The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLog123 JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 AI Scalf, Director MEMORANDUM TO: Stacie Hoskins, SEP A Responsible Official FROM: Zoe Ann Lamp, Associate Planner DATE: May 9,2006 SUBJECT: Analysis for Threshold Determination under the rules of the State Environmental Policy Act (WAC 197-11) Proponents & Property Owners: Jim Parker, Jefferson County POO #1 Jean Carr, Parametrix Patricia Sahlinger, Beckett Point Fishermen's Club Representative: Jim Parker Application: MLA05-00520, SDP05-00023, ZON05-00043, BLD06-00108 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Proposal: The proposal includes design and construction of a large on-site septic (LOSS) system for the Beckett Point Fishermen's Club. The Beckett Point Fishermen's Club is a leasehold property, currently divided into approximately 165 leases within two legal tax parcels. The residences are currently served by individual on-site septic (OSS) systems. The existing systems are old and their condition and level of treatment is not well known. The Beckett Point Fishermen's Club wishes to eliminate individual OSS systems and establish a community sewage collection and treatment system, thus reducing the potential pollution to nearby surface and marine waters. The proposed project involves abandoning the majority of the individual OSS systems and construction of two new independent community sewage collection and on-site treatment systems. Several underground grinder pump stations will be installed on the sand spit and at the top of the slope in residential areas. The grinder pump stations will collect sewage from one to five lots and convey the sewage via shallow, small- diameter pressure pipelines to one of two central underground pump stations located near the base of the bluff. From there, sewage will be pumped to intermittent pump stations located on an existing shelf on the bluff and pumped again to new large underground septic tanks located in a forested area on the eastern portion of the property. Effluent will be pumped to large drainfields on the eastern portion of the property. Approximately 5 acres of forestland will be cleared for the septic tanks and drainfields. The drainfield area has been located at the furthest point possible away from the existing slopes above Beckett Point. Property Location: Beckett Point Fishermen's Club is located approximately six miles southwest of Port Townsend on the east side of Discovery Bay. It consists of two tax parcels. Parcel Number 0022~ Building Permits/Inspections Development Review Division 3 Lon9~~riJ~Ptatnfri~Y I ( FAX: (360) 379-4451 (360) 379-4450 includes the beach area where most of the sewage collection will occur. Parcel Number 002242003 consists mostly of the uplands and bluff area where the drainfie1ds will be located. Legal Description: Parcel Numbers 002 231001 & 002 242 003 in Sections 23 & 24, Township 30, Range 02 West, WM, Located on Beckett Point Rd, Port Townsend, W A 98368. Site Conditions: The subject parcels encompass approximately 84.08 acres. The beach area is a large sand spit with a tidal lagoon in the middle of the sand spit. The beach area is flat, with a steep bluff separating it from the drainfield area. The west-facing bluff is covered with thick grasses and shrubs and sparse fir trees and has slopes as steep as 70%. The north-facing bluff is covered with Douglas Fir trees and thick vegetation and has slopes as steep as 100%. The north and west bluffs are separated by Beckett Point Road, Surrounding Area: The parcels adjacent to the northern boundary of the subject parcels are zoned Rural Residential1:5 (RR 1:5) and Rural Residential 1:10 (RR 1:10). The surrounding parcels vary greatly in size from .16 acre to 12.18 acres. Access to this area is via Cape George Road to Beckett Point Road. Two county local access roads, Marrakech Circle (C616409) and Hillcrest Avenue (C616009) intersect Beckett Point Road providing access to the bulk of the smaller parcels in the area. The eastern and southern boundaries of the subject parcels abut Discovery Bay shoreline, Required Approvals: Compliance with the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan, adopted August 28, 1998; and the Jefferson County Code, Unified Development Code, Title 18 JCC adopted December 18, 2000, and effective January 16,2001, Shoreline Management Master Program for Jefferson County, adopted March 7, 1989, integrated with the Jefferson County Code as Chapter 18.25 JCC, Shoreline Master Program, Jefferson County Code, Flood Damage Prevention, Chapter 15,15 JCC adopted November 20, 1995 and effective December 20, 1995. SEP A CHECKLIST: Submittal: The environmental checklist was submitted to the Department of Community