HomeMy WebLinkAboutBLD2013-00168 Critical Area I
1
CRITICAL AREA STEWARDSHIP PLAN
' 3401 PARADISE BAY ROAD
' PORT LUDLOW, WASHINGTON
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL#984000108
' May 2013
G. Bradford Shea, Ph.D.
Charles Tanner
' Copyright 2013 by G. Bradford Shea, Westech Company—All Rights Reserved
' Submitted to:
' JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
621 Sheridan St.
Port Townsend, Washington 98368
Submitted by:
' WESTECH COMPANY
P.O. Box 2876
Port Angeles, Washington 98362
1
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER/SECTION PAGE NO.
I
I
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 APPROACH AND METHODS 7
I
2.1 APPROACH 7
2.2 METHODS 7
3.0 MANAGEMENT PLAN 8
I
3.1 REGULATORY SETTING 8
3.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS 10
3.3 PROJECT IMPACTS 15
I3.4 MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL 16
3.4.1 Goals 16
3.4.2. Objectives 17
' 3.4.2.1. Mitigating Erosion and Plant Disturbance During
Construction 17
3.4.2.2. Mitigating the Impact of the Project on Existing Native
I
Vegetation 17
3.4.2.3. Mitigation of Potential Stormwater Runoff and Erosion
Due to an Increase in Impervious Surface 18
I
3.4.2.4. Mitigate the Loss of Habitat and Improve the Riparian
Buffer and Nearshore Habitat 21
3.4.2.5. Avoid the Use of Pesticides and Plant Nutrients on the
I
Property 21
3.4.3. Planting Techniques and Protection of Buffer Functions
and Values 21
I 3.4.3.1. Planting Plan 22
3.4.3.2. Protection of Buffer Functions and Values 24
3.4.4. Performance Standards and Monitoring 25
I
3.4.4.1. Performance Standards 26
3.4.4.2. Monitoring Plan 26
3.5 CONTINGENCY PLAN 28
I4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 30
4.1 CONCLUSIONS 30
4.2 RECOMMENDATIONS 30
I5.0 REFERENCES 32
I
WW1275ParadiseBayRdCASP.RPT/051313/mas i
I
' TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER/SECTION PAGE NO.
' TABLES
Table 1. Native Plants for Planting Areas 20
Table 2. Performance Standards for Monitoring Plan 27
' FIGURES
Figure 1. Location Map 2
Figure 2_ Vicinity Map 3
' Figure 3. Parcel Map 4
Figure 4. 2011 Aerial Map 5
Figure 5. Existing Development and Proposed Garage 6
Figure 6. Site Topography within 3/10 miles Approximately 13
Figure 7. On-site and Near-site Soils 14
Figure 8. Planting Map for Areas A, B, C and D 19
' APPENDICES
Appendix A—Site Photographs A-1
I
VVW1275ParadiseBaY RdCASP.RPT/051313/mas ii
1.0 INTRODUCTION
' The Property (Site) is located at 3401 Paradise Bay Road in Port Ludlow, Jefferson
County, Washington. The Property is owned by Carol Pongonis of P.O. Box 65006, Port
Ludlow, Washington 98365-0006. It is recorded as Assessor's Parcel # 984000108. The
' Site lies within Jefferson County, Washington in the Southeast quarter of Section 22 of
Township 28 North, Range 1 East, W.M. (Figures 1, 2, 3, and 4). The Site is located on
the western shores of the Paradise Bay in the Hood Canal in southeastern Jefferson
' County.
The Property abuts the western shoreline of Paradise Bay. It is approximately 265 feet
' long by 110 feet wide. According to county maps, the Site is approximately 17,553 square
feet, or 0.40 acres in area. An existing gravel driveway provides vehicular access to the
property. A small residence and a septic drain field are located on the Site.
' The marine shoreline along this Property is considered a Shoreline of Statewide
Significance and has been designated as critical habitat for Hood Canal Summer Chum
and Puget Sound Chinook (50 C.F.R. 226). The shoreline is classified as a "Fish and
Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area" (FWHCA) by Jefferson County, requiring a 150 foot
buffer from the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) and a five foot building setback from
the buffer.
The Site is also bordered to the West by a Type Ns, non-fish bearing seasonal stream
of greater than 20 percent grade. Such streams require a 75 foot buffer under the
' Jefferson County Critical Areas Code.
It is the intention of the owner to construct a garage on the Site between the existing
residence and Paradise Bay Road. The owner also has recently placed a new septic on
the property (JCC 18.25.410) (Figure 5).
' Because the proposed plan will extend inside the reduced buffer, disturb soils and some
existing vegetation, and increase impervious surfaces on-site, the Property owners have
contracted with Westech Company (Westech) to satisfy the County's requirements in
' regards to Critical Areas. This Report constitutes a Critical Area Stewardship Plan (CASP)
which will describe existing conditions on the Site, define the impacts of development, and
outline a management proposal to maintain and enhance the existing functions and values
of the buffer and its associated watershed.
I
I
WW1275ParadiseBayRdCASP.RPT/051313/mas 1
I
• 0
C) C)
CV CV
I
N.000'T:_..,kt N oi3O i i..!:rt N,000TS..Lt, N,000 Z::..Lb N,0001'I"CV N,000"S,.9b NA00'::£.,7+b 03 Q-
I 01
F Cr) r b ? 7 • a:yc U
;v ro ro gy m• u c v T b } a l.0 O r�
z L. L. m c w O • ni._
O �' T w N v 7 0 o p m Y' a.�, o a a }c U Q
CZ
.t _E ry c4 t.p •
J V ry ; �.i,� ` y C i O �v O
rod C a C"'-'•. 7 M Chu.- a > O�a'� a E LLI Ic!.
ro (� 0as
• Qn
•
k Z y ti4 a 0 ry LI
o O-0 V >=
J 0 c T x Y o ro a E v N� o O
���� L CDuO r m G J w o a o° ca
�02 A p r/ o t9 c y N cY w �� X 4•b1 " Z
• •
I ‘:", .I ° o � t� cGP • 7 E d c c D Q • b' 0
y v+ oa110: • a u o ! m C o o w
: N o�G >' y m m O-w b - a Z-y 0 b
.O O• 7 O •yW• C7� mid •�. s •=Q.D•�� J+m
G .�.m ' .p1 •
A _w• 77•0•
ti o E
CAS• = y • aOi^ �/�'x° aci C• rooms s m s • _
ZX •) 0 _ � m � , �a v i vE a
Jo 10 ± C ,yTV
o bT o_ Q
�`�''� • i7 GOi l� i C� •N crro. d0 �. _x • -,y . 0 • ,d A C
•
c C
" ed' E cv C U L.
+J
£ a.` "I
% ni •CJ' u • c ',,,�, QV
? d
-� , CE• • • • ~c. 2[— Z e } cCLL • _ f 0' 1'• • tic
ct oCLuc ¢0 'a N. m � -_
N U }r- ' o G oU ° m : 6 ' "C . 'I'd •a Cl m S. o m _
n Er, o p � u a mu? o 0
I
__ MtiC�� a vVO� �y aC yn(� s%o o
i a_ ,e E2. Q a N a�'.
a /�A�) 17'ul a • aQN 2 0 a. 0 so . yu
Qill CI ° ° '� E r �9b�• Y oao A ;�
' 9 A o s E 0 0
90 Se • -°� ? •Y i o z a N • a lc o — ry
JS • O f • oo a >v� ro co
�- C O 4 a U i 3 T � :0 � •
•3 on
kkk c
O
) aJ ra a ro 0.
/ ?-.:
, y cf) � rohIt -a vo TO m• ' o _ C3 kD a o M AUL a Nz U r
c + S . )C d
.
Q. c
e.
o
C,4 ,y c_ o, Wa ° JZ u.°o ly . d
fe
N.000'T:n.,Srt' N;DUO.T T.,.`:4 N,000 T S„L4 N,000":;,.Lb N.00U"T„Lb N,000"S„9t, N,000':=C.,?b
I
I - _.
1
I
I
N..00rGS rt N...000F57.r.. N s.ouo9Z r. N..rootr I r., N....TO t... N F..0006I7,.., 'N.,0009i.7.: N
'; - rni CL , / .Iy ' P. : I ' ''S-\\PI-0 -',,ii.. 'rf.1 i•' V iS 7:o' 751 OD f"--
N- C)
C) CD
n .i ,,..:(1). : l' _A,..0• ii"'g • : 't ' r / k...ii :,• ._. ..,.1:t C\I C\I
. i•?•.7 -a '4;.- ;_ii---q-.•
- i .
I .,..• ?FL.'
-
r , u_ ___Itr•-'''' F.',4, ,
k ?
z r is
.
,t .. ..„. ___ • „........ , rs.,._
. ,
. . .
C %......)
CD Q_
a n
........
-.L , - -
_.,
i F,:f's—' -1, i .. , _ ,. _,..i
. i.r . n f 1 a.,
r- —,---- -- -- C E
; r , 1 I ; -t_ • i
, i ,4_ 4 L.. ., , r . , ,,..,.. . ._ 1
____I
I '.-'f.!) . ',g -V. : ,.. }—t
. 's., k a ''-
,,., i. f)..[ i
, . --,;.th.,e--- '7 f r --__ .
_ • 1 ,'-.1 '
- `-'1 c3 2
i 2 -t-
1 r-
....0_---
i
c.) Cla
E .,f. ....
• i _rlf7' :'. '1 c-- `..,a I 3 (1) s-
•=,- ..1 '-7,
':"1, ____-• 1 ..!;',; I r 4i..— .• --9 11 c,-)
II
fr ,. -di ,,.''' -, ,i 4f7g:i
,-?, 4.
,
,i- ,,
I cr,
CDs'
8, g '., I-. 0 .1
i 5 ,. I _ / . t: . F.,:.'",, !
