Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLPA05-00092 APP ON 00 4 ' :2:; JEFFERSON COUNTY PER 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, �`SFIING�O JEFFERSON COUNTY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVI&J.uN CREEKSIDE PRELIMINARY LONG PLAT APPLICATION LP05-92 A. PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT To develop a 61 lot single-family detached residential subdivision on 34 . 09 acres. Gross density is approximately 1. 79 lots per acre or 0. 56 acres per lot. Lot sizes range from 5,870 square feet to 7 , 790 square feet and average 6, 360 square feet. 21. 92 acres (64 . 3% of the site) is proposed to be dedicated as open space. All lots will be served by sanitary sewer. Stormwater runoff would be detained on-site. Ludlow Water Company and Ludlow Sewer Company are the water and sewer purveyors, respectively. Road access would be via Creekside Drive to Paradise Bay Road. B. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Applicant: Pope Resources, represented by David Cunningham, Vice President and Linda Mueller, Planner. Site Address: Not available (Adjacent to Paradise Bay Road) . Property Location: The project site is located in the unincorporated community of Port Ludlow, westerly of Paradise Bay Road and the Inner Harbor development. Legal Description: Tax Parcels 821 173 001 and 002 and 821 174 001 within the West Half of Section 17, Township 28 North, Range 1 East. Property Description: The property contains 34 . 09 acres. It has an irregular shape. The site is undeveloped. Access to the property is by way of Creekside Drive off of Paradise Bay Road. Creekside Drive is not within the plat boundary. The proposal site has steep slopes on the east and north. The portion of the site proposed for residential lots occupies a moderately sloping plateau approximately 100 ' in elevation above the Paradise Bay Road. Preliminary Long Plat Creekside LP05-92 EXHIBIT / Page 1 Building Environmental Health Development Review Public Works Building Permits Septic Permits Subdivision, Zoning Road Approach 379-4450 Water Review & Shoreline Permits Permits &Addresses Inspection Hotline 379-4450 379-4463 379-4450 379-4455 1-800-831-2678 FAX: (206) 379-4451 Surrounding Area: The site is bounded on the east by Paradise Bay County Road. The area easterly of Paradise Bay Road has been developed for single family residences. The area to the north, south, and west is unplatted forestland. C. APPLICABLE PLANS AND ORDINANCES Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan: The proposal is subject to the goals and policies of the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan. The following sections of the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan apply to the review of the proposal: Chapter 7, County-wide Growth, pages 32-34; Chapter 7, Housing and Residential Development, pages 35-38; Chapter 7, Utilities, pages 41-43 ; Chapter 7, Transportation/Circulation, pages 44-48; Chapter 10, Optimum Development Map. Jefferson County Subdivision Ordinance (Second Edition) : Application for the proposal was made on June 22 , 1992 . The proposal is vested under the Second Edition of the Subdivision Ordinance. The proposal is to subdivide a parcel of land into more than five lots. The proposal is therefore subject to the goals and policies of the following sections of the Subdivision Ordinance: Section 3 Scope; Section 6 Long Subdivisions. Jefferson County State Environmental Policy Act Implementing Ordinance: The Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Port Ludlow Development Program was issued by Jefferson County on April 5, 1993 . This document is intended to provide general environmental analysis and recommended mitigation measures for Pope Resources Port Ludlow Development Program. The EIS provides important information and mitigation measures regarding issues such as groundwater, schools, fire and emergency services, and traffic. After site specific environmental review a Final Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance was issued by Jefferson County on February 14, 1994. The Final MDNS is attached to this staff report as an exhibit. The Final MDNS was appealed to the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners. A public hearing to take testimony regarding the environmental effects of the proposal was held by the Board on March 21 and April 4 and 13, 1994 . On April 13 , 1994 the Board upheld the Final MDNS. Preliminary Long Plat Creekside LP05-92 Page 2 D. AGENCY RESPONSES AND PUBLIC TESTIMONY: Public Works Department: Comments dated February 5 and May 10, 1994 are hereby incorporated by reference. Fire District No. 3 : No comments submitted. Health Department: Comments dated May 10, 1994 are hereby incorporated by reference. Park Advisory Board: No comment submitted. Chimacum School District: No comment submitted. Jefferson Transit: No comment submitted. Public Utility District #1: No comment submitted. Copies of agency comments are attached to this staff report. E. STAFF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The proposal is to subdivide 34 . 09 acres into a 61 lot single-family detached residential subdivision. All proposed lots will be served by sanitary sewer and public water. 21.9 acres will be dedicated as open space. 2 . The proposal is subject to review to determine its consistency with the goals and policies of the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan. The following Plan policies apply to the proposal: Countywide Growth Policies 1 and 4; Housing and Residential Development Policies 1-4 and 13 ; Utilities Policies 1, 2 , and 4 ; Transportation/Circulation Policies 2 , 5, and 8; and Chapter 10 Optimum Land Use Map. Each of these policies are discussed below. 3 . Countywide Growth Policy 1 states: The natural beauty and "liveability' of Jefferson County should be a primary consideration on the location, timing and quantity of growth. Natural amenities identified as important to the County's character and well-being should be considered. The proposal is for medium density clustered development with provision for placing 64% of the site in open space. It would not degrade any important natural amenity. The proposal is consistent with this policy. 4 . Countywide Growth Policy 4 states: A geographic pattern which results in the least public cost for new facilities and services should be encouraged. To that end, the major share of future growth should be directed toward the areas of Port Townsend, the Quimper Peninsula, Tri- Cities (Irondale, Hadlock, Chimacum) , Oak Bay/Mats Mats Corridor, Port Ludlow, Shine/South Point, Quilcene, and Brinnon. Preliminary Long Plat Creekside LP05-92 Page 3 410 410 The level of services and utilities in these areas should be steadily improved and increased to a level considered "urban" or "suburban" . Improved schools, parks, water and sewer systems, roads, and other public facilities should be emphasized for these communities to serve expected population increases. The proposed residential subdivision is located within the Port Ludlow community. Improvements to water and sewer systems, roads, and recreational facilities has been an ongoing activity in the area. The proposal is subject to SEPA mitigation measures requiring contributions to the Chimacum School District and Fire District #3 to avoid impacts to the services that they provide. Subject to conditions, the proposal is consistent with this policy. 5 . Housing and Residential Development Policy 1 states: A broad range of housing types and densities should be available for Jefferson County residents. The diversification of housing types should satisfy a variety of lifestyles and economic capabilities. The proposal is a component of the proponent' s overall program for development in the Port Ludlow area. This development program includes single-family and multi-family residential structures and a variety of densities. The proposal is consistent with this policy. 6. Housing and Residential Development Policy 2 states: The amount of land allocated for residential development should be reasonably scaled to reflect projected demand. The proposal is one of the first components of the proponent ' s overall program for development in the Port Ludlow area. Subdivision of additional parcels would be contingent upon market demand for residential properties in the area. The proposal is consistent with this policy. 7 . Housing and Residential Development Policy 3 states: Concentration of residential development should be related to employment centers, transportation systems, and public facilities such as water supplies and sewage disposal. The provision and close proximity of roads, utilities, drainage, emergency services, garbage disposal, schools, and other community services is deemed necessary to sound residential development. The site is located within commuting distance of employment centers in Port Townsend, Port Hadlock, and Kitsap County. The proposal site adjoins the Paradise Bay Road which provides connection to SR19 and Preliminary Long Plat Creekside LP05-92 Page 4 411 411 SR104 and to Port Ludlow. The Final MDNS requires provision of temporary and permanent erosion control and storm water management facilities that are consistent with the Department of Ecology' s Stormwater Management Manual. The Final MDNS also requires payments to the Chimacum School District and Fire District No. 3 in order to ensure adequate provision for the facilities and services that they provide. The proposal is consistent with this policy. 8. Housing and Residential Development Policy 4 states: Residential development should be located, designed, and constructed with respect to natural conditions as soil capability, geologic features, probability of flooding, and topography. The proposal has been designed to avoid development on steep slopes and drainage areas. The mitigative measures developed through environmental review address this policy. Subject to conditions, the proposal is consistent with this policy. 9. Housing and Residential Development Policy 8 states: A mixture of various types and densities of residential dwellings is encouraged, particularly in planned unit developments. The proposal is a component of the proponent' s overall program for development in the Port Ludlow area. This development program includes single-family and multi-family residential structures and a variety of densities. The proposal is consistent with this policy. 10. Housing and Residential Development Policy 13 states: Residential developers should assume all direct costs of their individual projects such as roads, accesses, parking, surface drainages, water systems, sewer systems, etc. The general taxpaying public of Jefferson County should not be required to pay those costs in future years due to lack of, or inadequate, initial construction. The adequate provision of these facilities is required by the mitigation measures of the Final MDNS and requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. Subiect to conditions, the proposal is consistent with this policy. 11. Utilities Policy 1 states: Whenever a new utility system is created, or an existing one expanded, it should be done so in support of the County-wide policies contained in this Comprehensive Plan. Preliminary Long Plat Creekside LP05-92 Page 5 The proposal includes the expansion of existing water and sanitary sewer systems. See discussion of Countywide Growth Policies above. The proposal is consistent with this policy. 