Development August 5, 2005. Adequacy: Staff determined the checklist to be substantially complete August 30,2005. NOTICE: Public Notice was published in the Port Townsend-Jefferson County Leader newspaper on January 18,2006. Notice of the pending threshold determination was posted on the property by the applicant/representative on January 17,2006. Notice of the pending threshold was also mailed to owner of subject property, to agencies, interested parties and to property owners within 300 feet on January 13,2006. COMMENTS: Notices were sent to 111 leaseholders within Beckett Point Fishermen's Club and adjacent property owners. Comments were received by 15 adjacent property owners and leaseholders, 14 comments were in support of the project and were not substantive (Log items # 43,47,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57, 58, 59, 62). A comment received from Barbara Blowers (Log Item #46) questioned boring "a hole through a sand hill". Boring a hole through the hill was discussed during the pre application phase of this project, however, the plans submitted for approval do not show this. MLAOS-OOS20 Beckett Point Sanitary Improvements Page 2 of 11 ,_,~.__,,_.i1::: 3._.,___. 2 ""'ff ({ \""~ ,j ,_,,,,,,...,-,.V'"'.'iV'''''<=''''''' ...,.,...-_"""'" Staff requested review and comments on the Environmental Checklist from the following agencies: . Department of Ecology (Gretchen Lux - Wetlands): No comments submitted. . Department of Ecology (Jeffree Stewart - Shoreline): Oral comment is hereby incorporated by reference (Log items # 64 and 69). . Department of Ecology (SEPA Review): No comments submitted. · Department of Ecology (Wastewater Facilities): No comments submitted. . Washington State Department ofFish and Wildlife (Jeff Davis and Randi Thurston): Written comments are hereby incorporated by reference (Log items # 45 and 61). . Washington State Department ofFish and Wildlife (Shelly Ament - Eagles): Oral comments are hereby incorporated by reference (Log items # 65 and 68). . Jefferson County Public Health: Written comments are hereby incorporated by reference (Log items # 108), · Jefferson County Fire District #6: No comments submitted. · Jefferson County Assessor's Office: No comments submitted. . Jefferson County Department of Public Works: Written comments are hereby incorporated by reference (Log items # 73 and 74), · Peninsula Daily News and Port Townsend Leader: No comments submitted. · Washington Environmental Council: No comments submitted. · Washington State Department of Natural Resources: No comments submitted · City of Port Townsend: No comments submitted. · Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe: No comments submitted. · Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe: No comments submitted, · US Army Corps of Engineers: No comments submitted. · Washington State Department of Health: No comments submitted. . Port Townsend School District: No comments submitted. · Olympic Environmental Council: No comments submitted SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL COMMENTS: This section is intended to supplement the applicant's environmental checklist with information from Development Review sources and comments and to analyze the proposal in order to identify potential environmental impacts. Information available in the environmental checklist is not repeated in this document unless it is necessary to do so as part of staffs analysis. Proposed mitigation measures are underlined and numbered, NATURAL ENVIRONMENT EARTH: GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Development is proposed on lands characterized by steep slopes and mapped as slight, moderate and high landslide hazard areas. A geotechnical report prepared by Myers Biodynamics Inc. (Log Items 11 & 30) addresses the generalized subsurface conditions, hydraulic loading rates, water budget and groundwater nitrate loads and quantification of nitrate in groundwater. The geotechnical report states, "The proposed treatment system will result in an annual increase in groundwater input to the local system of less than 6 inches based on prior analyses of the wastewater treatment area (MBI May 2005). Due to the relatively minor estimated increase to the groundwater regime, it is our opinion that the input to the system will have a negligible adverse affect on slope stability." MLAOS-OOS20 Beckett Point Sanitary Improvements Page 3 of 11 _~_'f1'3<<- '~~:":"-:C'-"":',,,,,,,,,~,,,""",,._,"_~ ..""'i.".......",..,..'.""'_:"'.