|
Description:
|
| | |
File Archived
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
12/28/2007
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Approval EXPIRED (STATUS "E")
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
12/28/2007
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Print Dummy UDC Permit-UF
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
2/28/2006
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Approve Permit-UF
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
5/13/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Ntc of Dec Apprvl/Appl Inst-UF
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
4/15/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Approve Permit-UF
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
4/15/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Review Complete-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
4/15/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Print Dummy UDC Permit-UF
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
4/15/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Ntc of App +14-Publish-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
3/10/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Ntc of App +14-APO-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
3/10/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Det. of Completeness-UF
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
3/2/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Application Received-UF
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
2/27/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Case Entered
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
2/27/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Septic Review Complete-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
4/15/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
App Substantially Complete-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
3/1/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Stormwater Review-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
4/15/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Env. Sensitive Area Review-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
4/15/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
Consistency Review-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
4/15/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Description:
|
| | |
RAP Review Complete-U
|
|
Date Completed:
|
| | |
4/15/2004
|
|
Disposition:
|
| | |
DONE
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
PERMIT EXPIRATION
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The conditional use permit automatically expires and becomes void if the applicant fails to file for a building permit or other necessary development permit within three (3) years of the effective date of the permit unless the permit approval provides for a greater period of time.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
ARCH RESOURCES
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
If archaeological resources are located the applicant shall cease all operations and immediately contact Jefferson County Department of Community Development.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
STORMWATER
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The applicant shall follow all stormwater measures outlined in the Stormwater Plan submitted by Parametrix, dated February 2004. All sedimentation and erosion control measures shall be implemented.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
ONSITE APPROVAL
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The applicant shall obtain a permit from the Washington State Dept. of Health for the upgrades to the onsite system.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
TYPE III REQD FOR RESERVOIR
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The applicant shall receive a seperate approval for the construction of the proposed water reservoir. The applicant shall undergo a Type III public hearing.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
MODIFICATIONS TO PROPOSAL
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Any modifications to the proposal shall require a review by Jefferson County for compliance with applicable codes.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
APPEAL
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Appeals of Type II permit decisions must be in writing, conform with the procedures for appeal set forth in Section 8.5.1(e) and be filed within fourteen calendar days after the Notice of Decision is issued.
Section 8.5.1(e): A notice of appeal shall be delivered to the administrator by mail or by personal delivery, and must be received by 4:00 p.m. on the last business day of the appeal period, with the required appeal fee of $612.00.
The notice of appeal shall contain a concise statement identifying:
i. The decision being appealed and the identification of the application which is the subject of the appeal;
ii. The name, address, and phone number of the appellant and his/her interest in the matter;
iii. Appellant's statement describing standing to appeal (i.e., how he or she is affected by or interested in the decision);
iv. The specific reasons why the appellant believes the decision to be wrong. The appellant shall bear the burden of proving the decision was wrong;
v. The desired outcome or changes to the decision; and
vi. A statement that the appellant has read the appeal and believes the contents to be true, signed by the appellant.
Any notice of appeal not in full compliance with this section shall not be considered.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
Coastal & At Risk SIPZ-Water Con
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
VOLUNTARY MEASURES OF COASTAL & AT 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:
|
| | |
Coastal & At Risk SIPZ-Measures
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
VOLUNTARY MEASURES OF COASTAL & AT RISK SIPZ:
1. Installation of a flow meter.
2. On-going well monitoring for chloride concentration.
3. Submittal of monitoring data to County.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
Coastal SIPZ-Mand Potable Water
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
MANDATORY MEASURES FOR COASTAL 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 requirement:
a. Chloride concentration of a laboratory-certified well water sample submitted with building permit application.
3. If public water is unavailable, a qualifying alternative system may be used as proof of potable water.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
Comply with Water Con Measures
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The property owner shall comply with Water Conservation Measures (per list maintained by the UDC Administrator).
