Pierce County's In-Lieu Fee Wetland Mitigation Program
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•455 views
Ann Boeholt, project manager, presented on Pierce County's In-Lieu Fee Wetland Mitigation Program at the August 2015 NRC meeting.
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (12)
Similar to Pierce County's In-Lieu Fee Wetland Mitigation Program
Similar to Pierce County's In-Lieu Fee Wetland Mitigation Program (20)
More from Nisqually River Council
More from Nisqually River Council (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Pierce County's In-Lieu Fee Wetland Mitigation Program
- 1. PIERCE COUNTY’S IN-LIEU FEE WETLAND MITIGATION PROGRAM Ann Boeholt, Project Manager Pierce County Public Works & Utilities, Surface Water Management September 18, 2015 Nisqually River Council
- 2. • History and Development of the PCILF Program • Mechanics of the PCILF Program • Case Study--Use of the PCILF Program • Nisqually Watershed Sites and Next Steps Learning Objectives Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 2
- 3. Review of Programmatic Mitigation Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 3
- 4. 1. Avoid 2. Minimize 3. Rectify the impacts by repairing, etc. 4. Reduce or eliminate impacts over time 5. Compensate for impacts by replacement 6. Monitor and take necessary corrective measures Mitigation Sequence Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 4
- 5. One of three compensatory mitigation mechanisms • Wetland Mitigation Banking • In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Programs • Permittee-Responsible mitigation (concurrent or advanced) In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 5
- 6. Sideboards in 2008 Rule (33 CFR 332): Sponsor must be government or non-profit natural resources agency. Strong oversight by COE. Must implement sites within 3 years of collecting fees. Compensation Planning Framework required. In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 6
- 7. • 2007-2008 first PCILF Pre-Capitalized site constructed (with strong oversight by COE). • 2010 Puget Sound Partnership effort to develop regional ILF program. • 2011 County agreed to take over sponsorship; issued Prospectus. PCILF History 2007-2011 Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 7
- 8. • 2012-2013: Regular meetings with the IRT. • 2013: Constructed 2nd Pre-Capitalization site. • 2014: County Council approved ordinances to authorize Executive to sign PCILF Instrument and to amend County Code. • 2015: Minor Code Corrections and PCILF Instrument Signed. First PCILF sale (in Chambers/Clover Creek Basin). PCILF History 2012-2015 Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 8
- 9. • Submitting Wetland Reports to officially recognize our two existing pre-capitalized sites as PCILF mitigation receiving sites. • Determining restoration needs for South Creek Headwaters site. • Program expansion into WRIAs 10 and 15. • Site Selection for WRIAs 11 and 12. PCILF Current Status Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 9
- 10. • Tracking Inquiries and Credit Sales. • Managing Fee and Credit Ledgers. • Monitoring and Maintenance of Pre- capitalized sites. • Annual Report of Program. • Developing Desk Manual to guide internal program management. PCILF Current Status Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 10
- 11. • Limited to Freshwater Wetlands. • Limited to two initial Service Areas. • Use Watershed Approach to Site Selection. • Use WDOE’s Calculating Credits and Debits for Compensatory Mitigation as credit valuation method. • Pre-capitalized two sites. • Requesting 120 Advance Credits in WRIA 12 and 30 Advance Credits in WRIA 11. PCILF Program-General Mechanics Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 11
- 12. Limited Initial Service Area Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 12 Service area: Geographic area in which the ILF program is authorized to provide mitigation
- 13. Pre-Capitalization Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 13
- 14. Pre-Capitalization: Types of Credits Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 14 120 166 2014 INTIAL WRIA 12 CREDIT BALANCES AFTER YEAR 2015 CREDIT SALE 100 166 20 AFTER 2016 CREDIT RELEASE 120 83 63 20 120 83 13 70 AFTER YEAR 2016 CREDIT SALE Advanced Credits Pre-Capitalized Unreleased Credits Advanced Unfulfilled Credits Pre-Capitalized Released Credits Sold and Fulfilled Credits
- 15. • Based on Full Cost Accounting. • Costs of credits are currently: $40,000 (per unit) in WRIA 12 . o ~$ 27.55 per sq. ft. ($1.2 million per acre) of impact $30,000 (per unit) in WRIA 11. o ~$20.66 per sq. ft. ($890 K per acre) of impact. • Credits may be purchased in increments as small as 1/100th of a unit. • Prices reviewed annually. Cost to use the PCILF Program Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 15
- 16. How Many Credits Are Needed? Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 16 1 Acre 1 Credit≠
- 17. How Many Credits Are Needed? Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 17 1 Acre 1 Credit>
- 18. • Best Available Science. • Estimates functions and values lost when a wetland is altered. • Estimates gain in functions and values that result from the mitigation. The Credit/Debit Tool Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 18
- 19. • Classification • Quality • Area of wetland disturbed • Timing of mitigation How Many Credits Are Needed? Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 19 (13.5) 30 (189) Credits per Acre of Impact
- 20. Case Study Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 20 •$30K to construct mitigation site; •$30K to monitor and maintain mitigation site for 10 years. •$10K for consultant to identify a mitigation site; •$10K for consultant to develop a mitigation plan; •$10K for consultant to develop construction plans; •$50K for ROW acquisition (perhaps condemnation); Estimate for onsite mitigation: $140K
