My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOCC Exhibits A-E ECY Approved SMP-Code Amendments
>
Meetings
>
2016
>
03. March
>
2016-03-15 10:00 AM - Commissioners' Agenda
>
BOCC Exhibits A-E ECY Approved SMP-Code Amendments
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/7/2018 10:36:59 AM
Creation date
4/7/2018 10:31:02 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting
Date
3/15/2016
Meeting title
Commissioners' Agenda
Location
Commissioners' Auditorium
Address
205 West 5th Room 109 - Ellensburg
Meeting type
Regular
Meeting document type
Supporting documentation
Supplemental fields
Alpha Order
m
Item
Request to Approve an Ordinance with Amendments to the Kittitas County Code and Kittitas County Comprehensive Plan to reflect the Washington State Department of Ecology Approved Shoreline Master Program for Kittitas County
Order
13
Placement
Consent Agenda
Row ID
28372
Type
Ordinance
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
339
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br />Kittitas County Shoreline Master Program <br />Chapter 5 71 <br />March 7, 2016 <br />Kittitas County Board of County Commissioners Shoreline Master Program Adopting Ordinance <br />Kittitas County Shoreline Master Program Exhibit A | March 2016 | Page 71 of 339 <br />except through a shoreline variance. Buffers that have been averaged or reduced by <br />any prior actions administered by Kittitas County shall not be further reduced. <br />Proposals for buffer reduction on such sites shall not require a shoreline variance if <br />the following conditions are met: <br />a. The existing buffer is predominantly unvegetated, composed of nuisance species <br />or in an otherwise highly disturbed condition; <br />b. The minimum width of the reduced buffer is at least seventy-five percent (75%) of <br />the standard width per Table 5.2-3; <br />c. The reduced portion of the buffer cannot exceed forty percent (40%) of the buffer <br />length on the development property; <br />d. A critical area report demonstrates that the reduction will not result in a net loss <br />of shoreline and aquatic habitat functions and values; <br />e. The reduced buffer area is planted and enhanced with species native to central <br />Washington; and <br />f. A mitigation plan is development and implemented, per the requirements of <br />Section 5.2. <br /> <br />9. Prior to approving a request for buffer averaging or reduction, the Administrator shall <br />ensure the development is designed to separate and screen the stream from <br />impacts such as noise, glare, and vegetation trampling. The site design shall <br />consider the varying degrees of impacts of different land uses. For example, parking <br />lots, store entrances, and roads generally have higher noise and glare impacts than <br />the rear of the store. Site screening should take advantage of natural topography or <br />existing vegetation, wherever possible. Where natural screening is not available, <br />berms, landscaping, and structural screens should be implemented (e.g., orient <br />buildings to screen parking lots and store entrances from critical areas). <br /> <br />L. Regulations—aquatic habitat conservation area reporting <br />1. Except for single-family residences located outside of shoreline buffers, if a <br />proposed use or development is located within two hundred (200) feet of a <br />designated aquatic habitat conservation area, a critical areas report is required, and <br />shall include the following: <br />a. The aquatic habitat conservation area habitat type and location of the OHWM; <br />b. All aquatic habitat conservation areas and required buffers within two hundred <br />(200) feet of the project area shall be depicted on the site plan; <br />c. The vegetative, faunal, topographic, and hydrologic characteristics of the aquatic <br />habitat conservation area; and <br />d. A detailed discussion of the direct and indirect potential impacts on aquatic <br />habitat conservation area by the project. Such discussion shall include a <br />discussion of the ongoing management practices that will protect habitat after the <br />project site has been developed. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.