Skip to main content
Loading…
Appendix 9. Cultural Resources Management Procedures
This appendix is included in your selections.

(Ord. 2982)

A. Cultural Resources Management Map Tool Specifications. Cultural Resources Management Map Tool Specification

The City shall employ a three-class model depicting areas that are known to have archaeological resources, areas having high probability, and areas having low probability. These areas shall be coordinated with tools and procedures regarding public and private development review.

Weights (generally)

1 = Known sites and their buffers, parcels shall be “locked/held” via the COR’s permit processing tool(s), permits shall be automatically conditioned:

Per annual data sharing agreement with the DAHP.

A weight of 1 requires a permit condition with notice to the DAHP and affectedIndian tribes.

o The condition requires the applicant to complete an archaeological surveyusing professional archaeological services, per RZC 21.30.070, Archaeological Sites and Resources and per WAC 25-48-020(4).

o Permit applicants shall be advised to contact the DAHP directly to obtain arequired cultural resources management plan and letter of concurrence tobe submitted to the COR application project manager.

2 = High probability, the COR shall obtain the recommended cultural resources management approach from the DAHP and affected Indian tribes, permits shall be conditioned per recommendations:

Per King County Probability Model.

A weight of 2 requires the COR’s consultation with the DAHP and affected Indiantribes to obtain recommended cultural resources management activities.

The recommended cultural resources management activities shall be provided asconditions to the respective permit.

3 = Low probability, Inadvertent Discovery Plan to be provided with permit approvals:

Per King County Probability Model.

A weight of 3 requires distribution of the COR Standard Inadvertent Discovery Plan. (Ord. 2982)

Effective on: 1/2/2020

B. Laws and Regulations. Laws and Regulations

List of Federal, State, and County Laws and Regulations (as adopted and hereafter amended)

Federal

National Environmental Policy Act

National Historic Preservation Act

36 CFR Part 60 (National Register of Historic Places)

36 CFR Part 61 (Procedures for State, Tribal, and Local Government Historic Preservation Programs)

36 CFR Part 63 (Determinations of Eligibility for Inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places)

36 CFR Part 65 (National Historic Landmarks Program)

36 CFR Part 68 (The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties)

Section 106

Professional Qualification Standards

Executive Order 11593 (Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment)

Executive Order 13006 (Locating federal Facilities in Historic Properties)

Archaeological Resource Protection Act of 1979

Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act

Washington State

State Environmental Policy Act

Shoreline Management Act

Growth Management Act

Executive Order 05-05

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (WAC 25-12)

Abandoned and Historic Cemeteries and Historic Graves (RCW 68.60)

Washington State Historic Building Code (RCW 19.27.120)

Heritage Barn Program (RCW 27.34.400)

State Historical Societies - Historic Preservation (RCW 27.34)

Indian Graves and Records (RCW 27.44)

Archaeological Sites and Resources (RCW 27.53)

Archaeological Excavation and Removal Permit (WAC 25-48)

Abandoned and Historic Cemeteries and Historic Graves (RCW 68.60)

Registration of Historic Archaeological Resources on State-Owned Aquatic Lands (WAC 25-46)

Aquatic Lands - In General (RCW 79.90.565)

Archaeological Site Public Disclosure Exemption (RCW 42.56.300)

Discovery of Human Remains (RCW 27.44)

King County

King County Landmark Ordinance (Chapter 20.62)

Detailed Description of Laws and Regulations (as adopted and hereafter amended).

Federal.

National Historic Preservation Act

Enacted in 1966, The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) established protections for archaeological and historic resources and created the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The NRHP is the federal list of archaeological, historic, and other cultural resources worthy of preservation. Resources listed in the NHRP include districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that are significant in American prehistory, architecture, history, archaeology, engineering, and culture. The NRHP is maintained and expanded by the NPS on behalf of the Secretary of the Interior.

In order for a particular property—a district, site, building, structure, or object—to qualify for the NRHP, it must be significant in American prehistory, history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, or culture. To guide the determination of eligibility of properties for inclusion in the National Register, the NPS has developed the NRHP Criteria for Evaluation (36 CFR Part 60.4). The criteria are standards by which every property, including archaeological sites and historical sites and structures, is evaluated for listing in the NRHP. A quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, or culture is possible in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity and meet one of the following criteria:

Criterion A: Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or

Criterion B: Are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or

Criterion C: Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or

Criterion D: Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

Cultural resources less than 50 years old do not meet the NRHP criteria unless they are of exceptional importance under Criterion Consideration G, as described in the NPS Bulletin No. 22, “How to Evaluate and Nominate Potential National Register Properties That Have Achieved Significance Within the Last 50 Years” (NPS 1998).

Retaining integrity, including for the prehistorical and historic time periods, means that the property has the ability to “convey its significance” (NPS 1990:44) through its location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. The NPS provides this guidance on the meaning of the elements of integrity:

Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event took place.

Design is the composition of elements that constitute the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property.

Setting is the physical environment of a historic property that illustrates the character of the place.

Materials are the physical elements combined in a particular pattern or configuration to form the property during a period in the past.

Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period of history. Workmanship is important because it can furnish evidence of the technology of the craft, illustrate the aesthetic principles of a historic period, and reveal individual, local, regional, or national applications of both technological practices and aesthetic principles.

Feeling is the quality that a historic property has in evoking the aesthetic or historic sense of a past period of time. Although it is itself intangible, feeling is dependent upon the property’s significant physical characteristics that convey its historic qualities.

Association is the direct link between a property and the event or person for which the property is significant. A period appearance or setting is desirable; integrity of setting, location, design, workmanship, materials, and feeling combine to convey integrity o fassociation.

Bulletin 15 states that in order “to retain historic integrity a property will always possess several and usually most of the aspects” (NPS 1990:44). Properties important under Criteria A or B ideally should retain some features of all seven aspects of integrity. However, integrity of design and workmanship might not be as important as other aspects to demonstrate significance under these criteria and eligibility for the NRHP (NPS 1990:46). Retention of the physical features that demonstrate design, workmanship and materials and characterize its type, period, or method of construction is important to be eligible under Criterion C.

Section 106 of the NHPA requires that federal agencies take into account the effects of their undertakings on cultural resources (resources listed in or eligible for listing in the NRHP). The procedures for complying with Section 106 (36 CFR 800) are issued by the Federal Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. 36 CFR 800 requires the inventory of cultural resources, determination of NRHP eligibility, assessment of project effects, and consultation with interested parties including the State Historic Preservation Officer and affected Indian tribes. Projects within the COR that receive funding or require a permit from a federal agency will require compliance with Section 106. The COR may also be a consulting party to a project initiated by another party, such as Sound Transit, that occurs within the City limits. Whereby, the COR would review and provide comment to the agency’s approach for cultural resources management.