12 . Utilities Policy 2 states: The general taxpaying public of Jefferson County should not bear the direct cost of utilities associated with private developments. Residential, commercial, and industrial developers should assume the costs associated with utilities which are necessary to make their projects functional. Water and sanitary sewer service are provided by Ludlow Water Company and Ludlow Utilities which are private utilities established to provide service to Pope Resources developments in Port Ludlow. The proposal is consistent with this policy. 13 . Utilities Policy 4 states: Utilities should be located, designed, sized, and installed to meet reasonably foreseeable future needs. Sewer and water utilities developed and upgraded by the proponent have been designed to meet the needs of the proponent' s overall development program for Port Ludlow. The proposal is consistent with this policy. 14 . Transportation/Circulation Policy 2 states: Transportation and circulation facilities should be located, designed and installed to meet reasonably foreseeable future needs. This is ensured by the road design, construction, and inspection standards of the Subdivision Ordinance. The proposal is consistent with this policy. 15. Transportation/Circulation Policy 5 states: Facilities associated with transportation and circulation should be located and designed with respect to such natural features as topography, soils, geology, floodplains, streamways, shorelines, marshes, and aquifer recharge areas. The proposal has been designed to avoid development on steep slopes and drainage areas. The mitigative measures developed through environmental review also address this policy. Subject to conditions, the proposal is consistent with this policy. Preliminary Long Plat Creekside LP05-92 Page 6 . . 16. Transportation/Circulation Policy 8 states: In order to provide public safety and to minimize public expenditures, road circulation routes should incorporate limited access provisions wherever possible. Jointly-used residential driveways and commercial or residential frontage roads should be a high priority in roadway and roadside design. Access to the plat from Paradise Bay Road would be by means of Creekside Drive which would also provide access for other future plats on adjacent property. The proposal is consistent with this policy 17 . Chapter 10 Optimum Development Map adopts the Optimum Development Map which is intended to serve as a graphic representation of the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The site is designated as suburban on the Map. Suburban is described in the text of Chapter 10 as: Areas of medium intensity development that will receive the earliest and for more concentrated growth. The improvement of public services such as water and sewer systems, roads, schools, parks, fire protection, and emergency services will be emphasized to serve actual population increases, but not to promote those increases. Densities of new residential developments will range from large acreage tracts up to five (5) dwelling units per gross acre for some individual projects. The proposal is consistent with the definition of and densities allowed within the suburban designation. Provision has been made by the applicant for improvements to public services such as water and sewer systems, roads, schools, recreational facilities, fire protection, and emergency services to serve the proposal. The proposal is consistent with this policy. 18. The proposal is subject to review to determine consistency with the Jefferson County Subdivision Ordinance (Second Edition) . The following sections of the Ordinance are applicable to the proposal: Section 3 . 10 Coverage; 3 .20 Compliance with Comprehensive Plan; Section 6. 105 Notice of Hearing; Section 6. 201 Lots; Section 6. 203 Roads; Section 6 . 204 Parks, School Sites, Community Sites, and Facilities; Section 6 . 205 Easements; Section 6. 206 Unsuitable Land; Section 6 . 301 Roads; Section 6. 302 Drainage; Section 6. 304 Signs; Section 6. 305 Water Supply; Section 6. 306 Sewage Disposal; Section 6.408 Fire Protection; Section 6. 308 Electric and Telephone Service; Section 6. 309 Surveys; Section 6. 40 Inspections; and Section 6. 50 Bonds. Each of the applicable sections are discussed below. Preliminary Long Plat Creekside LP05-92 Page 7 I III 19 . Section 3 . 10 Coverage states: This ordinance shall apply to all subdivisions. . . ; and every subdivision. . .shall proceed in compliance herewith. The proposal meets this criteria and is therefore subject to review under the appropriate provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance (Second Edition) . 20. Section 3 . 20 Compliance with Comprehensive Plan states: All subdivisions subject to this ordinance shall be in compliance with Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan. See discussion of the proposal 's compliance with the applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies above. The proposal is consistent with this policy. 21. Section 6. 107 Notice of Hearing requires public notice be given prior to the public hearing by posting the proposal site, placing a legal notice in the Port Townsend-Jefferson County Leader, and sending a public hearing notice to adjacent property owners. Notice of the public hearing to be held on May 17, 1994 was given as follows: Mailed to adjacent property owners: May 9, 1994 Posting property by applicant: May 6, 1994 Publication of legal notice: May 4, 1994 edition of the Port Townsend-Jefferson County Leader. The notices for the public hearing are consistent with this policy. 22 . Section 6. 201 Lots states: 1. The design, shape, size, and orientation of lots shall be appropriate to the use for which the lots are intended and the character of the area in which they are located. Lot areas in excess of minimum standards may be required for reasons of sanitation, steep slopes, slide hazards, poor drainage, flood hazards or other unique conditions or features which may warrant protection of the public interest. The proposal is designed to cluster lots on moderately sloped uplands and to avoid development on steep slopes and drainages. The proposal is consistent with this policy. 23 . Section 6.201 Lots states: 2 . Residential densities shall conform with the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan and any official control adopted pursuant thereto, and conform to the lot size standards and requirements of the Health Department and the Washington Preliminary Long Plat Creekside LP05-92 Page 8 411 411 State Department of Health, PROVIDED, in the event of a discrepancy, the stricter standards shall apply. The proposal is for average density of 1. 8 lots per acre. The proposal site is designated as suburban on the Comprehensive Plan Optimum Development Map. Density up to five dwelling units per acre are allowed. The plat would be served by extension of existing public water and sanitary sewage treatment systems. The proposal is consistent with this policy. 24 . Section 6.201 Lots states: 3 . Creativity in lot layout and configuration is encouraged. The plat was designed to avoid development on steep slopes and drainage areas and to preserve open space by clustering lots on gently sloping uplands. The proposal is consistent with this policy. 25. Section 6. 203 Roads states that roads shall be designed with appropriate consideration for existing and projected roads, anticipated traffic patterns, topographic and drainage conditions, public convenience and safety, and the proposed uses of the land served. In order to achieve these objectives Section 6. 203 Roads further states: 1. Whenever a subdivision abuts an existing or proposed County road, necessary realignment and/or widening of the right-of-way shall be accomplished to the applicable county standards and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. The proposal abuts the Paradise Bay County Road. The existing right- of-way is a minimum of 60 ' . There is not an identified need to realign or widen this right-of-way. The proposal is consistent with this policy. 26. Section 6. 203 Roads states: 2 . Roads shall be laid out in accordance with a logical arrangement of their functions as arterials, collectors, or local access roads. Local access roads should discourage through traffic; collector roads should provide for connection of local access roads and arterials. Intersections with arterials should be spaced at least 600 ' apart. Local access roads within the plat provide for one access on to Creekside Drive which is in turn the sole access on to Paradise Bay Road. The proposal is consistent with this policy. Preliminary Long Plat Creekside LP05-92 Page 9 27 . Section 6.203 Roads states: 3 . All long subdivisions shall be served by a constructed and maintained public road which shall provide access in at least two places wherever practicable. The proposal includes provision of public road access to the plat. It is not practicable to provide access at two places without construction of an additional access road on steep slopes. Subiect to conditions, the proposal is consistent with this policy. 28. Section 6. 203 Roads states: 4 . The standard width of public and private road rights-of-way shall be sixty (60) feet in width, EXCEPT for local access rights-of-way which may be reduced to fifty (50) feet, PROVIDED dead-end private rights-of-way four hundred (400) feet in length or less and serving twelve (12) lots or less may be reduced to forty (40) feet in width. Creekside Drive and Road "A" have 60 ' wide rights-of-way. Local access roads Drive B and C have 50 ' wide rights-of-way. These rights- of-way are consistent with this policy. Proposed access for Lots 27- 29 is over a 30 ' wide private easement described as Tract B. The applicant is requesting a variance from this standard to allow this easement width. This requires approval under the criteria in Section 10. 302 Private Road Variances. PP Subject to approval of this variance, the proposal is consistent with this policy. Otherwise the easement would need to be widened to 40 ' . See Variance Request #1 below. 29. Section 6. 203 Roads states: 5. Cul-de-sacs shall have rights-of-way at least one hundred (100) feet in diameter at the closed end and shall normally not exceed one-eight (1/8) mile in length. All the roads include provision for 100 ' diameter cul-de-sacs at their termination. The roads ending in cul-de-sacs are less than 1/8 mile in length. The proposal is consistent with this policy. 30. Section 6 .203 Roads states: 6. Where necessary to. . .provide for future area-wide circulation, roads may be required to extend to the outside boundaries of a long subdivision. The local access roads dead end due to steep slopes. They are not intended to provide for future area-wide circulation. The proposal is consistent with this policy. Preliminary Long Plat Creekside LP05-92 Page 10 • 31. Section 6. 203 Roads states: 10. Four-way intersections shall be permitted only where required for convenient traffic circulation. . . Intersecting streets shall digress at an angle as close as possible to ninety (90) degrees for a distance of two hundred (200) feet from their junction. The four-way intersection of Road A and Drive B is necessary to allow the proposed cluster development pattern. The proposal is consistent with this policy. 32 . Section 6.203 Roads states: 11. Curved rights-of-way shall provide for the smooth connection of straight road sections which deflect from each other, as is necessary to provide for traffic safety and proper location of utilities. Reverse curves shall be separated by tangents of sufficient length to provide for traffic safety. Road design is subject to review and approval by the Public Works Department. Subject to conditions, the proposal is consistent with this policy. 