5 _
. : 2, ',.. -:- F..:
....,.:. IL , _„,_ .
-
I "_- :A " " -•""'2, _
,t., 4,,1 ": L' Fi I:, •-:-...7.-----, .. • 1, , 1
...
.7---",..,..'.. • s.."' -47_,
as
(11- '''----- ,i F: . = -•..._1--.1 '..','• .- --x__E , 5-, '" a)
2
- ;
:4: 21r, • : - : -.
41 -77"H•'•:1- r"=" , .:,..2;7 ' -; 'I - ''''. i -.7-4 F- ' --.1-1"
.r., _ -.....e....kerL,... 1,...-.' - ....
C/)
`::.•,),'-; ,I f.,,3. . ';> ; '•-' , ...g, =3
: --J. -' ..1 qT-- , 7_ •f. ,,
w, • - _,..k. --.
.,, f,, = ' 1 ,!.' ; , i, -; E! _Jr:, x. &'5 x '•,i
e ,.?, -1 ?? •*...... •••• . •.....,---,A-..... *: ,,, . •,, ( -`;.
:,•1. .---1
.5
;•.;5-, I .,, ; I.- WI
7 ,17- 14, i•-° ' '.:, Z - C1-- , . ,•t•, -3 - -?,-;----f--7.."..., '...--`\ :.2:;•'' -4
I • --', If ,- !' ....,..1, •i3
...3,... .3 -... =
/ I 3 - j.,..
.II''''
' • - kfr"
.,
. , ..t r,7
I
r, - , .... - = .,..,.
""-'•
, _
... _
. . . . . o_
as
2
>-,
• r- .' -•:,---, - < i _ ,• .,,...-• ,; " --: • - ----y-'• .,j' - -- 8 :,-•4
..--... ' ?.. i r.,- .4...., _..-, ---- ...---7 . •-• cr)• -la -, .,4-,.. ..„ ,. •,,,.., -..: ,
.6
r- - i-'• .. ' ..5
I
'.6, -?-. \;,1_;) -1 -'-";--_,,,. •4-4,: : ' ..,,_,,,1 r. -.- , , .F1',. /4-..s--,terl,C -'
,.,_ .i_ / .,J; ,___...4. :,_,..... . ..: ,..,,t•I ;• --,_----, g . - ,..i,, c.4.3-1-,- ;\)- -'.''.. 7-"; .:[.;':'.
, , - - • ., , • ---- !_,a, , ,_ .. --
, s.. , -
E.._-,•--....__ \ . ; , , 2 , ••:,,_, . -•s -'41 •-
/ -J ' --
C•1
o -..•• -7 V. , ... - __,_-__,
•- t
cs . // ff-_--,-L',.. , 7. , r- .,. ,r. -2
t., EL_')
I .f.
.• ' . ,
,t1-\ "'"
. ,
,
, -
CZ
'8- 1 1(4.. ____
—---r.— F ,. .
• I ' ' •\.\ ' I
c. o,....,-.
." \-----—--7---—---I • ‘....-. 1 '- ' : i' 'e :: i--r•41-1'1''• ' ..-.
I Lai '
.' \
L .
. . '- A.. : •••• ".•,`. I - it
,,- •• : ,.,---•-' t••/- - ' ‘,7,; , 5
.Z.-.,• I
I: '
• l' •
/.. .3 - r - .• .y,.
*
.. , .
e ,
-,-,
fil4O r .--5 e-____,, Z ,.. I --,:l -. 5 •
•
\: k. i . I • - _Ali
\.,_1 i FM,—1
: - .3•- 1 i L_ •—'
ui
I L'., "'
§.- ',A -:.
t,.... - F"'•!... t i, I ,
i
g
I •• I _
: L -
_
42,
I gai
F
.•'
R.'
• \
1
\ c...- ...: 'r- ' 11
- I-t ' f t
' ' /. 12
. .
,., _
_
" ---'''''. ' I
1 • ..:
'0, i • i :-''- II :' ,..,_ F
' --I fCr I, I • +-
IA:t s
WI VZ ..t NC
-:..i
et .
I .r,
r..
021
e
.
- ..-F• o . x
, ; .; , ,, --. ,u - .;
2 .
"
I :-. (,1,4 i 4 .%, v -- I
, t • -a - --ttr 1- '. . ..E ,-i
'
/
/i dr I 4 :., - • =
0 .1-
tl, •
/ . 0
a I 1 r
I '‘_J ...1 gi
IL
i I I -
L ,3
P-13
I. 2 i
4/ ;7 I
I
. 5
.,_.._J 4`:,,, _, _ , ... I ' . ' I '- • dt
'NJ“o/r151,5,.. N..,aouLO,c, N...ocoSZt, N ..uow-r 1,.. N....roo6I5,... .N.Fr000L,.:'.L.. 'N k0000t,L
I
I
' CO M
O O
N N
C c
II
as
E U
og
U o
0 �
U i
N
N Q3
1 Q)
U
' ii
i
N w
i o (T)
' Q
f�
N
as
-
('7
' N
LL
1
1
1
I
I
I
01 Cr)
0 0
I
CV (NI
C
C15 C
C
a"
E O
=
H
CU
U
i
I
O
opco4I
U
a
1
ca
(70
f L
I ,-I
y
R
r
411/1
I
- , ilkill4, 4401k rit- - fl
Plik.,-1; ' : 6
., ti ;
. 0 .•
U
F
i , -i .
0 A ;1
'� 1
I
I
I
I
/
,/
I / ,
DIRECTIONS TO SITE /
..,
PAY Rev.: r‘..,77 a.U.0:5
/
I PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
bors 0 et 5' a.OCe ..1 PAz..tat....!Kw•S A*IS AS
Ratkala.A'MN VW . a.-ea,..1 PL4r5. PAU a
- :7— /., Sea Wall
//
..
\ -
..._
Fermvery:..Te-.1:,'A.,,on coLwrr. icaek&f:rdv,.r.;4.•_,
.OAY Fr. Pi MC7-4.14 22, 104,V715.71 hr27,,
aarTr.I no
7 W
551).175' "., ht, zric,c-Ave C
., / OC.490,1';:as:. /
/ LOT 9
I /
/ LAMM:61',x,,17..1.•
.." 1140,-..nr BY
. \
,tz'06/
FXSPNY:/414.!-. 11.1Y
I \
\ /
40.n„,,i ,rt 4:::Dpi• (P,,."'•••?_
NI!AI.IPP.'0..C'1 N Proposed
garage \
.t. ,,,,,i
\ ....- /
-' , ''''
_...
a' 5-.5...:am::CITe/AU----„,..
\ \ ''.. -,...\,,,LResidence
I \
„..„,
,
. \\, .
/
\ .
..„.
\ .
I \
\
\ -..
\
\ .
\ „\------•,,,..'''.6',"`v,.:;.,.."
i
4 / ' ''.. . . . ,.
, .
\ sX , . / If
//S4 ' -N7.-, ' 1r '\1 \ /;.
Septic
I --0'\\ !
\ \ ‘`,-i,,
\ '6.1\ _
4 / /•47 .'' / '. / ' ...
/' ./<NI! .... -
'„ and
\ -
/- ./''s .k1105,,, — ' /v..
.-...-. ,, drainfield
\ --5-7--A \ oil.,,Ns, N ,\s-•‘'., ‘
I
c-<\ \ 1--:-- \N../..e.''' c.•' \. •
"\-\''."•V- • • .. •.' y 1..
\ ? \ ,, On N.0 1 -....• ‘ ,,,
J I :t 0-, de
\'•
.,-
\
,
-57,,i_ \ \ -, •.A. 1-,
\ ^: r,.-1
,
c, 1) /,
.'.
\
...,
00..
\ V-. --51.0.:•.1.'2'
I \ /
/
N \
•
•, •
, \
/
/
•. .
• ,
\ \ ‘
. ,
I SEPTIC SYSTEM, PARCEL #98400010,8
SITE PLAN RECORD ..,
T FOR: CAROL PONGONIS DRAWING
IFaxmAkuaJar wo4 uerl MIs spo&lad:CIAAJI-
IFigure 5. Existing Development and Proposed Garage
Westech Company 2013
ISource: American Land Science, Inc. 2013
I
I
' 2.0 APPROACH AND METHODS
2.1 APPROACH
The approach for this investigation into the impacts of development of this Site included a
' detailed review of County Assessor's parcel maps, Critical Area Maps, aerial photographs
of the Site. In addition, mapped locations of Species of Concern by the Washington State
Department of Fish and Wildlife, mapped locations of Endangered Species Act (ESA)
' listed species', critical habitat defined by National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and topographic
maps of the area were reviewed.
' Westech Company's (Westech) field investigations for the Critical Area Stewardship Plan
(GASP) were carried out in April 2013 by Mr. Charles Tanner, staff Environmental
Scientist. During Site visits, the Property was inspected and Site characteristics were
' noted. Relevant measurements were taken for mapping purposes, photographic
documentation of the Site was acquired, and potential mitigation actions were identified.
' 2.2 METHODS
' Westech's field reconnaissance involved examining the existing conditions found at the
Site. This included reviewing the area proposed for development in relation to the natural
features found on-site. Botanical studies were conducted involving identification of plant
' species that could be found growing at the Site. Site measurements were taken (including
dimensions of proposed planting areas) using a fiberglass tape measure. The OHWM
was marked on-site with stakes and yellow flagging tape.
' A qualitative assessment of the landscape was conducted to determine the presence of
invasive species, the composition and characteristics of forests in the critical area,
' evidence of historical land uses, the slope of lands adjacent to critical areas, soil textures
and stability and an assessment of the role of existing vegetation in supporting soil
stability. Westech also assessed the extent of existing human disturbance in the critical
areas. This information was used to assess the potential impacts of the proposed Project.