National Environmental Policy Act

The NEPA of 1969 requires federal agencies to evaluate impacts to all cultural resources and those prehistoric and historical resources that are eligible for or listed in the NRHP before a project is approved. NEPA states that the policy of the Federal government is to preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our heritage. NEPA is implemented through regulations issued by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1500-08). Projects in the COR that may require compliance with NEPA including applications to the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for permits under the Clean Water Act or funding from the FHWA to improve roadways.

Washington State. Chapter 27 of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) includes measures for protecting Native American graves and penalties for disturbing these sites (Chapter 27.44). This chapter also describes measures to study and protect archaeological resources (Chapter 27.53). The Washington Administrative Code (WAC) (Title 25) established the State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, its functions, and procedures to comply with federal historic preservation program, and authorizes the office to issue archaeological excavation and removal permits.

DAHP also administers the Washington Heritage Register (WHR), an honorary designation for resources of local, state and national significance. Although there are no restrictions on resources with this designation, projects requiring review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), must give properties with this designation, and other cultural resources including NRHP listed properties, consideration for state undertakings. Many projects in the COR will require SEPA review including projects receiving assistance from a state agency and development projects requiring a City land use development permit.

Shoreline Management Act

The Shoreline Management Act and Shoreline rules (WAC 173-26-221) require all Shoreline Master Programs to incorporate provisions to protect historic, archaeological, and cultural features and qualities of shorelines. The Shoreline Master Program (SMP) Guidelines have provisions that apply to “archaeological and historic resources that are either recorded at the state historic preservation office and/or by local jurisdictions or have been inadvertently uncovered.” SMPs shall:

Include policies and regulations to protect archaeological, cultural, and historic resources.

Require developers and property owners to immediately stop work if resources are uncovered during excavation.

Specify that permits issued in areas documented to contain archaeological resources require a site inspection or evaluation by a professional archaeologist.

State Environmental Policy Act

In 1971, the Washington Legislature enacted SEPA (Chapter 43.21C RCW). The act declared a “state policy which will encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between humankind and the environment; (2) to promote efforts which will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and biosphere; (3) and [to] stimulate the health and welfare of human beings; and (4) to enrich the understanding of the ecological systems and natural resources important to the state and nation.

Among other things, the law requires all state and local governments within the state to:

"Utilize a systematic, interdisciplinary approach which will insure the integrated use of the natural and social sciences and the environmental design arts in planning and in decision making which may have an impact on man's environment;"

and ensure that

"...environmental amenities and values will be given appropriate consideration in decision making along with economic and technical considerations...." [RCW 43.21C.030(2)(a) and (2)(b)]

Under RCW 36.70B.050 all counties and cities are required to develop an integrated project review process that combines both procedural and substantive environmental review to help state and local agencies in Washington identify possible environmental impacts that could result from governmental decisions such as:

Issuing permits for private projects such as an office building, grocery store, or apartment complex.

Constructing public facilities like a new school, highway, or water pipeline.

Adopting regulations, policies, or plans such as a county or city comprehensive plan, critical area ordinance, or state water quality regulation.

SEPA applies to all decisions, unless exempt, made by state and local agencies including:

Washington state agencies;

Cities;

Counties;

Ports; and

Special districts such as school and water districts.

Under SEPA, one government agency is usually identified as the lead agency for every proposal determined not to be exempt from review. The lead agency identifies and evaluates potential adverse environmental impacts of a proposal. In practice:

For most private projects, the lead agency is typically either the city or county where the project is located.

For public projects, the lead agency is normally the agency proposing the project.

The SEPA checklist guides agencies through the process of determining potential impacts from a project and evaluating if an Environmental Impact Statement or other review is required. Known archaeological and historic resources, methods to identify these resources, and plans to minimize or mitigate impacts to these resources are identified in question 13 of the SEPA checklist (WAC 197-11-960).

SEPA Categorical Exemptions

Some project types and agency actions have been exempted from the requirements of SEPA by the Legislature. These statutory exemptions are contained in SEPA, Chapter 43.21C of the Revised Code of Washing (RCW). Statutory exemptions contained in the SEPA statute dated November 1, 2003 are listed in Appendix 9.C Exemptions.

Governor’s Executive Order 0505 (GEO 05-05)

Executive Order 0505 was signed into action in November of 2005. This order requires all state agencies with capital improvement projects to integrate DAHP, Governor’s Office of Indian Affairs, and affected Indian tribes into their capital project planning process.

Growth Management Act

In 1990, the Washington Legislature passed the Growth Management Act (GMA) which established planning goals and a system of planning for cities and counties which had experienced rapid growth. RCW36.70A.070 directs counties to adopt Comprehensive Plans. As a part of the GMA, King County adopted and the cities endorsed Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs) which are a series of policies that provide a standard framework to guide each city’s own comprehensive plan, which must be consistent with the overall vision for the future of King County.

The CPPs address issues that transcend city boundaries, such as setting Urban Growth Areas, accommodating housing and job demand, and addressing capital facilities that are regional in nature, as well as providing a framework to promote consistency between the plans adopted in each city. Also as part of the GMA, the Puget Sound Regional Council adopted Multicounty Planning Policies (MPPs) which are adopted as part of VISION 2040. The MPPs serve as the regional guidelines and principles used for the Regional Council’s certification of policies and plans. Cities and counties are required to periodically update their plans to comply with updates in regional and state requirements, as well as changes in local conditions. The CPPs identify development patterns as a framework to focus improvements to transportation, public services, the environment, and affordable housing. Development Pattern 41 identifies King County’s policy to “preserve significant historic, archaeological, cultural, artistic, and environmental features, especially where growth could place these resources at risk. Where appropriate, designate individual features or areas for protection or restoration. Encourage land use patterns and adopt regulations that protect historic resources and sustain historic community character” (King County 2012).

King County. King County cooperates with DAHP and is a participant in the Certified Local Government Program. Under the King County Historic Preservation Ordinance (20.62.150), King County will not approve any development proposal that would alter, demolish, or relocate any property listed in the King County HPI. Coordination with the King County Historic Preservation Officer would occur to establish effects to the resource. A historic property may be designated a King County Landmark if it is more than forty years old or, in the case of a landmark district, contains resources that are more than forty years old, and possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association, and:

A. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of national, state, or local history; or

B. Is associated with the lives of persons significant in national, state or local history; or

C. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, style or method of design or construction, or that represents a significant distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or

D. Has yielded or may be likely to yield information important in prehistory or history; or

E. Is an outstanding work of a designer or builder who has made a substantial contribution to the art.

King County will also designate resources as a community landmark. A community landmark is a resource which has been designated but which may be altered or changed without application for or approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA).

