|
Description:
|
| | |
File Archived
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
1/26/2006
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Final Building Inspection
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
8/25/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Change Status to RENEWED
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
6/21/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Foundation Inspection
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
6/21/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Approve Permit-UF
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
6/15/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Issue Building Permit (F)
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
6/15/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Approve Permit-UF
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
6/14/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Print Dummy UDC Permit-UF
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
6/14/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Review Complete-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
6/14/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Additional Info Request-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
6/14/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
PLAN CHK - Addt'l Info Request
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
6/4/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Additional Info Request-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
6/14/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Det. of Completeness-UF
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
5/27/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Application Received-UF
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
5/26/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Building Permit Application(F)
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
5/24/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
App Substantially Complete-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
5/27/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Case Entered
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
5/24/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Plan Check
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
6/1/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Septic Review Complete-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
5/25/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Contractor License/Bond Info
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
5/25/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Stormwater Review-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
5/27/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Env. Sensitive Area Review-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
6/14/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Consistency Review-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
6/14/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
RAP Review Complete-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
6/14/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
Bld Security/hooded lights
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Lighting fixtures shall be designed and hooded to prevent the light source from being directly visible from outside the boundaries of the property. The intensity or brightness of all lighting, during construction and after project completion shall not adversely affect the use of surrounding properties or adjoining rights-of-way.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
Bld Exterior height lights
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Exterior lighting for commercial and industrial uses shall not exceed thirty feet (30') in height from the finished grade. Exterior lighting for residential uses shall not exceed twenty feet (20') in height from the finished grade, excepting when such lighting is an integral part of a building or structure. Ground level lighting is encouraged.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
Bld Setbacks
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Minimum setback from Griffith Point Rd right-of-way is 20 ft. Minimum side and rear setbcaks are 5 ft. Environmentally Sensitive Areas further impact setback. In addition the detached garage shall be setback entirely off of the designated septic easement.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
Bld building height
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The building height is not to exceed 35 feet.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
Bld lot coverage
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Maximum lot coverage is not to exceed 25%. Lot coverage is defined as amount of impervious surface which includes roof tops, driveways, concrete, etc.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
Outdoor Residential Storage
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Outdoor residential storage shall be maintained in an orderly manner and shall create no fire, safety, health or sanitary hazard.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
Unlicensed/Inoperable Vehicles
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Not more than two (2) unlicensed or inoperable vehicles shall be stored on any lot less than one-half acre unless totally screened from view of neighboring dwellings and rights-of-way. Such screening shall meet all applicable performance and development standards specific to the district in which the storage is kept, and shall be in keeping with the character of the area. Screening shall meet the requirements of Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 6. Outdoor storage of thirteen (13) or more unlicensed or inoperable vehicles is prohibited except in those districts where specified as an automobile wrecking yard or junk (or salvage) yard and allowed as a Permitted Use in Table 3-1 of the UDC, and such storage shall meet the requirements of UDC Section 4.10. In no case, shall any such unlicensed or inoperable vehiclesbe stored in an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA).
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
C-MIN REQ #2
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The project shall comply with Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention (SWPP) Elements #1 through #12 of the Department of Ecology's Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington to control stormwater, erosion and sediment during construction. BMPs shall address permanent measures to stabilize soil exposed during construction, and in the design and operation of stormwater and drainage control systems.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
C-FUTURE WETLAND DELINEATION
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Any future development on site shall accompany a wetland delineation report prepared either by a biologist with wetland expertise or an individual or firm who has been certified by the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Region 10, to perform wetland delineations.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
Wetland Setback
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
A setback of 50-feet, measured perpendicularly from the wetland edge, shall be permanently maintained as a buffer. No filling, grading, clearing, or other alteration of the wetland or its buffer is allowed.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
Identify Wetland Buffer
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
A permanent physical separation along the upland boundary of the wetland buffer area shall be installed and permanently maintained. Such separation can include installing logs, trees, a hedgerow, or any other prominent physical marking approved by the UDC Administrator.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
Mark Wetland Buffer Drng Cnstrctn
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Buffer perimeters shall be marked with temporary signs at an interval of one per parcel or every one hundred (100) feet, whichever is less. Signs shall contain the following statement: "Wetland & Buffer - Do Not Remove or Alter Existing Vegetation."
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
150% Wetland Setback
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The project is located in close proximity to an identified wetland and is subject to the delineation provisions of Section 3.6.9 of the Jefferson County Unified Development Code. Based upon the proposed location of the project in relation to the identified wetland, the applicant has agreed to maintain a buffer (setback) that exceeds the standard buffer requirements by fifty (50) percent. The applicant acknowledges the additional setback and agrees to maintain the extra 50 percent buffer, therefore, waiving the wetland delineation requirements of the Unified Development Code.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
Aquifer Recharge Conditions (SFR)
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas may require special protection measures to mitigate water quality degradation. The submitted proposal does not require additional aquifer protection measures. However, during construction the project shall follow the Best Management Practices (BMPs) and facility design standards as identified and defined in the Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
Hi Risk SIPZ-Mand Water Cons
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
MANDATORY MEASURES OF HIGH RISK SIPZ:
Water conservation measures:
1. Roof and other intercepted precipitation shall be routed to on-site detention ponds and/or other approved means and allowed to be released to the soil slowly.