This GASP has been formulated to "maintain and enhance the existing functions and
values of the associated watershed" (JCC 18.22.480). A Management Plan (see Chapter
3.0) has been developed to describe the goals and objectives of the GASP as well as the
performance standards that will be utilized to assess the effectiveness of the plan. This
Plan is intended to restore and enhance the integrity of the Site by improving the quality of
' habitat and erosion control though planting of additional native vegetation at the Site. This
Plan is also intended to provide enhanced connection of upland areas to the marine
riparian zone.
WW1275ParadiseBaY RdCASP.RPT/051313/mas 7
1
3.0 MANAGEMENT PLAN
3.1 REGULATORY SETTING
' There are several jurisdictional issues related to the development of this parcel of land.
The Site is located along a section of the Hood Canal that is considered a "Shoreline of
Statewide Significance" and is regulated under Jefferson County's Shoreline Master
Program. This shoreline has been designated under the Shoreline Master Program as a
' "Suburban" shoreline. These are defined as "Areas where residential activity may
approach urban density, but usually where densities permit space for small numbers of
livestock, gardens or wood lots" (JCC 18.25.140). Another purpose of Suburban
' designation is to "provide permanent residential and recreational areas outside of urban
areas" provided that "development of these areas provides adequate facilities for sewage
disposal, water supply, open space and the like without severe degradation to the lifestyle
' that was sought initially" (JCC 18.25.140).
Under the Shoreline Master Program the standard setback for residential structures is
' "30 feet or one foot for each foot of bank height, whichever is greater." This setback is to
be measured from the bank's edge when the bank height is greater than 10 feet and
shall not exceed 100 feet (JCC 18.25.410). The setback under this provision would be
' 30 feet for this site. Exceptions to this provision area allowable, however, where "there
are existing dwellings within 300 feet on either side of the proposed building site." In
this event, the buffer is the "average setback of those dwellings" if this distance is less
' than the prescribed buffer (JCC 18.25.410).
This shoreline has also been designated "critical habitat"for threatened salmonid (salmon)
' species, specifically the Puget Sound Chinook and Hood Canal Summer Chum. This
listing comes from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) pursuant to the
Endangered Species Act (ESA). The Growth Management Act (36.70A RCW) mandates
that the County protect such critical areas. Jefferson County carries out this mandate by
' classifying this shoreline as a "Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area" (FWHCA).
These areas are considered to be of "critical importance to the maintenance of
endangered, threatened or sensitive species of fish, wildlife, and/or plants" (18.22.200).
' Jefferson County requires a buffer of 150 feet from the OHWM for areas in which
"federally listed species have a primary association." In addition, a five foot building
' setback from the buffer is required. Local and site specific factors may be taken into
account and the buffer width is to be "based on the best available information
concerning the species/habitat in questions" (JCC 18.22.270(2)). Any project located
within this buffer must follow Jefferson County drainage and erosion control, grading
and vegetation retention standards (JCC 18.22.270).
WW1275ParadiseBayRdCASP.RPT/051313/mas 8
I
I
I The Site is also governed by requirements for stream buffers. A type Ns, no-fish bearing
seasonal stream, runs along the western edge of the property. Since the stream has a
grade of approximately 40 percent, the county requires 75 foot buffers for construction
Iprojects (JCC 18.22.270(1)).
Landowners may obtain a reduction in the size of the buffer required for FWHCAs. The
administrator has the "authority to reduce buffer widths on a case-by-case basis"
Iprovided that standards are met for avoiding and minimizing impacts and that the buffer
reduction does not "adversely affect the habitat functions and values of the adjacent
FWHCA or other critical area" (JCC 18.22.270). However, the administrator may not
Ireduce the buffer to less than 75 percent of the standard buffer (JCC 18.22.270). Any
projects that "alter, decrease or average the standard buffer" require an accompanying
Habitat Management Plan (HMP) (JCC 18.22.265). The HMP must identify "how the
Idevelopment impacts of the propose project will be mitigated" (18.22.440).
However, the development of an HMP is not available for projects that take place within
I the reduced buffer. This applies to the project proposed for this Site (See Section 3.2).
In such cases, property owners "may elect to develop site-specific CASPs as an
alternative to the prescriptive requirements" for Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation
I Areas (FWHCAs) (JCC 18.22.460). CASPs can be applied only to residential
developments on properties of 0.25 acre or greater (JCC 18.22.461).
I The GASP must meet several requirements specified in the Jefferson County Code.
The CASP must "provide equal or greater protection of critical areas functions and
values than the prescriptive standards of buffers and setbacks" (JCC 18.22.460).
IAmong the elements that must be included in a GASP are:
• A detailed description of the existing conditions of the Site to include habitats of
I local importance and other critical areas, a description of the property and
adjacent watershed, a qualitative assessment of any surface waters on-site and
the existing physical and biotic landscape, and a description of existing human
impacts on the Site. The CASP must also describe potential adverse impacts of
Ithe proposed Project (JCC 18.22.470).
I . A description of the management proposal that describes the overall goals and
Iobjectives of the GASP. These must address how the proposed buffer
improvements will protect crucial functions and values from being degraded; a
description of how surface grading will be conducted so as to implement the
I goals of the plan; a plan for the maintenance of existing vegetation and/or re-
vegetation of the site; a proposed/approved stormwater management plan; and a
description of the timing of the proposed plan (JCC 18.22.480).
I • A description of performance standards for the plan and protocols for monitoring
and assuring the long-term function of its elements. These are to include the
I designation of performance indicators and their attributes, actions and
quantities/statuses that will be used to assess the effectiveness of the plan. In
I
WW1275ParadiseBayRdCASP.RPT10513131mas 9
I
I addition, it must include a time frame for implementing the plan and a plan for
periodic monitoring and reporting on the progress of the GASP (JCC 18.22.465).
I • A Contingency Plan describing planned steps to modify the CASP in the event
that monitoring indicates a failure to meet its stated goals (JCC 18.22.530).
I The CASP must also include maps that support its descriptive elements. A failure to
submit reports required under the Jefferson County Code will be considered a failure to
comply with the terms of the permit(JCC 18.22.540).
IThis Report is intended to satisfy Jefferson County's requirements that a Critical Area
Stewardship Plan be prepared and submitted prior to development of the parcel. This
document is intended to support permit applications that the landowners have already
I submitted or intend to submit to Jefferson County. The information provided herein and
adherence to the outlined mitigation and restoration measures is expected to show
compliance with the Article IX of the Jefferson County Code addressing the requirements
Ifor CASPs.
I3.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Property abuts the western edge of the Hood Canal along the shores of Paradise Bay.
I It is approximately 265 feet long by 110 feet wide. According to county maps, the Site is
approximately 17,553 square feet, or 0.40 acres in areas. An existing gravel driveway
provides vehicular access to the property.
IA small residence and a septic system are located on the Site (see Figure 4 and Appendix
A). An access driveway enters the property on the western side and includes a parking
Iarea to the right and turn around straight into the property.
Figure 5 shows topographic features within 3/10 miles of the Site. As this figure indicates,
I the property abuts the shoreline, rising from the sea level to a height of approximately 40
feet above means sea level (msl) atop a bluff overlooking the water. From there, the
landscape grades slowly upward north of the property. At a distance of approximately 3/10
mile from the Site, the elevation is at 300 feet above msl. From that point the land
Icontinues to grade slowly uphill.
The beach shoreline was viewed during an approximately 2.0 foot low tide. The upper
I intertidal areas of the beach are dominated by sand, with some pebbles. Pebbles become
more prominent as the beach grades down to the lower intertidal zone. A rock wall has
been placed along the beach. The wall appears to be below the OHWM. The owner
I reports that the water regularly rises up the wall, but does not come over the wall
(Pongonis 2013, personal communication).
1
IWW1275ParadiseBayRdCASP.RPT/051313/mas 10
' Both rockweed (Fucus distichus) and sea lettuce (Ulva lactuca) were observed on the
beach. The rockweed is attached to several rock surfaces located on the beach. No signs
' of kelp beds were noted in the bay adjacent to the shoreline. The rock surfaces also
provide habitat for chitons and barnacles (Balanus sp.). Several species of clam were
noted on the beach, including butter clam (Saxidomus giganteaus), Pacific littleneck
' (Protothaca staminea) and cockles. Olympia oyster shells (Ostrea lurida) were also
observed. Several large logs are located along the eastern side of the beach. Shorebirds,
including grebes and cormorants, were observed in the water adjacent to the beach.
To the immediate south of the rock wall is a 14 foot stretch of relatively level surface. This
area is vegetated with some grasses, though a significant portion of the area consists of
exposed soil. Some common horsetail (Equisiturn arvense) and sword fern (Polystichum
' munitum) are also located in this area. South of the level area, the hill climbs rapidly along
an approximately 45 degree incline. Western red cedar (Thuja plicata), Western hemlock
(Tsuga heterophylia), sword fern and ocean spray (Holodiscus discolor) line the incline
' along the eastern edge of the property. The face of the incline is dominated by English ivy
(Hedera helix) and sword fern. Vegetation on the incline appears to be mitigating hillside
erosion, as no signs of rutting from runoff were observed. Western red cedar and hemlock
' also sit atop the edge of the hill. English ivy has established itself on the trunk of one cedar
at the top of the hill as well as on another adjacent to the stream.
' A small, non-fish bearing, intermittent stream lies at the western edge of the property. The
stream enters the property from the north through a culvert. At the upper edge of the
stream sit Nootka rose (Rosa nutkana) and some willow (Salix spp). An English holly (flex
aquifolium) is also located at the top of the hill. The stream drains along an approximately
' 40 percent incline before emptying onto the western edge of the on-Site shoreline. Both
banks of the stream are covered in English Ivy with some sword fern and lady fern. While
the English Ivy is the dominant invasive plant on the Site, it is likely functioning to mitigate
' erosion along the stream banks. Despite the steep incline of the landscape, the streambed
shows no signs of slumping.
