|
Description:
|
| | |
Close Case "F"
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
5/1/2017
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Inspection Reminder Sent (2nd)
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
3/31/2017
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Inspection Reminder Sent (1st)
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
3/31/2017
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Approve Permit-UF
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
12/29/2005
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Review Complete-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
12/28/2005
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Det. of Completeness-UF
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
11/1/2005
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Ntc of App +14-Publish-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
10/31/2005
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Ntc of App +14-APO-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
10/31/2005
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
App Substantially Complete-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
10/31/2005
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Case Entered
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
10/28/2005
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Stormwater Review-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
12/28/2005
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Env. Sensitive Area Review-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
12/28/2005
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Consistency Review-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
12/28/2005
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
RAP Review Complete-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
12/28/2005
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
C-AIR
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The proposal shall have a water truck on-site to control dust from the mineral extraction areas. The operator shall ensure that mineral extraction will be done in a manner that will ensure that dust from the mineral extraction does not leave the land owner's properties and impact adjacent land owners. (Authority- Sections 4.24 (3b), (6b), & (7b)).
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
C-RECLAMATION SLOPES
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Reclaimed areas associated with this proposal shall have slopes ranging from 2:1 to 3:1 (horizontal to vertical). Final contours shall be in compliance with the DNR Reclamation Plan. (Authority-application and Section 4.24 (5b) of UDC).
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
C-STORMWATER
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
This proposal shall conform with the Stormwater Drainage Report (Log item 4) prepared by Team 4 Engineering dated October 25, 2005.
Runoff from the mineral extraction and processing areas shall be retained on-site and shall conform to the WA State Department of Ecology Sand and Gravel Permit (WAG 50-1237). (Authority-application & Sections 4.24(3b) & 6.7 of UDC).
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
C-STABILATION OF RECLAIMED AREAS
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Topsoil, slash and root wads shall be placed on the final slopes as soon as practical after final grading. These measures should ensure that erosion from wind or rain does not occur. (Authority-application & Sections 4.24(3b) & 6.7 of UDC).
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
C-10 ACRE LIMIT
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
To ensure that the proposal does not exceed 10 acres of disturbed area, the applicant is required to submit a report on July 1, 2006 and December 31, 2006 and bi-annually thereafter that includes documentation of the amount of disturbed and reclaimed areas within Segments L & M to Jefferson County. This documentation shall be in the form of a survey or GIS points. Once an area is reclaimed to DNR's specification no additional reports will be required for the reclaimed area. (Authority- Section 4.24(2a) of UDC).
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
C-NOISE
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The proposal shall not result in a noise disturbance, which is defined by exceeding the noise standards found in WAC 173-60 (Authority-Sections 4.24(6b) of UDC).
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
C-LIGHTING
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
All outdoor and security lights shall be focused downward to avoid glare onto surrounding areas. (Authority- Sections 4.24(3b), & 4.24(7b), and 6.14 (lighting) of UDC).
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
C-RECLAMATION PLAN
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Prior to the implementation of the proposal, a Reclamation Plan is required from WA State DNR meeting the requirements of the Surface Mining Act (RCW 78.44). (Authority-Section 4.24(1b)of UDC).
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
C-OFF SITE IMPACTS
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
If the proposed mineral extraction results in probable significant adverse impacts (noise, vibration, dust, traffic, etc) to off site properties or the public that can not be mitigated, then a conditional use permit would be required. (Authority-Section 4.24 (7b) of the UDC).
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-LOG ITEMS
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The following log items are part of the record for this review.
1. Application 10/25/2005
2. Site Plans 10/25/2005
3. Environmental Checklist 10/25/2005
4. Stormwater Drainage Report 10/25/2005
5. Reclamation Narrative & DNR forms 10/25/2005
6. Notice of Completeness 10/31/2005
7. Reviewer Letter 11/01/2005
8. Certificate of mailing, publication, and posting 11/02/2005
9. Three Comment Letters
a) Gendler & Mann, LLP 11/30/2005
b) Pacific Groundwater Group Tech. Memo 11/30/2005
c) Larry Mayes e-mail 11/09/2005
10.DOE Sand and Gravel General Permit
11.Final MDNS for Ace Paving (ZON 98-41) 6/1/1999
12.Robinson & Noble CARA Report 2/25/1999
13.Robinson & Noble CARA Report 6/3/1999
14.Noise Report on FHM Shine Hub 10/1/2002
15.Supplemental Noise Report on Wahl 2/1/2003
16.Hearing Examiner decision (ZON 98-41) 6/29/1999
17.Wahl Visual Analysis (Available at DCD office) 6/01/2003
18.Record for MLA 02-235 (690 ac. MRL) 7/6/2004
19. GIS Mapping 10/31/2005
20 Photographs of the site 11/16/2005
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-MINING PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Mineral Extraction and Processing Performance Standards (Section 4.24 of UDC).
