HomeMy WebLinkAboutNo Net Loss Report
McMinn NNL
Jefferson County, Washington
Prepared for
Rick Ramage
4824 Topanga Cyn Boulevard
Woodland Hills, CA 91364
310.774.1321
Prepared by
Ecological Land Services
1157 3rd Avenue, Suite 220A • Longview, WA 98632
(360) 578-1371 • Project Number 3833.01
SHORELINE NO-NET-LOSS
February 9, 2023
Rick Ramage – McMinn NNL Ecological Land Services, Inc.
Shoreline No Net Loss Report i February 2, 2023
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1
JEFFERSON COUNTY SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM ............................................................................ 1
SITE DESCRIPTION ...................................................................................................................... 1
SITE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL ...................................................................................................... 2
MITIGATION SEQUENCING ............................................................................................................ 2
ENVIRONMENTAL AND HABITAT CONDITIONS .................................................................................... 3
SHORELINE ENVIRONMENT .................................................................................................................... 3
HABITAT AREA DESCRIPTION ......................................................................................................... 3
STATE AND FEDERALLY LISTED SPECIES AND CRITICAL HABITAT .................................................................... 3
WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE, PRIORITY HABITATS AND SPECIES .................................. 5
WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM ................................. 5
WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY, COASTAL ATLAS ....................................................................... 5
JEFFERSON COUNTY CRITICAL AREAS MAP ............................................................................................... 5
IMPACT ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................................... 6
Shoreline Impacts ..................................................................................................................... 6
SHORELINE BUFFER FUNCTIONS AND IMPACTS .......................................................................................... 6
NO NET LOSS DETERMINATION .............................................................................................................. 7
SHORELINE RESTORATION PLAN ..................................................................................................... 7
LIMITATIONS ........................................................................................................................... 10
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 11
Rick Ramage – McMinn NNL Ecological Land Services, Inc.
Shoreline No Net Loss Report ii February 2, 2023
FIGURES & PHOTOPLATES
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Existing Conditions
Figure 3 Proposed Conditions
Figure 4 Jefferson County Critical Areas Map
Figure 5 WDFW Priority Habitats and Species Map
Figure 6 Coastal Atlas
Figure 7 Coastal Shoreline Photo
Figure 8 Impact Analysis
Figure 9 Restoration Plan
Photoplates Site Photos
Rick Ramage – McMinn NNL Ecological Land Services, Inc
Shoreline No Net Loss Report i February 2, 2023
SIGNATURE PAGE
The information and data in this report were compiled and prepared under the supervision
and direction of the undersigned.
Brenda Ruddick
Biologist
.
Emma Crockett
Biologist
Rick Ramage – McMinn NNL Ecological Land Services, Inc
Shoreline No Net Loss Report 1 February 2, 2023
INTRODUCTION
Ecological Land Services, Inc. (ELS) has prepared this shoreline no net loss report (NNL) in
preparation for development of a single-family residence on McMinn Road, Port Townsend,
Jefferson County, Washington. This property consists of a rural residential shoreline property,
Jefferson County Tax Parcel Number 002014003, that lies in a portion of Section 1, Township 30
North, Range 2 West of the Willamette Meridian (Figure 1). The project is located outside the
150-foot shoreline buffer but within a small portion of the 200-foot shoreline jurisdiction of the
Strait of Juan de Fuca. This report will achieve no net loss of buffer function and habitat for the
shoreline community in accordance with Jefferson County Code, Chapter 18.25, Shoreline Master
Program (JCCSMP).
JEFFERSON COUNTY SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM
This project is being reviewed under the updated JCCSMP because the western portion of the
property and the proposed building site is within 200 feet of the shoreline of Strait of Juan de Fuca.
Under the current administrative process, projects proposing construction within the designated
shoreline jurisdiction buffer must complete a habitat survey and shoreline mitigation plan to
document existing conditions and show that there will be no net loss of buffer function per Chapter
18.25.270(2) of the JCCSMP. There were no other critical areas associated with the shoreline
identified on or near the property.
SITE DESCRIPTION
This 1.46-acre property is located on the north side of McMinn Road just southwest of McCurdy
Point on the west boundary of Port Townsend, Jefferson County (Figure 1). A gravel driveway from
McMinn Road provides access to the property which is currently undeveloped aside from a small
footpath that extends from McMinn Road to the top of the bluff (Figure 2). This lot is surrounded
by residentially developed properties similar in size. The proposed house and positioning within
the shoreline jurisdiction will be consistent with existing developments in the area.
The Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) was not accessible during the site visit on November 10,
2022 due to the steep bluff that separates the buildable area from the shoreline. ELS biologists
utilized on-site observations along with aerial imagery and contours to determine the OHWM of
the shoreline. Much of the property consists of coniferous forest dominated by western red cedar
(FAC) with some Douglas fir (FACU) and western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla, FACU). The sparse
shrub layer consisted of ocean spray (Holodiscus discolor, FACU), salal (FACU), currant (Ribes
sanguineum, FACU), and Oregon grape (Mahonia nervosa, FACU). The herbaceous layer was
dominated by a dense population of sword fern (Polystichum munitum, FACU) with scattered false
solomon’s-seal (Maianthemum racemosum, FAC) and false lily of the valley (Maianthemum
dilatatum, FAC) (Photoplate 1). The shoreline lies along the north property boundary, which is
defined by a steep, tall bluff (Figure 7, Photoplate 2). The vegetation along the top of the bluff
consists of slightly smaller trees with a sparse canopy and dense shrub and herbaceous vegetation
including salal (Gaultheria shallon), yarrow (Achillea millefolium), orchard grass (Dactylis
glomerata), nootka rose (Rosa nutkana), and vetch (Vicia sativa). The vegetation along the side of
Rick Ramage – McMinn NNL Ecological Land Services, Inc
Shoreline No Net Loss Report 2 February 2, 2023
the bluff is patchy due to the steep grade. The onsite topography slopes down moderately from
McMinn Road to the top of bluff. The project proposes to construct a single-family home, garage,
and septic system along the south property boundary to avoid the 200-foot shoreline jurisdiction
to the extent possible.