33 . Section 6. 203 Roads states: 12 . Road grades, curves, and intersections shall provide adequate sight distances for traffic safety. Road design is subject to review and approval by the Public Works Department. Subject to conditions, the proposal is consistent with this policy. 34 . Section 6. 203 Roads states: 13 . Private roads shall only be permitted in a subdivision by a variance granted in accordance with these regulations, PROVIDED, as a condition to granting a variance for private roads, the Board of Commissioners may require a road improvement district or other provisions to be instituted upon final plat filing to insure future maintenance and improvement of said roads. The proposal includes a 30 ' wide private road easement described as Tract B intended to serve Lots 27-29 . The applicant is requesting a variance from this policy to allow this access to be a private easement. This requires approval under the criteria in Section 10. 302 Private Road Variances. Subject to approval of this variance, the proposal is consistent with this policy. Otherwise the easement would need to be a public right-of-way. See Variance Request #2 below. Preliminary Long Plat Creekside LP05-92 Page 11 35. Section 6. 203 Roads states: 14 . Engineering design of all roads shall conform with officially adopted Jefferson County road standards. Road design is subject to review and approval by the Public Works Department. Subject to conditions, the proposal is consistent with this policy. 36. Section 6. 204 Parks, School Sites, Community Sites, and Facilities states: In order that parks, school sites, open space, green belts, and similar amenities may be properly located and preserved as the County develops and in order that the cost of providing such sites necessary to serve the additional families brought into the County by subdivision development may be most equitably proportioned on the basis of the additional need created by the individual subdivision development, the following provisions shall apply: 1. Minimum area for parks, open space, green belt, and buffer strips shall be provided at 10% of the total gross area of the subdivision with at least one-half of said area being suitable for active recreational pursuits. 2 . Open space, parks, or common areas should be efficiently located and provided with adequate access. 64 . 3% of the site is dedicated as open space. This area was logged recently. It is for the most part characterized by steep slopes and drainages. It is not suitable for active recreation other than walking. However, lot purchasers would have access to the South Bay Community Center which is located within the adjacent Inner Harbor development and to the Port Ludlow Golf Course. Provision of these facilities satisfies the requirement to provide an area for active recreation. The proposal is consistent with this policy. 37 . Section 6. 205 Easements states: 1. When required for final plat approval, easements for utility installation and maintenance shall conform to the standard width of seven (7) feet along front lot lines, five (5) feet along side lot lines, and ten (10) feet along rear lot lines. Such easements may be made by separate recorded easement, declaration of easements, or dedication of easements and by graphic portrayal on the final plat. In the event that a variance is granted to reduce the width of the proposed private access road to Lots 27-29 to 30 feet in width, there Preliminary Long Plat Creekside LP05-92 Page 12 III • should be a condition that requires a seven foot wide utility easement across the front of Lots 27 and 28 to Lot 29. Subject to the approval of variance #1 and adoption of this condition, the proposal is consistent with this policy. 38. Section 6. 206 Unsuitable Land states: Marshes, swamps, streamways, tidelands, aquifer recharge areas, and land subject to flooding or having bad drainage and land having steep slopes or geological hazards and such other land as the Board of Commissioners finds unsuitable for the purpose of building sites, may be included in the boundaries of a plat as community property, recreation area, or other similar open space, or may be included as part of any lot, EXCEPT any lot containing such unsuitable land must also contain sufficient land of suitable characteristics to meet County standards for construction of a dwelling. The proposal site includes areas of steep slopes and seasonal drainages. The proposal has been designed to cluster residences on moderately sloping portions of the site and avoid development on steep slopes and drainages. Based on consideration of the topographic information provided in the preliminary plat and an inspection of the site, it appears that there is a buildable site on each lot. The proposal is consistent with this policy. 39 . Section 6. 301 Roads states: All roads shall be constructed to County standards upon approval of the Director of Public Works. All roads within the plat, or necessary for access to the plat, shall be constructed, ballasted, surfaced with crushed rock and paved in accordance with Jefferson County standards. All fixtures to be located under the roadway shall be installed before the ballast is laid, including culverts, storm drains, sanitary sewers, water lines, and service leads. The road bed shall be brought up to an approved grade, road ditches shall be graded and backsloped, and an inspection shall be arranged with the County Engineer before the ballast is laid. All required road construction must be approved by the Director of Public Works prior to approval of the final plat. Inspection of road construction by Public Works should insure that roads are constructed to County standards. Subject to conditions, the proposal is consistent with this policy. Preliminary Long Plat Creekside LP05-92 Page 13 411 411 39 . Section 6. 302 Drainage states: Drainage facilities adequate to prevent erosion, flooding, or hazard to the use of the roads, lots, property, or facilities within the plat, or to adjacent public and private property shall be installed according to a drainage plan approved by the Public Works Director in accordance with County standards. The plan shall show full details, including the locations, lengths, and sizes of culverts, and method and location of runoff disposal. The mitigative measures of the environmental review require preparation and implementation of a drainage plan, storm water management facilities, and temporary sedimentation and erosion control measures that meet the standards of the Puget Sound Stormwater Manual. Subject to conditions, the proposal is consistent with this policy. 40. Section 6 . 304 Signs states: Road signs shall be installed in accordance with Jefferson County standards. Road names shall be approved by the Public Works Director. Traffic signs and safety devices shall be provided and installed by the developer in accordance with Washington State highway traffic control standards as approved by the Public Works Director. Subject to conditions, the proposal is consistent with this policy. 41. Section 6. 305 Water Supply states: A community water system, adequate in quality and quantity, shall be provided for every subdivision in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services and Jefferson County Health Department as regards source, source protection, facilities for withdrawal, treatment, storage, transmission, and distribution. Potable water for the proposal would be supplied by Ludlow Water Company through a community water system. Review and approval of the water system would be the responsibility of the State Department of Health. Subject to conditions, the proposal is consistent with this policy. 42 . Section 6. 306 Sewage Disposal states Installation of sewage disposal systems within subdivisions shall be in compliance with regulations and standards of the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services, the Preliminary Long Plat Creekside LP05-92 Page 14 I Washington State Department of Ecology, and the County Health Department. Sewage disposal for the proposal would be supplied by Ludlow Sewer Company. Review and approval of the sewage treatment system would be the responsibility of the State Department of Ecology. Subject to conditions, the proposal is consistent with this policy. 43 . Section 6. 307 Fire Protection states: 1. Water supplies provided for subdivisions shall incorporate adequate capacity for fire protection in accordance with sound planning and engineering practices and local fire district requirements. 2 . Fire hydrants should be required for all long subdivisions and shall be located not more than 300 ' from any lot and shall be approved by the appropriate local fire district. Hydrants shall be installed at the same time that water system lines are placed. Review and approval of the proposal by Fire District #3 should ensure consistency with this policy and adequate protection of the public' s safety and welfare. Subject to conditions, the proposal is consistent with this policy. 44 . Section 6. 308 Electric and Telephone Service states: Arrangements may be made by the developer to install underground utility lines for electricity and telephone service. The proposal includes underground installation of utilities. The proposal is consistent with this policy. 45. Section 6. 309 Surveys states: 1. The survey and preparation of every plat shall be made by, or under the supervision of, a licensed land surveyor registered by the State of Washington. 2 . All surveys shall conform to standard practices and principles for land surveying and shall be to the satisfaction of the County Engineer. 3 . The County Engineer shall be furnished all documents and calculations necessary to determine the accuracy of surveys. 4 . The surveyor shall provide the Health Department and Planning Department data indicating the area of each lot within a final plat. Preliminary Long Plat Creekside LP05-92 Page 15 411 411 5. Permanent control and road monuments directly related to the long plat shall be constructed of materials as per Jefferson County standards. 6. Road monuments shall be set in such a manner that future road development or utility installation shall not disturb the accuracy of their position. Preparation of the plat by a licensed land surveyor and inspection by the Public Works Department would ensure consistency with this policy. Subject to conditions, the proposal is consistent with this policy. 46. Section 6.40 Inspections states: Required improvements shall be inspected to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works and/or Planning Department and/or Health Department, whichever is responsible. Inspections shall be requested by the subdivider at such stages as may be indicated by the appropriate department. The cost for all inspections, plan checking, testing, sampling, and other work incidental to approval of the required improvements shall be charged to the subdivider and paid before final approval of the subdivision or release of the bonds. The Department of Public Works may arrange for utility inspection to be conducted by properly qualified consultants and may charge the subdivider for the costs of such inspections. No bridge, water system, or sewer system shall be accepted unless the design and construction thereof shall have been certified by a civil engineer licensed by the State of Washington in accordance with all applicable State and local requirements. Subject to conditions, the proposal is consistent with this policy. F. SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE VARIANCE REQUESTS: VARIANCE REQUEST #1 A variance is requested from the requirements of Subdivision Ordinance Section 6. 