Chapter 22.20
NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION—GENERAL MANAGEMENT AREAS
Sections:
22.20.010 Practicable alternative test.
22.20.020 Development review for water resource zone protection.
22.20.030 Development review for wildlife habitat protection.
22.20.040 Development review for rare plant protection.
22.20.010 Practicable alternative test.
A. An alternative site for a proposed use shall be considered practicable if it is available and the proposed use can be undertaken on that site after taking into consideration cost, technology, logistics, and overall project purposes. A practicable alternative does not exist if a project applicant satisfactorily demonstrates all of the following:
1. The basic purpose of the use cannot be reasonably accomplished using one or more other sites in the vicinity that would avoid or result in less adverse effects on wetlands, ponds, lakes, riparian areas, wildlife areas and sites, or plant areas and sites;
2. The basic purpose of the use cannot be accomplished by reducing its proposed size, scope, configuration, or density, or by changing the design of the use in a way that would avoid or result in less adverse effects on wetlands, ponds, lakes, riparian areas, wildlife areas and sites, or plant areas and sites; and
3. Reasonable attempts were made to remove or accommodate constraints that caused a project applicant to reject alternatives to the proposed use. Such constraints include inadequate infrastructure, parcel size, and land use designations. If a land use designation or recreation intensity class is a constraint, an applicant must request a management plan amendment to demonstrate that practicable alternatives do not exist. (Ord. 2021-05 (Att. A), 12-14-21; Ord. 2018-04 (Exh. A), 4-17-18; Ord. 2008-06 (part): Ord. 2006-11 (part): Ord. 2005-07 (part))
22.20.020 Development review for water resource zone protection.
A. Water Resource Boundaries and Buffer Zones. Except as otherwise specified, water resources and their buffers shall be retained in their natural condition. Where buffer disturbance occurs during project development, revegetation with native vegetation shall be required and shall provide and maintain habitat diversity beneficial to fish, wildlife and native plants.
B. Delineating Water Resource Boundaries.
1. Wetlands.
a. The approximate location and extent of wetlands in the National Scenic Area are shown on the National Wetlands Inventory Maps (U.S. Department of Interior, 1987). In addition, the list of hydric soils and the soil survey maps shall also be used an indicator of wetlands in the National Scenic Area. Some wetlands may not be shown on the wetlands inventory, hydric soils, or soil survey maps. Wetlands discovered by the administrator during inspection of a potential project site shall be delineated and protected.
b. The project applicant shall be responsible for providing a wetland delineation conducted by a qualified professional using the procedures specified in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Wetlands Research Program Technical Report Y-87-1, online edition, and applicable regional supplements as may be revised from time to time).
c. The administrator may verify the accuracy of, and render adjustments to, a wetlands boundary delineation. If the adjusted boundary delineation is contested by the project applicant, the administrator shall obtain professional services to render a final delineation, at the applicant’s expense.
2. Streams, Ponds, and Lakes. The project applicant shall be responsible for determining the exact location of the ordinary high-water mark or, for the Columbia River, the normal pool elevation. The administrator may verify the accuracy of, and render adjustments to, an ordinary high-water mark or normal pool delineation. If the adjusted boundary delineated is contested by the applicant, the administrator shall obtain professional services to render a final delineation, at the applicant’s expense.
C. Standard Water Resource Buffer Zones. Buffers shall be required for all regulated activities adjacent to water resources. All buffers shall be measured from the wetland, stream, lake, or pond boundary as established pursuant to subsection (B) of this section.
1. Wetland, Lake, and Pond Buffers. The width of wetland, lake and pond buffers shall be based on the dominant vegetation community that exists in a buffer zone. The dominant vegetation community in a buffer zone is the vegetation community that covers the most surface area of that portion of the buffer zone that lies between the proposed activity and the affected wetland, lake or pond. Vegetation communities are classified as forest, shrub or herbaceous.
a. A forest vegetation community is characterized by trees with an average height equal to or greater than twenty feet, accompanied by a shrub layer. Trees must form a canopy cover of at least forty percent and shrubs must form a canopy cover of at least forty percent. A forest community without a shrub component that forms a canopy cover of at least forty percent shall be considered a shrub vegetation community.
b. A shrub vegetation community is characterized by shrubs and trees that are greater than three feet tall and form a canopy cover of at least forty percent.
c. An herbaceous vegetation community is characterized by the presence of herbs, including grass and grasslike plants, forbs, ferns, and nonwoody vines.
d. Buffer zones shall be measured outward from a wetlands, lake or pond boundary on a horizontal scale that is perpendicular to the wetland, lake or pond boundary. The following buffer zone widths shall be required:
i. Forest communities: seventy-five feet.
ii. Shrub communities: one hundred feet.
iii. Herbaceous communities: one hundred fifty feet.