SITE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL
The shoreline designation of this property is Rural Residential (Figure 6) which requires a buffer
of 150 feet with a 10-foot building setback from the edge of the buffer. The new house is proposed
outside of the shoreline buffer. The single-family residences on the properties adjacent to the
subject property are in line with the proposed building site if not closer to the top of the bluff. The
new house proposes 1,713 square feet within the 200-foot shoreline jurisdiction, including a
proposed attached patio. The septic system is proposed in between the proposed garage and the
top of the bluff, which will result in 970 square feet of temporary impact within the shoreline
Jurisdiction (Figure 8). The proposed house and associated structures will have no impact on the
shoreline buffer or the additional 10-foot impervious surface setback.
MITIGATION SEQUENCING
Avoiding Impacts:
The project is avoiding impacts by proposing the building site outside of the 150-foot shoreline
buffer.
Minimizing Impacts:
The project is minimizing impacts by proposing the building site as far landward as possible with
the majority of the home outside the 200-foot shoreline jurisdiction.
Rectifying Impacts:
The temporary impact caused by the installation of the septic and drainfield will be rectified by
suppressing any growth of invasive species to allow the dense native herbaceous vegetation to
reestablish.
Reducing or Eliminating Impacts:
Work within the building area will attempt to avoid and minimize impacts to existing trees. This
will reduce the number of trees required to be removed for the construction of the house. The
proposed building site is located in the only feasible area for development due to front and side
yard setbacks, reducing the impacts to the extent possible.
Compensating for the Impacts:
The project has avoided impacts to the shoreline buffer but cannot entirely avoid, rectify, or reduce
the impacts to the shoreline jurisdiction. The project has minimized impacts to the shoreline
jurisdiction to the extent possible. Because it cannot avoid all impacts to the shoreline jurisdiction,
restoration is proposed to compensate for the impacts through installing native plants between
Rick Ramage – McMinn NNL Ecological Land Services, Inc
Shoreline No Net Loss Report 3 February 2, 2023
the shoreline buffer and proposed home. The total area of shoreline jurisdiction impact is 1,713
square feet and the mitigation area totals 1,800 square feet, giving a restoration ratio of 1.05:1.
ENVIRONMENTAL AND HABITAT CONDITIONS
Shoreline Environment
The lot lies in a rural residential area of west Port Townsend (Figure 1). Along this section of
shoreline all properties are cliff/high bluff at the OHWM and developed with single family homes
beyond the top of the bluff. The shoreline is sparsely vegetated, but the trees and shrubs do not
provide much shade to the shoreline due to the steep grade of the slope. The shoreline was
composed mostly of sand and cobble ranging from 2 to 12 inches as well as shell debris and large
rock. Logs and vegetative debris had created a wrack on the shore, but there was no rooted
vegetation in the water or along the shoreline. The vegetation began at or above the OHWM along
the toe of the slope.
The shoreline adjacent to this property is located along the Strait of Juan de Fuca (Figure 1). The
property is located on a high bluff/cliff shoreline. The properties directly southwest and northeast
are developed with single family residences, also located on high bluff shoreline. While the
shoreline was not accessible during the site visit, it was visible from the top of the bluff. The
substrate consisted mostly of sand and cobble with some vegetative and woody debris that had
been deposited from fluctuations in the tide. There was no rooted vegetation observed. Maps
obtained for this project indicate the presence of patchy eelgrass fringe in this section of shoreline
(Ecology 2022, Figure 6). Estuarine wetland is mapped waterward of the OHWM, but there were
no wetland conditions observed along the shoreline or landward of the OHWM (Figure 5).
HABITAT AREA DESCRIPTION
The lot lies in a rural residential area of west Port Townsend (Figure 1). Along this section of
shoreline all properties are cliff/high bluff at the OHWM and developed with single family homes
beyond the top of the bluff. The shoreline is sparsely vegetated, but the trees and shrubs do not
provide much shade to the shoreline due to the steep grade of the slope. The beach is unvegetated
and composed of sand with some pebble and gravel-sized cobble, shell debris, and large rock.
The potential presence of listed species, including fish, bird, and mammals, as well as critical habitat
that have a primary association with the habitat of Strait of Juan Defuca was evaluated by a site
visit, aerial images, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitats and Species
website (WDFW 2022), the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service website (USFWS 2022), the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries website (NOAA 2022), and the Washington
Department of Nature Resources Natural Heritage website (WDNR 2022).
STATE AND FEDERALLY LISTED SPECIES AND CRITICAL HABITAT
Federally listed fish, bird, and mammals for Strait of Juan De Fuca and Jefferson County (WDFW
2022) were identified using the NOAA Fisheries and USFWS websites and are presented in Table 1.