203 (4) Road Design Standards. This section states that: The standard width of public and private road rights-of-way shall be sixty (60) feet in width, EXCEPT for local access rights-of-way which may be reduced to fifty (50) feet, PROVIDED dead-end private rights- of-way four hundred (400) feet in length or less and serving twelve (12) lots or less may be reduced to forty (40) feet in width. The applicant proposes that Tract B, the private easement road proposed Preliminary Long Plat Creekside LP05-92 Page 16 III III to serve Lots 27-29, be allowed to vary from this standard to be 30 ' wide. Tract B is approximately 160 ' long along its centerline. STAFF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. In order for a variance to be granted, all three conditions set forth in Subsection 10. 301 General Variances of the Subdivision Ordinance (Second Edition) must be met. 2 . The proponent has submitted a "Request For Site Development Standard Variance" in support of their variance request. This is attached to this report as an exhibit. 3 . The site is composed of steep slopes which surround a moderately- sloping plateau. The applicant proposes to cluster development on this plateau and leave the majority of the site in undeveloped open space. The area encompassed by proposed Lots 27-29 is characterized by moderate slopes and is suitable for building sites. Provision of a 40 ' wide right-of-way as allowed by the Ordinance is not necessary to provide adequate access to these proposed lots. 4 . The proposed plat density is significantly less than that allowed by the Comprehensive Plan. The requested variance is necessary for the relevant portion of the proposed clustered configuration. It is not being requested to allow development up to the maximum density allowed by the Plan 5 . The Second Edition of the Subdivision Ordinance would allow the creation of "pipe stem" lots as a means of providing access to these lots. The proposed common access over Tract B is a more suitable means of providing access. 6. The proposal has been reviewed by Jefferson County under the State Environmental Policy Act. No significant adverse impacts were identified that cannot be avoided by the required mitigative measures. 7. Granting a variance subject to recommended conditions would not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, welfare, use, or interest or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. 8. The requested variance will not materially compromise the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. It is consistent with the applicable County land use regulations and the spirit and intent of the Subdivision Ordinance. 9. In consideration of these findings, staff concludes that: a. The site is characterized by extraordinary conditions that require the variance request. The request is not the result of the applicant' s action; b. Requiring adherence to the requirement for a 40 ' right-of- Preliminary Long Plat Creekside LP05-92 Page 17 111 411 way would result in an unnecessary and undue hardship; c. The public interest can be secured by granting the requested variance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION - VARIANCE REQUEST #1: Based on the preceding findings and conclusions, staff recommends approval of the requested variance subject to the following conditions: 1. Based on the requirements of Section 10.40, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall submit documentation from Fire Protection District #3 demonstrating that adequate provision for fire and emergency vehicle access to Lots 27-29 has been incorporated into the design of the access over Tract B. 2 . Based on the requirements of Sections 6.205 and 10. 40, the applicant shall dedicate a seven foot wide utility easement across the front of Lots 27 and 28 to Lot 29 . Such easements may be made by separate recorded easement, declaration of easements, or dedication of easements and by graphic portrayal on the final plat. VARIANCE REQUEST #2 A variance is requested from the requirements of Subdivision Ordinance Section 6. 203 (13) Road Design Standards. This section states that: 13 . Private roads shall only be permitted in a subdivision by a variance granted in accordance with these regulations, PROVIDED, as a condition to granting a variance for private roads, the Board of Commissioners may require a road improvement district or other provisions to be instituted upon final plat filing to insure future maintenance and improvement of said roads. The applicant proposes the creation of Tract B as a private easement road serving Lots 27-29 . Tract B would be 30 ' wide and approximately 160 ' long along its centerline. STAFF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. In order for a variance to be granted, all three conditions set forth in Subsection 10. 302 Private Road Variances of the Subdivision Ordinance (Second Edition) must be met. 2 . The proponent has submitted a "Request For Site Development Standard Variance" in support of their variance request. This is attached to this report as an exhibit. 3 . The proposed private road would in effect provide a private common driveway for Lots 27-29 . It is not necessary for other parties to have access over this easement for the purposes of access to the plat or open space areas or for internal circulation. By achieving access to these lots in this manner the applicant avoids creation of "pipe stem" lots which are allowed by the Second Edition of the Subdivision Preliminary Long Plat Creekside LP05-92 Page 18 Ordinance, but which are a less desireable alternative method of access. 4 . In consideration of the limited length of the proposed private road and its access off of a 100 ' diameter cul-de-sac and subject to review and approval of the roadway design by Fire District #3 to ensure adequate fire and emergency vehicle access, the private roadway would provide adequate physical access to preserve public health, safety, and welfare. 5 . The Subdivision Ordinance provides that all roads within plats must be designed and constructed to County standards subject to the approval of the Public Works Department. The Ordinance also requires that provisions be instituted to ensure future road maintenance. 6. In consideration of these findings, staff concludes that: a. The proposed private access road for Lots 27-29 is necessary and desireable for the most logical development of the site; b. The proposed private access road will provide physical access adequate to preserve public health, safety, and welfare. c. Subject to conditions, the design, construction, and maintenance of the proposed private easement road is consistent with the standards of the Public Works Department. STAFF RECOMMENDATION - VARIANCE REQUEST #2 : Based on the preceding findings and conclusions, staff recommends approval of the requested variance subject to the following condition: 1. Based on the requirements of Sections 10. 302 and 10. 40, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall submit to the Public Works Department for review and approval a private road maintenance agreement for the access road across Tract B. The maintenance agreement shall be established either by recording of a separate instrument and referencing said instrument or by establishing said agreement by declaration on the long subdivision final plat. G. STAFF RECOMMENDATION - PRELIMINARY PLAT: Based on the forgoing findings and conclusions staff recommends approval of the proposed Creekside Preliminary Long Plat, subject to the following conditions. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS: 1. Based on the requirements of Sections 6. 203 and 6. 301, road and intersection plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. All road construction shall comply with the standards of and be performed under the inspection of the Jefferson County Department of Public Works prior to final plat approval, except as otherwise allowed under Subsection 6. 50 Bonds. Preliminary Long Plat Creekside LP05-92 Page 19 411 411 2 . Based on the requirements of Section 6. 302 and the mitigative measures of the Final MDNS, the proponent shall submit the required drainage, stormwater management, and temporary erosion and sedimentation control plans to the Public Works Department for review and approval and shall implement said plans as required. 3 . Based on the requirements of Section 6. 304, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall document that road signs have been installed in accordance with Jefferson County standards; road names have been approved by the Public Works Director; and traffic signs and safety devices have been installed in accordance with Washington State highway traffic control standards as approved by the Public Works Director. 4. Based on the requirements of Section 6. 305, prior to water system expansion construction, if required by the appropriate state agency, the applicant shall submit engineered construction design plans for review and approval. Construction of the water system expansion shall be either completed prior to final plat approval, or as an option, the applicant may post a County approved surety to guarantee construction of system expansion. 5. Based on the requirements of Section 6. 306, prior to sewer system construction, if required by the appropriate state agency, the applicant shall submit engineered construction design plans for review and approval. Construction of the sewer system expansion shall be either completed prior to final plat approval, or as an option, the applicant may post a County approved surety to guarantee construction of system expansion. 6. Based on the requirements of Section 6. 307, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall submit documentation from Fire Protection District #3 demonstrating that fire protection measures are in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Uniform Fire Code, and the recommendations of the Fire District consistent with State law. 7 . Based on the requirements of Section 6. 309, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall provide documentation that the Public Works Department has been furnished all documents and calculations necessary to determine the accuracy of surveys, that road monuments directly related to the plat have been constructed of materials as per Jefferson County standards, and that road monuments have been set in such a manner that future road development or utility installation shall not disturb the accuracy of their position. 8 . Based on the requirements of Section 6. 50, the applicant shall arrange for the inspection of all required improvements with the Department of Public Works, the Planning Department, or Health Department, whichever is responsible. Inspections shall be requested Preliminary Long Plat Creekside LP05-92 Page 20 by the applicant at such stages as indicated by the appropriate department. The applicant shall be required to pay all costs of work incidental to approval of the subdivision before final approval is granted. 9 . Based on the requirements of the Jefferson County 911 Emergency Locator System Ordinance, prior to final plat approval address plates for the lots shall be located in accordance with Ordinance provisions. 