2. Stream Buffers. The following buffer widths shall be required:
a. Streams used by anadromous or resident fish (tributary fish habitat), special streams, intermittent streams that include year-round pools, and perennial streams: one hundred feet.
b. Intermittent streams, provided they are not used by anadromous or resident fish: fifty feet.
c. The Wind River, Little White Salmon River, and White Salmon River are identified by the Environmental Protection Agency as priority cold water refuge fish habitat streams and shall have a buffer width of two hundred feet.
D. Site Plans for Uses in Water Resources and Buffer Zones. In addition to the information required for all site plans, site plans for proposed uses in water resources or their buffer zones shall include: a site map prepared at a scale of one inch equals one hundred feet (1:1,200), or a scale providing greater detail; the exact boundary of the water resource, ordinary high-water mark or normal pool elevation, and the buffer zone; a description of actions that would affect the water resource.
E. Review Uses in Wetlands. The following uses may be allowed in wetlands, subject to compliance with the approval criteria for review uses in wetlands in subsection (F) of this section.
1. The modification, expansion, replacement, or reconstruction of serviceable transportation or other public infrastructure (this does not include private roads and driveways), if such actions would not:
a. Increase the size of an existing structure by more than one hundred percent;
b. Result in a loss of water resource functions; and
c. Result in a loss of water quality, natural drainage, and fish and wildlife habitat.
2. The construction, modification, expansion, replacement, or reconstruction of minor water-related recreation structures that are available for public use. Structures in this category shall be limited to: boardwalks; observation decks; interpretative aids, such as kiosks and signs; and trails and paths, provided their surface is not constructed of impervious materials.
3. The construction, modification, expansion, replacement, or reconstruction of minor water-dependent structures that are placed on pilings, if the pilings allow unobstructed flow of water and are not placed so close together that they effectively convert an aquatic area to dry land. Structures in this category shall be limited to public and private docks and boat houses, and fish and wildlife management structures that are constructed by federal, state, or tribal government resource agencies.
F. Approval Criteria for Review Uses in Wetlands. The uses listed in subsection (E) of this section may be allowed only if they meet all of the following criteria:
1. Practicable alternatives for locating the structure outside of the wetland do not exist.
2. All reasonable measures have been applied to ensure that the use will result in the minimum loss of wetlands and in the minimum degradation of ecological functions, water quality, existing contour, vegetation, fish and wildlife resources, and hydrology.
3. The use will be constructed using best management practices. Best management practices can include measures to prevent soil erosion, the introduction and spread of invasive plants and aquatic species, and other impacts to plants, wildlife, soil, and water. Boardwalks and observation decks shall be constructed using nontoxic materials to protect water quality.
4. Areas disturbed during construction of the use will be rehabilitated to the maximum extent practicable.
5. The use complies with the approval criteria for other review uses in water resources in subsection (I) of this section.
6. Proposed uses in wetlands shall be evaluated for adverse effects, including cumulative effects, and adverse effects shall be prohibited.
7. The use complies with all applicable federal, state, and local laws.
G. Review Uses in Nonwetland Water Resources and Buffers. The following uses may be allowed in water resources (except wetlands) and may be allowed in all water resource buffer zones (including wetland buffer zones), subject to compliance with the approval criteria in subsection (H) of this section.
1. The modification, expansion, replacement or reconstruction of serviceable structures, if such actions would not:
a. Increase the size of an existing structure by more than one hundred percent.
b. Result in a loss of wetlands acreage or functions.
c. Result in a loss of water quality, natural drainage, and fish and wildlife habitat.
d. Intrude further into a water resource or water resource buffer. Structures shall be considered intruding further into a water resource or associated buffer if any portion of the modified, expanded, replaced, or reconstructed structure is located closer to the water resource or buffer than the existing structure.
2. The construction, modification, expansion, replacements, or reconstruction of minor water-related recreation structures that will be available for public use. Structures in this category shall be limited to:
a. Boardwalks;
b. Trails and paths, provided their surface is not constructed of impervious materials;
c. Observation decks; and
d. Interpretative aids, such as kiosks and signs.
3. The construction, modification, expansion, replacements, or reconstruction of minor water-dependent structures that are placed on pilings, if the pilings allow unobstructed flow of water and are not placed so close together that they effectively convert an aquatic area to dry land. Structures in this category shall be limited to:
a. Public and private docks and boat houses; and
b. Fish and wildlife management structures that are constructed by federal, state, local or tribal government resource agencies.
H. Approval Criteria for Review Uses in Nonwetland Water Resources. The uses listed in subsection (G) of this section may be allowed only if they meet all of the following criteria:
1. Practicable alternatives for locating the structure outside of the water resource or buffer zone do not exist.
2. All reasonable measures have been applied to ensure that the structure will result in the minimum alteration or degradation of ecological functions, water quality, existing contour, vegetation, fish and wildlife resources, and hydrology.