~". It further states, "In our opinion, the implementation of conventional erosion control techniques and best management practices (BMP's) during construction will mitigate the erosion hazard risk on the property." A summary of the geotechnical report recommendations are as the follows: Upland Area - Excavation can likely be performed using conventional equipment. For open cuts, the site soils would generally be considered Type A to B soils and can be cut to a minimum % to I horizontal to 1 vertical (3/4/ to IH:IV) based on the Safety standards for Construction Work, Chapter 296-135 WAC. If open cuts are not possible due to space limitations temporary shoring could be used. Shoring should be designed to support the granular site soils. We recommend an equivalent fluid unit weight of 35 pcf for soil in the upper 5 feet of the excavation and 25 pcf in the dense sand and gravel soils typically at depths greater than 5 feet. Beckett Point/Sewerage Alignment - Due to the loose nature of the site soils and groundwater, excavations will be subject to caving and sloughing unless shored particularly below groundwater levels, Where shoring is provided, we recommend the upper unsaturated soil zone be designed for an equivalent fluid unit weight of 35 pct. Below the groundwater elevation, a unit weight based on the combined soil and hydrostatic loading of 80 pcf is recommended. Above the groundwater level, open cuts could be used. Based on the WAC safety standards, the loose sand and gravel soils would be considered Type C soils with a maximum open cut of 1-1/2 H: 1 V. Where groundwater is encountered, flatter open cuts or shoring would likely be required. Structural Fill - To help reduce buoyancy forces during periods of elevated groundwater, seismic events and flooding, we recommend that fill placed around the proposed improvements including pump station and trench backfill (above pipe bedding) be placed as structural fill. Structural fill should consist of well-graded, granular material free of organic debris or other deleterious material. Structural fill should be at a moisture content to allow for proper compaction, Due to the primarily granular nature of the site soils, we anticipate that the majority of soils will be suitable for re-use as structural fill. In some locations on The Point, organic silt or clay soils are present. These organic silt or clay soils are not suitable for re-use as structural fill. If construction and fill placement are to occur during wet weather conditions or on wet subgrade soil surfaces, we recommend structural fill material be utilized that is suitable for wet weather construction. A suitable material is "Gravel Borrow" as presented in Section 9.13-,14 of the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction (Standard Specifications). However, the gradation should be modified so that a maximum 5 percent by weight of the material passes the U. S. No. 200 sieve as based on the minus %-inch fraction. Structural fill should generally be placed in lifts not exceeding 10 to 12 inches in loose thickness. Each lift should be compacted to a firm, non-yielding condition and to the minimum relative densities presented in the table below, Where hand or other lightweight compaction equipment is used, we recommend maximum lift thicknesses of 6 to 8-inches. MLA05-00520 Beckett Point Sanitary Improvements Page 4 of 11 ~"_ ,-L,?:-2..,-._,~._,,~ . '/"..." , <~.lL~"" Fill Location Recommended Structural Fill Compaction Beckett Point, Jefferson Count Required Minimum Relative Com action1 Under Roadways: Upper 2 feet Greater than 2 foot de th Landscape Areas ( The Point 90 percent2 Uland 85 ercent 1 Expressed as a percentage of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D-1557 (Modified Proctor). 2 Recommended for backfill above potentially buoyant structures where minimum soil unit weight of 120 pcf required for uplift resistance, 95 percent 90 ercent Uplift Resistance - Buried structures on The Point will likely be located partially below the tidally influenced groundwater levels, subject to flooding, and/or within liquefiable soils. These structures should be designed to resist hydrostatic uplift forces. Uplift forces can be resisted by increasing the weight of the structure such as additional concrete mass incorporated into a pump station, holding tank, and/or thrust blocks. Additionally, soil backfill above buried structures. This assumes backfill is placed and compacted as structural fill. Drainage - Control of site surface water is an important risk mitigation factor for both erosion and landslide hazards. We recommend that the proposed site improvements include a drainage system to capture and direct surface water turnoff to suitable discharge 10cation(s) at the base of the steep coastal slope. This includes new access roads and other impervious surfaces in the treatment system area on the upland portion of the site. Collected water should be routed down the slope via the existing Beckett point Road swale, assuming adequate