordinances?
Resources include:
. Optional Comprehensive Plan Elementfor Natural Hazard Reduction, Washmgton State
Department ofCommumty, Trade and EconomIC Development, 1999
December 5, 2003
Page 3