2. Water collected from Storm water and roof catchments may be used for watering lawns and gardens. Unless catchment water has been treated to meet drinking water standards, there shall be no cross connections allowed between the potable supply and impounded water.
3. Water withdrawn from wells on each property shall not be used for watering of lawns and/or gardens.
4. Ground water withdrawn from each property shall be restricted to a rate of three (3) gallons per minute.
5. Installation of water conserving fixtures such as low flow toilets, faucets and shower restrictors and other water saving plumbing fixtures.
6. Landscaping plan (xeriscaping, native vegetation with minimal amounts of irrigation).
Please NOTE that the above listed measures are not intended to be exhaustive, but rather is intended to be illustrative of the types of water conservation measures.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
Hi Risk SIPZ-Mand Potable Water
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
MANDATORY MEASURES FOR HIGH RISK SIPZ:
1. For proof of potable water on a building permit application, applicant must utilize DOH-approved public water system if available.
2. If public water is unavailable, a qualifying alternative system may be used as proof of potable water or an individual well may be used as proof of potable water subject to the following requirements:
a. Variance from Chapter 173 WAC standards granted by Ecology per WAC 173-160-106 for a new groundwater well within 100 feet of a sea-salt water intrusion area per WAC 173-160-171 (i.e., within 100 feet of a groundwater source showing chloride concentrations above 200mg/L or within 100 feet of the marine shoreline); or for an existing or proposed groundwater well not subject to an Ecology variance, applicant must provide evidence through a hydrogeologic assessment (relevant components of an Aquifer Recharge Area Report per UDC 3.6.10.e) of a reasonable probability that the subject aquifer will not be degraded by the proposed use of well.
b. Installation of a flow meter.
c. On-going well monitoring for chloride concentration.
d. Submittal of flow and chloride data to the County per monitoring program.
3. If public water is unavailable, a qualifying alternative system may be used as proof of potable water.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-ZON
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
This parcel has been designated as Rural Residential 1:5 under the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map effective August 28, 1998.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-SEP EASEMENT
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
There is a recorded Declaration of Easement under AFN 413141, granting an easement for the placement, maintenance, construction, reconstruction, repair and upkeep of a primary and reserve drainfield for septic tank and sewer line for the benefit of parcel 021 324 011.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-RAP
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Griffith Point Rd is a county local access road (C592009). A road approach was reviewed under RAP00-00066, and an address of 500 Griffith Point Rd has been assigned to the parcel.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-SITE VISIT
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Development Review staff conducted a site visit on June 9, 2004. The site visit and environmental sensitive areas maps identify the proposed building site is located near a mapped wetland. There is a wetland delineation report prepared by Polaris Engineering and Surveying Inc dated June 23, 1997 on Parcel 021 324 033 (Approximately 2000 ft North of the proposed parcel) and indicated a Class II wetland. This Class II wetland spread over 10 parcels to the South and the proposed parcel is one of them. The wetland has been disturbed by various developments. The major vegetations found on site are salmonberry, elderberry, fern, alder and cedar trees. Based on the site visit, County staff classified the wetland on site as a Class III wetland. Proponent has agreed to maintain a minimum buffer of 75 ft from the edge of the wetland to the building site, a delineation is therefore waived for the detached garage.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-Confirmed ESAs
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The application was reviewed by the Jefferson County Department of Community Development staff on May 27, 2004 for the potential presence of Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs) under the provisions of the Unified Development Code (UDC). After an initial Geographic Information Systems mapping review and an investigative site inspection, the following ESAs were confirmed to be present on the subject property: Wetlands, Seismic Hazard Areas Susceptible Aquifer Recharge Protection Areas and High Risk Seawater Intrusion Protection Zones (SIPZ).