3. The structure will be constructed using best management practices. Best management practices can include measures to prevent soil erosion, the introduction and spread of invasive plants and aquatic species, and other impacts to plants, wildlife, soil, and water. Boardwalks and observation decks shall be constructed using nontoxic materials to protect water quality.
4. Areas disturbed during construction of the structure will be rehabilitated to the maximum extent practicable.
5. Proposed uses in water resources and their buffer zones shall be evaluated for adverse effects, including cumulative effects, and adverse effects shall be prohibited.
6. The structure complies with all applicable federal, state, and local laws.
I. Approval Criteria for Other Uses in Water Resources. Uses that are not allowed outright or listed in subsections (E) and (G) of this section, may be allowed in water resources (except wetlands) and in all water resources buffer zones (including wetland buffer zones), subject to compliance with the requirements below. These requirements also apply to uses in subsection (E) of this section.
1. The proposed use is water-dependent, or is not water-dependent but has no practicable alternative as established in Section 22.20.010.
2. The proposed use is in the public interest. The following factors shall be considered when determining if a proposed use is in the public interest:
a. The extent of public need for the proposed use (for uses in wetlands, public need is limited to uses necessary to alleviate a current public safety issue supported by evidence establishing the safety issue);
b. The extent and permanence of beneficial or detrimental effects that the proposed use may have on the public and private uses for which the property is suited;
c. The functions and size of the water resource that will be affected;
d. The economic value of the proposed use to the general area;
e. The ecological value of the water resource and probable effect on public health and safety, fish, plants and wildlife;
f. Groundwater and surface-water quality will not be degraded by the proposed use;
g. Those portions of a proposed use that are not water-dependent or have a practicable alternative will be located outside of water resource zones; and
h. The proposed use complies with all applicable provisions of this title and other laws.
3. Proposed uses in water resources and water resource buffers shall be evaluated for adverse effects, including cumulative effects, and adverse effects shall be prohibited.
4. Measures will be applied to ensure that the proposed use results in the minimum feasible alteration of the resource. As a starting point, the following measures shall be considered when new development and uses are proposed in water resources or water resource buffers:
a. Ecological functions, contour, and hydrology shall be maintained. Nonstructural controls and natural processes shall be used to the greatest extent possible.
b. Construction shall occur during periods when fish and wildlife are least sensitive to disturbance. Work in streams, ponds, and lakes shall be conducted during the periods specified by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.
c. All vegetation shall be retained to the greatest extent practicable, including wetland, aquatic, and riparian vegetation.
d. Bridges, roads, pipelines and utility corridors, and other water crossings shall be minimized and should serve multiple purposes and properties.
e. Stream channels shall not be placed in culverts unless absolutely necessary for property access. Bridges are preferred for water crossings to reduce disruption to streams, ponds, lakes, and their banks. When culverts are necessary, oversized culverts with open bottoms that maintain the channel’s width and grade should be used. State agencies with permitting responsibility for culverts shall be consulted.
f. Temporary and permanent control measures shall be applied to minimize erosion and sedimentation when water resource areas are disturbed, such as slope netting, berms and ditches, tree protection, sediment barriers, infiltration systems, and culverts.
g. Measures shall be taken to prevent the introduction or spread of invasive plants or aquatic species.
5. Groundwater and surface-water quality will not be degraded by the proposed use.
6. Those portions of a proposed use that are not water-dependent or have a practicable alternative will not be located in water resources or buffer zones.
7. The proposed use complies with all applicable federal, state, and county laws.
8. Areas that are disturbed during construction of the proposed use will be rehabilitated. When a project area cannot be completely restored or rehabilitated, such as when a boat launch permanently displaces aquatic and riparian areas, enhancement shall also be required.
9. Unavoidable impacts to water resources will be offset through the deliberate restoration, creation, or enhancement of impacted resources. Wetland restoration, creation, and enhancement are not alternatives to the regulations listed above; they shall be used only as a last resort to offset unavoidable water resource impacts.