In addition to meeting all other applicable requirements of this Code, including this Section 4.24, all new mineral extraction and mineral processing activities located outside of an approved mineral resource land (MRL) overlay district designation (as specified in Section 3.6.3) shall be subject to the following standards:
1(a). New mineral extraction and mineral processing activities in rural residential districts shall require a conditional use permit subject to a Type III permit approval process.
STAFF COMMENT: This proposal is located within the Commercial Forest Designation, where mineral extraction is a permitted use.
2(a). The total disturbed area of mineral extraction, mining and quarrying sites (excluding access roads) and any associated mineral processing activities shall not exceed 10 acres. Any proposed mineral extraction which would create disturbed areas in excess of ten (10) gross acres shall require an MRL designation in accordance with Section 3.6.3 of this UDC.
STAFF COMMENT: The existing Shine Hub area is 144 acres in size and is comprised of mineral extraction and processing areas. This area is designated a MRL, and is not subject to this requirement.
Although the term "disturbed area" is defined by RCW 78.44.031(5) of the Surface Mining Act, the 10-acre limit on disturbed area is a requirement of the UDC and is administered by DCD. The proposed 10 acre mineral extraction proposal is located outside of an area designated a MRL. Mining operations located outside of MRL are limited to less than10 acres of disturbed area.
A previous mining proposal (MLA 04-549) to add 10 acres of mining area (Segments I, J & K) adjacent to the Shine Hub was approved by Jefferson County on November 19, 2004. It became apparent once mineral extraction was started that this area did not have the desired gravel needed to meet the applicant's needs and this area is the process of being reclaimed (see photos Log item 20).
Approximately 74 acres of mining area is currently in various stages of reclamation. The previous 10-acre area authorized by MLA 04-549 is being reclaimed, as evidenced by the placement of topsoil, slash and root wads over the area, which is ready for the planting of trees. This area is no longer being utilized for mineral extraction, processing, or any mining related activity. In addition, based on the location of the gravel resources, the proposed mineral extraction area sought by this application is not located adjacent to the MLA 04-549.
Based on the above this proposal does not violate Section 4.24(2)(a).
The following standards apply to all surface mining and reclamation activities:
1(b). All surface extraction shall be performed in full compliance with the Washington State Surface Mining Act (RCW 78.44). Other extraction must conform with all applicable Washington state laws.
STAFF COMMENT: This standard requires all mineral extraction to comply with the RCW 78.44. This proposed mineral extraction area would have approximately 10 acres of disturbed area. The disturbed area would be comprised of mineral extraction area only since all of the processing and stockpiling would be occurring within the existing 144-acre Shine Hub that is a MRL.
2(b). Applications for development permits for extraction shall be accompanied by a report prepared by a professional geologist. The report shall include at least the following information:
a. Types of materials present on the site;
b. Quantity and quality of each material;
c. Lateral extent of deposit(s);
d. Depth of deposit(s);
e. Depth of overburden; and,
f. Method of extraction.
STAFF COMMENT: This information is provided in the DRASTIC evaluation and the Critical Aquifer Recharge Report that was conducted by Robinson and Noble, Inc. In addition, this information has been obtained through test pits and drilling of the proposed mining ar
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-SEPA
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Because this proposal entails over 500 cubic yards of material, this proposal is subject to the the State Environmental Policy Act. An environmental checklist (Log item 3) was submitted with this proposal. The threshold determination for this proposal incorporates the Final Modified MDNS issued for Ace Paving Conditional Use Application (ZON 98-41) within the 144 acre mineral extraction and processing area, which was issued by Jefferson County DCD on June 1, 1999. The Final Modified MDNS for ZON 98-41 is Log item 11 of this review.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-SEPA ANALYSIS
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Summary of Potential Impacts from the proposal:
EARTH: The county's GIS mapping (Log item 19) indicates that a portion of the proposed mineral extraction area is located in a Landslide Hazard I Area (slight). This is based on the percent slope of this area and the type of soil. The landslide hazard is addressed by the nature of the use (mineral extraction and forestry). The reclamation of the site will ensure that the final slopes are appropriate for this type of material and are stable. No Geotechnical report was required for this proposal.