- 21. $140K Estimate for onsite mitigation Versus $24K to purchase 0.6 units Case Study Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 21
- 22. • Sale of 0.6 credits ($26,000) to Pierce County Transportation. • Three other sales pending. • Dozen additional inquiries. • King County ILF Program: 16 sales; $16 million in 3.5 years. • Larchmont and South Midland Wetland Reserves. Successes Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 22
- 23. 2002 2007 2015 South Midland Wetland Reserve
- 25. Larchmont Wetland Reserve 2005 2015
- 26. South Creek Headwaters Wetland Reserve Nisqually Basin Sites Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 26 May, 2009
- 27. South Creek Headwaters Wetland Reserve Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program9/18/2015 Slide 27 May 2009 April 2015
- 30. QUESTIONS? Ann Boeholt (253)798-4694 or aboehol@co.pierce.wa.us September 18, 2015 Pierce County’s In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Program The Tangled Bank Contemplate a tangled bank Clothed with many kinds of plant Insects and birds flitting about Worms crawling through the damp … From: Darwin’s Tangled Bank in verse By Michael Eisen Published: December 3, 2012
Editor's Notes
- Just wanted to review a few important points about ILF and other programmatic approaches for providing Compensatory Mitigation. Not sure how much of this others will have covered. First of all, wetlands are environmental critical areas (So designated within the WA State GMA). They are surface waters, groundwaters, or both. They provide important and critical habitat for majority of Washington’s Aquatic and Terrestrial animal species. They are part of our hydrologic cycle. They function to purify surface and groundwaters, to attenuate storm water flows, and to help regulate flows in tributary streams—helping to maintain low flow conditions during our summer droughts. As such, They are regulated and development must “mitigate” for wetland impacts. Up until recent times (the last 5 years or so) wetlands were typically mitigated on-site—or close to the impact site, by the single owner/developer. Known as permittee-responsible mitigation. Turns out this kind of compensatory mitigation does a poor job of replacing wetland impacts. These sites are often so small that they go unnoticed and are not corrected and protected. Or, they are poorly buffered and so are not able to provide viable wetland functions. Becoming more in vogue now, particularly with implementation of the 2008 rule for compensating for impacts to aquatic resources, is the use of Programmatic (combined, usually strategically sited and designed) mitigation sites…mitigation bank sites, etc.
- By “Mitigate” , we mean that this mitigation sequence must be followed. This sequence begins with avoidance, and includes the requirement that we conscientiously minimize, rectify, or reduce impacts over time, prior to jumping into compensation. Another often overlooked element of this mitigation sequence is the need to monitor a mitigation site and to take corrective measures as necessary. In-Lieu Fee Mitigation and Mitigation Banking enter at this fourth step– compensation--where they provide an option for developers (or applicants) with unavoidable wetland impacts that are required to provide compensation. This is a key point. In-Lieu Fee Mitigation does not circumvent the requirement to first avoid and minimize wetland and other aquatic resource impacts to extent practicable.
- In-Lieu Fee Mitigation is one of three primary mechanisms for permittees to meet their compensatory mitigation obligations. The others are purchasing credits from a mitigation bank, and permittee-responsible mitigation. Permittee-Responsible mitigation is mitigation undertaken by the applicant or their consultant. This is the most common way of providing compensatory mitigation, until now. This kind of compensatory mitigation is usually done at the same time as the impacts and often on the same site as the impacts. Sometimes it is done it advance, for future, known impacts. Unfortunately, research has shown that permittee-responsible mitigation projects are frequently not monitored nor maintained sufficiently (remember that last step in the mitigation sequence?) and so often fail to achieve their objectives or to adequately compensate for the wetlands originally disturbed.
- ILF programs began in the late 1980’s, with the States of New Jersey and Maryland, and Sacramento County, California among the first jurisdictions to have ILF programs. There was a great deal of concern from the public and regulatory community that with some of these early programs fees were collected but never spent on mitigation projects, or their was inadequate follow -through so many of these ILF programs were not sufficiently compensating for wetland losses. In 2006 the Federal Government proposed a new rule to clarify compensation for losses of wetlands and other aquatic areas. They considered bagging the use of ILF programs, but enough proponents argued that it was sometimes the only or the best option for providing meaningful mitigation that it was retained…but with strict sideboards. Some of these sideboards are that:
- The Pierce County In Lieu Fee program was seeded years ago. Back in 2007 and 2008 we constructed our South Midland Wetland Reserve, for the purpose of providing advance mitigation for undetermined unavoidable impacts from Pierce county Public Work projects. The details of which still had to be worked out. This site subsequently became our first (proposed) pre-capitalized ILF mitigation receiving site. In 2010 the Puget Sound Partnership began efforts to develop a regional ILF program. When their priorities shifted, Pierce County agreed to pick up from the work they started, and to develop a Pierce County ILF program. We issued a prospectus, and…NEXT SLIDE
- .
- A Summary, I’ll go over these in a little more detail in the slides that follow.
