Ocean Shores hearing examiner reviews four wetland RUEs; city explains Weatherwax mitigation bank

The Ocean Shores hearing examiner conducted a public hearing on April 14, 2026 to consider four reasonable‑use‑exception applications that would allow single‑family residences to impact wetland buffers. City staff recommended approval with conditions in each case, and staff explained how mitigation — primarily through on‑site restoration and the city’s Weatherwax mitigation bank — would compensate unavoidable impacts.

Summary of the four matters: RUE26000005 (444 South Portal Loop SW) involves roughly 2,252 sq ft of buffer impacts to a category 4 wetland; city staff recommended standard conditions including a wetland buffer mitigation plan and protective delineation fencing. REU26000006 / the Sanders project (261 Sand Dune Ave NW) involves approximately 10,985 sq ft of buffer area associated with an off‑site category 1 wetland; staff again recommended code compliance and a mitigation plan. RUE26000007 (776 Duck Lake Drive NE) was the lengthiest item and raised questions about shoreline jurisdiction (see separate article). RUE26000008 (479 Ocean Shores Blvd NW) affects about 3,433 sq ft of buffer associated with a category 1 interdunal wetland; the applicant proposed minimization measures and a 0.75:1 buffer-to-bank mitigation ratio, resulting in a roughly 0.078‑acre request for bank credits.

On mitigation banks and oversight: during public comment a reporter asked where mitigation‑credit fees go and whether funds have led to implemented mitigation projects. Mr. Reed, the city’s lead planner and shoreline administrator, described the Weatherwax mitigation bank as “a piece of property…27‑plus acres in size” acquired to provide compensatory mitigation and maintained through an escrow/accounting process; he said Washington State Department of Ecology and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers participate in interagency oversight and track credits and transfers.

Public participation and outcomes: most applicants indicated they would comply with staff‑recommended conditions and showed revised designs intended to reduce buffer impacts. Public commenters raised questions about how bank funds are used and whether neighboring properties could be harmed by fill and retaining walls; staff said those construction‑level issues would be addressed later in permitting (SEPA and engineering review). The hearing examiner admitted staff reports, wetland reports from consultants (Key Environmental Solutions and Agua Tierra Land and Water Services), and the applicants’ slides and left the record open on one matter for additional clarifying exhibits.

Next steps: the examiner said the record on the Duck Lake Drive matter will remain open until the close of business Wednesday to permit the city to file a jurisdictional memorandum and additional exhibits; the examiner aims to issue written decisions within 10 business days after the record closes.