The proposal mineral extraction is less than 10 acres. Mineral extraction is regulated by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources through a Reclamation Permit. A reclamation narrative has been provided as part of this proposal (Log item 5). The proposal includes final reclamation slopes between 2:1 and 3:1 (horizontal to vertical). In addition, topsoil, slash and root wads should be placed on the final slopes as soon as practical after final grading. These measures should ensure that erosion from wind or rain does not occur. The proposal is not likely to result in a probable significant adverse impact to earth.
AIR: Dust and air emissions from the processing activities (asphalt plant, crushing, screening, storage/stockpile areas, and truck loading areas) would be controlled by an air permit required from the Olympic Region Clean Air Authority (ORCAA). FHM currently has a permit from the ORCAA for their Shine Hub operation.
The ORCAA has three general requirements:
1.) Procedural (i.e. obtaining permits for crusher, sorters, asphalt plant, etc.); 2.) Prohibitions (i.e. not having dust leave the land owners properties and impacting adjacent land owners); 3.) Performance standards (i.e. watering down haul roads).
Generally, dust from the mineral extraction (like scooping up sand or gravel
and putting into a truck) without processing is Jefferson County's responsibility to control.
The mineral extraction from Segments L & M would be located approximately 1,000 feet further away from the closest residences that the current mining activities being conducted in the south eastern corner of the Shine Hub. The additional distance would reduce dust impacts.
In addition, the proposed mining area is in an area that has less wind exposure than the current mining areas located near the ridge along the eastern portion of the Shine Hub. The reclamation of the eastern edge of the Shine Hub will eventually establish trees that will catch dust.
If dust from the mineral extraction becomes a problem, the ORCAA has the ability to issue fines for any nuisance through their general requirements. The proposal has been required to have a water truck on-site to control dust from the mineral extraction areas. The proposal is not likely to result in a probable significant adverse impact to air.
WATER:
Surface: Based upon DNR FPA permits completed in the area, studies submitted for this proposal, and a site visit conducted by DCD, the area of the proposed mineral extraction does not contain any surface water bodies. Berms and mining concaved areas will ensure that no water leaves the mineral extraction areas.
Groundwater: Water usage for the facility would not change with adding 10 acres of additional mineral extraction to the existing operations at the Shine Hub.
The GIS mapping of the property indicates that this area is designated a Susceptible Aquifer Recharge Area. However, the GIS mapping only provides general information while site specific studies are more accurate at determining the existence of critical aquifer recharge areas.
A DRASTIC Evaluation dated August 19, 1998 was conducted by Robinson and Noble, Inc. for a 100-acre study area centered around the proposed asphalt plant. This study area includes the proposed 10-acre expansion being reviewed through this permit. The DRASTIC Evaluation resulted in a DRASTIC index of 14
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-SEPA NOTICE, PROCESS & COMMENTS
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
SEPA
Reviewed under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) by Jefferson County acting as lead agency. Notice of Type I Land Use Application (MLA05-00630) and Preliminary Threshold Determination for a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) utilizing the optional process (WAC 197-11-355) was published in the November 2, 2005 edition of the Jefferson County Port Townsend Leader.
On November 2, 2005 notice was sent to agencies, the applicant/representative, and surrounding landowners.
The Notice was posted on the site on November 3, 2005.
A letter was received from Gendler & Mann, LLP dated November 30, 2005, representing the Hood Canal Coalition (Log 9A). This letter also incorporate a visual analysis, conducted by Pacific Groundwater Group, on the potential visual impacts of the proposal (Log 9B). Their letter expressed concerns regarding the visual impacts of the proposal and other potential 10-acre proposals. The letter also expressed concerns about the 10-acre limit of mining areas outside of MRL. Finally, the letter indicated that Pope Resources timber management within the Thorndyke Tree Farm should be coordinated with FHM mineral extraction and processing activities.
STAFF COMMENT: Visual impacts are addressed in the Staff Comment in Section .