10. The applicant shall comply with all mitigative measures of the Final Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance as issued by Jefferson County for the proposed Creekside Long Plat. Preliminary Long Plat Creekside LP05-92 Page 21 • JEFFERSON COUNTY LONG SUBDIVISION APPLICATION The Washington State Boundaries and Plat Act (RCW 58.17) requires that divisions of land for sale or lease y� comply with the provisions of the Jefferson County Subdivision Ordinance. The purpose of this Act and ett Ordinance is to ensure that potential purchasers have lots with adequate access, water supply, sewage a; disposal, legal description of land, etc., and the general taxpayers of the County will not later have to PtV _ " unnecessarily contribute toward those development costs. The Ordinance requires that long subdivisions (1-' __ (the division of land into five or more lots, tracts, parcels, or sites) within the unincorporated area of � Jefferson County be reviewed with criteria established by the Ordinance. A parcel of land eligible for long \I c =4 ., subdivision includes commercial, industrial, or residential land use(s). APPLICANT: Pope Resources ADDRESS: PO Box 1780, Poulsho, Washington 98370 business TELEPHONE: (home) (business) 206-697-6626 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE: Linda Mueller, Land Use Planner _ 5 ADDRESS: Same as above. TELEPHONE: (home) (business) 206-697-6626 ext. 529 DIRECTIONS 1. Answer all questions completely. Please print or type. Contact the Jefferson County Planning Department for aid in filling out this application and for instructions on further administrative procedures required to complete its processing. 2. Attach any additional information(reports,studies,maps, illustrations,leases, permits, etc.)that may further describe the proposed development or may be required by Jefferson County, in addition to the preliminary or final plat. 3. Check with appropriate agencies to determine if the proposed development requires additional permits or approvals. An accepted plat under the Jefferson County Subdivision Ordinance does not excuse a developer from complying with other local, state, or federal ordinances, regulations, or statutes applicable to the proposed development. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION GENERAL LOCATION: In the community of Port Ludlow, approximately 1 /2 mile south of Oak Bay Road on the west side of Paradise Bay Road across from the Inner Harbor Village Condominiums. LEGAL (from property tax statement): The East Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 17, Township 28 North, Range 1 East, WM: Tax Parcel Numbers 821173001 , 821173002 , 821174001 OWNERSHIP: Applicant: XxOwner Lessee Contract Purchaser _Other Owner Name & Address: SUBDIVISION DESCRIPTION SUBDIVISION NAME (if known): "C reek side" LAND USE (identify as commercial, residential, industrial, etc.): Residential APPLICATION IS FOR: xX PRELIMINARY PLAT FINAL PLAT NOTE: Applications for a long subdivision which upon initial inspection appear to be insufficiently prepared to provide a basis for adequate review will be returned to the applicant. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I hereby declare, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the foregoing information and all attached information is true and correct. (Applicant or Authorized Representative) (Date) �/ s I- YT � • • JEFFERSON COUNTY PRELIMINARY LONG PLAT CHECKLIST GENERAL: The preliminary long plat shall consist of a preliminary subdivision map including a vicinity map. Eight (8) copies of the preliminary long plat, consisting of one (1) or more pages, shall be submitted. It shall be no larger than 18" by 24" inches, to scale, and prepared to clearly portray the nature of the development. VICINITY MAP: The general location of the subdivision shall be depicted in an area approximately 3" by 3" inches, drawn in a corner of the preliminary long plat map, and indicate the location of the proposed development to the nearest geographical feature(s) (community, water body, major road, mountain, valley, etc.). PRELIMINARY PLAT MAP: Submitted with this application are eight (8) copies of the full size plat map including a reduced copy (81i" by 14" or 11" by 17") of the preliminary plat and other required material containing the following data: o Vicinity map. o North arrow & scale. 0 Location of fire hydrants including o Subdivision name. fire & school district identification. o Name, address, and phone number of o Greenbelt or open space, including official subdivision representative. location and size. o Developer's name and address. - o Acreage allocated to parks, open o Names & addresses of adjacent space, greenbelt, or common area, property owners. and percentage of total acreage. o General location & description. o Method of solid waste disposal. o Topography with a contour interval 0 Designated trails of the Jefferson of five (5) feet. County Park, Recreation, and Open o Approximate lot dimensions and Space Plan within vicinity of numbers. proposed subdivision. o Total acreage and lots per gross o Jefferson County Comprehensive acre. Plan optimum land use map o Number of lots including maximum, designation. average, and minimum lot sizes. 0 Completed environmental checklist o Acreage allocated to lots and (pursuant to RCW 43.21C percent of total acreage. Washington State Environmental o Length of roads to be created. Policy Act). o Existing and proposed road widths. 0 Existing restrictions and covenants o Cul-de-sac radius. (when applicable). o Acreage allocated to roads and o Proposed restrictions and covenants percent of total acreage. (when applicable). o Indication as to public or private o Encumbrances (easements, road system. encroachments, etc.). o Road right-of-way width and typical 0 Written recommendations from cross sections. Washington State Department of o Outstanding natural features Transportation when a proposed long (water courses, tree lines, etc.) subdivision is located adjacent to of the property to be platted and the right-of-way of state highways. adjacent property. o Written approval from the Washington o Soil log holes; soil investigation State Department of Ecology when sites. any part of a proposed long o Drainage plan. subdivision is located within a o Water, sewage disposal, and other flood control zone. utility plans. 0 Subdivision fees of $350 plus $5 o Source of water supply. per lot. o Sewage disposal method. o7 X0/01/92 1 • f, ct\,._.... / :•,... 1 \ \ / -----,,. .■,>",-,.. -.::-...„.,_ ---___ ,.... N ir ,...._______________ . . . . . . . w ) t , - N., \ ) ) 7---- ''.- c / ) .,? ‘'''-\_,..------\\. \ , ) / / / ii , \\L.,_....a......;%,,----, ,, ., . / .,.- / /YIP/ . -,„,..._____,--- /, . . . --v... -_,-- ,;,,, , __/:".71) ,---/ /,.. --/::-.--.---.:-7,--:_i_____..--__-' '' ,.....___________.---------",%•...—.. / /...„. 4........ ....... ----:- ,,/ ..._.----- - ---...,.-:„...,-, -,,,„,. ----- z.--: :. _-- c "::=---..:---...\ --:,,,At.: --,.._ ______.-!-.7...,:■-:-.„:, L ., \ 1 'Ti ;N''',.... \.\ ' I .‘. .... ifilkb ' '.N , . . , . ,r .. \ \':::N...''.%.......■,..' .... ..........\\..,..\:::ORS \S.,-\ I i I \ r -›*-------i-,. way \ ----------- AA • ,......_., ,....,,,,, . .... . (._ .7. . ......... \\N .,. s.,, ,,, \ ,1 ......\_ , iii,-,_ I______,\I__ c7 / ___-_-:„.- -..-- -..-,.„.._ -\ \4*. L.:... ____ 4041i _________A ‘ .......,\\ . -41N \, -\ \,\ I . . ., ,,... .„: ,,.. !..\, 2 • ,_......„ .............___. . .., .1. I 1 . t. • , i ---\ 1,--. \-/- ( , / -*/ .• N1 ,1, 1, 8( sl) . a i ,........„.. .. . $ 1----j.--y----/ ,,,-- "--3--:-.7.22 ,, . .,'''•■- -..,L '" \ :-.. -----■ .../.,V, T.--•"-.......,:. ::.‘ -444'... 4° -/.77-. '--- tir '.":7 ,---"-------------' 1 a • ------------ "7.0 ..'",•.% c•-•• .• "<-:',/7--- ,-- • , . ./ _.,-...-----4, \ y -,,t,.--• .----------7-------=, > .._---: _f___,--.______-- _ _• ',,'• -ARM: , ___„\. .. .,.., - „..././ `ss...., •.:„.;,...., _____;>________,-.---------- ,----. .----..:---___..-----------_, - • , , -- -AMIF,:t. • .... t4,": IIIIIIIPI:0 • --r---_,-- "- a'r". .400!.. •• ..•• \.,..,, -•.,, '''., i s‘.. -,.... s"•••••••‘. ••.,, ''-'\ ligig i' iN. t (,..1\ , 4.----.,17,.;,-":::4 ' -•/. -1/1-1c7~---. -' — -----`--<'- .'--...,...\TN,... '',s.'N 110P ''' 111141"I'''''sr- eraZ.%:-\ \\ ----- .\\ .„ T: 11.4..04-' \„ ' '•,‘s\\ / ii 1 it ri't. 4, ":‘`',. ..* $ .-- 114,k4 ' ' -----.: ""r",•;--, s,„\\' ;" :,;N.!*- ' . 11: . '\\\ 1 \ lilt' g •-•':"-----.....„.., NtIP-4 I V 5 a -1•:-- . ,--'''\,.---tvn)')pr , ,_, . ji ‘11 1 --- -...„-------,--...._—_—_:---------- - .,--------,---.-----... ----.- ----z-- ---717—: )\ '' rk _..s„,. ,„, :),, ,...,..._.1, ."..\.i.4 , ,„i__-.-_..7;-_:7,".-__•_._-_-__—_,_,:-\4,..,..7......'_''_'_'__,___..-..-.-„_7_"",-'_--_-—_—_-_-_-_1_7_:-__.-__..._..„.:.„..,..........„.„..„.i.._.... I,___-.7..._._.—.......„..,..,_..-„,,,...`,•,*i4..i. .,.1 1,-„.-.-...,... , ,... _ ,-,.„ . ,j„ ,). .. rk '- -- -4:111I\ - ... 1 ,, %N., ,, ,'--::.-7.,,,-"*"+„ ---' ' -'_----'1;-- -- ..------ • 1/ 4 2 1 . '• ....4'...----.74-../, „. c., --- - i --'''. -,,..---' ,/ / I ' ' .N..,....,-:<::\ ..) / .....,/‘ 1 :.....,,,,,,,-.1”' ...-, ' 1•L----__%'.... : ,_,■.,/.- ',.•;.':;,"/ ,.'-'7',,,-'-'-- __,--/ / ._,N\d. / / . 6 x i _x _ _ § _____ — '\> 44 ___,, .. — --21,-- \ 1 . _ _ \ , ..-- '.., ;...i -4°34814 i W X Ili \ i . h 12•7,.”ri f' ■t EI * 3C . i 111 I 1 glif illpil 1114 ” I li III 1 ! E -,r,,, •_ 4`t. g I ; 7 7) 1 ill ii ! ! ! ! 1? ; tifLt g 8 ir 44 . , i il IN i I lit ..-'i .: d ii 1 i 4 5 t, 11 it! ,( fi 1 11 II 1 VI PIN iiiii 2 '1!IliYi 1T1 Pg 8 , p 1 i 11 I V4A la I 1 1 ir " 111 ill ..-A F 1 I 1 1 -1 NI Uhl i 1 goPTif -4 t S S ,0. .r ! t I f 9 111 h II le 1 16 11 ' ill Il /1 4 1 i 1 ll ! a L 8 is A R K 8 e / 1 1 1 1 i elifill7r. iki 1 --- ,..,...................,.................H14 ' '11 . • i'l 4 i . J i at t . ."-----5 - 13 1 r 0041 ■;,,t,k 1,01,1111 ... .: c, ''' ,,,,411111111R:4 11 II li':1 ,. ... _ . , . -,., •_< sostr■ommuntoon -.. 1 SIJIMMIaLVESOMIIIII■II POPE RESOURCES . ESM inc. ...,.... , . ..iail ...._, • 9 3 1 -:,. .,„••■••. ■ '=".z- ■Pot baJ11164 LOD&Re./4)new 1.1..ame COM ILO,... i . a i -- g " 7 1 • CREEKSIDE i,. ..r.:,...• • 34004 Sth AVENUE SO., 01.130. A A FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON 95003 • . 79.. " • . i 7 JEFFERSON COUNTY . PREUMPNARY PLAT WASHINGTON ,I'" 1, PHONE [20e] oxi—ts 1 1.3 • . Ex2[-uBrr____ . __........ 1 • Pope Resources A Limited Partnership 19245 Tenth Avenue Northeast P.O.Box 1780 Poulsbo,Washington 98370-0239 (206)697-6626 (206)697-1156 FAX May 10, 1994 Mr. Jim Pearson, Associate Planner Jefferson County Permit Center 621 Sheridan Port Townsend WA 98368 Re: Variance Requests for "Creekside" Preliminary Plat, LP05-92 Dear Mr. Pearson: As you indicated in your telephone call of May 8, 1994, the "Creekside" preliminary plat application was submitted under the 2nd Edition of the Jefferson County Subdivision Ordinance. The variance request submitted with the application was incorrectly submitted under the 3rd Edition effective July, 1992. At issue is the correct variance procedure and references under the 2nd Edition, Section 6.203, "Roads," for providing private drive access easement (Tract B) to three lots with the proposed 30 foot width and 160 foot length. Under the 2nd Edition, the following sections apply: 6.203(4). The standard width of public or private road rights-of-way shall be sixty (60) feet in width, EXCEPT for local access rights-of-way which may be reduced to fifty (50) feet, PROVIDED dead-end private rights-of-way four hundred forty (440)feet in length or less and serving twelve (12) lots or less may he reduced to forty (40) feet in width. 