Rick Ramage – McMinn NNL Ecological Land Services, Inc
Shoreline No Net Loss Report 4 February 2, 2023
Table 1: State and Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Species and Critical Habitat
Species, ESU1 or DPS2 State Status4 Federal
Status3
Critical
Habitat5/6 in
Project Vicinity
Fish
Dolly Varden
(Salvelinus malma) None Species of
Concern No
Bull Trout
(Salvelinus confluentus) Candidate Threatened No
Puget Sound ESU
Chinook Salmon (Onchorhyncus tshawytscha) None Threatened No
Hood Canal Summer-Run ESU
Chum Salmon (Onchorhynchus keta pop. 2) None Threatened No
Birds
Marbled Murrelet
(Brachyramphus marmoratus) Endangered Threatened No
Yellow-billed Cuckoo
(Coccyzus americanus) Candidate Threatened No
Short-tailed Albatross
(Phoebastria albatrus) Candidate Endangered No
Flowering Plants
Golden Paintbrush
(Castilleja levisecta) Endangered Threatened No
Insects
Taylor’s Checkerspot
(Euphydryas editha taylori) Endangered Endangered No
Mammals
Southern Resident DPS
Killer Whale (Orcinus orca) Endangered Endangered No
1) ESU - Evolutionarily Significant Unit. A distinct group of Pacific salmon.
2) DPS – Distinct Population Unit.
3) Endangered - In danger of becoming extinct or extirpated; Threatened - Likely to become endangered within the foreseeable
future throughout all or a significant portion of its range and that has been formally listed as such in the Federal Register under the
Federal Endangered Species Act; Sensitive - Vulnerable or declining and could become Endangered or Threatened in the state;
Species of Concern - An unofficial status, the species appears to be in jeopardy, but insufficient information to support listing. State
candidate species include fish and wildlife species that the Department will review for possible listing as State Endangered,
Threatened, or Sensitive. A species will be considered for designation as a State Candidate if sufficient evidence suggests that its
status may meet the listing criteria defined for State Endangered, Threatened, or Sensitive.
4) Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, PHS website.
5) NOAA 2022
6) USFWS 2022
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) shows that the project is not within critical habitat or
management areas for any of the species listed above. There are no mapped terrestrial wildlife
occurrences within the vicinity of the project and no habitat features are available in the project
vicinity for the federally listed endangered, threatened, or sensitive species. None of the species
identified during online research were observed during the site visit conducted on November 10,
2022. The shoreline environment appears to be in a relatively natural condition on this property.
Rick Ramage – McMinn NNL Ecological Land Services, Inc
Shoreline No Net Loss Report 5 February 2, 2023
WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE, PRIORITY HABITATS AND SPECIES
The WDFW PHS website (WDFW 2022) identifies the presence of priority habitat and species within
Strait of Juan de Fuca and adjacent to the onsite shoreline project. The priority species listed on
the PHS mapped within the area of the project are listed in Table 2.
Table 2: WDFW Priority Habitats and Species List
Species/Habitat Occurrence/Migration
Presence Location
Pacific Geoduck Presence Offshore
Cliffs/Bluffs Habitat Feature Shoreline
Estuarine and Marine Wetland Aquatic Habitat Puget Sound
WDFW PHS website identifies a few marine species existing within the onsite shoreline extent
(Figure 5). Cliffs and bluffs are present along this portion of the shoreline, which prevented closer
observation of the shoreline to check for presence of pacific geoduck or wetlands. If wetland is
present along the shoreline, the shoreline jurisdiction and buffer would supersede any required
wetland buffers. Additionally, all development is being consolidated as close to the south property
line as possible in order to avoid disturbance to the shoreline, so aquatic species such as pacific
geoduck will not be impacted (WDFW 2022c).
WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM
The Natural Heritage Program identifies thirty species of rare plants in Jefferson County. ELS did
not observe any rare plant species during the November 10, 2022 site visit nor are any mapped in
or adjacent to the property by the sources listed above. However, a botanical survey has not been
performed (WDNR 2022).
WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY, COASTAL ATLAS
The Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) indicates fringe eelgrass along this section of
shoreline (Figure 6; Ecology 2022). The wrack observed during the November 10, 2022 site visit did
not contain eelgrass but, it contained sparse amounts of Fucus sp. algae. There was no attached
aquatic vegetation observed.
Jefferson County Critical Areas Map
The Jefferson County Critical Areas Map (JCCA) identifies the shoreline critical area as well as the
FEMA flood zone along the shoreline. Neither of these critical areas extend beyond the bottom of
the high bluff (Figure 6). There are no wetlands or other critical areas mapped by JCCA.1 The
absence of additional critical areas was confirmed during the November 2022 site visit.
1 The JCCA maps should be used with discretion because they are used to gather general information about an area.
Rick Ramage – McMinn NNL Ecological Land Services, Inc
Shoreline No Net Loss Report 6 February 2, 2023
IMPACT ANALYSIS
Shoreline Impacts
The portion of Strait of Juan de Fuca shoreline associated with this property is along a high cliffside.