4.24(3)(b)(2) of this permit. Issues related to 10-acre limit of disturbed areas are addressed in the Staff Comment of Section 4.24(2)(a) of this permit. The issue of multiple 10-acre segments was addressed in the Non-Project SEIS completed for a comprehensive plan proposed by FHM for a 690-acre MRL (MLA 02-235). DCD has the broad authority to regulate 10-acre mining proposals through Section 4.24(3)(b)(3) of the UDC and through the SEPA Process required for each proposal that exceed 500 cubic yards of grading or excavation. Furthermore, the applicant has made known its desire to move the mineral extraction to the Wahl Extraction Area (MLA 03-377), but there are considerable monitoring, permitting, and infrastructure required before the Wahl Extraction Area may occur. Issues related to DCD authority to regulate forestry is addressed in the Forest Management Section of this review.
An e-mail was received from Larry Mayes on November 9, 2005 (Log item 9C).
STAFF COMMENT: Many of the issues raised in the e-mail are addressed in the Staff Comment above. The Pit-to-Pier proposal (MLA 03-155) to construct a pier on Hood Canal, conveyor system, and increased mineral extraction and processing is independent of this proposal.
The Final Threshold Determination is incorporated into this decision.
There is no Administrative Appeal process under the UDC for Type I permit as specified by Section 8.10(12) of the UDC. Appeal of a Type I permit requires a Judicial Appeal as specified by Section 8.5(2) of the UDC.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-HISTORY
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
A previous mining proposal (MLA 04-549) to add 10 acres of mining area (Segments I, J & K) adjacent to the Shine Hub was approved by Jefferson County on November 19, 2004. This brought the total acreage of the DNR Reclamation Permit to 154 acres. It became apparent once mineral extraction was started that this area did not have the desired gravel needed to meet the applicant's needs and this area is the process of being reclaimed. Currently approximately 74 acres of mining area is in various stages of reclamation (see photos Log item 20).
This proposed additional mineral extraction area will provide a source of material for FHM operation until mineral extraction is undertaken within the Wahl Extraction Area (MLA 03-377) that was approved by Jefferson County on July 18, 2005. The approved proposal was for 37.9 acres of mining area and included a Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance (MDNS) issued by Jefferson County on June 22, 2005. The MDNS addressed impacts of mining area within the 165 acres of the Wahl Extraction Area and the first area to be mined. Additional environmental review will be conducted when additional mining segments are proposed, which require a stormwater permit from Jefferson County.
The Wahl Extraction Area is located within the 690 acre Mineral Resource Overlay District adopted through Ordinance 08-0706-04 on July 6, 2004. The 690 acre MRL area is located approximately 1 mile west of the Shine Hub.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-Confirmed ESAs
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The application was reviewed by the Jefferson County Department of Community Development staff on 10/31/05 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: 1) Fish & Wildlife (Heritage Great Blue Heron & Osprey), 2) Landslide Hazard I (slight), 3) Susceptible Aquifer Recharge Area, and 4) stormwater.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-Site Plan Changes
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The site plans (Log item 2) submitted with the stormwater permit (BLD 05-677) on October 25, 2005 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 December 29, 2005 shall be resubmitted for review and approval by Jefferson County Department of Community Development.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-Approval for _____ Only
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
This approval is for mineral extraction (segments L&M) less than 10 acres in size 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.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-FOREST MANAGEMENT
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
FOREST MANAGEMENT-
Trees have recently been harvested by Pope Resources for this proposed mineral extraction area through a FPA (Forest Practices Application), which is required to meet the requirements of WAC 222 - Forest Practice Rules. It is anticipated that the proposed mineral extraction area would be mined for approximately one year; at that time, reclamation would occur. Provided that a harvested area has been replanted with trees within three years, then that area is not considered converted from timber use and may be processed through a Class III FPA. Jefferson County has limited authority to regulate FPA that does not involve a conversion to non-forestry use or is not adjacent to shorelines of statewide significance.
If an activity would result in trees being removed and the area not reforested within three years, then this activity would be considered a "conversion," since the area is not reforested in the required timeframe for a FPA. The County is provided additional authority over conversions to non-forestry use and ensures that conversions meet all UDC requirements (such as Environmentally Sensitive Areas, performance & development standards). After the County's review is completed, the conversion is implemented through a Class IV General FPA processed through WA State DNR.
Mineral extraction is a use that is consistent with forestry use as outlined in the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan. The Unified Development Code is the implementing development regulation for the Comprehensive Plan, which states that mining is a permitted use in Commercial Forest Designations with a MRL. The subsequent use of the area to be mined is timber production with other uses allowed in the underlying Commercial Forest Designation.
|
|