6.203(13). Private roads shall only be permitted in a subdivision by a variance granted in accordance with these regulations, PROVIDED, as a condition to granting a variance for private roads, the Board of Commissioners may require a road improvement district or other provisions to be instituted upon final plat filing to insure future maintenance and improvement of said roads. Under Section 10, a General Variance (10.301) is required for the reduced road width and the following findings must be made: 1. There exists extraordinary conditions or unusual circumstances peculiar to the property and not the result of the action of the applicant. The topography of the property consists of steep, hilly terrain with variable slopes and some smaller building sites located on hilltops. The narrower road will allow better lot layout and provide more efficient access to smaller, developable land units and better sensitivity to steep slopes. �, • • Mr. Jim Pearson May 10, 1994 Page 2 2. A literal enforcement of the regulations would result in unnecessary and undue hardship. A 60 foot right-of-way requirement for Tract B is impractical for the three lots accessed, considering the limiting conditions of the site. The requirements could create awkward design and substandard lots or could require excessive grading. The variance eases the fit of the proposed development to the land. 3. Justice could be done and the public interest secured by granting a suitable variance. The variance will provide legal access to lots, is an acceptable AASHTO standard adopted by the Public Works Department, and will improve safety by reducing the number of driveways on standard public roads. Under Section 10, a Private Road Variance (10.302) is necessary for private drive approval with the following findings made: 1. The proposed private road system is necessary or desirable for the most logical development of the land. The proposed access essentially provides a common driveway access to these three lots and will not be utilized for any other purpose. A full-sized public right-of-way is not necessary. See also #1 and #2 above. 2. The proposed private road system will provide physical access adequate to preserve public health, safety, and welfare. The variance will provide legal access to lots, is an acceptable AASHTO standard adopted by the Public Works Department and will improve safety by reducing the number of driveways on standard public roads. 3. The design, construction, and maintenance for the proposed private road system is assured to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. The roadway will be constructed to Public Works standards. The 30-foot width is to AASHTO standards. Maintenance will be provided through the CCRs and Homeowners Association. The foregoing comments should facilitate approval of the variance request. If you have further questions, don't hesitate to call. Sincerely, Linda Mueller Land Use Planner ph po • • 1.444 l Ludlow Water Company - 781 Walker Way Port Ludlow: Washington 98365 Phone (206) 437.2213 Phone(206)437-2101 Fa.,. (206)437-2522 January 14, 1993 Mr. Jerry Smith Jefferson County Planning and Building Dept. P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 RE: CREEKSIDE - DIVISION I - Dear Mr. Smith: The water system for the above referenced plat is designed and will be constructed in compliance with Washington State Department of Health rules and regulations. Bonding has been posted to secure construction of the system. Once constructed, the system will be owned, operated and maintained by Ludlow Water Company. Adequate quantity and quality of water will be made available to serve sixty one (61) family residences within the plat. Sincerely, arry smith Manager of Support Services c: Greg McCarry, Pope Resources David Cunningham, Pope Resources I:4 e • • Pope Resources A Umded Partnership 70 Breaker Lane Port Ludlow,Washington 98365 (206)437-2101 FAX(206)437-2522 January r 14, 1993 Mr. Jerry Smith Jefferson County Planning and Building Dept. P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 RE: CREEKSIDE - DIVISION I - Dear Mr. Smith: The sewer system for the above referenced plat is designed and will be constructed in compliance with Washington State Department of Ecology rules and regulations. Bonding has been posted to secure construction of the system. Once constructed, the system will connect to the expanded Wastewater Treatment Plant and will be owned, operated and maintained by Pope Resources. This letter is a commitment of adequate plant capacity for sixty one (61) family residences within the plat. Sincerely, Larrycmith Manager of Support Services c: Greg McCarry, Pope Resources David Cunningham, Pope Resources AAA/ JILL* AfteNeleftekeelft Ludlow Water Company _. 781 Walker Way Port Ludlow, Washington 98365 Phone(206)437-2213 Phone(206)437-2101 Fax (206) 437-2522 January 14 , 1993 Mr. Jerry Smith Jefferson County Planning and Building Dept. P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 RE: CREERSIDE - DIVISION I - Dear Mr. Smith: The water system for the above referenced plat is designed and will be constructed in compliance with Washington State Department of Health rules and regulations. Bonding has been posted to secure construction of the system. Once constructed, the system will be owned, operated and maintained by Ludlow Water Company. Adequate quantity and quality of water will be made available to serve sixty one (61) family residences within the plat. Sincerely, arry Smith Manager of Support Services c: Greg McCarry, Pope Resources David Cunningham, Pope Resources EXHIBIT r • Pope Resources A Umked Partnership 70 Breaker Lane Port Ludlow,Washington 98365 (206)437-2101 -FAX(206)437-2522 January 14 , 1993 Mr. Jerry Smith Jefferson County Planning and Building Dept. P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 RE: CREERSIDE - DIVISION I Dear Mr. Smith: The sewer system for the above referenced plat is designed and will be constructed in compliance with Washington State Department of Ecology rules and regulations. Bonding has been posted to secure construction of the system. Once constructed, the system will connect to the expanded Wastewater Treatment Plant and will be owned, operated and maintained by Pope Resources. This letter is a commitment of adequate plant capacity for sixty one (61) family residences within the plat. Sincerely, LarrySmith Manager of Support Services c: Greg McCarry, Pope Resources David Cunningham, Pope Resources , - - - �.c- J i � ,; .f I Jefferson County Health & Human Services -. JI .. r ) i,CASTLE HILL CENTER • 615 SHERIDAN • PORT TOWNSEND,WA • 98368 TO: JIM PEARSON, PLANNING DEPARTMENT FROM: LARRY FAY, ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT ./ `l DATE: May 10, 1994 RE: Preliminary Plat Review Creekside LP05-92 Ironwood LP06-92 Both of the above proposals call for the extension of the Ludlow Water and Ludlow Sewer Systems . The water system extensions need to be consistent with the approved Ludlow Water System plan or construction documents need to be submitted to and approved by the Washington Department of Health prior to construction. Sewer system extensions need to be consistent with the Pope Resources General Sewer Plan. The Environmental Health Division recommends the following conditions for final approval : 1) Based on the requirements of Subsection 6 .406 and prior to water system expansion construction, if required by the appropriate state agency, the applicant shall submit engineered construction design plans to the appropriate state agency for review and approval . Construction of the water system expansion shall be either completed prior to final plat approval, or as an option, the applicant may post a County approved surety to guarantee construction of system expansion. 2) Based on the requirements of Subsection 6 .407 and prior to sewer system expansion construction, if required by the appropriate state agency, the applicant shall submit engineered construction design plans to the appropriate state agency for review and approval . Construction of the sewer system expansion shall be either completed prior to final plat approval , or as an option, the applicant may post a County approved surety to guarantee construction of system expansion. LDF/wg ExHiBrr -_. =-- HEALTH ENVIRONMENTAL DEVELOPMENTAL ALCOHOL/DRUG DEPARTMENT HEALTH DISABILITIES ABUSE CENTER FAX 206/385-9400 206/385-9444 206/385-9400 206/385-9435 206/385-9401 MEMORANDUM TO: Jim Pearson Permit Center/Development Review FROM: Carter Renner DATE: May 10, 1994 SUBJECT: Creekside Long Plat--Application & Variance Review Application Review ROADS Widths for construction of roads within a development shall conform to the Department of Public Works requirements. These requirements vary in width, depending upon the number of daily trips generated by the development (ADT) . Each individual lot is estimated to generated ten (10) trips per day. Developments that produce less than 100 ADT, and dead-end, may utilize the minimum standard, which is a fourteen foot wide road, with twenty feet of clear zone. Road plans shall be designed to meet the criteria of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) . All roads, regardless of width, must meet the "Typical Minimum Roadway Section" for compaction, ballasting, surfacing and ditching. Right of way widths may vary depending upon roadway construction widths, however, if reduction in right of way width is proposed, an adjoining easement for utilities must be rovided. Roads built to less than twenty-two feet P Y in width and with less than sixty feet of wa right of shall remain g way as private roads and will not be considered for inclusion into the Jefferson County Road Log. 1. The proposed roadways shall be constructed to AASHTO requirements to meet Department of Public Works standards. All plans and specifications required shall be submitted, reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to construction. A set of approved plans shall be on site at all times during construction. Variance Request Road Right of Way, Tract "B" : We recommend, for the following reasons, that the variance for reduction in right of way width be granted to thirty (30) feet, provided the applicant make provision for a parallel easement for utility installation and maintenance. The width of this easement shall be seven (7) feet. However, Tract "B" shall remain a private road. a. Due to the steepness of the terrain, the road dead-ends, and cannot be extended. b. The road does not exceed five hundred feet (500 ' ) in length. c. The road serves less than fourteen (14) lots. • • Variance Request Road Right of Way, Drives "B" and "C" : We recommend, for the following reasons, that the variance for reduction in right of way width be granted to fifty (50) feet. a. Due to the steepness of the terrain, the roads dead-end, and cannot be extended. b. Adequate emergency vehicle turnaround has been provided. The review of this variance request does not constitute approval of individual roadway sections. Review of roadway drainage systems, and final road and storm water and sedimentation plans, is not contained within this report. 2 . A "Road Approach Permit" shall be obtained from the department for access to Creekside Drive and the number of the permit(s) shall be referenced on the final plat. Inspection 3 . Construction of roads and storm water facilities and/or land disturbing activities requires that the applicant submit plans in accordance with the Department of Public Work' s plan review schedule, and, the applicant shall notify the Department of Public Works during various phases of construction in accordance with the department' s inspection schedule (attached) . Road Maintenance 4. Road "A" , Drives "B" and "C" shall be public roads. An agreement for the continued maintenance of Tract "B" shall be established either by recording of a separate instrument and referencing said instrument, or by establishment of said agreement by declaration on the subdivision plat (Model agreements attached) . Addressing 5. In accordance with Chapter 486, Washington Laws of 1993 [amending RCW 58 . 