COR established an Interlocal Agreement (4672) whereby the County provides landmark designation and protection services for the City. The agreement between the COR and King County required the city to establish regulations and procedures for the designation of historic buildings, structures, objects, sites, and archaeological sites as landmarks. The agreement gives the King County Landmarks Commission (KCLC) the authority to designate and protect landmarks within the COR limits in accordance with the City ordinance. One of the requirements in the City ordinance is that the owner must approve and sign the nomination of a property or structure for proposed landmark designation. The KCLC also acts as the review board for special tax valuations and eligibility for low interest loans, grants, and other incentives administered by King County. Under the agreement the County serves an advisory role and provides consulting services in the review of COAs for City of Redmond Landmarks (CORLs). The King County Historic Preservation Officer reviews and comments on applications for permits which affect CORLs.

City of Redmond.

COR established regulations and procedures for the protection and designation of archaeological sites and historic buildings, structures, objects, districts, and sites as part of the Redmond Zoning Code (RZC). The objectives of the regulations include meeting the goals of the GMA by preserving lands, site, and structures with archaeological or historical significance, providing guidance for land use decisions affecting properties with archaeological significance and designated landmarks, considering the effects on historic properties, and protecting Redmond’s unique community and character.1

The RZC Title 21 of the Redmond Municipal Code (RMC) provides standards and regulations for development including allowed uses, setback requirements and lot coverage, design standards, parking, landscaping, and other like standards. Historic Preservation is addressed in Section 21.30 Historic and Archaeological Resources which provides direction on what sections of RMC – Title 21 are applicable to archeological sites, designated historic landmarks, and properties that are eligible for historic landmark designation.

The RZC (21.30.070) provides for the investigation of archaeological sites to identify recommended excavation and preservation techniques, appropriate mitigation or other treatment, and further needs for evaluation. In areas with known or high probability of containing archaeological artifacts, the COR can require investigations by a qualified archaeologist to prepare a study, identify the boundaries of sites, and recommend mitigation or construction monitoring.

21.30.070.D directs the COR to stop work in the event of an inadvertent discovery and use a qualified archaeologist to investigate and recommend further measures including preservation, excavation, or other appropriate treatment. Such discoveries may occur in Redmond because some portions of the City are relatively lightly developed and development was limited to the surface. For example, many historic-period houses did not have full basements so materials were preserved below the structure of the residence. Paving for surface parking lots or properties where only limited grading occurred may also protect subsurface layers of cultural materials.

21.30.030 established the Redmond Heritage Resource Register. There are currently 16 properties designated as CORLs under the Redmond Heritage Resource Register. One of these resources, the Redmond Trading Company is designated as a Community Landmark. Nominations to the register require property owner’s consent. The owner may be eligible for incentives through local and regional grants, tax benefits, transfer of development rights, other grants, and loans

RZC 21.20.050 Certificate of Appropriateness provides protection and procedures against the loss of archaeological sites and designated historic landmarks of historic significance. Prior to consideration of a demolition, alternatives will be explored and mitigation, if appropriate, may be required. Property owners wishing to make significant changes to City Landmarks must apply for a COA. There are three levels of COAs for historic landmarks. Level I COAs apply to restorations and repairs using identical materials. Level II COAs apply to additions, replacement of historic materials with alternate materials, or painting that does not match the original color. Level III COAs apply to moving or building an addition to a structure. Level III COAs are also required for filling, grading, excavation, paving or building over or in an archaeological site. The City’s Landmark Commission reviews applications for these changes to ensure that the property maintains its archaeological and historical integrity. Level II and III reviews will also require review by the COR Technical Committee.

City of Redmond Comprehensive Plan. The COR’s Comprehensive Plan (Plan) provides a broad statement of the community’s vision for the future and contains policies that are intended to guide the built environment as well as aspects of Redmond’s social and economic character. Specifically, the Plan reflects the long-term values and aspirations of the community and addresses how aspects such as land use, housing, transportation, capital facilities and services, and historic preservation work together to achieve the desired vision. Ultimately, the Plan anticipates how development should be guided over the next 20 years. The Plan is implemented through zoning regulations, functional plans, capital facility improvements, and other implementation measures such as this CRMP. Principles and policies relating to the protection of archaeological resources and other cultural resources are included in several elements of the Plan.

The policies relating to Community Character and Historic Preservation are found in Element 5, Community Character and Historic Preservation, supporting historic preservation of archaeological, historic, and other cultural resources. This element provides a series of goals that specifically address: Preservation, Survey and Evaluation, Landmark Nomination, Implementation Measures, and Regional and Community Involvement.

Several policies directly support protection of archaeological and other cultural resources including:

Plan policies CC-42-43 encourages protection of significant archaeological resources from adverse impacts of development, protection of historic landmarks from demolitions, or modification, and provides for mitigation of adverse effects to archaeological or landmark sites.

Plan policies CC-32 and CC-33 addresses the identification of archaeological sites and historic resources as essential steps toward preservation and encourages the COR to conduct ongoing surveys and maintain an inventory to guide planning and decision making.

Plan policies CC-46-CC-49 encourage cooperation, information sharing, and collaboration on the development of education programs and materials with affected Indian tribes, King County, DAHP, and other entities.

Plan policies CC-40 and CC-41 encourage the maintenance and preservation of cultural resources through financial incentives, fee reductions, and flexibility within the Zoning Code.

In addition to protecting the existing character of the shoreline, where many cultural resources are located, the SMP adopted by the COR as part of the Plan provides specific requirements to identify and protect archaeological and historic sites (SF-12, SL-83, and SL-87). The protections include requirements for developers and property owners working in shorelines to:

Identify potential development impacts to and to protect and respect, valuable archaeological and historic sites and cultural resources.

Try to incorporate interpretation of on-site archaeological and historic resources into the design of shoreline development.

Stop work if archaeological resources are uncovered during excavation.

Engage a professional archaeologist to perform a site inspection or evaluation for permits issued in areas documented to contain archaeological resources.

The Natural Environment element of the Plan also addresses issues related to sustainability, low-impact development, and conservation of natural resources that are beneficial in maintaining the setting and character of cultural resources in the area.

The policies of the Plan are supported through programs such as the Heritage Grant Program implemented by the Planning Department and also enforced through the Zoning Code.

1 The complete list of objectives is available in Section 21.30.010. (Ord. 2982)

Effective on: 1/2/2020

C. Exemptions. Exemptions

Exemptions shall not apply to ground disturbing activities in known archaeological sites or to modification of sites or structures designated as historic landmarks, listed in the Redmond Heritage Resources Register (RZC Appendix 5), or listed on other local, state, or federal registers. The Administrator shall have the authority to clarify ambiguities and conflicts within this section.

Work exempt per the following within the Redmond Municipal Code (RMC):

o RMC 15.08 IBC/IRC

o RMC 15.16 UPC

o RMC 15.14 IMC

o RMC 15.18 Energy

o RMC 15.12 NEC

o RMC 15.20 Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality Code

Local undertakings presumed to have no or minimal potential to disturb native soil.

