Lacey staff recommends approval to replace existing lift station within wetland buffer; hearing record to remain open

For the record, Hearing Examiner Bill Albrecht heard a City of Lacey application on April 23, 2025, for a wetland development permit and concurrent site plan review to replace an existing wastewater lift station (file 24-0362), city staff said.

The project would replace a one-story control building, add an emergency backup generator, install multiple buried utility vaults, on-site sewer piping, service irrigation, and an odor control system on a roughly 7,500-square-foot site zoned Open Space Institutional with a small Urban Conservancy overlap, City of Lacey staff said.

Staff recommended approval. "Staff does recommend the approval of the wetland development and site plan review permits," said Mr. Fett, the city staff lead, and the hearing record will be returned to the examiner for a final decision within 10 business days.

Why it matters: The lift station is an existing piece of critical infrastructure sited near wetlands and within a wetland buffer. City staff and the applicant said the proposal avoids direct impacts to wetland areas, uses mitigation measures during construction, and restores paved surface to native vegetation within the buffer.

Project scope and site constraints City of Lacey staff described four wetlands adjacent to the site, identified in the applicant's critical areas report as wetlands A, B, C (each Class 3 with 60-foot buffers) and wetland D (Class 2 with a 110-foot buffer). No new development is proposed inside any wetland; some construction will occur inside the buffer for wetland C, staff said. The project footprint is centered on existing paved areas to avoid new disturbance where possible.

The record cites an earlier conditional use approval for the lift station from 1998 (file CUP 980005). Staff and the applicant said the station's existing location and function inform the city's approach to the buffer encroachment and that the proposal meets the city's nonconforming-use interpretation for retrofit of existing critical infrastructure.

Environmental review and mitigation Staff reported that comments on the State Environmental Policy Act review were submitted by the Washington State Department of Ecology, ORCA, and local tribes; none required actions beyond the city's standard development conditions and a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) was issued. To limit construction impacts, the project will use temporary high-visibility fencing, implement stormwater controls to prevent runoff entering wetlands or buffers, and restore an area of existing asphalt to native groundcover and plantings.

Applicant clarifications and landscaping Nate Ensley, representing the applicant and City of Lacey Public Works, told the examiner the design has been refined and the building footprint reduced since the site-plan drawings in the record were prepared. Ensley said landscaping shown on file will be finalized off-line with city staff to avoid conflicts with nearby stormwater infrastructure, but that the project "will still taking an area that's currently asphalt and turning that into a vegetated surface," and that final planting locations may shift.

Staff review and conditions Staff said it will administratively review and approve a finalized landscaping plan to ensure it meets the critical areas report and, if needed, consult the wetland biologist before issuing final approval. The staff presentation included exhibits 1–11 (environmental review, wetland report, critical areas report, site plans, drainage report, and arborist report), which were admitted into the record at the start of the hearing.

Process and next steps No members of the public offered testimony at the hearing. Examiner Bill Albrecht closed the hearing after the presentations and said he expects to issue a final decision in approximately 10 business days.

Ending The decision will be issued by the hearing examiner based on the hearing record and the conditions described by staff; the record remains open only to the extent needed for that administrative decision.