10. Restoration, creation, and enhancement shall improve water quality, natural drainage, and fish and wildlife habitat of the affected wetland, stream, pond, lake, or buffer zone. When a project area has been disturbed in the past, it shall be rehabilitated to its natural condition to the maximum extent practicable. The following water resource guidelines shall apply:
a. Impacts to wetlands shall be offset by restoring or creating new wetlands or by enhancing degraded wetlands. Wetlands restoration shall be the preferred approach when wetlands are impacted.
b. Water resources restoration and enhancement shall be conducted in accordance with a wetlands compensation plan or water resources mitigation plan. Voluntary enhancement project applications shall be encouraged. See Section 22.12.070.
c. Water resources shall be replanted with native plant species that replicate the original vegetation community.
d. Natural hydrologic conditions shall be replicated, including current patterns, circulation, velocity, volume, and normal water fluctuation.
e. Natural stream channel and shoreline dimensions shall be replicated, including depth, width, length, cross-sectional profile, and gradient. Riparian areas shall be rehabilitated to their original configuration, including slope and contour.
f. The bed of the affected aquatic area shall be rehabilitated with materials appropriate for the channel and hydrologic features.
g. Fish and wildlife habitat features shall be replicated, including pool-riffle ratios, substrata, and structural habitat features including large woody debris and boulders.
h. Rehabilitation and enhancement efforts shall be completed no later than ninety days after the water resource or buffer zone has been altered, or as soon thereafter as is practicable.
i. The size of replacement wetlands shall equal or exceed the following ratios. The first number specifies the acreage of wetlands requiring replacement and the second number specifies the acreage of wetlands altered or destroyed.
i. Restoration: two-to-one.
ii. Creation: three-to-one.
iii. Enhancement: four-to-one.
j. Replacement wetlands shall replicate the functions of the wetland that will be altered such that improvement of wetlands functions occurs.
k. Replacement wetlands should replicate the type of wetland that will be altered. If this standard is not feasible or practical due to technical constraints, a wetland type of equal or greater benefit may be substituted; provided, that improvement of wetlands functions occurs.
l. Wetlands restoration, creation or enhancement should occur within one thousand feet of the affected wetland. If this provision is not practicable due to physical or technical constraints, replacement shall occur within the same watershed and as close to the altered wetland as practicable.
m. Restoration, creation and enhancement efforts should be completed before a water resource is altered. If it is not practicable to complete all restoration, creation and enhancement efforts before the water resource is altered, these efforts shall be completed before the new use is occupied or used.
n. Within five years after a wetland is restored, created or enhanced, or three years after a stream, pond, lake, or riparian area is restored, at least seventy-five percent of the replacement vegetation shall survive. The project applicant shall monitor the hydrology and vegetation of the replacement water resource, provide reports, and shall take corrective measures to ensure that it conforms with the approved wetlands compensation plan or water resources mitigation plan and this requirement.
J. Wetland Compensation Plans. A wetland compensation plan shall be prepared by the applicant whenever an applicant is required to restore, create or enhance wetlands. A written plan addressing the standards in this section is also required for voluntary enhancement projects. All wetlands compensation plans must be approved by the local government, after consultation with federal and state agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands. Wetlands compensation plans shall satisfy the following requirements and any requirements of federal and state agencies:
1. Be prepared by a qualified professional hired by a project applicant;
2. Provide for land acquisition (if applicable), construction, maintenance and monitoring of replacement wetlands;
3. Include an ecological assessment of the wetland that will be altered and of the wetland that will be restored, created or enhanced, including information on flora, fauna, hydrology and wetlands functions;
4. Assess the suitability of the proposed site for establishing a replacement wetland, including a description of the water source and drainage patterns, topography, wildlife habitat opportunities and value of the area to be converted;
5. Include a plan view and cross-sectional, scaled drawings, topographic survey data, including elevations at contour intervals no greater than one foot, slope percentages and final grade elevations, and other technical information in sufficient detail to explain and illustrate:
a. Soil and substrata conditions, grading, erosion and the sediment control needed for wetland construction and long-term survival;
b. Include planting plans that specify native plant species, quantities, size, spacing or density, source of plant materials or seeds, timing, season, water and nutrient requirements for planting and, where appropriate, measures to protect plants from predation;
c. Set out water quality parameters, water source, water depths, water control structures, and water level maintenance practices needed to achieve the necessary hydrologic conditions;
6. Establish a five-year monitoring, maintenance and replacement program that, at a minimum, requires provision of an annual report to the administrator that documents milestones, successes, problems, and contingency actions, including photographs, taken from points identified in the program not less than annually; and
7. Include proof that the applicant has sufficient fiscal, technical and administrative competence to successfully execute a wetlands compensation plan.
K. Water Resources Mitigation Plans. Mitigation plans shall be prepared when a project applicant is required to rehabilitate or enhance a stream, pond, lake or buffer zone. A written plan addressing the standards in this section is also required for voluntary enhancement projects. Plans shall satisfy the following requirements and any others required by federal and state agencies:
1. Mitigation plans are the responsibility of the project applicant. Plans shall be prepared by qualified professionals.
2. All plans shall include an assessment of the physical characteristics and natural functions of the affected stream, pond, lake or buffer zone. The assessment shall include hydrology, flora and fauna.
