Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout41_Vegetation Management Plan Narrative_2024-0325 COUNTY COMMENT. Compliance with Vegetation management plan. Section 8.8.7 of the Development Agreement requires implementation of the Vegetation Management Plan in Appendix L. Before site development, the Applicant must devise several specific operational prescriptions to achieve “the ultimate vegetation goals and objectives established following the guidelines presented by the BoCC in Ordinance No. 01-0128- 08”. Please provide a narrative explaining how the project design will implement the Vegetation Management Plan, incorporating specific operational prescriptions and conditions developed through an overlay of the current condition maps (Appendix M “Forest Report”) with the footprint of the PHMPR development. PHMPR RESPONSE Page 12 of the vegetation management plan lists the five requirements born by the MPR for vegetation management covered by the BoCC in ordinanceNo. 01-0128-08. The first of the five specific requirements 3.0 (a) relates to the SEIS which has not to my knowledge been found to be insufficient in its submitted form so I will pass on restating it here. The second of the specific conditions 3.0 (s) is in several parts. The first part requires a green belt to be maintained between the development and hwy 101 which will, in the current site plan either be maintained or installed during construction. It also requires the 200-foot riparian buffer along the steep bluff where the MPR borders the Hood Canal to the South. The project has set aside and recorded the described easement. The conservation easement is depicted on the site plan. The maritime village is being designed to preserve the greenbelt and provide the natural visual separation called out in the ordinance. Until the architectural details are designed it is not possible to include the maritime village vegetation buffer on the site plan. The buffer will be shown and submitted with the request for a development permit in this area. The set-back from wetlands called out in the ordinance is covered by the kettle “B” preservation and the golf course design is meandered to preserve green belts and natural visual separations. The vegetation management plan is detailed and specific in its description of the requirement to remove problem trees and invasive vegetation. The management plan can be taken at face value as our prescription for meeting the letter and intent of 01-0128-08. Specifically, the VMP’s listed in 3.0 of the Vegetation management plan in all of its parts. The third constraint on vegetation management from section three 3.0 (u) page 12 is a general description relating to preservation of or providing for vegetation to screen the development and amenities from view and impacts on the adjacent rural areas. This section is not site plan specific but rather general in nature. “the greenbelts of the shoreline should be retained and maintained as they currently exist in order to provide for screening of facilities and amenities so that all uses within the MPR are harmonious with each other”. The quote above is included here to illustrate the impossibility of including these constraints on the drawings until much higher granularity of design is available. Exhibit 41 The fourth section is specific to the maritime village and requires the buildings to be designed such that they blend in with the natural terrain and be landscaped with greenbelts between buildings. The building design incorporates these features with most of the structure built down slope and as such not visible. The detailed design is being done but not yet available in sufficient detail to allow its depiction on the site plan drawing. The last condition is generalized to cover construction of all the MPR buildings. It states that we must consult an arborist to ensure that we strive to preserve trees 10 inches or more breast high and protect them from damage during construction. Trees of that size or greater that must be removed are to be taken out with their root wads and preserved for stream reclamation projects. Part 6.2.1 with its plan view and accompanying descriptive paragraphs cover the maritime village area plan. Finally, Part 6.2 covers, with boundaries, and a diagram the MPR existing vegetation conditions. Everything in this section is independent of the proposed site plan and deals with the heavy impact of former land use on the site. In summary, the management plan itself is the narrative you are asking us to provide and with the listed exceptions it is not site specific. The plan cannot be, by its nature, displayed on the site plan beyond the beyond the easements, setbacks, and natural preserved areas. We have provided a current site plan with the vegetation plan shown in text notations on the drawing. John Holbert PE Project Manager Exhibit 41