' Six Western red cedars are located atop a hillside located to the immediate east of the
western stream bank. These trees appear to be approximately 30 to 40 years old. A
hemlock of approximately 100 years old in this area has a trunk covered in English Ivy.
The owner has planted several blue spruce trees along this edge of the hill. The area
between the on-Site driveway and this area also includes exposed soils.
' A small grass lawn is located to the immediate west and northeast of the home on-site.
Some dandelion is present on the western lawn. The owner has begun planting blue
spruce in the area adjacent to the lawn on the northeastern side of the home.
No habitats of local concern are noted on county maps within 3/10 miles of the Site.
VVW1275ParadiseBayRdCASP.RPT/051313/mas 11
1
1
I
' The shoreline adjacent to the property has been designated as critical habitat for two
species listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act: Puget Sound Chinook
and Hood Canal Summer Chum (50 C.F.R. 226).
' The Site is zoned Rural Residential 1:5 (RR1:5), which has a maximum density of one
dwelling per five acres with a minimum lot size of one acre. The purpose of rural
residential zoning is to allow for"continued residential development" in areas of the County
of "relatively high density pre-existing patterns of development," including "along the
County's coastal areas" (JCC 18.15.015).
Figure 6 shows the degree of present development on the Site. A house approximately
625 square feet in size (25 x 25) is presently located on the lot about 15 feet from the top
of a hill that slopes downward toward the shoreline. Jefferson County lists the residence as
' having 624 square feet of floor area. A septic system is located to the immediate south of
the residence with a drainfield located southeast of the residence. A graveled driveway
immediately southwest of the Site allows entrance; the driveway consists of an entry way
' and a parking area to the immediate right of the driveway and north of the septic. Cleared
lawns covered in grasses lie to the immediate west and northeast of the residence.
The Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) has mapped the soil at this site as
Everett gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 15 percent slopes (see Figure 7). The soils are described
as a gravelly sandy loam from 0 to 6 inches, a very gravelly sandy loam from 6 to 16
' inches, and a very gravelly coarse sand from 16 to 60 inches. These soils are described
as having a high capacity (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) to transmit soils and no frequency of flooding
or ponding. They are listed as having a depth to the water table of more than 80 inches
' and a depth to the restrictive feature. Surface layer soil samples taken in the lawn areas
atop the hill, along the slope leading to the shoreline, and in the level area adjacent to the
sea wall confirm the presence of sandy loam soils.
The NRCS lists the soil alongthe shoreline as Coastal beaches (Co). This soil is
associated with 1 to 5 percent slopes and a depth to water table from zero to 72 inches.
' Co is also associated with frequent flooding.
The existing vegetation in the buffer area plays an important, but limited, role in supporting
soil stabilization. Areas of open soils on the hilltop adjacent to the stream as well as the
' base of the hill adjacent to the shoreline provide only limited protection against erosion and
impacts from stormwater runoff. The dominance of the hillside and stream banks by
English Ivy limits the species diversity and the corresponding variation in root depth that
' can most effectively mitigate nearshore erosion. However, the presence of English Ivy is
likely providing some mitigation against erosion as the stream banks and areas of the
hillside most covered with English Ivy show little evidence of erosion.
WW1275ParadiseBayRdCASP.RPT1051313/mas 12
I
I CO CO
C. CD
C\I 04
I >, >,
c
as z
a- o
E 0
e,
I0
o g
I
(1)
0
i..
=
0
I 1 U)
0 I a)a) a)
..--,4-•
0 (7)
CL cts
E
x
I
-
I
- . .. ...•
•- co
..--,-
- ' '.,- 7; ':' 1. 1 9 1$
- ,. . • . '.
. .* •-us -
..,
.• • _. ••• ,-./ * ,.3.?„,.,' f-,.; CD
U> i .,• X
,• 1 L*V1. C
..... .. '' *-1 IS"i!':V• ' .4 .'1,., ::',,;
••••• •"f I
ez_ cft, ie 7 -. ..,,,,:!r..,..t,--1.1
A 0,- ,xi:: R :, i , - :.• ,,,,..7
• . .
-0 * 1 ,4e-x _4,-f)!R• ii.,i, ' 'if---4.-A-...s,
;J....3 -, ,..,.
a ..-z ''. / . ' --- ' _C
.. . ,• ‘ .t. i m . .., , --..:,2_•. '.' .: • „, ...'.. CI.
I .
. .. . , q-4_"... !) i, ' :14• '- %.4-.. V *,,:j 2
. ',--,: -' 1 : 't'l• -.. * -*, N-:,, .....1----,
-4-c-__,__ • "-' - .-------- ...t....;705 -i 3 kt :'s ) 5 ,- •-•-z*, ; ;;t4-,,...,..,,---.,
'''''"- -'1`=:-''-` - - - -";.:". r.' ...f.c.P;17 1-- ! ,Ji :3"-1;,, .,---, as
cs,
0
-- -•,-:-.i i,...p- ,.- ,..--_,0,---•,/ ‘- i'(-..Z.,t-z--• , a_
4 i:•4• 1- Z nre•(/'-''''''‘.0 .../ ..-' / ,...-•' I ----J\I r
1.--
I ... • ixii•_, ----: ..----</ , '---.1 % _ b-- ____-1 \ ‘ ,
..:-- ,,-.. ,_ i,e' --"— .-"—%••• -"- 7-- -..... ". (--- ,
- 1 r; .-• f. i-• ... -.N..", , ......
'• 1 '''. 4 1 . '-- ".' ;* I '''1. .....' ""'-.--'-'.://.'''...', ° ' ' I i
C/)
: ..- -i-i • ! , ,h - 1 /7-;--_-_ 10)N'" \--,-
, — ,
__...= i zs; ,, co
,..,_,--.....—„---...../ ....._ ."1 4.120, _.
I v-...-_---....,-----.:_:-._ _ _ ,
, ....„, __-...... ,_,,,
— ,- ..---.....,,__,,, ... _ —. ....— , —, \ i
I ,- \
'---.-"..7..\-•/------,,,,,---,.....----,_/ _ ‘.../ 1 P---,..,\ r'‘ '
0)
--n...._.. .---'\\,. ) .\',\I 1
C U--
-,--f,—..-‘., (.-4... ../..,-3', '....':-•
I ----•\-',.,'`. si if i_ ....-----.\4 I - •‘\.1•') i r` --• ,
I .„--,:, ) \ .•..__......„.... N._,:: „, `•-,......... „ ' ,....•_,,..."
i -. --• \., \:‘, . k. i
/ • . -----....) t i. --"\-..'"•-•,_./ --' --.-----..-.' -•-'... 4'''," .i.-"1".".;"'
• / .._,.... t i 7----.... --.. ..,..—-- ..'.-• ., ., ..•
/ /".- --•;', i , ..`-... --`," • '.....\_—.. <,....1:,
, ,''' ' .-......,, j• ,• -.....',-Y./-'-' ...---.'‘,..:1--- -...'..:-,.. -- ,.. )1 ..,_ N `
I / i 7 #••••
...._„.._ _.• ... _ ,..,,..._ P ..."---."-.-.."•-..._-, •...,_.--•--,\12--..„...'N,...
.....'•/. ..."'..„,_ ..-. 1 1 ii ---,
,•7,..."7-- -•-.-- i . •, -.....,
'-.•••--.
I •••••
• '..-..-.4 ..-' ... ,,
' / •'" _,-....„,,-*- .....'.• ' s',-
, ........,., 1 „
-
I .-- :.'":;••Wl=-"*".
-4 •
'\ C . ..:•'-..:-, .1
.1.1••.
o..''''''...'.'-'"-...'.....---,./ ..-......,,,.i.,, '..- '••,
. ,,o;)
.--. if ' '0,,
- --
."'".--.__- --- ——--ii----_ ,., '',....
.i,
. ff
111 = — = —---..., -, A ,_/;%.-
-,,•:-.- ------__, -,• ..... -' i...4.:--
2-......_ ' ..--..„,•'- ---' - Jrc` .---'
•
,-----
,.'--::-- 4-'—-- ,...,-. ,..," P.-••
I ' -----k ..---''' .-r- ..- .•-•
I
I
lr „ ,
s 0 0
i >, 0
"' C U
•
g.{ � CC
e
y ,r U O
'.'.4. ..`apt i�..M4 - a Y w it . U)
En
k! 1, /. a)
Aa y • ' 1 .
111 ro
x� ; /
/
h + = s
' r n - elirlik
cn
.'.t t., iiV"a.�6
oilt
111 .. 41 c6
I 4 • ,4;.,
. N Z
n`
�
as
.• / •4, it.....,* Ilic 4 k*A di* a)
' ry / moo
3 P
'"r tir \ .... *Ift..... Z..&„,,,,,,,4e _ , L. •4 : - a)
i: ,-07 .. ,, , . . tr,,,iwc, N •r. :4.. "' at.t• - - ;11P- '
. .4-401% - *a,*".,, !V.,- It.::•" •L:,...'.,' ,.4.
/,-' '. t r, • ' ,• �..-am, x_�,' •,�• � y .
limo,
/\, .ram Y a • `.. ti �,. •r
ate' �k r ..•
I
' 3.3 PROJECT IMPACTS
The proposed development of this Property entails the construction of a small garage to
' the immediate west of the residence (See Figure 6). The garage will provide cover for a
single car owned by the owner and a small storage area. While plans have presently not
been produced for the garage, the project would likely be approximately 15 by 15 feet in
size (minimum) up to 20 x 20 feet(maximum).
Potential impacts of the project include the following.
' 1) Potential short-term erosion and soil instability caused by the construction
process and the removal of some vegetation in the buffer. The earth moving
grading during the construction process may contribute to increased
Sand
erosion. Grading may slightly decrease the one to two percent slope found
directly behind the home, though this impact will be minimal.