capacity is available, or via a separate drainage discharge pipe. Vegetation Management - The presence of established vegetation on the upland portion of the site and steep coastal slope helps reduce the risk of slope instability and erosion. Vegetation removes water from the shallow slope soils, helps to reinforce the shallow soils via live vegetative root systems, and intercepts incident precipitation. We recommend that vegetation be maintained on all portions of the site, except where required for the treatment system installation. This will help maintain the current site slope condition and help avoid adverse impacts to the steep coastal slope. Where construction activity requires clearing and/or disturbs existing vegetation, the areas should be immediately protected from erosion and revegetated as soon as possible following construction. The following item is requested as mitigation to avoid significant impacts due to this proposal: 1. The proiect shall comply with all recommendations within the geotechnical report prepared by Mvers Biodynamics Inc. dated June 16.2005 and any subsequent amendments or addendums to this report. These geotechnical report recommendations are proposed mitigation. Based on the applicant's compliance with these recommendations, this proposal is not likely to result in significant adverse impacts to GEOLOGY AND SOILS. MLAOS-OOS20 Beckett Point Sanitary hnprovements Page 5 of 11 ,_,=,.,._.=,~.g3 ""'_~'.'...._ 5 EROSION: The proposal includes the following: · Clearing approximately 5 acres for drainfields . 6,000 cubic yards of soil will be excavated for septic tanks · 3,000 cubic yards will be excavated for trenching and backfill · 2,000 cubic yards of pipe bedding material will be used for fill. A Stormwater Site Plan and a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation control plan prepared by Parametrix dated July 2005 were submitted on August 5,2005. Jefferson County Public Works commented (Log Items # 73 & 74): Unified Development Code Section 6.7 adopts the requirements of the Washington Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. Public Works Department Findings The proposal will create more than 7,000 square feet of land disturbing activity. Significant portions of the site are adjacent to wetlands and shorelines. The Stormwater Management Manual requires proponents of developments that meet these criteria to implement Minimum Requirement #2 Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention and to prepare a Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention (CSWPP) Plan. The proponent has submitted a Stormwater Site Plan, a temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan sheet, and construction plans for the proposal. Public Works Department Recommendation · The Department has reviewed and approved the proponent's CSWPP Plan and temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan sheet. · Prior to commencing construction, the proponent shall schedule a pre-construction conference with its contractor and the Public Works Department. The following item is requested as mitigation to avoid significant impacts due to this proposal: 2. Prior to commencing construction, the proponent shall schedule a pre-construction conference with its contractor and the Public Works Department. Contact Jim Pearson at 360-385-9162 to schedule this meeting. Based on the applicant's compliance with the proposed mitigation and the applicant's compliance with the engineered stormwater site plan, the proposal is not,Ukely to result in significant adverse impacts related to EROSION. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to EARTH is not necessary. AIR: No significant adverse environmental impacts related to air have been identified. No mitigation measures are proposed. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to AIR is not necessary. MLA05-00520 Beckett Point Sanitary Improvements Page 6 of 11 'f;'{) l.' ~ {Z,3 w. ...~. .~{?~':~"'--'~Z(~-.. WATER: SURFACE WATER: Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (Log Item #45) made the following comments for this proposal, "The SEP A checklist references discharging trench water onto the shoreline, as well as, trenching below the ordinary high water mark. All of these activities will require a Hydraulic Project Approval (HP A) from WDPW prior to initiation of work. The applicant should contact Randi Thurston at (360) 895-6123 for more details on HPA requirements." The following item is requested as mitigation to avoid significant impacts due to this proposal: 3. Prior to commencing development activity. the proponent shall obtain a Hydraulic Proiect Approval (HPA) from Washington State Department ofFish and Wildlife. Contact Randi Thurston at (360) 895-6123 for