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
BMPs
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The project shall adhere to the Best Management Practices (BMPs) 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:
|
| | |
BMPs
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The project shall adhere to the Best Management Practices (BMPs) 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:
|
| | |
Stormwater Plan
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
An engineered stormwater management plan has been submitted and approved by the Department of Community Development. Once the subject permit has been issued the applicant shall fully implement the provisions of the submitted plan and contact the Jefferson County Department of Community Development to arrange a schedule to inspect the property for plan compliance. No clearing for roadways or utilities shall occur on the project site until clearing necessary for the installation of temporary sedimentation and erosion control measures have been completed.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
Hydraulic Code/HPA Check
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Prior to commencing development activity, proponent is responsible for informing the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) in order for WDFW to determine whether this action is subject to the Washington State Hydraulic Code (Chapter 220-10 WAC). Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) is required for all hydraulic projects, which are defined as construction or performance of other work that will use, divert, obstruct, or change the natural flow or bed of any of the salt or fresh waters of the state.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
TYPE II CUP
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The proposal is classified as a Minor Utility under the Jefferson County Unified Development Code. In addition, the applicant has submitted a stormwater management permit and shoreline exemption to install the replacement utility lines within 200-feet from the OHWM of the shoreline.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
SEPA FOR PHASE II
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The proposal encompasses two (2) seperate phases. Phase one includes the installation of sewer and water lines to replace and improve the existing infrastructure. The second phase is for the installation of a new water reservoir. Phase II will require a seperate review and approval in the form of a public hearing.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-NOTICE
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The proposal was noticed in the Jefferson County Leader on March 10, 2004. In addtion, posting was provided on the property on March 17, 2004.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-ADJACENT NOTICE
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Notice was provided to 13-property owners located within 300-feet around the perimeter of the property. Bob and Marybelle Brown provided written comment expressing support for the proposal.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-AGENCY RESPONSES
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Three Agencies commented on the proposal and provided the following comments:
The Washington State Dept. of Health stated concerns regarding the on-site system improvements. Revisions were requested to clarify the area proposed for the geoflow subsurface dripline. A follow up letter was sent by the Department of Health. The letter approved the design and addressed the concerns expressed from the original letter.
The Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation requested from Washington State Parks (SEPA Lead) a copy of the referenced Archaeology report.
The Washington State Department of Ecology submitted a comment letter advising of the proceedures of soil and groundwater contamination.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-CUP CRITERIA
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Approval Criteria for all Conditional Use per Section 8.8.5(a) of the Unified Development Code:
(1) The conditional use is harmonious and appropriate in design,
character and appearance with the existing or intended character and
quality of development in the vicinity of the subject property and with
the physical characteristics of the subject property;
Staff Comment: The proposed infrastructure improvements will be located in or near the existing road prism. The use of the property will not change.
(2) The conditional use will be served by adequate infrastructure
including roads, fire protection, water, wastewater disposal, and storm
water control;
Staff Comment: Infrastructure for the conditional use is existing. The existing sewer and water lines are dilapidated beyond repair. The proposal will install new lines to serve the existing Fort. A stormwater management plan has been submitted to address the 85,600-square feet of land disturbing activities. In addition, a geotechnical report was submitted May 22, 2003. The report conducted by Myers Biodynamics concluded the proposed infrastructure improvements will be located in areas that will not impact the stability of the bluffs. The Fort is serviced by existing roads and no new additional roadways are being proposed.
(3) The conditional use will not be materially detrimental to uses or
property in the vicinity of the subject parcel;
Staff Comment: The conditional use will not be materially detrimental
to uses or property in the vicinity of the subject parcel.
(4) The conditional use will not introduce noise, smoke, dust, fumes,
vibrations, odors, or other conditions or which unreasonably impact
existing uses in the vicinity of the subject parcel;
Staff Comment: Negative externalities will not be created by the proposed infrastructure impovement project. Sedimentation and erosion will be controlled as stipulated through the approved storwmater management plan.
(5) The location, size, and height of buildings, structures, walls and
fences, and screening vegetation for the conditional use will not
unreasonably interfere with allowable development or use of neighboring
properties;
Staff Comment: The work will be conducted within the existing Fort Flagler Facility. A majority of the improvements will be sited towards the Fort Flagler Historic area, which is located more than 3,200-feet away from the adjacent property boundaries.
(6) The pedestrian and vehicular traffic associated with the
conditional use will not be hazardous to existing and anticipated
traffic in the vicinity of the subject parcel;
Staff Comment: Additional vehicular traffic is not anticipated as a result of the infrastructure improvement proposal. The proposal will replace the dilapidated water and sewer lines with new lines to serve the fort.
(7) The conditional use complies with all other applicable criteria
and standards of this Code and any other applicable local, state or
federal law; and more specifically, conforms to the standards contained
in Sections 4 and 6 of this Code;
Staff Comment: As conditioned in this approval, the proposal complies
with all other applicable criteria and standards of the Unified
Development Code, other applicable local, state and federal laws, and
the performance standards and development standards contained in
Sections 4 and 6 of the Unified Development Code.
(8) The proposed conditional use will not result in the siting of an
incompatible use adjacent to an airport or airfield;
Staff Comment: The parcel is not located in the vicinity of an airport
or airfield.
(9) The conditional use will not cause significant adverse impacts on
the human or natural environments that cannot be
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-MINOR UTILITIES-SECTION 4.40
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Section 4.40 of the UDC stipulates criteria for minor utility developments. The following criteria applies to this proposal.