2) The removal of some native and non-native vegetation in the buffer zone.
Vegetation in this area is sparse, however, as the area is presently the
location of a graveled driveway. Vegetation in this area mainly includes small
' patches of grasses.
3) An increase in the impervious surface on-site. The current residence
structure is approximately 25 x 25 feet with an overall footprint of
approximately 625 square feet. The garage will add some impervious area.
However, since the location of the garage is currently a graveled driveway,
the amount of impervious surface added will be incremental.
4) Potential long-term increase in stormwater runoff and erosion due to the
slight increase in imperious surface and loss of native vegetation. The
increased footprint of the new residence and loss of vegetation could
increase the rate and quantity of runoff during stormwater events,
' contributing to increased sedimentation and declining water quality.
5) Continued activity in the buffer area. The stream buffer area is already used
for the entry and parking. The construction of a garage will allow the
continuation of this activity.
The Management Plan is intended to offset these adverse impacts and improve the overall
' quality of this riparian area. The Mitigation Measures developed in this Plan are intended
to compensate for the impacts to the shoreline habitat and buffer zone. In addition, the
buffer area will be enhanced through replacing native vegetation lost during construction,
removing invasive plants in the buffer and planting natural vegetation adjacent to the
shoreline. This will result in the overall improvement of buffer zone quality and the
connection between riparian and upslope habitat.
WW1275ParadiseBayRdCASP.RPT/051313/mas 15
' 3.4 MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL
This section outlines the goals and objectives of the CASP's Management Proposal,
' describes a planting plan for achieving these goals and defines the performance standards
and monitoring protocols to be used to assess the success of the Plan. Section 3.5
describes a Contingency Plan to be implemented in the event that performance standards
are not met. The overall aim of the proposal is to "maintain and enhance the existing
functions and values of the associated watershed" (JCC 18.22.480). The requirement to
"maintain" existing functions is similar to the goal of "no net loss" of habitat function for
other critical areas in the County (JCC 18.22.350). The requirement to "enhance" existing
' functions corresponds to the condition that the CASP "provide equal or greater protection
of critical areas functions and values than the prescriptive standards of buffers and
setbacks" (JCC 18.22.460).
' 3.4.1 Goals
' The goals of this management proposal are:
1. Mitigation of the immediate impacts of erosion during the construction
process through the use of erosion control technologies.
2. Mitigation of impacts on native vegetation in the construction area. This will
' include replanting native plants removed during the project.
3. Mitigation of potential stormwater runoff and erosion due to the loss of native
vegetation in the construction area and reduced buffer size. This will involve
planting a mix of native vegetation in the area currently occupied by the lawn
and adjacent to the stream bank.
' 4. Mitigation of the loss of habitat caused by the removal of native vegetation
and improve habitat in the buffer zone. This will involve a partial
' reconnection of the upslope habitat to the riparian zone through a planting
plan.
5. Minimize the impacts of nutrients and pollutants on the nearshore by the
' owners refraining from using pesticides or plant nutrients within 150 feet of
the OHWM.
Buffer areas serve a variety of functions. They are important in that they reduce the
adverse impacts of adjacent land uses by stabilizing soil and preventing erosion; filter
suspended solids, nutrients, and toxic substances; and moderate impacts of stormwater
runoff. Mitigating adverse impacts and enhancing buffers involves action both during and
after the construction process. Actions during the process can involve the use of erosion
control technologies while enhancement after construction is best accomplished by
' planting native vegetation.
WW1275ParadiseBaY RdCASP.RPT/051313/mas 16
' The narrow size of the stream buffer as it currently exists and will exist after the project,
limits its capacity to filter nutrients and pollutants from the water. However, by improving
the native vegetation in the buffer, this capacity may be incrementally enhanced and
' surpass existing conditions. In addition, an increase in native vegetation in the buffer will
enhance the buffer's contribution to erosion control and its role as habitat.
' As a transition zone between aquatic and terrestrial habitats, riparian buffers also provide
important habitat for both animal and fish species. Buffer vegetation provides habitat for
small mammals as well as many bird species. They also provide habitat for many insect
species. The provision of habitat for insect species plays an important role in linking
' terrestrial to aquatic habitat, as juvenile and adult salmonids have been shown to rely on
terrestrial invertebrates as an important food supply (Brennan et al 2004, Fresh 2006). To
the extent that the buffer provides richer habitat for insect species, the quality of the
nearshore habitat will also be enhanced for salmonids and other fish species.
3.4,2. Objectives
' The goals of this Plan will be met through the implementation of the following objectives.
These objectives are intended to achieve the goals of impact mitigation and the overall
tenhancement of the buffer area.
3.4.2.1. Mitigating Erosion and Plant Disturbance during Construction
' Because the potential exists for short term erosion during construction, erosion control
technologies should be emplaced between the construction site and the buffer zone.
' These should include the placement of silt fencing between the graded area and both the
stream bank and the top of the slope top north of the home. Erosion on-site should be
continuously monitored. In the event of any observed erosion, additional erosion control
' steps should be taken immediately. Additional erosion control materials should be kept on-
site (e.g., straw bales, etc.) to allow for a rapid response to any observed erosion. Silt
fencing should also be used to define and minimize the area to be graded.
Care should also be taken during construction to avoid the disturbance of native plants
found in the buffer zone not directly related to the placement of the structure. This should
' include the identification of plants for all construction personnel and clear instructions to
avoid native plant disturbance.
3.4.2.2. Mitigating the Impact of the Project on Existing Native Vegetation
' Steps should be taken to mitigate the impacts of the proposed Project on native vegetation
in the buffer zone. Native vegetation could be impacted across the area where the garage
' will be placed.
Three steps should be taken to compensate for the loss of this vegetation. First, invasive
' plants should be removed from the cedar and hemlock trunks where they are presently
growing. The Washington State University extension program recommends the hand
WW1275ParadiseBaY RdCASP.RPTt0513131mas 17
1
' removal of English Ivy. Chemical means of removal have had limited success due to the
Ivy's waxy leaves. Because English Ivy is an invasive plant that has been found to limit the
growth of native species, it should be completely removed from these areas. It is not
' recommended, however, to remove the English Ivy adjacent to the stream bank and on
the face of the hill to the north of the house. While it would be ideal to replace the ivy with
native vegetation, because of the steep slopes in these areas, removal of Ivy would likely
' result in a rapid increase in erosion during invasive plant removal and while native plants
were becoming established. The lack of erosion in streambank areas and on the north hill
slope indicate that the Ivy is presently mitigating erosion to at least some extent. Removing
Ivy from the standing trees on the property, however, will protect these trees from long-
term damage.
Second, if any trees are removed during construction, they should be replaced at the rate
' of two replanted for every one removed. However, the owner does not plan to remove any
trees.
' The third step involves replanting native vegetation in four areas on the property. These
areas, labeled Planting Areas A, B, C and D are show in Figure 8. The plants to be used in
these areas are listed in Table 1. This Planting Plan builds on existing plants in this area,
' and adds additional species adapted to these climates. More detail on planting methods is
included below in Section 3.4.3.
3.4.2.3. Mitigation of Potential Stormwater Runoff and Erosion Due to an Increase in
Impervious Surface
' To mitigate the potential for increased stormwater runoff and erosion due to increased
impervious surface and construction in the buffer zone, the area between the new garage
and the stream bank should be planted with a mix of native vegetation. This area is shown
' as Planting Area A in Figure 8. The plants to be used in this area are listed in Table 1. This
objective will be met by replacing the current exposed areas with a mix of native ground
cover and shrubs. The mix of root depths will provide effective mitigation against erosion
' and surface runoff. This should contribute to protecting water quality in the nearshore area
and avoiding excess sedimentation. These plants have been chosen for their ability to
grow in marine environments exposed to sea spray, as well as, for their varied root depths.
Additional planting areas intended to decrease the impacts of stormwater runoff and
' erosion include an area to the north and northeast of the home (Area B); in areas of
exposed surface on the face of the hill north of the home (Area C) and the 14 foot wide
strip of land adjacent to the rock wall at the base of the hill (Area D) (See Figure 8).
I
WW1275ParadiseBayRdCASP.RPT/051313/mas 18
I
I s/ •
DIRECTIONS TO SITE
3-4.‘ ✓A•,L,11 WI'Hoc: prA77 LLI:UI it,
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION `
••
LOTS e et 5. it M< "..e. FeAka, »_s'W)'.S OS / Planting / -'.
.RECA3)L:i V. KA:MIr. A 6r taW !"Ai S_ i'll.:' A I \`
wm:cns;i __;rtrrsc:v :,r.,. »aSht• 7(.,,f.,, Area D
rva;e r ras- w.M. ,KrlCk;[:r�crnarr,
j //
Aa�1AWC.W. LOT 9
I
vesrem;wfn Y.I([F(:
'--T4i451,,Y.0 He.V711 \
I /
71
tzsIWC we^)ctrt Planting ',
Area C
1C.,Ct St laAT(M7 M 0h
e# \ 6"' .
fncntir.�7 ;+u—•.� / i�
\ �+
nl
Planting
Area A I % /
\ / / 1 /
./ter f N�.
7s // % ^.