details on HPA requirements. FLOODS: County Environmentally Sensitive Area mapping identifies the beach area of this proposal lying within a frequently flooded area. The FEMA FIRM Map 530069 0135B shows portions of the beach area in Zone A (Area of 100-year flood; base flood elevations and flood hazard factors not determined) and Zone V (Areas of 100-year coastal flood with velocity - wave action, base flood elevations and flood hazard factors not determined), The geotechnical report prepared by Myers Biodynamics Inc. addresses uplift resistance (see page 5 of this memo). The Jefferson County Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance requires the following for sewage disposal systems installation within a flood hazard area. 4. The elevation and location of all utility svstems of a structure shall be designed to prevent floodwaters from entering the structure(s). 5. Where possible. all new and replacement water supply systems and on site sewage disposal systems shall be located outside the flood hazard area. 6. All new and replacement sanitary sewage svstems shall be designed to eliminate buoyancy and to minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwaters into the systems and discharge from the systems into floodwaters. 7. On-site waste disposal systems shall be located to avoid impairment to them or contamination from them during flooding. Onsite or alternative proprietary sewage systems meeting Treatment Standard 2. as defined I WAC 246-272. or subsequent amendments. may be installed in flood hazard areas. provided the performance of the system component providing the level of treatment is not impaired during flooding. GROUNDWATER: County Environmental Sensitive Area mapping identifies portions of this proposal lie within a Susceptible Aquifer Recharge Area. The geotechnical report prepared by Myers Biodynamics Inc. addresses the water budget and groundwater nitrate loads. The report states, "It appears the nitrate impact of the proposed treatment system design that handles 102 hook-ups at an average daily flow of 7,250 gallons per day that is applied to the 30 acre project area has a localized impact to groundwater quality." MLA05-00520 Beckett Point Sanitary Improvements Page 7 of 11 1~3 "..- '._^<.~._7.d". '-"~'.~-f)~-' ,"," ,c ,'"",',';,:.;.__,": '_'."'_'.' '" _."'~ '.., ~~." .. ~"'_ ',:a.:." ~""'M_ ~..; The Geotechnical Report further states, "Since the estimated nitrate concentration in local groundwater appears to be close to the 10 mg/L MCL limit for drinking water, it would be appropriate to require groundwater monitoring of nitrate levels in any future water supply wells completed near the project site. Alternatively, groundwater-monitoring wells could be installed near the perimeter of the site to monitor actual nitrate levels migrating from the project area in order to have an early detection system available to respond to potential changes in groundwater quality," The following item is requested as mitigation to avoid significant impacts due to this proposal: 8. Groundwater-monitoring wells shall be installed near the perimeter of the site to monitor actual nitrate levels migrating from the proiect area. Based on the applicant's compliance with the proposed mitigation, this proposal is not likely to result in significant adverse impacts to WATER. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to WATER is not necessary. PLANTS AND ANIMALS: HABITAT: A wetland area exists in the interior of the sand spit. The proposal will not directly affect the wetland, however, a substantial portion of the project will take place within the wetland buffer. A wetland delineation prepared by Pacific Rim Aquatic Environmental Sciences dated August 5, 2000 and a Wetland Delineation Amendment prepared by Parametrix dated June 17, 2005 were submitted with the application. The wetland delineation classifies the wetland as a Category II wetland. Table 3-4 of JCC 18.15.340 requires a standard buffer of 100-ft. The wetland delineation amendment states: 9. Work areas at Becket Point will be restricted to existing improved areas. including the prism of Beckett Point Road. private driveways. and landscaped areas at homes to be included in the upgraded septic system. 10. Best management practices. including the use of sedimentation fencing. will be used to protect water quality for local area waters and the wetland during construction. 