Interior residential remodel and commercial tenant improvement permits within the foundation of the existing structure, pier, or footing.

o New interior foundation post and footing when original construction occurred between 1950 and the present.

o Residential and commercial exterior modifications without ground disturbing activities.

o Commercial modular permits such as portable and job trailers.

o Manufactured home in existing manufactured home park or mobile home park.

o New or replacement residential decks that are within 25 feet of existing structure.

o Tree removal limited to trees planted as landscaping in development since 1936 –visual confirmation of planting via King County Assessor’s IMap.

Operation, maintenance, repair, modification, minor addition to, or replacement of existing structures, infrastructure improvements, utilities, public or private roads, dikes, levees, or draining systems — provided the activity does not further alter or increase impacts tonative soil.

o Operation and maintenance include vegetation management performed in accordance with best management practices; provided that such management actions are part of regular and ongoing maintenance and do not further alter or increase impacts to native soil.

o The following activities generally create or increase impacts to native soil:

Encroachments within a known archaeological site; and

Additional encroachments into an area having high probability of cultural resources including significant addition or expansion of a structure or utility.

Emergencies as defined within the Redmond Municipal Code.

Statutory exemptions per Chapter 43.21C RCW – State Environmental Policy. (Ord. 2982)

Effective on: 1/2/2020

D. Cultural Resources Management Recommendations and Standards. Cultural Resources Management Recommendations and Standards

Standards for Cultural Resources Management

The COR is committed to managing cultural resources in a manner that complies with the requirements of Federal and state laws while supporting economic growth and a changing population. These goals are reflected in the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, and other documents. These plans and policies reflect the three main roles the COR plays in managing cultural resources.

The COR directly manages resources on city-owned property such as the structures at Redmond City Park (Anderson Park) that are listed on the NRHP.

The COR uses its financial resources to enhance the quality of life by developing infrastructure and investing in parks and other community resources. Many of these projects result in construction and development that have potential to impact cultural resources located on city land or in/or adjacent to roads and utility rights-of-way.

The COR also reviews and decides on permit applications for projects and other activities by developers or property owners that have the potential to impact cultural resources such as tree removals and utility trenching.

In these roles, the COR is currently using many of the best management practices for protecting cultural resources including commissioning its own surveys, proactively designating important resources as CORLs, and requiring developers to survey properties with a high potential of containing archaeological materials.

The following standards relate to management of the cultural resources within the COR. These recommendations are based upon the COR’s existing goals, code, and policies. They are regulated/authorized by the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation. The standards are widely used by agencies throughout the United States and are currently used by the COR in maintaining structures it owns and in approving COAs for changes to CORLs.

The standards for management vary by resource type and the most important preservation considerations for those resource types.

The greatest potential for damaging archaeological resources comes from ground disturbance.

The majority of the COR’s historic landmarks are considered historic structures. Historic structures benefit from the retention of their original architectural features but minimizing changes to the setting from new development is also important.

Retaining the natural setting and the spatial relationships between the landscape and structures are important for protecting cultural landscapes.

Minimizing disturbance of the natural environment helps protect traditional cultural places by creating an atmosphere suitable for performance and observation of spiritual practices and where traditional resources (bark and wood, berries, roots, and salmon) are available.

The management standards also reflect the multiple roles the COR plays in protecting cultural resources. Although the COR can include conditions relating to identifying archaeological and historic structures in its permit applications, some of the standards will be most applicable to projects on City property or constructed using City funds.

Cultural Resources Management Standards

The COR recognizes the management standards developed at the Federal and state level. The CRMP is developed to complete the following:

Ensure COR’s compliance with state and federal laws.

Recognize the importance of cultural resources to members of the public and Indian tribes.

Recognize the responsibilities of Indian tribes and agencies to manage and protect cultural resources.

Identify, preserve, and protect NRHP, WHR, and CORL resources.

Coordinate with partner agencies.

If preservation and protection of NRHP, WHR, and CORL resources is impossible, mitigate the adverse effects upon such resources.

Provide for public interpretation and education regarding the cultural resources in the COR.

Partner with other entities and members of the public in acting as a cultural resources steward.

Provide tools and resources to assist owners and developers in protecting and managing resources located on their properties and work sites.

Provide tools and resources for COR staff to ensure their knowledge of cultural resources protection and management techniques.

Archaeological Resources1

These are resources that document and symbolize the social and cultural patterns of prehistoric and historic societies. Archaeological resources are generally, but not necessarily, buried below the surface. Examples include isolated artifacts, remnants of building foundations, and campsites. COR has many recorded archaeological resources. Consistent with state and federal laws and regulations, management standards for implementation regarding the protection and management of archaeological resources include:

Protect resources consistent with state and federal regulations.

Avoid disturbance to archaeological sites.

Maintain records of archaeological sites and cultural resources surveys within the COR boundaries.

Safeguard the confidentiality of archaeological sites.

Protect known archaeological sites from vandalism.

If avoidance of impacts to archaeological sites is not possible, conduct data recovery.

Develop and require the use of an inadvertent discovery plan (IDP) for COR and private development projects.

Provide training to COR staff and community members to identify and protect archaeological resources.

Require surveys and/or monitoring in areas with high probability of containing archaeological resources and at known archaeological sites.

Arrange for and/or require the curation of archaeological resources that cannot be left in-situ.

Historic Structures Including Landmarked Structures and Structures Over 50 Years of Age

Redmond’s historic preservation program recognizes historic structures that have been designated as landmarked properties in agreement with the respective property owner. The Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code provide the policies and regulations that direct the long-term maintenance and reuse of these properties, structures, and contributing elements consistent with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.

Historic Structures over 50 Years of Age and Not Landmarked

At the time of application for proposed modification or redevelopment of historic structures, the COR assesses the respective property.

The COR consults with the DAHP to consider the effects of the proposed activities on historic structures and in some cases, also the property.

The COR provides the modification or redevelopment proposal to the DAHP and affected Indian Tribes for review regarding site-specific requests such as the property owner’s or developer’s use of DAHP’s non-professional EZ-forms for providing additional documentation or the need for a qualified professional in the completion of a HPI form.

For properties that have a significant amount of remaining intact integrity of workmanship or other elements that support a property possibly being eligible for listing on a national or local register, the COR works with property owners at the owner’s discretion:

To interpret the possible eligibility; and

To inform them of opportunities such as landmark designation, property tax benefits, and other preservation support programs.

The COR also maintains an HPI in consideration of these standards and in support of the NHPA. Proactive survey of historic resources can enhance community awareness of resources and can provide predictability in addition to cost and time savings for property owners and developers in advance of proposed structural modifications and redevelopment.

Traditional Cultural Property/ Places

Traditional Cultural Properties are NRHP-eligible or listed districts, sites, buildings, structures or objects whose significance is derived from the role the property plays in a community’s historically rooted beliefs, customs, and practices. For example, a location associated with the traditional beliefs of a Native American group about its origins, its cultural history, or the nature of the world.