\\ \ GJ' %`\ Planting
\ S'"p�7 \ Y '�`� . �,� ` ��`,' I' Area B
/ , ,
•
\ c ,t'ttt I
\ +cvrn
\ \
\ \
/
\ \
I SEPTIC SYSTEM, PARCEL #984000108 RECORD
PLAN DRAWING
i FOR: CAROL PONCONIS
[axieA&TOW u)oy ueld ovs spo6u0d:QMM1-I! J £1./t,
IFigure 8. Planting Map for Areas A, B, C and D
I
Westech Company 2013
Source: American Land Science, Inc. 2010
I
I
I
TABLE 1. NATIVE PLANTS FOR PLANTING AREAS
I
Planting Species -Scientific Name Number Size
Area
I A Tall Oregon grape Mahonia aquifolium 5 1 gallon
A Evergreen huckleberry Vaccinium ovatum 5 1 gallon
A Red huckleberry Vaccinium parvifolium 5 1 gallon
I
A Salal Gaulthena sha/ton 5 1 gallon
A Sword fern Polistichum munitium 5 1 gallon
I B Tall Oregon grape Mahonia aquifolium 5 1 gallon
B Nootka rose Rosa nutkana 5 1 gallon
B Sword fern Polistichum munitium 10 1 gallon
I B Evergreen huckleberry , Vaccinium ovatum 5 1 gallon
B Red huckleberry Vaccinium parvifolium 5 1 gallon
b Salal Gaulthena shallon 5 1 gallon
I
C Common snowberry Symphoricarpos a/bus 5 1 gallon
C Tall Oregon grape Mahonia aquifolium 10 1 gallon
I C Nootka rose Rosa nutkana 10 1 gallon
C Oceanspray Holodiscus discolor 8 1 gallon
C Sword fern Polistichum munitium 25 1 gallon
D Common snowberry Symphoricarpos albus 5 1 gallon
D Hooker's willow Salix scou/eriana 15 1 gallon
I D Tall Oregon grape Mahonia aquifolium 5 1 gallon
D Nootka rose Rosa nutkana 5 1 gallon
D Beach strawberry Fragaria chitoensis 40 plants
I D Evergreen huckleberry Vaccinium ovatum 5 1 gallon
D Oceanspray Holodiscus discolor 5 1 gallon
D Sword fern Polistichum munitium 20 1 gallon
I
I
I
I
WW1275ParadiseBayRdCASP.TAB1/051313/mas 20
' 3.4.2.4. Mitigate the Loss of Habitat and Improve the Riparian Buffer and Nearshore
Habitat
' In addition to providing protection against stormwater runoff and erosion, the plants in all
planting areas have been chosen to improve the quality of habitat in the riparian zone of
the stream and the shoreline.These plants provide habitat for a broad range of native bird,
' small mammal and insect species (See Section 3.4.3.2). The inclusion of a zone of plants
to the west of the new structure is also intended to enhance corridors between the planting
areas and facilitate the reconnection of the upslope habitat (adjacent to the stream) to that
' of the shoreline. In addition to providing direct habitat to terrestrial species, revegetating
the riparian zone should improve the nearshore habitat for fish species, including ESA
listed salmonids. Several recent studies in Puget Sound indicate that terrestrial insects
provide an important food source to salmonids, especially juvenile Puget Sound Chinook
which are listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (Brennan et al. 2004,
Fresh 2006). To meet this end, Planting Area D at the base of the hill should include
willows adjacent to the rock wall that will allow some overhang across the nearshore. This
' will facilitate the movement of terrestrial insects into nearshore waters.
3.4.2.5. Avoid the Use of Pesticides and Plant Nutrients on the Property
I
While a replanted buffer area will improve habitat and provide additional support for buffer
soils against erosion, its impact on the filtration of nutrients and pollutants adjacent to the
' stream will be limited. Research indicates that buffers of 100 feet provide good control of
sediment flows and nutrients such as phosphorus and other pollutants (Wenger 1999).
The capture of sediment flow is particularly important in riparian zones, as pollutants often
' adsorb to sediment particles. While some narrow buffers have been found to effectively
filter nutrients such as nitrogen, most narrow buffers (3 to 45 feet) have been found to
increase nutrient loads. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA)
' reports that riparian buffers of 150 feet have been successful at removing nitrogen (Mayer
et al. 2005).
' Because this buffer is smaller than recommended widths for protecting water quality, the
property owners should avoid using pesticides or plant nutrients within 150 feet of the
Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM).
3.4.3. Plantinq Techniques and Protection of Buffer Functions and Values
' The following specific plan should be followed to insure the survival of native vegetation
planted in the mitigation areas and the remainder of the buffer zone. This includes both a
general Planting Plan (Section 3.4.3.1) and the use of specific plants to insure the
' protection of buffer functions and the enhancement of the buffer habitat for animal and fish
species (Section 3.4.3.2).
WW1275ParadiseBaY RdCASP.RPT/051313/mas 21
I
I
I3.4.3.1. Planting Plan
I Several ideas guide this Planting Plan. The first is the clustering of plants to mimic natural
patterns and foster self-seeding. The second is the planting of multiple species in each
area to maximize the creation of habitat for different species. This includes the use of both
I deciduous and evergreen plants in each zone. Third, plants have been selected that are
found in coastal ecosystems in the Puget Sound similar to that present on-site. And fourth,
a mix of ground cover, shrubs and trees has been selected to maximize the web of roots
Ithat will contribute to erosion control.
Shrubs will be placed in a semi-random fashion with shrubs on six foot centers and ground
cover interspersed in patches between shrubs on two to three foot centers. Trees should
I
be placed on ten foot centers. There are two exceptions to this general pattern. First,
shrubs and ground cover should be overplanted at a level of 120 percent. Second, the
Planting Plan should build on existing plant cover by locating planted species near existing
I
plants of the same species. For instance, additional sword fern can be added to those
areas where this species is already found in the planting areas. This will build on any
potential favorable micro-habitats and foster self-seeding.
INew plantings to be established in the buffer zone should be carried out during early fall if
possible (September-October) to avoid the necessity of supplemental watering. Plantings
I can be placed during the winter or early spring if necessary. If plantings occur during
summer months, supplemental watering with a drip irrigation system or equivalent method
may be necessary. However, this is not recommended because of the narrow width of the
Ibuffer.
Plants installed in the fall usually outperform those installed in the late winter or spring.
I Planting projects scheduled for early October to mid-December are generally the most
successful. The earlier the plants go into the ground in the fall, the more time they have to
recover from transplant shock, adapt to the site, and expand their root systems before the
I growing season. They will require less water and grow more vigorously than if they are
planted in the spring. To increase the potential for the planted species to survive, four
inches of mulch should be placed around the installed plants with the mulch at least two
Iinches away from the stem of the plants.
The planting areas should be completely re-vegetated to reach the target goals described
in Section 3.4.4. To facilitate plant survival, these areas should be over-planted at
I
approximately 120 percent. Holes should be of appropriate size, generally two to three
times the size of the container, filled with topsoil. New plantings should be adequately
watered immediately upon placement in the ground.
I
I
WW1275ParadiseBayRdCASP.RPT/051313/mas 22
I
' The Planting Plan will consist of planting in four areas (Figure 8):
' • Planting Area A will include the area west of the propose garage and running
adjacent to the top of the stream bank. It will lie between the garage and the
streambank in the area where some exposed soil presently exits. This area is
' approximately 10 by 40 feet for a total of 400 square feet.
• Planting Area B will be located next to the existing home and the top of the slope to
' the north and northeast of the home. This area currently consists of a mix of trees,
grasses and areas of exposed soil. This area is approximately 20 by 30 feet for a
total area of 600 square feet.
' • Planting Area C will be located on the face of the hill that slopes down toward the
shore. While much of this area is currently covered in a mix of English ivy and
sword fern, planting in this area should focus on filling in spaces where the soil has
' been exposed and vegetation is more sparse. This area is approximately 65 by 25
feet for a total area of 1,625 square feet.
' • Planting Area D is directly southward of the rock wall on the shoreline. This level
strip will be planted with a mix of herb and shrubs to include willows adjacent to the
wall. This will facilitate the connection of riparian areas to the north and the
' shoreline. This will also facilitate the entry of terrestrial insects into the nearshore
waters. This area is approximately 14 by 650 feet for a total area of 910 square
feet.
It is difficult for native species to survive transplant shock. Success depends on choosing
species that are not only suited to the site conditions, but are also hardy and adaptable,
' capable of handling nutrient poor soil, scarce water and shade, and competitive weeds.
The native trees and shrubs selected for this part of the Management Plan were based on
the amount of soil moisture and sunlight they prefer. Plants for use in these planting areas
' were also selected for the ability to grow in saline environments that receive regular sea
spray.
' Shade is particularly important for salal. salal grows better in the shade, though it can
tolerate exposure in sunny areas once it has established. It is therefore especially
recommended to plant salal in late fall or winter months when significant shading is
present from cloud cover. This will provide the plant time to establish roots. salal should
also be planted adjacent to existing trees and shrubs to provide cover. To the extent
possible, shrubs added to the planting area should be somewhat developed so as to
facilitate the further provision of shade for the salal. The shade provided by conifers
' located in Planting Area A should provide ample shade for the success of salal.
WW1275ParadiseBaY RdCASP.RPT/d51313/mas 23
' Westech also recommends that erosion control measures be used during the ground-
disturbing activities. We recommend that silt fences, mulch or other protective covering be
placed on the ground following the removal period and for the duration of the seeding
period. Any work carried out during the rainy season should have all erosion control
measures in place prior to beginning work and additional materials should be kept on site
' to be used in the event of any observed erosion.
3.4.3.2. Protection of Buffer Functions and Values
' This Planting Plan has the goal of enhancing three man buffer functions: (1) mitigating
runoff and erosion; (2) providing habitat and (3) enhancing the link between upslope and
nearshore habitat.
' The species, size, and number of plants that will be used to revegetate these areas is
shown in Table 1. These plants were chosen for several reasons. First, these are plants
' commonly found in marine riparian areas in the Puget Sound association with forests of
the composition found on-site. These plants are salt tolerant and provide habitat for a
range of species found in coastal Puget Sound areas (Brennan 2007).
' The combination of plants included here will also provide a network of root and rhizome
systems what will bind soil across layers and limit surface erosions. Sword fern will provide
' a system of surface rhizomes adapted to these climates and soils. The moderate to deep
roots of the shrubs will provide reinforcement for soils and bind soil particles at the surface.