11. After installation ofthe force main and hookups for individual homes. disturbed areas will be graded to the pre-construction contour. Paved driveways and Beckett Point Road will be resurfaced with pavement. Disturbed vegetated areas will be reseeded in compliance with the Ecology stormwater manual. Environmentally Sensitive Area mapping identified saltwater marsh, bald eagle and blue heron habitat. Copies of the proposal were sent to Gretchen Lux with Washington State Department of Ecology. She made no comments. Copies of the proposal were sent to Washington State Department of Fish & Wildlife. Oral comments were received from Shelly Ament regarding bald eagle habitat stating that no eagle habitat management plan is required, however, she would like to keep as many trees as possible. Written comments from Jeff Davis with the Washington State Department of Fish & Wildlife stated, "The Great blue heron rookery has relocated from the Beckett Point slope to a wetland located on parcels 002242017 and 002242013. The current heron rookery site is located within 1/4 mile ofthe project, therefore, WDPW recommends that land clearing and grading operations on the LOSS site occur between July 31st and February 15th to avoid impacts to nesting herons." The following two items are requested as mitigation to avoid significant impacts due to this MLA05-00520 Beckett Point Sanitary Improvements Page 8 of 11 l,~~~.~._.. '. ---,,,,- ^'~~ - II 'J"~,.">rQ",,,,-....,:;(,,.,,,.,,;,...~ ~''''':,."",,",''''!':'''~'''''''''':';' 12. Tree clearing shall be limited to that required to install the LOSS. 13. Land clearing and grading operations on the LOSS site shall occur between July 31st and February 15th only. to avoid impacts to nesting herons. Based on the applicant's compliance with the proposed mitigation, this proposal is not likely to result in significant adverse impacts to ANIMALS, Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to ANIMALS is not necessary. GIS mapping indicates rare plants on portions of parcel 002242003. This portion of the parcel will not be disturbed as a part of this project. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to PLANTS is not necessary. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to PLANTS AND ANIMALS is not necessary. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES: RENEW ABLE RESOURCES: The proposal includes the clearing of approximately 5 acres of forested land. Since the subject parcels are zoned Rural Residential 1 :20, there will be no loss of resource land. The following item is requested as mitigation to avoid significant impacts due to this proposal: 14. Prior to commencing development activity, the proponent shall obtain a Class 4 General Forest Practices Permit from the Washington State Department of Natural Resources. Contact Ross Goodwin at (360) 732-7175 for details on Forest Practice Permit requirements. Based on the applicant's compliance with the proposed mitigation, this proposal is not likely to result in significant adverse impacts to RENEW ABLE RESOURCES. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to RENEWABLE RESOURCES is not necessary. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES is not necessary. BUILT ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH: No significant adverse environmental impacts have been identified. No mitigation measures are recommended. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH is not necessary. NOISE: Noise levels will increase during construction and become nonexistent after installation is complete. No significant adverse noise impacts have been identified. No mitigation measures are recommended. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to NOISE is not necessary. LAND & SHORELINE USE: LAND USE: The two parcels within this proposal are designated Rural Residential 1:20 under the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The Beckett Point Fisherman's Club was established prior to land use regulations within Jefferson County. The first known survey of the development was drafted in 1951 and adopted for Club Records on June 10, 1958. The Beckett Point Fishermen's Club development is a legal nonconforming use. Approximately 90 homes exist on the leased lots. The proposed LOSS has been designed to serve the existing residences and up to 12 additional MLAOS-OOS20 Beckett Point Sanitary Improvements Page 9 of 11 ,ez:rJ#,,~~,_._-, ,.,.",t,,,-,..,,.,, a.'''