Coordinate and consult with the Snoqualmie Tribe, the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians, and the Tulalip Tribes about the identification and treatment of TCPs and areas of cultural significance.

Coordinate and consult with other Indian tribes including the Yakama, Duwamish, and Suquamish who have a traditional interest in the Redmond area about impacts from projects on places of tribal significance.

Maintain regular communication with other affected Indian Tribes in the area to identify areas of cultural significance.

Treatment may include identification of time periods when audible or visible impact should be restricted.

Recognize that the natural setting, including the existing flora and fauna, contribute to the significance and integrity of many TCPs. When TCPs are identified, avoid altering natural features located within their boundaries or that are visible or audible from within the boundaries.

Cultural Landscapes

Cultural landscapes are settings humans have created in the natural world. They reflect the ties between people and the land. Examples include farmsteads, ranches, formal gardens, funerary, military sites, commerce sites, and pilgrimage routes to village squares.

Conduct studies to identify potential cultural landscapes in the COR.

Treatment may include retaining the spatial arrangements between natural features and designed/built features such as structures and grazing areas.

Cultural Resources Management Structure and Responsibility

The responsibility implementing the CRMP is primarily with the Executive, Parks, Planning, and Public Works departments. Staff in these departments have the responsibility of working City of Redmond CRMP collaboratively to ensure the CRMP is used to comply with federal, state, and local regulations. The CRMP is maintained by the Planning department, including policies in the Comprehensive Plan and regulations and standards within the RZC, with significant guidance and participation from the other key departments.

Specific management standards:

RZC 21.30.070 Archaeological Sites, RZC Appendix 9. Cultural Resources Management Procedures, and corresponding operations procedures address specific project management standards.

Consider potential for impacts to cultural resources early in project approval and budget process for Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects.

Proactively review projects for potential impacts to cultural resources.

Implement early review of projects by the COR.

Require cultural resources surveys, based on recommended requirements from DAHP and affected Indian tribes in areas with a moderate or high probability of containing cultural resources.

Facilitate early review and comment on potential impacts from projects and the results of cultural resources surveys by the affected Indian tribes and DAHP.

Implement inspections for private development and COR projects to verify monitoring and other provisions to protect resources approved by DAHP or recommended in the cultural resources report are in place and maintained as necessary for the duration of construction.

oDaily work and monitoring progress reports could be required based on the scope and scale of the respective project. For example, significant changes to a designated City landmark would require a brief daily work progress report to be provided to the City of Redmond Project Manager and RHPO. Changes such as painting and minor maintenance procedures would not typically require daily reporting.

Communicate planned maintenance work and other long-range planning actions with consulting parties.

Notify affected Indian tribes of annual comprehensive plan docket.

Inform consulting parties immediately of inadvertent discoveries and impacts to cultural resources.

Protocol for Private Development Cultural Resources Review Including Project Implementation of Monitoring and Inadvertent Discovery Plan

Cultural Resources Report Review. If a cultural resources report is required, the Project Manager will store the document in the approved, confidential folder and flag EnerGov that the document has been received. The Project Manager and RHPO will review the report and update the issues matrix, when necessary, with the results of their review. Factors considered in the review include:

Project description explains project and potential impacts.

Quality of research sources.

Survey adequately covers locations of potential impacts.

Recommendations for National Register of Historic Places eligibility and effects to resources identified meet National Park Service and DAHP standards.

Adequate supporting documentation (maps and photographs, historic property inventory forms, isolate forms, archaeological site forms).

After working with the CR consultant to confirm the accuracy and completeness of the report, the Project Manager and RHPO will distribute the report to DAHP and the affected Indian tribes for their standard 30-day review. Based on their review, the Project Manager will include requirements for monitoring, avoidance, or protective measures to be implemented by the project applicant during construction in the Issues Matrix. This could also include additional or changed requirements from DAHP and the affected Indian tribes for the CR consultant. The requirements will be noted in the Issues Matrix.

Project Implementation of Monitoring and Inadvertent Discovery Plan Standards:

In addition to any requirement for on-site monitoring, the applicant will be responsible for providing a copy of the safety log, digital on-site monitoring log, or other means acceptable to the City for demonstrating on-site monitoring activities undertaken by a professional archaeologist (RCW 27.53.030(11)). The log, indicating the date and time of monitoring activities, will be provided to the City on a daily basis during the required span of monitoring activities.

Failure to submit the copy of the safety log, monitoring log, or other means acceptable to the City shall be subject to the enforcement and abatement provisions in RMC Chapter 1.14, Enforcement and Penalties.

Proposed changes to the monitoring plan shall be submitted to the City of Redmond Planning Project Manager and the RHPO. The proposal will be directed to the WA DAHP and affected Indian tribes for review and formal concurrence. Project permit conditions concerning monitoring requirements may be amended exclusively through a WA DAHP Letter of Concurrence.

Once the cultural resources survey and monitoring report is final, staff will update the Cultural Resources Management Map with the interim results of the survey and monitoring activities.

COR Employee Training

As described in the Bear Creek Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), a five-year training schedule will be implemented to provide training on cultural resources and the CRMP to members of the planning, construction, capital planning, and maintenance and operations groups including as part of respective new hire orientation. In addition to using the training materials developed for the CRMP, the COR will arrange for staff to receive specialized training relevant to their job duties.

Specific management standards:

Construction Division Capital Project Managers, CIP Functional Leads, and Parks and Natural Resource Division Maintenance leads will attend the state’s training on cultural resources or a program with similar content.

Key staff managing public and private projects that affect Redmond’s land will attend the Cultural Resources Protection Summit or similar training opportunity to better understand tribal concerns and best management practices relating to cultural resources.

COR will develop and maintain a staff attendance schedule for additional training and seminars.

Cultural Resources Surveys for Private Development

The COR currently issues land use development permits for projects proposed by private property owners and developers.

The COR Project Manager receives applications for proposed private development.

The Project Manager, with review and recommendations for requirements from DAHP and affected Indian tribes, shall require surveys for projects based on site conditions including the probability for locating cultural resources in the project’s area of potential effects.

The extent of the survey will depend on the anticipated level of ground disturbing activities or other work that has the potential to impact cultural resources.

Specific management standards:

Establish on-call relationships with qualified archaeological consultants who can facilitate the process of determining if a survey is required when DAHP is overloaded, when the Project Manager is uncertain, or if the developer is questioning the need for a cultural resources survey.

Consult with DAHP and the affected Indian tribes to establish specific survey requirements for individual projects in high probability areas.

Develop list of activities, such as deck construction or limited paving, requiring permits where cultural resources review is not required.

Affected Indian Tribes, Agency and Community Consultation

Projects in the COR impact many individuals and groups who have a wide variety of perspectives on the best approach to cultural resources management. These groups and individuals provide input to the COR through a variety of programs and processes.