Salal has shallower but firmly attached roots. Placing these plants in proximity to existing
' trees in the Planting Areas A and B will further add to the complexity of the root system
across soil layers. The mix of shrubs and ground cover all planting areas will provide
similar protection against soil erosion as well as surface water runoff.
' Using a variety of shrub species in this zone will also increase the habitat provided from
birds, mammals and nearshore fish species, including salmonids (WNPS 2011). Some
' examples of the expected improvement of nearshore habitat by planting these species
include:
• Common snowberry is a low-growing shrub. Its berries are eaten by grosbeaks,
waxwings, thrushes, robins, towhees, and pheasants. Its leaves are eaten by
deer and some moth larvae, while bumble bees and hummingbirds feed on nectar
from its flowers. Its leaves also provides low-to-the-ground refuge for small
' mammals.
• Tall Oregon grape is a broadleaved evergreen shrub with holly-like leaves. It
' has clusters of yellow flowers and dark blue berries. Many bird species eat the
berries as do small mammals. The fruit is eaten by birds including pheasants,
robins and juncos. Bees and butterflies extract the nectar.
VWV1275ParadiseBayRdCASP_RPT/051313/mas 24
' • Nootka rose. Bird species eating the hips from Nootka rose include bluebirds,
juncos, grosbeaks, pheasants and thrushes. The plants are also an important
' shelter for bird species. The leaves are eaten by some butterfly larve and the
young shoots are popular with aphids which provide food for many birds and
insect species. Chipmunks, rabbits, and deer also eat the hips and the shrubs
' provide habitat for small mammals species.
• Oceanspray: Insect-eating birds such as chickadees and bushtits forage in this
' shrub while its dense branches provide refuge habitat for many song birds.
Butterflies and other insects forage on the foliage. The dense structure also
provides refuge for small mammals. Deer also eat the foliage.
• Salal: Deer eat salal leaves while many species of ground-feeding birds such as
pigeon and towhees feed on this plant's berries. Butterfly larvae eat the salal
twigs while many small mammals and deer eat the berries.
' • Evergreen huckleberry: This species provides habitat for a number of species
found in this area. Many bird species eat the berries as do squirrels and door. Bird
species eating the berries include pigeons, robins, towhees and sparrows. The
firm structure of the plant also provides good refuge and nesting habitat for birds.
The flowers also attract butterflies and hummingbirds. This evergreen plant also
provides some habitat functions year-round.
While the habitat that these plants provide for birds and small mammals will be the most
' visible form of habitat enhancement, the improvement of insect habitat may produce an
even more significant outcome. This will enhance the nearshore habitat for the populations
of chum and Chinook salmon listed as threatened under the ESA as well as other species
' that rely on food from terrestrial riparian sources. Juvenile Chinook are estimated to obtain
as much as one-third of their diet from these sources (Brennan et al. 2004, Fresh 2006).
3.4.4. Performance Standards and Monitoring
This section discusses the performance standards that are to be used to assess the
success of the Management Plan. Section 3.4.4.1 below discusses the specific
performance standards while Section 3.4.4.2 outlines the specific Monitoring Plan. Section
3.5 then describes the Contingency Plan to be implemented in the event that monitoring
indicates a failure in the performance standards.
VVW1275ParadiseBayRdCASP.RPT/051313/mas 25
1
' 3.4.4.1. Performance Standards
' Table 2 lists the performance standards to be used in assessing the success of the overall
management plan. Three indicators and related attributes will be used for determining the
success of the Planting Plan in the buffer zone. These are:
' • The percent cover of invasive plants removed from the two planting zones.
• The percent cover of the combined total of native plants remaining and re-planted
in the both planting zones.
• The observation of erosion or sediment movement in the buffer zone.
Specific target quantities of percent cover ("action" in JCC 18.22.465) will be used to
p g
determine when the Contingency Plan should be implemented. A target quantity of five
percent cover or less is set for invasive plants. If invasive plant growth reaches ten
percent, the Contingency Plan is to be triggered. For native plants, a target goal of at least
90 percent total area cover is targeted. In the first year following planting, ground cover of
less than 90 percent will trigger the Contingency Plan. In the second year and subsequent
years ground cover of less than 85 percent will trigger the Contingency Plan. The action
levels for both invasive and native plants will be attained by the first summer following the
' termination of the proposed Project.
In addition to plant cover levels, the presence of visible rill or sheet erosion will be a third
indicator. A target of zero observed erosion in both planting areas will be sought. Any
visible erosion which cannot be mitigated immediately will trigger the Contingency Plan.
This action level will be attained during the construction process through on-site mitigation
' measures and maintained following construction through the Planting Plan.
3.4.4.2. Monitoring Plan
' Because of the importance of buffer zones to the success of this Plan, monitoring over an
extended period provides the best assurance of success. Westech recommends that the
Monitoring Plan outlined here be conducted by an independent landscaping firm, certified
arborist, registered nursery, or qualified botanist. The following monitoring schedule will be
followed:
' • Monitoring success of erosion control measures will be carried out daily during
construction, as well as, during the removal of invasive plants and the replanting
period. Any observed erosion will result in immediate action to block it. This can
' best be accomplished by additional silt fences, mulch, straw bales or other
protective covering. Sufficient mitigation supplies should be kept on-site to allow an
immediate response in the event of observed erosion.
WW1275ParadiseBayRdCASP.RPT/051313/mas 26
I
ITABLE 2. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR MONITORING PLAN
_Standard Indicator# 1 indicator#2 Indicator# 3
Indicator Invasive species Remaining and Signs of erosion
I planted native
species
Attributes Percent cover Percent cover Any sign of
_ erosions
IActions Will not exceed 10 • 90 percent cover Will not be
percent first year visible in buffer
I
• 85 percent cover zone.
in subsequent
years
Quantities/Status Less than 5 percent 85 percent cover of No visible
I
cover of buffer buffer erosion in the
buffer zone.
Time Frame Achieved by first Achieved by first Achieved during
I summer following summer following construction and
construction project construction project maintained
I
i thereafter.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IWW1275ParadiseBayRdCASP.TAB2/051313/mas 27
1
' Plants will be planted in the fall to the extent possible (See Section 3.4.3.1 Planting
Plan) and target planting quantities will be reached by the end of the first summer
' following construction.
• Within one year of completion of the project, the Site should be monitored. The
' Contingency Plan (Section 3.5) should be activated in the instance that action
levels for invasive plants, native plants or erosion are reached (See Table 2). A
Monitoring Report (first year) addressing the success of the Management Plan or
the need for implementation of the Contingency Plan should be produced and
presented to Jefferson County.
• Monitoring should be conducted at the end of the second year following the end of
' planting. The Contingency Plan should be activated in the instance that action
levels for invasive plants, native plants or erosion are reached. A Monitoring Report
(second year) addressing the success of the Management Plan or the need for
' implementation of the Contingency Plan should be produced and presented to the
Jefferson County.
' • Monitoring should then occur in each consecutive year for five years after the initial
planting. The second year action levels should be used to assess success of the
Management Plan in each of the subsequent years. These levels should be used to
assess the need to initiate the Contingency Plan.
• To facilitate monitoring, photo-stations should be used to provide a benchmark for
' tracking the planting action levels for Monitoring Reports. Photo stations in Planting
Areas A and B should select an existing tree to provide a frame of reference to
insure the same location is monitored. Photo stations in Planting Areas C and D
' should likewise select a stationary feature of the landscape to insure consistency in
monitoring.
All reports should be submitted to Jefferson County for review and concurrence.
t3.5 CONTINGENCY PLAN
Adaptive management should be introduced into the Management Plan through a
' Contingency Plan. A Contingency Plan should be implemented if the proposed measures
in the Management Plan appear to be failing. Failure should be assessed by the
quantitative indicators found in Section 3.4.4.1 and Table 2 on Performance Standards.
In the event that invasive plants exceed the action level of 10 percent, steps should be
taken to completely remove the invasive plants and to replant the area with the most
proximate successful plant. In the event that the survival of native plants falls below action
levels (90 percent in year one, 85 percent in subsequent years) the area should be
replanted. If a specific species of plant appear to have failed, then the dying plant should
WW1275Pa rad iseBayRdCASP.R PT/051313/mas 28
I
' be completely removed and the area overplanted (120 percent) with the nearest existing
successful plant. Proximate successful plants should be chosen because their success in
an area may indicate that micro-habitat conditions are interacting to foster the success of
' that species.
The Contingency Plan should also provide for immediate action in the face of any
' observed rill or sheet erosion in the buffer zone. This should include the employment of
additional erosion control technologies, including sift fencing, mulch and straw matting.
These materials should be kept on-site in the event that erosion is observed. In the event
that this occurs, the professional responsible for conducting the Monitoring Plan should be
' immediately contacted and informed of the erosion.
1
VVVV1275ParadiseBayRdCRSP.RPT/051313/mas 29
1
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 CONCLUSIONS
The proposed Project to add a garage to the existing site will slightly increase the
' impervious footprint on-site and cause the removal of some native vegetation. This may
result in the potential for increased erosion and stormwater runoff as well as a reduction in
on-site habitat.
The landowners contracted with Westech Company to prepare a Critical Area Stewardship
Plan to address development within the buffer zone of the nearshore. A Management
Plan has been formulated in Chapter 3.0 to offset impacts associated with ground-
disturbing activities and enhance the overall quality of the buffer zone. In addition to
specific mitigation and enhancement measures, this section also describes Performance
Standards for assessing the success of the Management Plan, a Monitoring Plan for
' tracking success, and a Contingency Plan to implement adaptive management in the
event that the Management Plan fails.