('(~'''''' home-sites. The following two items are requested as mitigation to avoid significant impacts due to this proposal: 15. Future residential connections to the Large On-Site Septic System (LOSS) are subject to Jefferson County approval and may include the recording of an Assessor's Plat. 16. The approval of the LOSS permit does not vest future development on these parcels. All building permits are subject to Jefferson County review and may include the recording of an Assessor's Plat. SHORELINE USE: The beach area is within shoreline jurisdiction. Individual septic tanks, grinder pumps, pump tanks and transport lines will be located in this area. The shoreline designation for the beach area is Suburban. Utilities are classified as a Secondary use within the Suburban designation requiring a Type III review process which includes noticing and a public hearing before a hearing examiner. Utilities are subject to the Policies and Performance Standards as listed in the Shoreline Master Program under JCC 18.25.045. Based on these Policies and Performance Standards the following items are requested as mitigation to avoid significant impacts due to this proposal: 17. Upon completion of installation and maintenance projects of shorelines, banks shall be restored to preproject configuration, replanted with native species, and be provided with maintenance care until the newly planted vegetation is established. 18. Utilities shall be installed adjacent to or within existing utility or circulation easements or rights-of- way whenever feasible. 19. Utilities installed in the water, beach, or upon tidal areas shall assure that water quality and marine life will not suffer degradation. 20. Installation of utilities shall assure the prevention of siltation or beach erosion. 21. Utility discharges and outfalls shall be located, designed, constructed and operated so degradation to water quality, marine life, and general shoreline ecosystems is kept to an absolute minimum. 22. Both during and after installation, utilities shall assure that geohydraulic shore processes and marine life are basically maintained in their natural condition. 23. Utilities located in flood prone areas shall be provided with adequate flood protection and shall not be installed to increase flood hazard or other damage to life or property. 24. Flammable or toxic materials shall not be stored in areas subject to flooding. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to LAND & SHORELINE USE is not necessary. TRANSPORTATION: The drainfield site is accessed from Beckett Point Road and Hillcrest Avenue. Both are county local access roads. Portions of this proposal will be installed within the rights-of-ways of these roads. Jefferson County Department of Public Works comments (Log Items 73 & 74) were, "The Jefferson County Utilities Accommodation Ordinance requires a permit to conduct work within County Road rights-of-way." The following item is requested as mitigation to avoid significant impacts due to this proposal: MLA05-00520 Beckett Point Sanitary Improvements Page 10 of 11 " "" ",,,i't:.?:.n ,--.--, . /fL""." II 25. Prior to commencing development activity, the proponent shall obtain the appropriate utility permits from Jefferson County Public Works Department. Contact Terry Duff at (360) 385-9159 for details on utility permit requirements. The proposal is not likely to result in significant adverse impacts to County roads or State Highways. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to TRANSPORTATION is not necessary. PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES: UTll..ITIES: Jefferson County Public Health commented (Log Item # 108) as follows, "JCPH offers the following comments on the Beckett Point LOSS project: 26. All septic tank abandonment's and new tank/grinder pumps shall be permitted by JCPH. The drainfield and other appurtenances will be approved by DOH. 27. Applications for tank/grinder pump tank installation and septic tank abandonment's must be submitted by a licensed septic system designer or engineer licensed by the State of Washington. 28. All tank/grinder pumps installation locations must conform to code whenever feasible; waivers and mitigation will be required when nonconforming installations are necessary. 29. All waivers will be will be reviewed by JCPH and considered for approval on a case-by-case basis. 30. A copy of the most up-to-date plans should be submitted to JCPH as soon as possible. No significant adverse environmental impacts have been identified. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES is not necessary. RECOMMENDA TION: Development Review staff recommends issuance of a Determination of Mitigated Non-Significance. Determination of the SEP A Responsible Official: I have reviewed and considered the referenced proposal, the environmental checklist, public comments, other available material, and the Development Review staff memo and recommendation. I hereby: _ issue a Determination of Non-Significance --L issue a Determination of Mitigated Non-Significance issue a Determination of Significance determine that I do not have sufficient information upon which to make a threshold determination and direct Development Review Division staff to obtain additional information on the proposal. ~(~\ de Hoskins, SEP A Responsible Official ~9,~(p Dat MLA05-00520 Beckett Point Sanitary hnprovements Page 11 of 11 /2,3 "..-...--- IC~~'.~~lJ~