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-Aquifer Recharge Area
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Aquifer Recharge Areas in Jefferson County are characterized by porous geological formations that allow percolation of the surface water into the soils and the underlying zone of saturation. Aquifers are geologic formations that contain sufficient saturated permeable material to yield significant quantities of water to wells and springs. Aquifers serve as the source of drinking water within most of the rural portions of Jefferson County.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-Critical Aquifer Recharge Area
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas are defined as Seawater Intrusion Areas, and Special Aquifer Recharge Protection Areas and the following land uses located within Susceptible Aquifer Recharge Areas (1) All Industrial Land Uses (2) All Commercial Uses (3) All Rural Residential Land Uses requiring a Discretionary Use or Conditional Use Permit (4) All Rural Residential Land Uses with nonconforming uses that would otherwise require a Discretionary Use or Conditional Use Permit (5) Unsewered Planned Rural Residential Developments (6) Unsewered residential development with gross densities greater than one unit per acre. All of the above listed uses shall be subject to the applicable requirements and standards of the Jefferson County Unified Development Code.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-Geohazard Area
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Geologically Hazardous Areas in Jefferson County are characterized by slope, soil type, geologic material, and groundwater that may combine to create problems with slope stability, erosion, and water quality during and after construction or during natural events such as earthquakes or severe rainstorms.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-Buffers
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Buffers are areas that shall be maintained in their natural condition, however, minor pruning or alteration of vegetation may be permitted as long as the function and character of the buffer are not diminished.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-Native Vegetation List
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Among the native conifer species which may be used in buffers or for re-vegetation include, but are not limited to: Grand Fir (Aibes grandis), Sitka Spruce (Picea Sitchensis), Shore Pine (Pinus Contorta), Douglas Fir (Pseudotsuga Menziesii), Western Red Cedar (Thuja Plicata), and Western Hemlock (Tsuga Heterophylla).
Among native tree species which may be used includes: Vine Maple (Acer Circinatum), Big-Leaf Maple (Acer Macrophyllum), Red Alder (Alnus Rubra), Pacific Madrone (Arbutus Menziesii), Quaking Aspen (Populus Tremula), Black Cottonwood (Populus Trichocarpa), Bitter Cherry (Prunus Emarginata), Oregon White Oak (Quercus Garryana), Cascara (Rhamnus Purshiana), Pacific Willow (Saliz Lasiandra), and Scouler's Willow (Saliz Scouleriana).
Among the native shrub species which may be used are: Sevice-Berry (Amalanchier Alnifolia), Red Osier Dogwood (Cornus Stolonifera) Salal (Gaultheria Shallon), Ocean Spray (Holodiscus Discolor), Indian Plum (Oemlaria Cerasiformis), Pacific Ninebark (Physocarpus Capitus), Red Flowering Currant (Ribes Sanguineum), Wild Rose (Rosa Nutkana), Swamp Rose (Rosa Pisocarpa), Willows (Salix ssp.), Red Elderberry (Sambucus Racemosa), Snowberry (Symphoricarpos Albus), Evergreen Huckleberry (Vaccinium Ovatum), Red Huckleberry (Vaccinium Parvifolium).
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-SIPZ
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Marine shorelines and islands are susceptible to a condition that is known as seawater intrusion. Seawater intrusion is a condition in which the saltwater/freshwater interface in an aquifer moves inland so that wells drilled on upland areas cannot obtain freshwater suitable for public consumption without significant additional treatment and cost. Maintaining a stable balance in the saltwater/freshwater interface is primarily a function of the rate of aquifer recharge (primarily through rainfall) and the rate of groundwater withdrawals (primarily through wells). The Washington Department of Ecology is the agency with statutory authority to regulate groundwater withdrawal for individual wells in Jefferson County. New development, redevelopment, and land use activities on islands and in close proximity to marine shorelines in particular should be developed in such a manner to maximize aquifer recharge and maintain the saltwater/freshwater balance to the maximum extent possible by infiltrating stormwater runoff so that it recharges the aquifer.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-High Risk SIPZ
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The parcel is located within a High Risk SIPZ (seawater intrusion protection zone) according to the County GIS map. There are mandatory measures identified in the Jefferson County Seawater Intrusion Policy (Resolution 44-22, effective September 23, 2002) that apply to well drilling proposals and building permit applications on existing lots of record.
A High Risk SIPZ is defined as: areas within 1,000 feet of a groundwater source with a history of chloride analyses above 200 milligrams per liter (mg/L).
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-Stormwater
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The applicant is proposing to create or add 600 square feet of impervious surface and 576 square feet of land disturbing activities. Sections 6.6 and 6.7 of the Jefferson County Unified Development Code requires that your proposal shall adhere to Best Management Practices (BMPs).
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-SEPA Exempt
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Jefferson County determined that this proposal is categorically exempt from review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(i).
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-Site Plan Changes
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The revised site plan as submitted on June 14, 2004 has been reviewed for consistency under the UDC, and has been approved by Jefferson County Department of Community Development. Any modifications, changes, and/or additions to the stamped, approved site plan dated June 14, 2004 shall be resubmitted for review and approval by Jefferson County Department of Community Development.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-Approval for _____ Only
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
This approval is for a detached garage only. Any future permits on this site are subject to review for consistency with applicable codes and ordinances and does not preclude review and conditions which may be placed on future permits.
|
|