3. Plan view and cross-sectional, scaled drawings; topographic survey data, including elevations at contour intervals of at least two feet, slope percentages, and final grade elevations; and other technical information shall be provided in sufficient detail to explain and illustrate each of the following:
a. Soil and substrata conditions, grading and excavation, and erosion and sediment control needed to successfully rehabilitate and enhance the stream, pond, lake and buffer zone.
b. Planting plans that specify native plant species, quantities, size, and spacing or density; source of plant materials or seeds; timing, season, water and nutrient requirements for planting; and where appropriate, measures to protect plants from predation.
c. Water quality parameters, construction techniques, management measures, and design specifications needed to maintain hydrologic conditions and water quality.
4. A minimum three-year monitoring, maintenance and replacement program shall be included in all mitigation plans. At a minimum, a project applicant shall prepare an annual report that documents milestones, successes, problems and contingency actions. Three years after an aquatic area or buffer zone is rehabilitated or enhanced, at least seventy-five percent of the replacement vegetation shall survive. The project applicant shall monitor the replacement vegetation and take corrective measures to meet this guideline. Photographic monitoring shall be used to monitor all rehabilitation and enhancement efforts.
5. A project applicant shall demonstrate sufficient fiscal, administrative, and technical competence to successfully execute and monitor a mitigation plan.
L. Hazard Tree Removal. Where a hazard tree, as defined in Section 22.04.010, is demonstrated to exist, it may be removed or converted to a wildlife snag only if the hazard cannot be eliminated by pruning, crown thinning, or other technique that retains some of the tree’s ecological function. Where the hazard is not immediately apparent to the administrator, the applicant shall submit a report from a qualified professional that documents the hazard. 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 year. Replacement trees shall be of a native species at least four feet in height. (Ord. 2021-05 (Att. A), 12-14-21; Ord. 2018-04 (Exh. A), 4-17-18; Ord. 2008-06 (part): Ord. 2006-11 (part): Ord. 2005-07 (part))
22.20.030 Development review for wildlife habitat protection.
A. Review Uses—Wildlife. Except uses allowed without review pursuant to Section 22.10.040, review uses may be allowed within one thousand feet of a priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site, subject to review by the administrator for compliance with the provisions for the protection of scenic, natural, cultural, and recreational resources and the following:
1. Site Plans and Field Surveys.
a. In addition to the information otherwise required for site plans, uses within one thousand feet of a priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site shall include a map prepared at a scale of one inch equals one hundred feet (1:1,200) or a scale providing greater detail.
b. A field survey to identify priority habitat or sensitive wildlife sites shall be required for:
i. Land divisions that create four or more parcels;
ii. Recreation facilities that contain parking areas for more than ten cars, overnight camping facilities, boat ramps, or visitor information and environmental education facilities;
iii. Public transportation facilities that are outside improved rights-of-way;
iv. Electric facilities, lines, equipment and appurtenances that are thirty-three kilovolts or greater; and
v. Communications, water and sewer, and natural gas transmission (as opposed to distribution) lines, pipes, equipment and appurtenances and other project related activities, except when all of their impacts will occur inside previously disturbed road, railroad or utility corridors, or existing developed utility sites, that are maintained annually.
c. Field surveys shall cover all areas affected by the proposed use or recreation development. They shall be conducted by a professional wildlife biologist hired by the project applicant. All priority habitat and sensitive wildlife sites discovered in a project area shall be described and shown on the site plan map.
2. Review by Department of Fish and Wildlife.
a. Site plans and field surveys for uses proposed within one thousand feet of a priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site shall be submitted by the administrator to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and shall be reviewed by WDFW to determine if the proposed use would adversely affect a priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site. Within thirty days the WDFW biologists shall review the site plan and their field survey records to:
i. Identify/verify the precise location of the priority habitat or wildlife site,
ii. Ascertain whether the priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site is active or abandoned, and
iii. Determine if the proposed use may compromise the integrity of the wildlife habitat or site or occur during the time of the year when wildlife species are sensitive to disturbance, such as nesting or rearing seasons. In some instances, state wildlife biologists may conduct field surveys to verify wildlife data and assess the potential effects of a proposed use.
b. The following factors may be considered when site plans are reviewed:
i. Biology of the affected wildlife species.
ii. Published provisions regarding the protection and management of the affected wildlife species.
iii. Physical characteristics of the subject parcel and vicinity, including topography and vegetation.
iv. Historic, current and proposed uses in the vicinity of the priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site.
v. Existing condition of the priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site and the surrounding habitat and the useful life of the area or site.
c. Oregon white oak shall not be removed if practicable alternatives exist. If no practicable alternative exists, a wildlife survey and mitigation plan shall be required. This guideline shall not apply to forest practices that are otherwise allowed and that do not violate conditions of approval for other approved uses.