A. Utility developments shall comply with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of the Shoreline Master Program.
Staff Comment: The proposal is for the replacement of the water and sewer lines. The lines will be within 200-feet of the Ordinary High Water Mark. The applicant has applied for review under the Jefferson County Shoreline Master Program (SDP04-00003).
B. New utility distribution lines shall be placed underground wherever reasonable and practical. Undergrounding of existing lines in the course of routine maintenance and replacement is encouraged where practicable, particularly where such undergrounding would enhance recongnized scenic and open space areas and resources;
Staff Comment: The proposed utility replacement will be buried near the existing roadway prism. Scenic and open space areas will not be impacted by the utililty replacement. The applicant has modified the proposal to avoid removing several conifer trees. The areas of new trenching will be buried and replanted where appropriate. Sedimentation and erosion control will be utlized during the trenching and construction process.
c. Environmental impacts resulting from installation or maintenance of utilities and utility facilities shall be avoided or minimized. Where no feasible alternative to the impact exists, and mitigation is not feasible, appropriate compensating measures should be developed;
Staff Comment: The applicant has revised the proposal route to minimize tree removal from the property. In addition, a geotechnical report, and stormwater management plan have been submitted. The project has undergone review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) with Washington State Parks acting as the SEPA Lead Agency. A final DNS was issued on March 9, 2004.
d. Utilities and transportation facilities shall be installed in the same rights-of-way when the effect will be to reduce the adverse impacts on the physical environment;
Staff Comment: The proposal will install a majority of the new lines within the existing road prism.
e. Extension of community sewerage lines outside of existing areas shall be allowed only if:
(1) The extension is demonstrated to be necessary to remedy existing or potential groundwater contamination problems or to correct existing or impending health hazards, as determined by the County Health Official; or
(2) The extension is to provide sewerage collection and treatment service to a public elementary or secondary school; and
Staff Comment: A majority of the work proposed encompasses replacement of existing lines. The proposal will remedy the failing, leaking system. In addtion, fire suppression will be bolstered by the proposed improvements to the system.
f. Routine maintence and replacement of wired utility transmission and distribution lines and poles within existing rights-of-way, not present and where exempt from SEPA and the Shoreline Master Program review, are authorized without further permit application and development approval, provided that such construction and activities shall comply with applicable performance and development standards of this Code.
Staff Comment: A majority of the replacement lines will be installed within the existing road prism. In addition, the application has undergone review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), with Washington State Parks acting as the SEPA lead agency. A Determination of NonSignificance was issued on March 9, 2004. The proposal will undergo shoreline review pursuant to the Jefferson County Shoreline Master Program. A shoreline exemption (SDP04-00003) is being reviewed in conjunction with this proposal.
g. It shall be the affirmative duty of the applicant who proposes a minor utility development to dtermine if any state or federa
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-Confirmed ESAs
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The application was reviewed by the Jefferson County Department of Community Development staff on 2/25/04 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: Shoreline (Conservancy), Eagle Habitat, Landslide Hazard Area (High & Slight), Aquifer Recharge Area (SARPA+ SUSC) and Seawater Intrusion Protection Zone (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-Susc. Aquifer Recharge Area
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
Susceptible Aquifer Recharge Areas are those with geologic and hydrologic conditions that promote rapid infiltration of recharge waters to groundwater aquifers.
|
|
|
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-Coastal SIPZ
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The parcel is located within a coastal SIPZ (seawater intrusion protection zone) according to the County GIS map. There are voluntary and 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 Coastal SIPZ is defined as: all islands and area within one-quarter mile of marine shoreline, but no history of chloride concentration above 100 mg/L in groundwater sources within 1000 feet.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-Stormwater
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The applicant is proposing to create or add 85,600 square feet of land disturbing activities. Sections 6.6 and 6.7 of the Jefferson County Unified Development Code requires that your proposal submit an engineered stormwater management permit.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-DNS Issued
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The minor utility proposal was reviewed under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) by Washington State Parks and Recreation acting as lead agency. A Final Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) issued on 3/09/04.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-Site Plan Changes
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The site plan as submitted with the Conditional Use/Shoreline Exemption application on 2/25/04 to the Jefferson County Department of Community Development. Any modifications, changes, and/or additions to the stamped, approved site plan dated 4/19/04 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 minor utility(CUP)/Shoreline Exemption 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-Surrounding Zones
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The property is bordered by the shoreline on the north and east sides of the property. The southern and western parcel boundaries are adjacent to rural residential uses.
|
|
|
Title:
|
| | |
F-Consistent w Comp Plan
|
|
Wording
|
| | |
The proposed use is consistent with the goals, policies, and provisions of the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan and Jefferson County Zoning Ordinance No. 09-0801-94.
|
|