The signatories to the MOA including DAHP, USACE, KCHPP, and the Washington Department of Transportation (WSDOT) will continue to be important partners for reviewing potential impacts to cultural resources.

The COR will continue to maintain communication with these groups as well as the Indian tribes who were signatories to the MOA including Snoqualmie Tribe, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians, and Tulalip Tribes.

The COR will also continue to seek input from other Indian tribes who may have used the area as well as private developers, residents, and business owners on the effectiveness of the CRMP and for some, but not all, projects requiring permits or approval by the City.

The COR may also participate as a consulting party on projects where another agency is the lead. For these projects the COR will follow that agency's designated consultation process.

For example, if Sound Transit is developing a rail station in the COR boundaries, the COR will likely be invited to participate as a consulting party under Section 106 of the NHPA. The FTA will be lead federal agency and may delegate some of its consulting responsibilities to Sound Transit. The COR will provide input and participate in processes as invited by Sound Transit/FTA.

During the private development application process, the COR shall reach out to the following for input on the cultural resources management approach including whether a survey should be required for private or COR developed project.

DAHP

Snoqualmie Tribe

Muckleshoot Indian Tribe

Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians

Tulalip Tribes

Through the SEPA process additional parties including other affected Indian tribes will be contacted for their feedback on projects.

The Natural Resources Division, Transportation Planning and Engineering Division, and the Parks and Recreation Planning and Administration Division also conduct outreach to affected Indian tribes and agencies for their work.

This outreach will be coordinated to ensure consistency of procedures and requirements.

Specific management standards:

Continue to hold regular meetings with MOA signatories.

Coordinate consultation and outreach.

Develop a list of projects that are exempt from consultation.

Provide the list of exempt work to consulting parties.

Information Management

The COR maintains a variety of information on cultural resources within its boundary including information on the designations for CORLs, historic maps and archival materials, and reports on cultural resources for COR funded and private development projects.

Cultural resources reports are considered confidential and the information in the reports will be held in secure locations with limited access. Permissions and maintenance for confidential documents are discussed in more detail in the Secure Document Management protocol.

Distribution of information relating to archaeological sites contained in the cultural resources reports will be limited to cultural resources professionals meeting the appropriate qualifications, the owner of the parcel, and consulting agencies and tribes.

Periodically the COR receives requests for information from members of the public on resources within the boundary. Under RCW 42.56.300, information on archaeological sites is exempt from public disclosure. The COR may distribute redacted copies of reports to members of the public or direct property owners to DAHP to obtain details of archaeological and cultural resources on their property.

Certain COR staff have access to the WISAARD system and are able to locate information in this system on previously recorded cultural resources.

The COR uses GIS-based tools including software for permit review. These tools have limited information on previously recorded historic structures in the city and do not directly provide the age of existing structures on the corresponding parcel.

Staff who are more familiar with cultural resource requirements use the King County IMAP system to determine the building’s date of original construction.

The COR also uses maps and information on streams, utilities, etc. as well as IMAP and WISAARD to locate information on areas with a high probability of containing archaeological sites.

The COR and DAHP entered into an agreement to share data relating to archaeological and other cultural resources.

This information is used in the GIS-based Cultural Resources Management Map tool developed as part of this project.

The COR staff will use the GIS-based Cultural Resources Management Map tool with layers for identifying areas with a high potential for archaeological and cultural resources.

The Cultural Resources Management Map tool will be available to staff who complete the appropriate CRMP training for data security.

Specific management standards:

Maintain and update as needed the data-sharing agreement with DAHP to obtain and provide information on cultural resources within the COR boundary.

Maintain information related to archaeological sites and areas sensitive to the affected Indian tribes on secure servers within the COR with limited access.

Mark correspondence relating to archaeological sites and investigations confidential.

Redact information from cultural resources reports prior to public distribution.

Implement training on the Cultural Resources Management Map tool.

Make regular updates to the Cultural Resources Management Map tool

Continue to reach out to the affected Indian tribes to share information and where appropriate, incorporate into the Cultural Resources Management Map tool.

Curation

The context and setting of a resource is important to its preservation.

Whenever possible, cultural resources identified in the COR boundaries shall be left in-situ.

If artifacts are identified as part of a project, curation is discussed with the appropriate affected Indian tribe and local historical societies.

For private development projects, the developer will continue to be responsible for any required curation. Curation of historic artifacts is a decision made during discovery and site analysis when the archaeologist, DAHP, and others can evaluate the significance of the site, the quality of the artifacts in relationship to the site, and the value of the artifacts for further study.

Curation will be determined on a case by case basis with DAHP and the affected tribes based upon the significance of the site and the resources.

If the site is not determined eligible for the NRHP or WHR, curation is typically not required.

Specific management standards:

The City will enter into a curation agreement (s) with a repository or repositories, such as a Tribally-owned repository and/or the Burke Museum, which meets the standard of 36 CFR 79, for curation of materials other than human remains. The COR will discuss this issue with the signatories to the MOA and select an appropriate repository based upon their input and the availability of repositories to receive materials.

The curation agreement should be available for all COR projects. In the event that a project will require curation of a large collection, the COR may wish to establish an agreement for that individual project.

The City will work with local historical groups and other applicable groups to identify locations to display or store historic period artifacts that may not warrant curation at the Burke or other repositories.

The City will include conditions on permits and special provisions in contractor specifications that, when appropriate, require the developer to follow the IDP and provide materials to a repository meeting the standard of 36 Code of Federal Regulations 79.

The City’s curation agreement and any contractor provisions should allow developers or individual property owners to curate artifacts under the COR agreement. In such cases, the costs of curation and artifact preparations will be the responsibility of the developer.

Public Education and Interpretation

The COR has an active program of education related to cultural resources.

The website provides information on the history of the area and known cultural resources. The COR sponsors programs on Redmond’s history throughout the year including events for Archaeology Month and Historic Preservation Month.

Area parks have interpretive signs and information on historic structures and other cultural resources located in the park.

The Bear Creek discovery and resulting agreement led to a collaboration with the affected Indian tribes to incorporate artwork at the Bear Creek site and develop educational material on local cultural resources for use in the schools.

The COR plans to continue to create and sponsor periodic public education and interpretation programs for the benefit of the community.

Specific management standards:

Coordinate with the affected Indian tribes to plan and sponsor community and educational programs.

Highlight the artistic traditions of the affected Indian tribes by commissioning works for display at COR properties.

Work with Eastside Historical Society and the Redmond Historical Society to sponsor programs.

Use COR properties with historic structures as venues for city activities to highlight Redmond’s heritage.

Collaborate with the Arts & Culture Commission, Landmark Commission, developers and COR project managers to commission works or otherwise encourage use of the 1% for Arts Program, Arts Program Activity Fund and other funds for artistic projects that incorporate themes relating to the history and heritage of the Redmond area including the art and traditions of Native culture.