d. Review by the administrator under this section may terminate if, after consultation with the WDFW, the administrator determines that:
i. The sensitive wildlife site is not active; or
ii. The proposed use would not compromise the integrity of the priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site or occur during the time of the year when wildlife species are sensitive to disturbance.
e. If the administrator, after consultation with WDFW, determines that the proposed use would have only minor effects on the priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site that could be eliminated through mitigation measures recommended by the state wildlife biologist, or by simply modifying the site plan or regulating the timing of new uses, a letter shall be sent to the project applicant that describes the effects and recommends measures needed to eliminate them.
f. If the project applicant accepts the recommendations of the administrator, the administrator will incorporate them into the staff report and, if applicable, the administrative decision, and then the wildlife protection process may conclude.
g. The administrator shall keep on record and address any written comments submitted by WDFW in its staff report and, if applicable, the administrative decision.
h. The administrator shall make a final decision on whether the proposed use would be consistent with this section. If the administrator’s decision contradicts the comments submitted by the WDFW, then the administrator shall justify how the contrary conclusion was determined.
3. The proposed use shall be evaluated for adverse effects, including cumulative effects, and adverse effects shall be prohibited.
4. If the administrator discovers a new protected wildlife location during the review process, the administrator shall submit this information to the appropriate state agency to be updated in its species databases.
5. Wildlife Mitigation Plans. If the administrator, after consultation with WDFW, determines that a proposed use is likely to adversely affect a priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site, then a wildlife mitigation plan shall be required. The primary purpose of the plan is to document the special characteristics of a project site and the habitat requirements of affected wildlife species. The information in the plan shall provide a basis for the applicant to redesign the proposed use in a manner that protects priority habitats and sensitive wildlife sites, maximizes their development options, mitigates temporary impacts to the sensitive wildlife site or buffer zone, and offsets unavoidable negative impacts to priority habitat and sensitive wildlife sites. Wildlife mitigation plans shall meet the following criteria:
a. Wildlife mitigation plans shall be prepared by a professional wildlife biologist hired by the project applicant.
b. All relevant background information shall be documented and considered, including biology of the affected species, published protection and management provisions, physical characteristics of the subject parcel, past and present use of the subject parcel, and habitat value of the wildlife site.
c. Where applicable, the core habitat of the rare wildlife species shall be delineated. It shall encompass the sensitive wildlife area or site and the attributes or key components that are essential to maintain the long-term use and integrity of the wildlife area or site.
d. A wildlife buffer zone shall be established. It shall be wide enough to ensure that the core habitat is not adversely affected by new uses, or natural forces, such as fire and wind. Buffer zones shall be delineated on the site plan map and shall reflect the physical characteristics of the project site and the biology of the affected species.
e. The size, scope, configuration or density of new uses within the core habitat and the wildlife buffer zone shall be regulated to protect the rare wildlife species. The timing and duration of all uses shall also be regulated to ensure that they do not occur during the time of the year when wildlife species are sensitive to disturbance. The following provisions shall apply:
i. New uses shall generally be prohibited within the core habitat. Exceptions may include uses that have temporary and negligible effects, such as the installation of minor underground utilities or the maintenance of existing structures.
ii. Intensive uses shall be generally prohibited in wildlife buffer zones. Such uses may be conditionally authorized when a wildlife area or site is inhabited seasonally, provided they will have only temporary effects on the wildlife buffer zone and rehabilitation or enhancement will be completed before a particular species returns.
f. Rehabilitation and enhancement actions shall be required when new uses are authorized within wildlife buffer zones. When a buffer zone has been altered in the past, it shall be rehabilitated to its natural condition to the maximum extent practicable. When complete rehabilitation is not possible, such as when new structures permanently displace wildlife habitat, enhancement shall also be required. Enhancement shall achieve no net loss of the integrity of the wildlife area or site. Rehabilitation and enhancement actions shall be documented in the wildlife mitigation plan and shall include a map and text.
g. The project applicant shall prepare and implement a three-year monitoring plan when the affected priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site is occupied by a species that is listed as endangered or threatened pursuant to federal or state wildlife lists. At a minimum, the project applicant shall prepare an annual report and shall track the status of the priority habitat or sensitive wildlife site and the success of rehabilitation or enhancement actions.
h. At the end of three years, rehabilitation and enhancement efforts may conclude if they are successful. In instances where rehabilitation and enhancement efforts have failed, the monitoring process shall be extended until the applicant satisfies the wildlife mitigation plan requirements.
i. Wildlife mitigation plans shall be submitted by the administrator to the WDFW.
i. WDFW shall have thirty days from the date that a wildlife management plan is mailed by the administrator within which to submit written comments to the administrator.
ii. The administrator shall retain in the record and address any written comments submitted from WDFW in its staff report and, if applicable, the administrative decision.
iii. Based on comments submitted from WDFW, the administrator shall make a final decision on whether the proposed use would be consistent with the wildlife provisions of this title.
iv. If the final decision contradicts the comments submitted by WDFW the administrator shall justify how the contrary conclusion was determined.