This feature minimizes the direct impacts that construction would have to the shoreline. The single-
family home is proposed as close to the east property boundary as possible to further protect the
shoreline. It will be necessary to remove native vegetation in the proposed building area including
about 1,713 square feet of permanent impact within the shoreline jurisdiction. No trees or
vegetation will be removed along the OHWM, top of the cliff, or the shoreline buffer. As much
vegetation as possible will be retained on this property and there will be no direct impacts to the
shoreline. Restoration will take place for the permanent and temporary impacts caused by the
construction of the home within the shoreline jurisdiction.Therefore, measures will be taken to
ensure that native herbaceous vegetation reestablishes in areas temporarily impact by
construction.
Noise generated during home construction, which will include use of heavy equipment and workers
to construct the house, may affect use of the forested environment utilized by wildlife species. This
area is already developed and there is noise currently generated by adjacent homes and residential
activity. There will likely be an increase in noise generated during construction but once
construction is completed, the noise level will lower significantly.
Shoreline Buffer Functions and Impacts
Buffers with dense vegetation communities limit human intrusion because they are difficult to
penetrate. These dense vegetation communities also reduce indirect impacts from noise and light
on shoreline areas. The value of the buffer to provide these functions is based on the condition of
the shoreline and wildlife that are currently utilizing the shoreline (Sheldon, et al. 2005). A dense
vegetated community exists between the shoreline buffer and McMinn Drive and continues
throughout the shoreline buffer until the top of the bluff. In the case of this property, the cliff
provides additional protection for the shoreline in terms of noise and light from human activity.
The width of buffers necessary to protect a critical area from degradation is also related to the
functions of the critical area and the buffer itself (Castelle, et al. 1992). Buffers function to protect
water quality of critical areas including shorelines by removing sediment and nutrients from runoff.
The function depends on the type of soils and vegetation in the buffer and the characteristics of
the runoff. The onsite buffer offers high functionality to filter pollutants generated upslope on
impervious surfaces because there is dense native vegetation throughout the buffer including
dense herbaceous growth dominated by sword fern. This vegetation along with the relatively level
topography until the top of the bluff also slows the flow of runoff, decreasing the amount of
sediment and pollutants that would impact the shoreline.
This property lies within a Rural Residential designation. There is residential development to the
north and south of the property that has been constructed as close or closer to the shoreline as
the proposed home on this property. The upland southeast of the shoreline jurisdiction and the
high bluff on this property function well to protect the shoreline from human activity such as noise
and light. There will be no impacts to the buffer and the only impact to the shoreline jurisdiction
Rick Ramage – McMinn NNL Ecological Land Services, Inc
Shoreline No Net Loss Report 7 February 2, 2023
will include removing minimal native vegetation for the 1,713 square feet of the home that is
proposed within the shoreline jurisdiction. This will be limited as much as possible and clearing
will only take place as necessary. Additionally, restoration planting will take place in between the
proposed home and shoreline buffer to account for the portion of the home to be developed
within the shoreline jurisdiction.
No Net Loss Determination
The impact will be accounted for by retaining vegetation throughout the property wherever
possible. The property is comprised of a native forest with a multi-layer understory. The proposed
building site is as close to McMinn Road as setbacks will allow and further from the top of the bluff
than surrounding houses. Overall, the project will result in no net loss of shoreline ecological
functions due to the well-established native vegetation within the shoreline buffer which will be
left undisturbed. To ensure no net loss of shoreline ecological functions, native vegetation will be
planted between the house and the shoreline buffer upon completion of the project. The area
cleared for the drainfield is expected to recover quickly due to the lack of invasive species and
dense cover of native vegetation.
SHORELINE RESTORATION PLAN
The project proposes to build a single-family home and install a septic system and drainfield in the
southeast corner of the property. Construction work will be kept to the minimum necessary to
achieve project goals. This project will result in no-net-loss of shoreline function because the
shoreline buffer will be left undisturbed and the 1,713 square feet of development within the
shoreline jurisdiction will be accounted for by planting native vegetation in between the building
site and the shoreline buffer. Additionally, areas of temporary impact such as the drainfield will
naturally restore due to the existing dense native vegetation cover and lack of invasive species that
could potentially interfere with recovery. The proposal will involve planting a total of 1,800 square
feet of upland area and ensuring invasive species do not establish in the temporarily impacted
areas (Figure 9).
Table 3: Restoration Plant List
Common name Scientific name Spacing on
center
Type Number
Sword fern Polystichum munitum 6 1 gallon, potted 16
Salal Gaultheria shallon 6 1 gallon, potted 16
Oregon grape Mahonia nervosa 6 1 gallon, potted 18
Total 50
Plant Materials
Potted Stock
1. 1-gallon potted plants will be purchased from a native plant nursery.
2. Potted stock will have a minimum size of 1.5 to 3 feet tall.
3. Potted stock will be kept in a shaded area prior to being planted.
4. The potted stock will have well-developed roots and sturdy stems with an appropriate root-
to-shoot ratio.
Rick Ramage – McMinn NNL Ecological Land Services, Inc
Shoreline No Net Loss Report 8 February 2, 2023
5. No damaged or desiccated roots or diseased plants will be accepted.
6. Unplanted stock will be properly stored at the end of each planting day to prevent
desiccation.
7. The project biologist will be responsible for inspecting potted stock prior to and during
planting and culling unacceptable plant materials.
Planting Methods
1. Plant the specified shrubs and ferns in the winter after construction activities are completed,
as listed in Table 3. Planting after construction is completed is recommended to avoid
impacting the plants during construction. Space the plants somewhat irregularly and in
groups to create dense heterogeneity in the planting area, leaving enough space between
each group to allow for mowing. Plant the potted stock with a tree shovel or comparable
tool.
