Ordinance 2600-02 - Laserfiche WebLink

Findings & Conclusions 3/1/02 Page 9 additional language adds clarity and is consistent with the City's response to public access impacts concerns.) In addition, expansion of existing facilities such as SR529 and I-5 may be allowed when mitigation is provided for buffer impacts. b. Where dike setbacks are proposed or required, the wetland area within the setback area (i.e., between the waterward toe of the existing dike and the waterward toe of the setback dike) shall be delineated per the state wetland delineation manual. Areas not presently functioning as wetland will be credited toward the required buffer area. (Language added for clarity.) c. The buffer on the south side of the Category 1 wetland north of the Simpson development pad shall fiet be determined by a wetland analysis per Sections 37.100 and 37.170 of the Everett Municipal Code. This analysis shall include a Habitat Management Plan (HMP) and Buffer Enhancement Plan (BEP). Buffers recommended in the wetland analysis cannot be less than 100 feet unless significant improvements are made to the wetland and buffer functions. In no case shall the buffer be reduced below 75 feet, and the trail shall be relocated outside of that buffer except where it connects to the trail along the river. The buffer shall be enhanced to provide for the potential for large woody debris recruitment into the wetland. Provided however that a spur trail to the wetland may be provided in the buffer to provide views into the wetland. Associated interpretive facilities such as signs, a viewing platform, and benches may also be provided in the buffers. (The language reflects BAS and discussions with the City for buffers on this site.) d. Buffers shall not be reduced below that required by EMC 19.37.100.A for the Urban Conservancy designated wetlands in the Marshland area, or the wetlands in 1997 SEWIP AUs 10, 8, and 20 on Smith Island, except when the proposal includes significant actions that would restore salmonid rearing functions, such as removing dikes, improving channel connections, and removing fill to create tidal marsh, and except where existing improvements such as the railroad effectively limit the buffers in some areas. (The subsection is added to avoid confusion with buffer reduction options found elsewhere in EMC 19.37.) e. Stormwater facilities such as wetponds • . • . - . -: are prohibited in buffers for Category 1 streams and wetlands and the wetlands in 1997 SEWIP AUs 8, 10, and 20 on Smith Island and the Urban Conservancy designated wetlands in the Marshland area. In situations where stormwater facilities arc placed in buffers on category 2, 3 &4 wetlands