B. Approval Criteria for Fences in Deer and Elk Winter Range. New development permits issued by the administrator shall include a requirement that, in deer and elk winter range, construction of new and replacement fences shall be subject to the following:
1. New fences in deer and elk winter range may be allowed only when necessary to control livestock or pets or to exclude wildlife from specified areas, such as gardens, priority habitats, or sensitive wildlife sites. Fenced areas shall be the minimum necessary to meet the needs of the project applicant.
2. New and replacement fences in winter range shall comply with the guidelines in the Forest Service document Specifications for Structural Range Improvements (Sanderson et al. 1990), as summarized below and may be revised from time to time, unless the applicant demonstrates the need for an alternative design. To allow deer and other wildlife safe passage:
a. The top wire shall not be more than forty-two inches high to make it easier for deer to jump over the fence.
b. The distance between the top two wires shall be at least ten inches to make it easier for deer to free themselves if they become entangled.
c. The bottom wire shall be at least sixteen inches above the ground to allow fawns to crawl under the fence. It should consist of smooth wire because barbs often injure animals as they crawl under fences.
d. Stays or braces placed between strands of wire shall be positioned between fence posts where deer are most likely to cross. Stays create a more rigid fence, which allows deer a better chance to wiggle free if their hind legs become caught between the top two wires.
3. Woven wire fences may be authorized only when a project applicant clearly demonstrates that such a fence is required to meet their specific needs, such as controlling hogs and sheep or the protection of crops. (Ord. 2021-05 (Att. A), 12-14-21; Ord. 2018-04 (Exh. A), 4-17-18; Ord. 2008-06 (part): Ord. 2006-11 (part): Ord. 2005-07 (part))
22.20.040 Development review for rare plant protection.
A. Review Uses. Except uses allowed without review as listed in Section 22.10.040, review uses may be allowed within one thousand feet of a rare plant, subject to the provisions for the protection of scenic, natural, cultural, and recreational resources and the following:
B. Site Plans and Field Surveys.
1. In addition to the information otherwise required in site plans, site plans for uses within one thousand feet of a rare plant site shall include a map prepared at a scale of one inch equals one hundred feet (1:1,200) or a scale providing greater detail.
2. A field survey to identify rare plants shall be required for:
a. Land divisions that create four or more parcels;
b. Recreation facilities that contain parking areas for more than ten cars, overnight camping facilities, boat ramps, and visitor information and environmental education facilities;
c. Public transportation facilities that are outside improved rights-of-way;
d. Electric facilities, lines, equipment and appurtenances that are thirty-three kilovolts or greater; and
e. Communications, water and sewer, and natural gas transmission (as opposed to distribution) lines, pipes, equipment and appurtenances and other project related activities, except when all of their impacts will occur inside previously disturbed road, railroad or utility corridors, or existing developed utility sites, that are maintained annually.
3. Field surveys shall cover all areas affected by the proposed use or recreation facility. They shall be conducted when plants are expected to be flowering or most easily detectable.
4. Field surveys shall be conducted by a person with recognized expertise in botany or plant ecology hired by the project applicant.
5. Field surveys shall identify the precise location of the rare plants and delineate a two-hundred-foot buffer zone.
6. The results of a field survey shall be shown on the site plan map and kept confidential by the administrator.
C. Review by the Washington Natural Heritage Program (WNHP).
1. Site plans and field surveys for uses proposed within one thousand feet of a rare plant species shall be submitted by the administrator to WNHP and shall be reviewed by WNHP to determine if a proposed use could affect rare plants or buffer zones of rare plants.
2. Within twenty days, WNHP staff shall review the site plan and their field survey records to:
a. Identify/verify the precise location of the affected plants; and
b. Delineate a two-hundred-foot buffer zone on the project applicant’s site plan.
3. If the field survey records of the WNHP are inadequate, the project applicant shall hire a person with recognized expertise in botany or plant ecology to ascertain the precise location of the affected plants.
4. The administrator shall submit a copy of all field surveys to the WNHP. The latter shall have twenty days from the date that a field survey is mailed within which to submit written comments to the administrator. WNHP should respond within the twenty days, even if the reply is as simple as “the agency needs an additional number of days (WNHP to specify the number of days) to review this field survey.”
5. The administrator shall keep on record and address any written comments submitted by the WNHP in its staff report and if applicable, the administrative decision.