2. Place the potted species in the planting holes so that their roots are able to extend down
entirely and do not bend upward or circle inside the hole.
3. Position the root crowns so that they are at, or slightly above, the level of the surrounding
soil.
4. Firmly compact the soil around the planted species to eliminate air spaces.
5. Irrigate all newly installed plants as site and weather conditions warrant.
Goals, Objectives, and Performance Standards
Project Goal: Achieve no net-loss of shoreline habitat and function through restoration to
compensate for impacts associated with the development of a single-family residence.
Objective 1: Maintain native plant cover within the forested understory.
Performance Standard 1(a): The project will maintain 85 percent survival of plants during the 5-
year monitoring period. The percent cover will be recorded in the monitoring reports in Years 3
and 5. Plant species number will be recorded and compared with as-built conditions for inclusion
with the monitoring reports.
Objective 2: Control invasive species.
Performance Standard 2(a): The project will maintain no greater than 10 percent cover by invasive
species for the duration of monitoring. During Years 1 through 5, invasive species will be removed
and suppressed in the restoration area as often as necessary to meet this performance standard.
Percent cover will be recorded annually and included in monitoring reports.
Maintenance
Maintenance of the planting area will occur for 5 years and will involve removing invasive plant
species, irrigating planted species, and reinstalling failed plantings, as necessary. The maintenance
may include the following activities:
1. Remove and control non-native and/or invasive vegetation from within the restoration area
for a minimum of two times during the growing season for the first 5 years.
2. Irrigate planted species as necessary during the dry season, approximately July 1 through
October 15. ELS biologists recommend that watering occur at least every two weeks during
the dry season for the first three years. The most successful method of watering plants is
Rick Ramage – McMinn NNL Ecological Land Services, Inc
Shoreline No Net Loss Report 9 February 2, 2023
using a temporary above-ground irrigation system set to a timer to ensure the plants are
regularly watered.
3. Replace dead or failed plants as described for the original installation to meet the minimum
annual survival rate performance standards.
Monitoring Plan
The restoration area will be monitored annually for a 5-year period following plant installation.
Monitoring reports will be submitted to Jefferson County by December 31 of each monitored year.
The goal of monitoring is to determine if the previously stated performance standards are being
met. The restoration area will be monitored once during the growing season, preferably during the
same two-week period each year to better compare the data.
The use of monitoring units is often not necessary for smaller restoration plantings such as this that
occur on single family, residential lots. The entire planting area can easily be monitored due to the
low number of plants being installed in select areas of the property. Photo stations will be
established from several locations within the restoration area to visually document the changes
that occur in the buffer during the 5-year monitoring period by counting plants to assess survival
rates.
Monitoring Report Contents
The annual monitoring reports will contain at least the following:
• Location map and representational drawing.
• Historic description of project, including dates of plant installation, current year of
monitoring, and restatement of goals, objectives, and performance standards.
• Description of monitoring methods.
• Documentation of plant cover and overall development of plant communities.
• Assessment of non-native, invasive plant species and recommendations for management.
• Observations of wildlife, including, amphibians, invertebrates, reptiles, birds, and mammals
• Photographs from permanent photo points.
• Summary of maintenance and contingency measures proposed for the next season and
completed for the past season.
Contingency Plan
If the performance standards are not met during the 5-year monitoring period, a contingency plan
will be developed and implemented. All contingency actions will be undertaken only after
consulting and gaining approval from Jefferson County. The applicant will be required to complete
a contingency plan that describes (1) the causes of failure, (2) proposed corrective actions, (3) a
schedule for completing corrective actions, and (4) whether additional maintenance and
monitoring are necessary.
Site Protection
Rick Ramage – McMinn NNL Ecological Land Services, Inc
Shoreline No Net Loss Report 10 February 2, 2023
The restored buffer area will be owned, maintained, and managed by the landowner, unless such
responsibilities are assigned to another entity. The owners will be responsible for maintenance and
monitoring of the planting area for the prescribed 5-year period.
LIMITATIONS
ELS bases this report’s determinations on standard scientific methodology and best professional
judgment. In our opinion, local, state, and federal regulatory agencies should agree with our
determinations. However, the information contained in this report should be considered
preliminary and used at your own risk until it has been approved in writing by the appropriate
regulatory agencies. ELS is not responsible for the impacts of any changes in environmental
standards, practices, or regulations after the date of this report.
Rick Ramage – McMinn NNL Ecological Land Services, Inc
Shoreline No Net Loss Report 11 February 2, 2023
REFERENCES
Castelle, A.J., C. Conolly, M. Emers, E.D. Metz, S. Meyer, M. Witter, S. Maurermann, T. Erickson,
S.S. Cooke. 1992. Wetland Buffers: Use and Effectiveness. Adolfson Associates, Inc.,
Shorelands and Coastal Zone Management Program, Washington Department of Ecology.
Olympia. Pub. No. 92-10.
Hruby, T (Hruby). August 2014. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western
Washington- 2014 Update. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #14-06-029.
Olympia, Washington. Effective January 1, 2015.
Jefferson County Code (JCC). 2022. Chapter 18.22 Critical Areas Ordinance.
