My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2005/08/10 Council Agenda Packet
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2005
>
2005/08/10 Council Agenda Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/15/2017 10:14:08 AM
Creation date
2/15/2017 10:10:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Council Agenda Packet
Date
8/10/2005
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
547
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
13 <br /> 7. How Compensation is Calculated (Concurrent Mitigation). The acreage of compensation <br /> for concurrent mitigation (mitigation that is constructed but may not be fully functioning <br /> at the time impact is incurred) shall be calculated from the IVA function performance <br /> scores at the time of impact,provided that the minimum compensation requirements of <br /> Regulation 35.A.3 are met at all times (see Table 5.1 in the Salmon Overlay for <br /> example): <br /> IVA score per acre function lost X 1.3 X (acres lost) =Acres of compensation <br /> IVA score per acre function gained (at the time of impact) <br /> 8. Compensation Based on Limiting Function. Under Regulations 35.A. 6 and 7, the <br /> acreage needed for compensation shall be calculated separately for the chinook and <br /> coho/bull trout functions. Whichever function requires the greater acreage for <br /> compensation (i.e., which is the limiting function)will determine the required overall <br /> compensation acreage in order to ensure that the limiting function is adequately <br /> compensated for. Excess compensation acreage for the nonlimiting function shall not be <br /> available as compensation for other habitat impacts. <br /> 9. Use of Average Restoration Potential Per Acre. An average restoration potential per acre <br /> shall be used to establish the compensation requirements in cases where several AUs are <br /> restored simultaneously (as in a compensation bank) or where several individual project <br /> impacts are to be mitigated in a single restoration project. This average is calculated by <br /> summing the potential increase in IVA-acre points and dividing by the total acreage of <br /> the site. This average shall then be used to determine the acres of compensation required <br /> according to Regulations 35.A. 3 and 6 or 7. <br /> 10. Guidelines for Developing Compensatory Mitigation Plans. Compensatory mitigation <br /> and monitoring plans (CMMPs)with applicable performance standards submitted under <br /> the SEWIP plan should follow the interagency"Guidelines for Developing Freshwater <br /> Wetlands Mitigation Plans and Proposals" (Department of Ecology Publication #94-29), <br /> which is subject to amendment by Department of Ecology and future acceptance by the <br /> City. en-El-should be reviewed by the SSO-TAC. C MMPs shall be circulated to the <br /> SSOTAC for review and comment and for adaptive management purposes as provided in <br /> Salmon Overlay Section 5.6. Applicants should consider the overall restoration <br /> objectives set forth in SO Chapter 6. <br /> 11. Performance Criteria. Standards and performance criteria shall be established for each <br /> mitigation action as described in SO Section 5.6 and stated in the CMMP. <br /> 12. Monitoring Requirements. Each compensation site shall be monitored over a period of <br /> up to10 years as described in SO Section 5.6. <br /> 13. Threatened, Endangered, or Commercially Important Species. All tidal and associated <br /> riparian areas within the SEWIP planning area are designated critical habitat for chinook <br /> salmon and are likely to also constitute important habitat for coho salmon and <br /> 1 3 <br /> 38 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.