- We had the unique opportunity to “Pre-capitalize” receiving sites. With Surface Water Management funds and a grant from the Washington State Legislature, we were able to implement two receiving sites in the Chambers/Clover Creek basin prior to the sale of any credits. It is our intent to continually stay ahead of the demand for credits. So, with Money collected from the sale of credits at these sites, we will begin to design and construct the next sites, hopefully ahead of the demand.
- The point of these pie charts is to explain the relationship between advance credits and pre-capitalized credits; between potential credits and released credits. And between fulfilled credits and unfulfilled credits. It is not necessary to understand this in order to purchase credits from the program. The real concern for a developer is going to be whether we have sufficient program credits available to meet their needs. They do not specify which types of credits they purchase, nor from which site credits come. But, since I have mentioned Pre-capitalized credits and advance credits I thought it good form to clarify their association. The first step a developer will take if interested in using the PCILF program will be to contact me and to inquire whether credits are available. This is what I will use to respond to that question. At any one time we could have Advance Credits or Pre-Capitalized-Released Credits available to sell. Those are the only types of credits we can sell. We are anticipating that we will earn approximately 166 pre-capitalized credits from Larchmont and South midland Wetland Reserves. We cannot sell pre-capitalized credits until they have been released. And they will only be released (incrementally) as we begin to meet performance standards. Upon release, pre-capitalized credits can be sold directly (to avoid dipping into our allotment of advance credits) or used to re-charge (“fulfill”) advance credits that were sold. We will also have our 120 Advance Credits. Once we sell any allotment of Advance Credits, we are then obligated to fulfill those credits, by implementing a new site (and meeting performance standards at that site) or with released credits from our pre-capitalized sites.
- Everyone wants to know the cost to use the program. In order to address this we need to consider the cost of a credit and the number of credits (or units) that will be required to compensate for a given impact. Per federal Rule, the cost of a credit is based on full cost accounting. No profit; no subsidy. Currently cost is… VERY Roughly 27.55 and 20.66 per square foot of impact.
- The other question, is how many credits will be needed for a given area of impact. 1 acre of impact does not equate to 1 mitigation credit. Many wetland mitigation banks do use the 1 acre= 1 credit valuation method, so admittedly this is confusing.
- In fact, Mitigation for 1 acre of wetland impact will require many more than 1 credits.
- So, why don’t we use the 1 acre of impact = one credit of mitigation valuation method if it is so much simpler? Well, it is too simplistic and as such does not incorporate best available science. Science has shown that not all acres of wetlands provide the same functions to the same degree. The Washington State DOE’s valuation method, known at the Credit/Debit Tool, works with that principle. The Credit/Debit Tool, looks at the degree to which wetlands provide ecological functions in three categories: Hydrologic, improving water quality, and providing habitat and maintaining food webs. It is based on the Washington State Wetland Rating System and incorporates refinements in characterizing functions and values using rapid assessment methods.
- So, How Many credits are required for any given impact? It will be based on the classification (including category) and quality (degree of functions provided) of the wetland being disturbed, as well as on the area of disturbance and the timing of the mitigation. It is variable. But, based a very limited sample, roughly 30 credits needed to compensate for unavoidable adverse impacts to 1 acre of most wetlands, through the PCILF Program.
- Pierce County’s 176th Street East Intersection Improvements Project will be constructed this summer. This project will widen the existing 176th roadway to provide an eastbound right-turn lane and westbound u-turn pocket at the intersection with 78th Avenue East. It will also include modifications to the existing enclosed storm drainage system and storm water treatment facilities, as well as curb, gutter, and sidewalk. 700 Square Feet of wetland B will be disturbed from this activity. Federal, State, and County regulations require compensatory mitigation when wetland impacts cannot be avoided. Given that this is a category III wetland, compensatory mitigation would ordinarily consist of 1400 Square feet of wetland creation. Opportunities to provide wetland mitigation onsite were explored and determined impracticable. CLICK. Onsite mitigation would require the acquisition of ROW (about $50,000, plus the costs to design, construct, monitor and maintain the mitigation site for 10 years (estimated at another $90,000 for all). Plus, right of way acquisition would delay the project into next year. On the other hand, given the numbers of debits accrued from the instersection improvements (0.6 debits), 0.6 In Lieu Fee credits are needed as compensation. 0.6 credits at $40,000 per credit will cost a mere $24K. The Pierce County Transportation Engineering section concluded that in this case it is very reasonable to purchase the required number of credits from the PCILF program. The use of the In Lieu Fee program provides a time savings as well as a cost savings.
- Mitigation Site: Before construction (UR), First winter after construction—Jan. 2009 (LR) and Sept. 2015.
- It is my pleasure to have had the opportunity to speak to you and to share our excitement about these Pierce County Programs. We feel that these programs help enrich communities--providing opportunities for people to contemplate the natural environment that surrounds us-- and strengthens the eggshell of our natural environment (that is, these programs incrementally strengthen the ecological health of our watersheds, so that they are more resilient to various land use pressures). I believe I have a few minutes for questions, but feel free to call or e-mail me with more questions following today’s seminar.