Jefferson County Code (JCCSMP). 2022. Chapter 18.25 Shoreline Management Program
Jefferson County Parcel Search. 2022. https://gisweb.jeffcowa.us/LandRecords/. Website
accessed December 2022.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2022. Fisheries Department, West
Region http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/. Website accessed December 2022.
Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). 2022. Web Soil Survey. Online document
http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm. Website accessed December
2022.
Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). 2016. Washington Hydric Soils List.
<http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/soils/use/hydric/>.
Sheldon, D. T. Hruby, P. Johnson, K. Harper, A. McMillan, T. Granger, S. Stanley, and E. Stockdale.
March 2005. Wetlands in Washington State – Volume 1: A Synthesis of the Science.
Washington State Department of Ecology. Publication #05-06-006. Olympia, WA.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0),
ed. J.S. Wakeley, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-08-13. Vicksburg, MS: U.S.
Army Engineer Research and Development Center.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2022a. Endangered Species Website.
http://www.fws.gov/endangered/. Website accessed December 2022.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2022b. Information for Planning and
Consultation (IPaC). https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/index/. Website accessed
December 2022.
Rick Ramage – McMinn NNL Ecological Land Services, Inc
Shoreline No Net Loss Report 12 February 2, 2023
Washington State Department of Ecology. July 2018. Modified from Appendix 8-C: Guidance on
Buffers and Ratios for Western Washington Wetlands in Washington State Volume 2 –
Protecting and Managing Wetlands Ecology Publication No. 05-06-008.
Washington Department of Ecology. 2022. Washington State Coastal Atlas
https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/coastalatlas/. Website accessed December 2022.
Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology). 2022. Washington State Water Quality Atlas
https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/waterqualityatlas/map.aspx?CustomMap=y&RT=0&Layers=2
3,29&Filters=n,n,n,n. Website accessed December 2022.
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2022. Priority Habitats and Species PHS on
the Web. https://geodataservices.wdfw.wa.gov/hp/phs/. Website accessed December
2022.
Washington State Department of Natural Resources (WDNR). 2022. Natural Heritage Program –
Rare Species. https://www.dnr.wa.gov/NHPspecies. Website accessed December 2022.
FIGURES & PHOTOPLATES
48.1145° Latitude
-122.8674° Longitude
2/6/2023 9:27 AM C:\Users\Emilio\Box\ELS\WA\Jefferson\County\3833-Ramage\3833.01-McMinn NNL\3833.01-Figures CAD Only\3833.01_NNL.dwg Emilio N
6
: (DATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:Figure 1VICINITY MAP2/6/233833.01McMinn NNLRick RamageSection 1, Township 30N, Range 2W, W.M. Jefferson County, WAEFECECSCALE IN FEET0200040001157 3rd Ave., Suite 220ALongview, WA 98632Phone: (360) 578-1371Fax: (360) 414-9305www.eco-land.comLOCATION MAP
WASHINGTON
SITE
NOTE:
Quadrangle topographic map from USGS.
PROJECT
VICINITY MAP
SCALE IN MILES
520
Mt. St.
Helens
SKAMANIA
N. Bonneville
Stevenson
Carson
14
WashougalCamas
Vancouver
Battle
Ground
Woodland
Ridgefield
CLARK
5
500
503
205
Kalama
Longview
ToutleCastle
Rock
COWLITZ
504
4Cathlamet
WAHKIAKUM
6
101
401
103
105
PACIFIC
Ilwaco
Long Beach
Ocean Park
South
Bend
Raymond
101Westport
Ocean Shores
Copalis Beach
Pacific Beach
Taholah
Quinalt
Aberdeen
MontesanoElma
Oakville
12
8
105
109
101
GRAYS
HARBOR
Queets
101
Kalaloch
Port
Townsend
Port Ludlow
Quilcene
Brinnon
101
19
104
20
JEFFERSON
CLALLAMForks110
101
113 112
101
112
Port
Angeles
Sequim
Neah Bay
Clallam Bay
Friday Harbor
Blaine
Ferndale
Bellingham
542
542
9
Lynden5
539
SAN
JUAN
WHATCOM
ConcreteAnacortes
Mount Vernon
Sedro-Woolley
5
20
11
530
SKAGIT
Lynnwood
MulkiteoEverett
Marysville
Monroe
Arlington
Darrington
5
9
2522
SNOHOMISH
Mt St Helens
KING
Seattle
Shoreline
90
Carnation
North Bend
Redmond
Enumclaw
Auburn
Issaquah
Burien
Kent
Renton
405
18
169
410
169
202
Mt. Rainier
Eatonville
4
Puyallup
Tacoma
Gig Harbor
165
162
164
161
7
702
507
Roy
DuPont Carbonado
5
5 Olympia
Shelton
Yelm
Tenino
508
Centralia
Chehalis
Pe Ell Morton 12
Toledo
7
505
Winlock
PIERCE
LEWIS
THURSTON
5
5
KITSAP
Poulsbo
3
16
Bremerton
SITE
SITE
75'
150'
200'