1 Historic period sites are afforded the same protections under NHPA and Washington State law as prehistoric sites. Decisions about the eligibility and treatment of historic archeological sites must be made by a professional archaeologist, DAHP, and the affected tribes. (Ord. 2982; Ord. 3028)

Effective on: 2/27/2021

E. Cultural Resources Management Plan Review and Revisions. Cultural Resources Management Plan Review and Revisions

Review and Revision

Periodic review and amendment of the implementing protocols outlined in the CRMP and tools used to comply with them are essential to ensure all cultural resources regulations, restrictions, and policies are updated and revised as appropriate. Updates to procedural aspects (such as exempt maintenance activities) are discussed under their respective headings.

Internal review of criteria requiring cultural resources survey, training protocols consulting parties, Tribal contacts and other data will be conducted annually for the first three years following the adoption of the CRMP.

After three years COR will coordinate with DAHP and the affected Indian tribes to establish the frequency of reviews for the CRMP.

CRMP Qualitative Review

The CRMP provides COR with the tools to effectively plan for and consider cultural resources in its project planning and permitting processes and is designed to be regularly updated and refined.

Review of the CRMP and associated tools and policies is intended to assess the effectiveness and implementation of the plan, including evaluation of the utility of existing management, and the identification of management/protocol gaps.

Qualitative review of the core cultural resources policies and procedures will be undertaken in consultation with affected Indian tribes and DAHP every three years.

This review will rely partly on changes to statutes, regulations and policies and partly on the results, comments, and reporting of protocol implementation.

Project completion debriefing documents produced by the COR will be a primary source of data for the CRMP review.

These documents are compiled from documentation of cultural resources consultations, planning documents, and agreements compiled over the course of each project.

Zoning Code

COR planning staff conduct periodic reviews of the Zoning Code in response to changing conditions in the City or questions resulting from code administration.

Updates to sections of the Zoning Code pertaining to cultural resources including archaeological sites and CORLs will be reviewed internally and discussed with community members including developers, architects, property owners, and affected Indian tribes.

As part of the CRMP review process, the COR will discuss the Zoning Code requirements related to cultural resources including common issues and questions that arose during the permitting or inspection process to identify areas where the code language should be modified to clarify procedures.

Proposed amendments will be presented to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation and to the City Council for review and decision.

Table Appendix E-1:  CRMP Update Schedule

CRMP Element

Participants

Timeframe

Review and update cultural resources sites, surveys, and published reports in the Cultural Resources Management Map Tool

COR Internal

Ongoing

Update Cultural Resources Management Tool with new data from DAHP

COR Internal, DAHP

Annually

Review and conduct/commission surveys to update Historic Building Inventory

COR Internal

Every 10 years

Review and update list of standard consulting partners and contact information, including state and tribal authorities

COR Internal

Annually, or As Needed

Review and update COR and Tribal and stakeholder coordination tables

COR Internal

Annually, or As Needed

Review and update list of activities that require or are excluded from cultural resources review

COR, affected Indian tribes, DAHP

Annually for three years*

Review criteria by which cultural resources actions are recommended for projects

COR Internal

Annually for three years*

Review and update training plan

COR Internal

Annually for three years*

Review changes to federal and state regulatory requirements, private development requirements for potential code updates

COR, affected Indian tribes, DAHP, and stakeholders

Annually

Review of Standards and Procedures

COR, affected Indian tribes, DAHP, and stakeholders

Every three years

*Timeframe for future review schedule will be updated after 3 years based upon internal feedback and discussion about the process with the DAHP and affected Indian tribes.

Protocol Review

The CRMP’s protocols are intended to serve as living documents and will be updated through two mechanisms. A list of housekeeping type tasks will be logged and addressed annually.

Fatal flaws can be addressed with immediacy (as needed).

The Technical Committee (as described in Redmond Municipal Code Chapter 4.50 Technical Committee) will retain authority for both of these mechanisms following the City Council’s original action to adopt the CRMP’s policies and regulations.

Cultural Resources Management Map Tool Update Procedures

The cultural resources management map tool will be updated through two mechanisms:

The COR receives cultural resources reports with the results of surveys that are not currently included in WISAARD. These will be added to a layer within the cultural resources management map tool when the final cultural resources report is received from the consultant. The update will be reflected in the cultural resource probability maps accordingly. Other layers will be updated by the COR GIS team.

Annually, updates to the cultural resources management map tool shall be provided by the DAHP in coordination with the COR/DAHP data sharing agreement.

The COR may also receive annual or periodic updates to the King County predictive model, an underlying mapping layer informing countywide areas of archaeological probability.

Table Appendix E-2:  Data Layers and Frequency of Updates

Data Layer

Frequency

Other Verifications or Processing

Interim Cultural Resources Survey Data

When received by the COR

COR verification cultural resources survey report is final

DAHP Data

Annually

Review/coding of archaeological survey data by qualified archaeologist

King County Assessor Data (building construction date)

Annually

 

City of Redmond Boundary Layers

When updated by COR

 

Historic Roads

When updated by COR

 

COR Historic Structures Surveys

Every 10 years or more frequently when updated by COR

 

King County Sensitivity Maps

When updated by King County

 

(Ord. 2982)

Effective on: 1/2/2020

F. Cultural Resources Reporting Requirements. Cultural Resources Reporting Requirements

Washington State Standards for Cultural Resources Reporting

The standards for reporting regarding cultural resources are established and updated annually by the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP). The outline presented in the Washington State Standards indicates the organizational format of a professional archaeological resources survey report. It contains the information needed by governmental agencies, DAHP staff, property owners, planners, Tribes, and interested parties to make informed decisions.

The report must be completed, reviewed, and approved by an individual meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for Archaeology. For additional information and detailed formatting and content requirements, refer to DAHP at (360) 586-3065 or https://dahp.wa.gov/.

The following information is required to be submitted for sites identified as having high probability for containing cultural resources or when required as an outcome of a preliminary cultural resources assessment:

A. General Information (required for all cultural resources).

1. Name of proposal as shown on City applications.

2. Name of applicant as shown on City applications.

3. Name of organization and individual providing this information.

4. Name and contact information for the professional archaeologist, per Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 27.53.030(11), providing this information.

5. Date the information was prepared.

6. Clearly identify the development proposal being addressed, including City file number and key project drawing references, as necessary (originator of drawings, originator’s reference number if shown on the drawings, sheet numbers, revision numbers and dates for each sheet, and include reduced copies of key drawings in the report).

7. A copy of an aerial photo with overlays displaying site boundaries and area of potential effects (APE).

8. information may be required. The Technical Committee, Washington DAHP, or affected Indian tribes may require additional information to be included when deemed necessary to the review of the proposed activity.