6. The administrator shall make a final decision on whether the proposed use would be consistent with this section. If the administrator’s decision contradicts the comments submitted by the WNHP, the administrator shall justify how the contrary conclusion was determined.
D. Proposed uses within one thousand feet of a rare plant species shall be evaluated for adverse effects, including cumulative effects, and adverse effects shall be prohibited.
E. Buffer Zones—Reduction of Buffer Zones.
1. A two-hundred-foot buffer zone shall be maintained around rare plants. Buffer zones shall remain in an undisturbed natural condition.
2. New uses shall be prohibited within rare plant species buffer zones, unless it is in accordance with the variance provisions of Section 22.06.040 and the project applicant prepares a mitigation plan that complies with subsection (F) of this section.
3. Buffer zones may be reduced if a project applicant demonstrates that intervening topography, vegetation, manmade features, or natural plant habitat boundaries negate the need for a two-hundred-foot radius. Under no circumstances shall the buffer zone be less than twenty-five feet.
4. Requests to reduce buffer zones shall be considered if a professional botanist or plant ecologist hired by the project applicant:
a. Identifies the precise location of the rare plants;
b. Describes the biology of the rare plants; and
c. Demonstrates that the proposed use will not have any negative effects, either direct or indirect, on the affected plants and the surrounding habitat that is vital to their long-term survival.
d. All requests shall be prepared as a written report. Published literature regarding the biology of the affected plants and recommendations regarding their protection and management shall be cited. The report shall include detailed maps and photographs.
5. The administrator shall submit all requests to reduce rare plant species buffer zones to the WNHP. The latter shall have twenty days from the date that such a request is mailed within which to submit written comments to the administrator.
6. The administrator shall keep on record and address any written comments submitted by the WNHP in its staff report and if applicable, the administrative decision.
7. The administrator shall make a final decision on whether the reduced buffer zone is justified. If the administrative decision contradicts the comments submitted by the WNHP, the administrator shall justify how the contrary conclusion was determined.
F. Rare Plant Mitigation Plans.
1. If a proposed use must be allowed within a rare plant buffer zone in accordance with the variance provisions allowed under Section 22.06.040, then the project applicant shall prepare a mitigation plan. Mitigation plans shall minimize and offset unavoidable impacts that result from a new use that occurs within a rare plant buffer zone as the result of a variance. All plans shall be the responsibility of the applicant and shall meet the following provisions:
a. Mitigation plans shall be prepared by a professional botanist or plant ecologist hired by a project applicant.
b. Construction, protection, and rehabilitation activities shall occur during the time of the year when ground disturbance will be minimized and protection, rehabilitation, and replacement efforts will be maximized.
c. Rare plants that will be altered shall be transplanted or replaced, to the maximum extent practicable. “Replacement” is used here to mean the establishment of a particular plant species in areas of suitable habitat not affected by new uses. Replacement may be accomplished by seeds, cuttings or other appropriate methods. Replacement shall occur as close to the original plant site as practicable. The project applicant shall ensure that at least seventy-five percent of the replacement plants survive three years after the date they are planted.
d. Rare plants and their surrounding habitat that will not be altered shall be protected and maintained. Appropriate protection and maintenance techniques shall be applied, such as fencing, conservation buffers, livestock management and noxious weed control.
e. Habitat of a rare plant that will be affected by temporary uses shall be rehabilitated to a natural condition.
f. Protection efforts shall be implemented before construction activities begin. Rehabilitation efforts shall be implemented immediately after the plants and their surrounding habitat are disturbed.
g. Rare plant mitigation plans shall include maps, photographs and text. The text shall:
i. Describe the biology of rare plant species that will be affected by a proposed use.
ii. Explain the techniques that will be used to protect rare plants and their surrounding habitat that will not be altered or destroyed.
iii. Describe the mitigation actions that will minimize and offset the impacts that will result from a proposed use.
iv. Include a three-year monitoring, maintenance and replacement program. The project applicant shall prepare and submit to the administrator an annual report that documents milestones, successes, problems, and contingency actions.
2. The administrator shall submit all mitigation plans to the WNHP. The latter shall have twenty days from the date that a mitigation plan is mailed within which to submit written comments to the administrator. WNHP should respond within the twenty days, even if the reply is as simple as “the agency needs an additional number of days (WNHP to specify the number of days) to review this plan.
3. The administrator shall keep on record and address any written comments submitted by the WNHP in its staff report and, if applicable, the administrative decision.
4. The administrator shall make a final decision on whether the mitigation plans are adequate. If the administrative decision contradicts the comments submitted by WNHP, the administrator shall justify how the contrary conclusion was determined. (Ord. 2021-05 (Att. A), 12-14-21; Ord. 2018-04 (Exh. A), 4-17-18; Ord. 2008-06 (part): Ord. 2006-11 (part): Ord. 2005-07 (part))