10'McMinn RdStrait of Juan de FucaParcel #:002014003NOTE(S):1.Aerial from Google Earth™ (7/30/21).2.OHWM estimated from aerial imagery and contours.3.Top of bluff, and photo point located using handheldGPS capable of submeter accuracy.4.Lidar provided by NOAA at web address:https://coast.noaa.gov/dataviewer/#/lidar/search/2/6/2023 9:27 AM C:\Users\Emilio\Box\ELS\WA\Jefferson\County\3833-Ramage\3833.01-McMinn NNL\3833.01-Figures CAD Only\3833.01_NNL.dwg Emilio N6:(DATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220ALongview, WA 98632Phone: (360) 578-1371Fax: (360) 414-9305www.eco-land.comDATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:Figure 2EXISTING CONDITIONS2/6/233833.01McMinn NNLRick RamageSection 1, Township 30N, Range 2W, W.M. Jefferson County, WAEFECECSCALE IN FEET0601201LEGEND:Site BoundaryParcel BoundaryOHWM150' Shoreline Buffer200' Shoreline Jurisdiction10' Building SetbackTop of Bluff75' Top of Bluff Setback2' ContoursPhoto Point Location1
McMinn RdStrait of Juan de FucaProposedDrainfieldFutureDrainfieldProposedSingle FamilyResidenceProposedGarageParcel #:002014003FutureDrainfieldNOTE(S):1.OHWM estimated from aerial imagery and contours.2.Top of bluff, and photo point located using handheldGPS capable of submeter accuracy.3.Site plan provided by Hayne Architects.4.Lidar provided by NOAA at web address:https://coast.noaa.gov/dataviewer/#/lidar/search/2/6/2023 9:27 AM C:\Users\Emilio\Box\ELS\WA\Jefferson\County\3833-Ramage\3833.01-McMinn NNL\3833.01-Figures CAD Only\3833.01_NNL.dwg Emilio N6:(DATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220ALongview, WA 98632Phone: (360) 578-1371Fax: (360) 414-9305www.eco-land.comDATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:Figure 3PROPOSED CONDITIONS2/6/233833.01McMinn NNLRick RamageSection 1, Township 30N, Range 2W, W.M. Jefferson County, WAEFECECSCALE IN FEET060120LEGEND:Site BoundaryParcel BoundaryOHWM150' Shoreline Buffer200' Shoreline Jurisdiction10' Building SetbackTop of Bluff75' Top of Bluff Setback2' ContoursProposed BuildingProposed DrivewayProposed DrainfieldFuture Drainfield
2/6/2023 9:27 AM C:\Users\Emilio\Box\ELS\WA\Jefferson\County\3833-Ramage\3833.01-McMinn NNL\3833.01-Figures CAD Only\3833.01_NNL.dwg Emilio N
6
: (DATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:Figure 4JEFFERSON COUNTY CRITICAL AREAS2/6/233833.01McMinn NNLRick RamageSection 1, Township 30N, Range 2W, W.M. Jefferson County, WAEFECECSCALE IN FEET01503001157 3rd Ave., Suite 220ALongview, WA 98632Phone: (360) 578-1371Fax: (360) 414-9305www.eco-land.comNOTE(S):
1. Map provided on-line by Jefferson County at web address: https://gisweb.jeffcowa.us/LandRecords/
LEGEND:
SITE
Site Boundary
Critical Areas
DNR Streams & Water Bodies Forest Practices
DNR Water Body Forest Practices
Fish Habitat
Non-fish Habitat
Inventoried Shoreline
DNR Streams Forest Practices
Fish Habitat
Non-fish Habitat
Inventoried Shoreline
Soils Hydric
Hydric Soil
Wetlands
Wetlands
FEMA Flood Zones
A: High Risk 100yr/1% chance no
Base Flood Elevation (BFE) determined
AE: High Risk 100 year, Base Flood
Elevation has been determined
AE FLOODWAY: High Risk 100 year
Regulatory Floodway
VE: Coastal High Risk 100 year, Base
Flood Elevation has been determined
X: Low to Moderate Risk 500 year
NOTE: Map provided on-line by Washington State Department of Fish & Wildlife at web address:
http://apps.wdfw.wa.gov/phsontheweb/2/6/2023 9:27 AM C:\Users\Emilio\Box\ELS\WA\Jefferson\County\3833-Ramage\3833.01-McMinn NNL\3833.01-Figures CAD Only\3833.01_NNL.dwg Emilio N
6
: (DATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:Figure 5WDFW PRIORITY HABITAT AND SPECIES2/6/233833.01McMinn NNLRick RamageSection 1, Township 30N, Range 2W, W.M. Jefferson County, WAEFECECSCALE IN FEET02004001157 3rd Ave., Suite 220ALongview, WA 98632Phone: (360) 578-1371Fax: (360) 414-9305www.eco-land.comLEGEND:
Cliffs/Bluffs
Estuarine and Marine Wetland
Pacific Geoduck
SITE
NOTE(S):
1. Map provided on-line by WA State Department of Ecology at web address:
https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/coastalatlas/tools/map.aspx
2/6/2023 9:27 AM C:\Users\Emilio\Box\ELS\WA\Jefferson\County\3833-Ramage\3833.01-McMinn NNL\3833.01-Figures CAD Only\3833.01_NNL.dwg Emilio N
6
: (DATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:Figure 6COASTAL ATLAS2/6/233833.01McMinn NNLRick RamageSection 1, Township 30N, Range 2W, W.M. Jefferson County, WAEFECECSCALE IN FEET04008001157 3rd Ave., Suite 220ALongview, WA 98632Phone: (360) 578-1371Fax: (360) 414-9305www.eco-land.comSITE
Eelgrass
Fringe (patchy)
LEGEND:
Site Boundary
Surfgrass
Fringe (patchy)