B. Cultural Resources - Archaeology Reporting Requirements. A cultural resources report shall be prepared by a professional archaeologist who meets the requirements identified by RCW27.53.030(11) and shall meet the requirements of a cultural resources report as defined and amended by the Washington DAHP.

1. Cultural Resources Report Requirements (in addition to the A. General Information listed above) to be provided to the administrator as pdf of final drafts:

a. A Cultural Resources Cover Sheet consistent with formatting established by the Washington DAHP.

b. A site map showing all proposed ground disturbances including the following:

i. Filling, grading, compacting, blasting, boring, tunneling, or any form of earthwork or disturbance; or

ii. Excavating or mining; or

iii. Excavation of artifacts; or

iv. Paving or otherwise covering of the earth surface with such materials as concrete; or

v. Planting or farming; or

vi. Demolishing or erecting a structure; or

vii. Any other activity that may harm or disturb a site.

c. A cultural resources survey report consistent with the Washington State Standards for Cultural Resource Reporting.

d. Appropriate Archaeological Site Forms.

e. National Register forms used for Determination of Eligibility of Archaeological sites (as needed)

f. Letters submitted to the following affected Indian tribes as consultation and responses thereof.

i. Snoqualmie Tribe.

ii. Muckleshoot Indian Tribe.

iii. Tulalip Tribes.

iv. Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians.

g. Letters submitted to the following interested Indian tribes as communication and responses thereof.

i. Suquamish Tribe.

ii. Duwamish Tribe.

iii. Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation.

h. Additional records demonstrating area and depth of previous ground disturbances, if available.

C. Reconnaissance Historic Structures Reporting Requirements. An reconnaissance historic structures report may be prepared by the applicant or a professional who meets the requirements of the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards and shall meet the minimum requirements of WA State Standards for Cultural Resources Reporting – Reconnaissance Level Survey as defined and amended by the Washington DAHP.

1. Reconnaissance Historic Structures Survey Requirements (in addition to the A. General Information listed above) to be provided to the administrator as pdf of final drafts:

a. The historic and current use of the structure(s).

b. A detailed description of the structure(s) including all observable architectural features.

c. An evaluation of the structure’s integrity such as cladding, foundation, roof shape, architectural form/type and style based on its original construction including the following:

i. Identifying features and characteristics that appear to have been maintained from the original construction.

ii. Identifying features and characteristics that appear to have been modified from the original construction.

iii. Identifying features and characteristics that appear to have been replaced from the original construction.

d. A concise Statement of Significance based on the knowledge of the professional, if available.

e. An approximate date of the original construction as obtained from the best available resources.

f. A photographic inventory of the structure(s) meeting the requirements of the E. Photographic Inventory listed below.

D. Intensive Historic Structures Reporting Requirements. An intensive historic structures report shall be prepared by a professional who meets the requirements of the Secretary of the Interior’s Qualification Standards for Architectural Historian and shall meet the requirements of WA State Standards for Cultural Resources Reporting – Intensive Level Survey as defined and amended by the Washington DAHP.

1. Intensive Historic Structures Survey Requirements (in addition to the A. General Information and Reconnaissance Historic Structures Reporting Requirements listed above) to be provided to the administrator as pdf of final drafts:

a. An accurate date of construction based on research.

b. Historic images, if available.

c. The name of the original architect or building, if available.

d. A bibliography.

e. A determination of National Register eligibility by a cultural resources professional.

f. Ownership information including original owner or claimant of property and of structure.

g. Historic or common name of the property.

h. Area of Significant/Historic Context.

i. A thorough, in-depth statement of significance based on integrity and National Register Criteria for Evaluation.

E. Photographic Inventory of Historic Structures Reporting Requirements. A photographic inventory of historic structures shall be prepared.

1. Photographic Inventory of Historic Structures Requirements (in addition to the A. General Information above) to be provided to the administrator:

a. Photographs must be taken and provided at the highest resolution possible to ensure clarity of details.

b. A scale device should be included in specific views to show the size of the object recorded, particularly in documentation of the main facade of a building.

c. The direction, such as the cardinal point from which the view was taken or the direction a building is facing, should be noted in an accompanying Index to Photographs.

d. The photographic inventory shall include the following:

i. General or environmental view(s) to illustrate setting, including landscaping, adjacent building(s), and roadways.

ii. All facades, with and without a scale device.

iii. Perspective view, front and one side.

iv. Perspective view, rear and opposing side.

v. Detail, front entrance and/or typical doorway.

vi. Typical window.

vii. Exterior details, such as chimney, clerestory, oriel, date stone, gingerbread ornamentation, or boot scrape, indicative of era of construction or of historic and architectural interest.

viii. Interior views to capture spatial relationships, structural evidence, a typical room, and any decorative elements; these include hallways, stairways, attic and basement framing, fireplaces and mantels, moldings, interior shutters, kitchen (especially if original), and mechanicals.

ix. If they exist, at least one view of any dependency structures, such as privies, milk or ice houses, carriage houses, sheds, detached garages, or barns. These structures need to be identified in the Index to Photographs.

Related Forms: 

Forms shall be obtained from the Washington DAHP (Ord. 2982)

Effective on: 1/2/2020

G. Acronyms and Abbreviations. List of Acronyms and Abbreviations

AD

...................

Anno Domini

AP

...................

Analytic Period

BP

...................

Before Present

CIP

...................

Capital Investment Program

COA

...................

Certificate of Appropriateness

COR

...................

City of Redmond

CORL

...................

City of Redmond Landmark

CPP

...................

Countywide Planning Policies

CRMP

...................

Cultural Resources Management Plan

DAHP

...................

Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation

FHWA

...................

Federal Highway Administration

FTA

...................

Federal Transit Authority

GMA

...................

Growth Management Act

HPI

...................

Historic Property Inventory

IDP

...................

Inadvertent Discovery Plan

KCHPP

...................

King County Historic Preservation Program

KCLC

...................

King County Landmarks Commission

MPP

...................

Multicounty Planning Policies

MOA

...................

Memorandum of Agreement

NEPA

...................

National Environmental Policy Act

NHPA

...................

National Historic Preservation Act

NPS

...................

National Park Service

NRHP

...................

National Register of Historic Places

PREP

...................

Pre Review Entitlement Process

RCW

...................

Revised Code of Washington

RMC

...................

Redmond Municipal Code

RZC

...................

Redmond Zoning Code

SEPA

...................

State Environmental Policy Act

SMP

...................

Shoreline Master Plan

TCP

...................

Traditional Cultural Property/Place

USACE

...................

United States Army Corps of Engineers

WAC

...................

Washington Administrative Code

WCC

...................

Washington Conservation Corps

WHR

...................

Washington Heritage Register

WISAARD

...................

Washington Information System for Architectural and Archaeological Records Data

WSDOT

...................

Washington Department of Transportation

(Ord. 2982)

Effective on: 1/2/2020