' The overall result of implementing this plan is to "maintain and enhance the existing
functions and values of the associated watershed" (JCC 18.22.480). Rebuilding the
connection between the upland forest and the aquatic shoreline with natural vegetation will
improve existing erosion control and enhance the overall habitat for terrestrial species as
well as fish species that use the nearshore area. This will also benefit ESA-listed salmon
species, particularly Puget Sound Chinook.
1
4.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
' This Report constitutes a Critical Areas Stewardship Plan (CASP). It is intended as
supporting documentation to allow development on the Site under the guidelines of the
' Jefferson County Critical Areas Code (JCC 18.22.460).
Westech recommends that all mitigation and planting requirements are followed. A
' Planting Plan has been included in this Report and we recommend that it be implemented
on the Site upon approval by the County.
To ensure that stormwater runoff does not increase erosion along the nearshore area, silt
' fencing should be emplaced around the construction area based on runoff potential from
the construction site to the nearshore. Other standard drainage and erosion control
measures should be undertaken in accordance with Jefferson County regulations. Such
' measures would include placement of straw bales or similar control devices at the downhill
edge of construction areas and spreading straw or jute netting (or similar measures) over
exposed soil areas.
WW1275ParadiseBaY RdCASP.RPT/051313/mas 30
1
i
1 The Monitoring Plan should be followed and the Contingency Plan implemented in the
event that Performance Standards are not met. Monitoring should continue as
described over a five year period.
i
1
1
i
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 wVV1275ParadiseBayRdCASP.RPT/051313/mas 31
1
' 5.0 REFERENCES
American Land Science, Inc. 2010. Unpublished Septic System Site Plan for 3401
' Paradise Bay Road, Port Ludlow, Washington. Port Hadlock,Washington.
Brennan, J.S. 2007. Marine Riparian Vegetation Communities of Puget Sound. Puget
' Sound Nearshore Partnership Report No. 2007-02. Seattle District, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Seattle, Washington. Available at
http://www.pugetsoundnearshore.orq.
' Brennan, J.S., Higgins, K.F., Cordell, J.R. and V.A. Stamatiou. 2004. Juvenile Salmon
Composition, Timing, Distribution, and Diet in Marine Nearshore Waters of Central
Puget Sound in 2001-2002. King County Department of Natural Resources and
' Parks. Seattle, Washington.
Fresh, K.L. 2006. Juvenile Pacific Salmon in the Nearshore Ecosystems of Washing State.
' Puget Sound Nearshore Partnership Report No. 2006-06. Seattle District, U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle, Washington. Available at
http://www.pugetsoundnearshore.org.
' Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of
Washington Press. Seattle,Washington.
' Jefferson County. 2013. Online Map Database. http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/. Jefferson
County, Washington.
' Jefferson County. 2011. Jefferson County Shoreline Master Program. 18.25 JCC.
Department of Community Development Port Townsend, Washington.
' Jefferson County. 2009. Jefferson County Critical Areas Code. Title 18.22 JCC.
Department of Community Development. Port Townsend,Washington.
' Lyons, C.P. 1997. Wildflowers of Washington. Lone Pine Publishing. Renton,
Washington.
Mayer, P.M., Reynolds, S.K. and T.J. Canfield. 2005. Riparian Buffer Width, Vegetative
Cover, and Nitrogen Removal Effectiveness: A Review of Current Science and
Regulations. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
' National Geographic. 2007. TOPO! Outdoor Recreation Mapping Software. Evergreen,
Colorado.
WW1275ParadiseBaY RdCASP.RPT/051313/mas 32
1
' Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). 2013. Web Soil Survey.
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm
Pojar, J. and A. MacKinnon. 1994. Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast. Lone Pine
Publishing Company. Redmond,Washington.
' Pongonis, C. 2013. Personal communication between Carol Pongonis, Landowner and
Charles Tanner, staff Environmental Scientist, Westech Company. Port Angeles,
Washington.
ITaylor, R. 1995. Northwest Weeds. Mountain Press Publishing Company. Missoula
Montana.
' Washington Native Plant Society(WNPS). 2011. http://www.wnps.org/.
Wegner, S. 1999. A Review of the Scientific Literature on Riparian Buffer Width, Extend
' and Vegetation. Athens, Georgia: Institute of Ecology, University of Georgia.
1
WW1275ParadiseBayRdCASP.RPT/051313/mas 33
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IAPPENDICES
I
I
I
I
I
IWW1275ParadiseBaY RdCASP.RPT/051313/mas 34
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IAPPENDIX A
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
I
I
I
I
I
I
IWW1275ParadiseBayRdCASP.APPA/051313/mas A-1
I
I
I
I . '.
I ,,
I , - et•
as
s-
I
-
I
. ^
sr _. . •
•
I
1) Shoreline Adjacent to Sea Wall (from eastern end).
' ' v + -'t .40i ', fir: ,
., .t..* . , •4
ik•r' `st
I
.f ° 7' !ice .
' �7t .7ta 9'.S x .tv
-`` ,' , - " c ? t�,l'1�f t•a"415"•>, 7,,'t_ ` , ... e[-,.—'e.
.
li • 1
N t -•2) Hillside North of home (from shoreline).
IWW1275ParadiseBayRdCASP.APPA/051313/mas A-2
rd
I
jotit
•
i f$ +
..t_' 11
ryt:
i
I.
I
, 1 I i'I
I3) View from home (looking North).
4, 1•- S. • 'gil
p_
..,.. 1
r
I i
A
II II
� 1 _,�
y
4y
I4 View of home with septic drainfield to left (viewed from North).
I
IWVV1275ParadiseBayRdCASP.APPA/051313/mas A-3
U
I
Ab
rtif) 0 . :1I el _- .. - . ,
%i` ,# 46'%'!I ' Yie 4' A. Ai . 'V' -fra`b,- • • ' .,
.w- •.-
. r '''i I •ik�i
f Ilk,
I Y •
M
1 5) Planting area B.
i •
•
r
M
4 , , .
,_ _ _...,:::„.., ... ..: _I , . ... . ..-4, ---_,: :- __,
`-':L
4
#' • ,Nr
_+ramf . --
Ii•. yy.
"y _
` ..
I
6) Home from south with location of proposed garage (where care is parked).
I
I
WW1275ParadiseBayRdCASP.APPA/051313/mas A-4
I
r=•i flu
•
0o /
v Z 'C \
�o
O rpDiw
(j Cr)4.43 /
o A tri trl
r Ov > t9 H
/ yamaZ �' C7 8 c
t+i ')o / uNQ
umiu
•
co / ..fir
w 1.
r ^fffVff �^�^�))) / y,/
�rA�r
7 Zc�2Op
/ /
0 8
�n / Cj1 • (�� �! z� \ o �o o
vJ r�s� fi \r_ 7 r z4. �ti2 rn
a
1
-0 o -1).r, \ -,--,(-)c,
�Ii . �co co � °°° HLd MI 1, 0
/ Q z-o s< , \ �z�` co
10
i.
P.
Z PA i \
� Op ati G , n aO 411 , o��
ti C .'�
aas,O J �o°' °/%rr \ / 11(.1
\
(�• �% % ';;'� \ '� '� �' \ ma'•
s.
oo
rr^^ o
\ 44.0.. .,,,,‘,,,„,z,
:,,,, _1-'-_-_--_-_ ,--------;-----14.%- ii, , _\\441.(zoor,.....;zioll': '
\\
03
-N / Q ./#.00` .
1. 0 , .5325,
seV\ --Ce'i> \.-e, .
\ 410),;IS
ti 1 ♦v � \ \ 2A� \
, // .
W \ \ I % 'Oo.\6, \
\\ tiso \ •ss \
o� \ 759,t\ k11
y
i g \ 0 \
_._. ,
__,r-
\ ,z..---.1..
CO
0 /00,°>C).'I
\ Da
-z \ /13Q;C'C
z�° •
1 \ \
\ /:
1\3 \ Z200-<133Z
CO
1�1 / a�o�c� �o�
I \ •COy p� oa
\
/rn
c mo ��c 2�p? �� �0o2 � � Zy2o c�
� o a
='
lici?o3,o,
Z~iy no o n, o< c
8103 VMS-
rz
. \
�/M� `� n �y � en 0oao,,2(o ',� xacc�o% / 0za n om ? a ps/F ��o o�ooa� ^,,n �x�c = �gs�r��- oo ^� o
to). � °nOn ?� � tim ga 8r1 Fip �-o rm . ami �1C���
%
tt
•
›/
co \�`0r �., Fq �cyaZ�m ,fon�, i
��-��tny `iN�i°n � �-0 ♦ CA -IL r. 2a2� oo �0�tim�ti �m 0♦0 ... � : iiO A�� \' 4l // on� a � 4'°° � r`) v ,, / ic'� ° C2��c�n �, �tNo CO . nr�Op2� i`° N y< . arn .. ifil m �kZ GI btiytnO2 ° '1 1'10 0 O2 n Ill onPOmt� ^y�ar�
aAp Z CD\ tali
0 z , \ .. r U 'A2 ~�� 2�r O
c.� m Dn .� `` • V/ �o JJ 22� r.o2 p�p� ^�°y7' �''
� m �� ► L M� f:o ---....______ n .,rCa�O��2 p�� `ntiy°^�-42o � I
y m �� •_ z � UuU oaooao�oS o0a0 ooa°
a_ a 3 V .t� nm �0 2�c�n^°i ~2o� oZo1m�7
n O C)--rn C
r- = In cr) .1� 4c T �" �iy02�2�1D mW�Ort,
O ,' Lsill Zp I
�Cra�n�. titi OZ nti�o = r C o c cz� '022 0°�r'l 1.0(/) p �o�vCO C 1w �..] zo ""ohg�o�m a�m �oA�"'ONS. V O^�i2 0��='ti '[Z�rl�n2 0=
c y O _ �aSZCO���Z �O
t� L to n�1
1 _ 2a0°(n2 0�
/CD
i
V