2/6/2023 9:27 AM C:\Users\Emilio\Box\ELS\WA\Jefferson\County\3833-Ramage\3833.01-McMinn NNL\3833.01-Figures CAD Only\3833.01_NNL.dwg Emilio 1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220ALongview, WA 98632Phone: (360) 578-1371Fax: (360) 414-9305www.eco-land.comDATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:DATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:Figure 7COASTAL SHORELINE PHOTO2/6/233833.01McMinn NNLRick RamageSection 1, Township 30N, Range 2W, W.M. Jefferson County, WAEFECECNOT TO SCALENOTE(S):1.Map provided on-line by WA State Department of Ecology at web address:https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/coastalatlas/tools/Map.aspxSITE
McMinn RdStrait of Juan de FucaProposedDrainfieldFutureDrainfieldProposedSingle FamilyResidenceProposedGarageParcel #:002014003FutureDrainfieldNOTE(S):1.OHWM estimated from aerial imagery and contours.2.Top of bluff, and photo point located using handheldGPS capable of submeter accuracy.3.Site plan provided by Hayne Architects.4.Lidar provided by NOAA at web address:https://coast.noaa.gov/dataviewer/#/lidar/search/2/6/2023 9:27 AM C:\Users\Emilio\Box\ELS\WA\Jefferson\County\3833-Ramage\3833.01-McMinn NNL\3833.01-Figures CAD Only\3833.01_NNL.dwg Emilio N6:(DATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220ALongview, WA 98632Phone: (360) 578-1371Fax: (360) 414-9305www.eco-land.comDATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:Figure 8IMPACT ANALYSIS2/6/233833.01McMinn NNLRick RamageSection 1, Township 30N, Range 2W, W.M. Jefferson County, WAEFECECSCALE IN FEET060120LEGEND:Site BoundaryParcel BoundaryOHWM150' Shoreline Buffer200' Shoreline Jurisdiction10' Building SetbackTop of Bluff75' Top of Bluff Setback2' ContoursProposed BuildingProposed DrivewayProposed DrainfieldFuture DrainfieldShoreline JurisdictionImpacts (1,713 sq. ft.)Shoreline JurisdictionTemporary Impacts (970 sq. ft.)Planting Area (1,800 sq. ft.)
McMinn RdStrait of Juan de FucaProposedDrainfieldFutureDrainfieldProposedSingle FamilyResidenceProposedGarageParcel #:002014003FutureDrainfieldNOTE(S):1.OHWM estimated from aerial imagery and contours.2.Top of bluff, and photo point located using handheldGPS capable of submeter accuracy.3.Site plan provided by Hayne Architects.4.Lidar provided by NOAA at web address:https://coast.noaa.gov/dataviewer/#/lidar/search/5.Plants are not to scale and locations are approximateas shown. Actual planting locations will be determinedin the field, with consideration to the listed spacing anddensity to produce the most natural appearancepossible.2/6/2023 9:27 AM C:\Users\Emilio\Box\ELS\WA\Jefferson\County\3833-Ramage\3833.01-McMinn NNL\3833.01-Figures CAD Only\3833.01_NNL.dwg Emilio N6:(DATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220ALongview, WA 98632Phone: (360) 578-1371Fax: (360) 414-9305www.eco-land.comDATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:Figure 9RESTORATION PLAN2/6/233833.01McMinn NNLRick RamageSection 1, Township 30N, Range 2W, W.M. Jefferson County, WAEFECECSCALE IN FEET060120LEGEND:Site BoundaryParcel BoundaryOHWM150' Shoreline Buffer200' Shoreline Jurisdiction10' Building SetbackTop of Bluff75' Top of Bluff Setback2' ContoursProposed BuildingProposed DrivewayProposed DrainfieldFuture DrainfieldPlanting Area (1,800 sq. ft.)PlantingDiagram:NTS6'6'6'
Photo 1 was taken from an existing footpath
looking southeast at the proposed
home site which is marked by the blue
flagging tape. Downed trees and debris
covered the area from recent wind
storms.
1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220A
Longview, WA 98632
Phone: (360) 578-1371
Fax: (360) 414-9305
DATE: 11/28/22
DWN: EC
PRJ. MGR: EC
PROJ.#: 3833.01
Photoplate 1
McMinn NNL
Rick Ramage
Jefferson County, Washington
Photo 3 was taken from the same location as
Photos 1 and 2 looking northwest to-
wards the bluff that leads down to the
shoreline.
Photo 2 was taken from the same location as
Photo 1 looking southwest. The foot-
path is on the right and the proposed
home site is to the left of the photo.
Photo 4 was taken from the top of the bluff
looking west. The bluff was covered in
shrub and herbaceous vegetation with
patches of small trees and snags.
1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220A
Longview, WA 98632
Phone: (360) 578-1371
Fax: (360) 414-9305
DATE: 11/28/22
DWN: EC
PRJ. MGR: EC
PROJ.#: 3833.01
Photoplate 2
McMinn NNL
Rick Ramage
Jefferson County, Washington
Photo 6 was taken from the same location as
Photo 5 looking east showing the dense
forested canopy that lines the top of
the bluff.
Photo 5 was taken from the top of the bluff
looking directly down at the shoreline
which was inaccessible due to the
steep slope. Vegetation continued
down the slope to the shoreline which
consisted of rocky and sandy substrate.
There was no visible aquatic vegetation
aside from seaweed that had washed
up on shore.