17. 280] , addresses shall be assigned to all lots and clearly shown on the final plat prior to approval. 6. Address plates for the lots shall be located in accordance with Jefferson County 911 Emergency Locator System Ordinance provisions. The Department of Public Works shall be consulted when naming any private road to avoid duplication of road names. 7. The proponent shall select road names in consultation with the Department of Public Works to avoid duplication of existing road names. "A privately-owned driveway or common access with five or more assigned emergency locator numbers shall be considered a private road for the purpose of this ordinance. • • All private and county roads shall be provided with names. . ." 7 . The private road serving the subdivision shall be named, and the name of the road shall be shown on the survey. It is required that the applicant consult the Department of Public Works in reference to signing and when selecting a name to avoid duplication of an existing road name. In accordance with Section 3 . 120 (2) of the 911 Ordinance, "No road names shall be duplicated. Efforts shall be made to avoid the adoption of similar road names." Easements 8 . All easements of record shall be graphically portrayed on the final plat with the Auditor ' s File Number (AFN) of the easement (s) also referenced on the face of the plat. STORM WATER/DRAINAGE All storm water requirements are developed through the application of the Washington State Department of Ecology Storm Water Management Manual, based upon the amount of impervious surface created and amount of land disturbing activity performed. Common impervious surfaces include, but are not limited to, roof tops, walkways, patios, driveways, parking lots or storage areas, concrete or asphalt paving, gravel roads, packed earthen materials, and oiled, macadam or other surfaces which similarly impede the natural infiltration of storm water. Land disturbing activities means any activity that results in a change in the existing soil cover (both vegetative and nonvegetative) and/or the existing soil topography. Land disturbing activities include, but are not limited to demolition, construction, clearing, grading, filling and excavation. 1. The proponent shall submit an engineered drainage and storm water plan and report to the Jefferson County Public Works Department for review and approval. The drainage plan must incorporate the storm drainage criteria of the Washington State Department of Ecology Storm Water Management Manual (current edition) . The plan shall be of sufficient detail to clearly illustrate the "Best Management Practices" utilized are adequate to treat and control the runoff. 2 . Prior to the commencement of any land disturbing activities on the site, an erosion and sediment control plan shall be developed to the standards of the Washington State Department of Ecology Storm Water Management Manual (current edition) and be submitted to the Department of Public Works for approval. a. Construction of roads and storm water facilities and/or site disturbing activities require that the applicant submit plans in accordance with the Department of Public Work' s plan review schedule, and, the applicant shall notify the Department of Public Works during various phases of construction in accordance with the department ' s inspection schedule. Temporary erosion control methods for construction purposes (roads, facilities) shall be approved by the Department of Public Works and employed during construction. . . 3 . The applicant shall submit plans in accordance with the Department of Public Work's plan review schedule (attached) . A set of the approved plans shall be on site at all times during construction. 4 . The applicant shall notify the Department of Public Works during phases of construction in accordance with the department's inspection schedule (attached) . GENERAL COMMENTS Land Disturbing Activities 1. Prior to the commencement of any land disturbing activities, the proponent shall consult with the Department of Public Works regarding storm water and erosion control requirements. Storm water and erosion control requirements, as determined by the Department of Public Works shall be considered conditions to final approval of the proponent' s project. 2 . If roadway construction is the only planned improvement to the subdivision, roadways plans must include provision for storm water management, both permanent and temporary. All storm water (drainage) facilities shall be developed to the standards of the Washington State Department of Ecology Storm Water Management Manual (current edition) and be submitted to the Department of Public Works for approval. " Fee Requirement 3 . In accordance with Ordinance 12-1214-92 , effective January 1, 1993 , the applicant shall be required to pay all costs of work incidental to approval of the subdivision before final approval is granted. Surety 4 . The applicant may enter into a surety agreement with the Department of Public Works as an alternative to complete installation of required improvements prior to final plat approval. The surety may not exceed one (1) year, and must be in a form acceptable to the County Prosecutor. Acceptable examples of sureties are available from the Department of Public Works. All sureties must be accompanied by an estimate of the cost of all improvements, and the estimate must be approved by the Department of Public Works prior to acceptance of surety. Variances 5. Or, in accordance with Section 12 of the Subdivision Ordinance, the applicant may apply for a variance from these conditions. Additional Approvals 6. The department reviews the application only for impacts associated with issues within the scope of its regulatory authority. Additional permits may be required by other agencies. This may include, but is not be limited to: r ' J . • • Washington State Dept. of Transportation--State Highway Access Washington State Dept. of Ecology--Flood Control Zone Approval Washington State Fisheries--Hydraulics Permit Approval Washington State Department of Natural Resources--Forest Practices Permit .JEFFERSON TRANSIT 1615 W.Sims Way,Port Townsend, WA 98368 206/385-4777 February 5, 1993 Craig Ward Director, Jefferson County Planning and Building Department P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA A 98358 Subject Creekside Subdivision Application LP05-92 Dear Mr. Ward: Jefferson Transit has reviewed the environmental checklist for the Creekside preliminary plat and has the following comments: As indicated in the document, Jefferson Transit does provide transit service along Paradise Bay Road past the site. For residents of Creekside to use public transit however the stops at Oak Bay Road and South Bay Lane are impractical and unsafe to access as pedestrians. A bus pullout with sufficient space for a few Creekside residents to park their vehicles in a park and ride mode at the intersection of the new collector road and Paradise Bay Road would mitigate this problem. Alternatively a pedestrian walkway from the development to a pullout along Paradise Bay Road would achieve the same end. Pedestrian and bicycle amenities are encouraged within the development and along the new collector road to encourage residents to use nonmotorized forms of transportation for local circulation. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposed development. Sincerely, Jeff Hamm, General Manager JH/jth cc Steve Iden, Operations Supervisor, Jefferson Transit Emu:e r /0 Corr • _ • _ "t". JEFFERSON COUNTY PERMIT CENTER • ti � 1 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 �`S$TNGS MEMORANDUM To: Iry Berteig. Jefferson County Hearing Examiner From: James W. Pearson, Associate Planner Date: May 12 , 1994 Re: Jefferson Transit comments on Creekside Long Plat Application LP05-92, Pope Resources, applicant Attached please find a copy of the referenced comments. I did not discover them in the file until after the staff report had been prepared. The following is an addendum to the staff report prepared for the referenced plat that discusses these comments. TRANSIT COMMENTS Jefferson Transit states that it provides transit service along Paradise Bay Road. It would be unsafe for Creekside residents to use the existing turnouts at the Paradise Bay Road/Oak Bay Road or Paradise Bay/South Bay Lane intersections. Transit recommends construction of either a park and ride facility or a transit turnout at the intersection of Paradise Bay Road and Creekside Drive. PLATTING AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REQUIREMENTS The Second Edition of the Subdivision Ordinance does not contain policies or standards that address provision of transit services. However, the goals and purposes of the State Subdivision statute (RCW 58 . 17) , the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan, and the Subdivision Ordinance itself are intended to promote the public health, safety, and welfare by such means as providing for safe, convenient, efficient, and energy-efficient transportation systems; by avoid congestion on highways; by ensuring that developers pay the full costs of the public infrastructure necessary to serve their projects; and by ensuring that transportation facilities are designed and constructed so as to meet reasonably foreseeable future needs. 1 Building Environmental Health Development Review Public Works Building Permits Septic Permits Subdivision, Zoning Road Approach 379-4450 Water Review & Shoreline Permits Permits &Addresses Inspection Hotline 379-4450 379-4463 379-4450 379-4455 1-800-831-2678 FAX: (206) 379-4451 Based on these general goals and purposes, it is appropriate to consider Jefferson Transit 's comments and, as appropriate, incorporate them into the conditions of preliminary plat approval. TRANSIT PULLOUT DISCUSSION In order to achieve the goals and purposes of RCW 58 . 17 , the Comprehensive Plan, and the Subdivision Ordinance and particularly to provide for safe and convenient use of transit services, Jefferson County has required the provision of bus turnouts for other proposed plats when they are located on Transit routes. A bus turnout should likewise be provided by the proponent at the intersection of Paradise Bay Road and Creekside Drive to serve south bound Transit buses. Because the area on the easterly side of Paradise Bay Road is platted, it would not be feasible to construct a bus turnout for north bound Transit buses. However, there is adequate room for transit buses traveling northerly on Paradise Bay Road to to pull off at Spinaker Place, the entrance to a portion of the Inner Harbor development approximately 600 ' northerly of Creekside Drive. The County has not required provision of park and ride facilities as suggested by Transit in its comment. The proposed plat does not exhibit characteristics so substantially different from other previously reviewed plats that a revision to this policy is required. RECOMMENDED CONDITION Staff recommends that the following condition be required as a condition of final plat approval: Prior to final plat approval the proponent shall enter into an agreement with Jefferson Transit regarding construction of a bus pullout at the intersection of Paradise Bay Road and Creekside Drive which meets the specifications of Jefferson Transit. The agreement shall be submitted to the Development Review Division prior to final plat approval. c: Linda Mueller, Pope Resources C: \Memoform\HearExam 2 a '_ 130 Huckleberry Lane RUG 0 ' 1994 Port Ludlow, WA 98365 1 August 1994 Jefferson County Commission i;, `; . . L P. 0. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98365 Dear Sirs : From the July 27 issue of the Port Townsend Leader, I learned of your decision to approve two additional preliminary plats . The "condition that wells be monitored to detect adverse impacts on groundwater supplies" is meaningless. Exactly what is planned to alleviate "adverse impacts" should they occur? To date the only solution of which I am aware is to pump water from the South aquifer ; despite admonitions in the letter of 2 December 1992 from Don Davidson of the Washington State Department of Ecology to the Jefferson County Building and Planning Department, a copy of which I sent you on 27 August 1993 and from which I quote: "Given the existing rights already allocated, it appears that no additional rights should be allocated until existing wells are put to use and monitoring data is gathered. " To my knowledge this has not yet been done. Later, same letter, "It is possible that the aquifer has already been over-allocated and no primary rights should be issued. " Same letter, "The DEIS asserts that sufficient ground water resources have been identified to provide water for the proposal , but advocates using the South Aquifer to provide water via an existing intertie. It is not clear how this will be done given that the place of use of the two Bywater wells does not include the Port Ludlow area. At this time the permit for Bywater Well #1 is currenty under appeal, and use is not allowed; Bywater well #2 is permitted, and is in use. " Same letter, further on , "All interties must be approved by the Department of Ecology, through a change of place or use application; we have no requests to withdraw water from the South Aquifer, and utilize it in the north. " In view of the severe drough we experienced at Sound View Villa from late April until mid October 1992 , which I reported to the PUD at the time, and on which I reported in detail , with confirming data, to the County Commission, with copies to the PUD, the State Department of Ecology and the Jefferson County Planning and Building Department in a letter dated 28 August 1993. - From the "Final Environmental Impact Study dealing with the development of the Port Ludlow area, prepared by Robinson & Noble, Inc:, I quote, "Unlike the North Aquifer, the South Aquifer lacks historical data to directly estimate aquifer yield, therefore a hypothetical yield was developed for the South Aquifer. To determine this value, an accurate 011 111 assessment of the magnitude of groundwater recharge per unit area to the system must be made. Once the amount of recharge is determined and the area of recharge is delineated, the hypothetical yield can be calcu- lated. " To my knowledge, no such determination has been made, but now, a year and a half later, the PUD is conducting such a test. Would it not be prudent to complete and evaluate this test before issuing any additional permits for water use? We duplicated the measurements of the level of the South Aquifer made on the Sound View Villa well for the P.U. D. by Roats Engineering, starting on 9-2-93 and ending on 10-28-93, and our results were identical. To establish a common reference, we requested and received from Roates Engineering a copy of the data pertinent to making this comparison. The level of the aquifer measured on 10-28-93 was 16 . 4 feet above sea level, the highest level recorded to that date. Since early October 1993 we noted that we had been enjoying particularly high aquifer levels, to be expected with the precipitation we were getting, so we decided to stop taking taking further measurements until 3-3-94 when we measured the aquifer at 15. 4 feet. Following that we re- commenced taking periodic aquifer readings , and found it reached the highest level recorded to date, 16 . 9 feet, on 4-6-94. On 6-18-94 we re- corded 10. 5 feet, a drop of 6. 4 feet, and on 7-27-94 it was measured at 2. 1 feet; a drop of 14. 3 feet since 4-6-94. Starting 7-1-94 the PUD has been making another survey, this time, besides measuring aquifer, they are conducting a draw down recovery rate investigation. We feel , at a minimum, authorization for the PUD plat should be revoked pending evaluation of the results from these tests . We realize we have been experiencing particularly warm weather during this period so an increase in water use must be expected. Having exper- ienced that severe drought in 1992 with virtually no warning, the amount of this drop must be a matter of concern. We have issued a plea to all Sound View Villa residents to curtain water consumption to the greatest extent possible, and we shall continue to monitor this situation. Considering the above and the dearth 'of water in all known aquifers of this area, as reported in various articles in the Port Townsend Leader, I am surprised and distressed that yet more building has been author- ized before a full assessment of the true situation regarding our water sources has been completed. Very tru y yours , G..Stocker cc: Public Utilities District Washington State Department of Ecology Port Townsend Leader r SHINE C®ISMUNITY ACTION dibUNCIL Robert A. Krutenat, Chairman pro tem Wendi Heins Wrinkle, Secretary 12001 Highway 104 12503 Highway 104 Port Ludlow, WA 98365 Port Ludlow, WA 98365 (206) 437-2259 (206)437-2575 FAX (206)437-9255 July 22, 1994 Jefferson County Permit Center Att: Hearing Examiner 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 Subject: Comments on preliminary approval of "Ironwood" and "Creekside" long plats. Hearing Examiner; Thank you for the opportunity to make comment on the subject long plats of "Ironwood" and "Creekside To avoid repetition we would like the following comments to be made part of the record for both long plat public hearings. It is our opinion that the long plat approvals should be denied for "Ironwood" and "Creekside" until the following criteria is met; 1. Submission, evaluation and approval of an updated Ludlow utility "water system plan" sufficient to meet state DOH "adequacy " requirements. 2. Submission and approval of a complete water monitoring program to County and DOE standards as outlined in the final Port Ludlow EIS and in mitigation for subject long plat submissions. 3. A copy of approval on a revised sewer service area permit from the DOH, to include the expansion of the service area to include the subject long plats. The following information supports our position and has been provided in attached reference documents for the record and your review. 1. DOH on growth management act and drinking water: A. All expanding water systems with 15 or more services are required to submit water system plans for review and approval by DOH, 8. RCW 58.17.060 and RCW 58.17.110 require findings of adeauacv of water systems prior to subdivision or short plat approvals. Local governments should contact DOH to verify the adequacy of the water system if a proposed development is going to be served by a public water supply. C. GMA requires findings of an "adequate" supply of water prior to approving new subdivisions and short plats in all 39 counties. D. The Washington State Attorney General's office has rendered an opinion that local governments must t Com* with DOH determinations regarding the adeguacv of public water systems. 2. Letters from state DOH and local environmental health regarding adequacy of water in response to the Port Ludlow EIS. Shine Community Action Courill,Inc. • Subject: Comments on "Ironwood" and "Creekside" Date: July 22, 1994 Page: 2 A. State DOH representative Karl Johnson points out that proof of adequate water supply pursuant to the growth management act is determined by existence of a water right adequate for the intended use and compliance with DOH drinking water regulations. He goes on to say if the existing system is expanded to provide service, the purveyor must update the water system plan to address new development. 1. The Port Ludlow EIS response to Karl's letter says as each specific development project is brought on line, specific water availability will be demonstrated. It also says the water system plan will be updated once the development program completes Jefferson County review and approval {Now a year ago). The response says that current water rights are sufficient for "most of" the needed water supply, and that should more water be needed the appropriate water right applications will be filed. B. County Environmental health director Larry Fay, in his response to the EIS says there has been no verification supplied in the Port Ludlow EIS, that DOH will accept Robinson and Noble's recommendation that design be based on peak rates of 480 gallons per day per residential connection. In response to solid waste he raises the concern that the Port Ludlow EIS does not address impacts from solid waste generated by the additional residences and new development. 3. The statements in the Port Ludlow EIS made by Robinson and Noble suggest that DOH make revisions downward to reflect the demonstrated use patterns of the development in relationship to adequacy requirements. The area under review is an urban growth area and DOH will need to evaluate an updated water system plan that addresses the changing community profile to determine realistic "adequacy " of the water supply. 4. Jefferson County Subdivision Ordinance 6.406, water supply: (1.) For long subdivisions less that 2 acres, an adequate potable water supply shall be provided.... (2.) Where the lots of a long subdivision do not meet the health department standards for individual wells, water shall be provided through public or community water supply systems. Community water systems must comply with _all applicable state statutes, and the rules and regulations of the Washington State DOH, as well as the Jefferson County Health Department and Coordinated Water System Plan provisions. In closing, the determination of adequacy of public water systems is clearly a DOH responsibility and requirement, and cannot be determined solely by the proponent. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Sincerely, Wendi Wrinkle SCAC, Secretary 200 wtay IcL4- Foes Luc, Dpit.1A . °1$J65 1-1, .2-01 t 9'4 "3-EFFEI�II-.S ON C�►.nom PEt°—tv\ r A- 1, PTeAlatNCr 6 2_t s 1994 ftC r TotoNSENr->, �u�1 . gFS�CS uv Su.0:3ECr : CoorIc:.ir't- oi� Pg'.�L■6"1tnARy AP('k-o�rprL- oF C2c>�-stoE err c- F'L(krS . I �Lf�k� tNc CX,�(`�� tc Z T�tl �E�r LLB F�LLeL!INC. ItNFLT--t"A-t;o.3 t $ Tltc p__E6 Co,^—o oF Apc�t-r�oN`•>` C"mmEtJT M°tne HEp,C<'IN � 3y S. C . I . 0 . WE EL%EVE ‘1T 13 'tfr\f% 1r�T TNA' TNT Q�Co 1s ■,JPv" TrN ca lms 6‘1 cc 711E FZCCo Wr1S i►ELD OPEN TH 1.1 bpir NIA) 23 P--r) . st r t e%()pt.-ti pr+E1L- T tc ay c Ly A et.-) ar C6mr►Er i Al ►'—t_r9�y o -rAf : `I►C-4;G- sAy SC(1=1 R?eG-AL Opt -rt1C S taJCCT LANG f' F-I ( pr05 ts.tG �Nc` SA∎n _sift-re Tek-Tkoir E 5 4c o v-r P�� S`t --r� C-t TeS -t-;Mdr� '10_5-le ta PegeSer` kc--s F -O.E - . :o .E • _e e N T�i� RuFl A L-1 e� ��P urvn I E� - .S �. 61 TJ w f�T A b � L P:'� ►S.SkE , : 7 tt14"1 v . 7-Doe.S No-T" #oaGv?Ice. o Sy-s-r m o tx! P-4 c ttiS j o Ff-u )-11 s 11, . F(2- 1-1 -roc [ 4 kR-or( I`'IEf- L HEt9LTI-1 Z>E►P I SAC o `T N r'1 '0 4 t4.s C o o a N W i T if nil_ 5 11 r4- �►� �J � _fl y°rT� 3)• U . (-Lt-42 C PICT C� + SCV-Vn-TriJ uSA(sC FiGI,ia_eS -1:3eTwe_Et3 htob Rr✓o G r. 0 (.._a 't1\1 EVeLitm-6 AziN 'Ny, -3) . o .-FI . L ■fzP-y FA_y acs NAT Hflvl--. THE 15 $°I Lwn<al� l`A TES Sys i•PLA � ON Fr t--C � Alt CcG�r�.T r AKL �. D ii-ids o� �p !� c EIS t.10-1- �1 fig c ft �h T�+�-I'��N f�"C't vN d F' Fj r7F At.A., ca\ err- -T 0 t= S 7 59-7- 1- --,-p. 0. Pi , 7 tiP c t s R eLC-V A NT i ` 1 S E 'AcuskON frci o .S43 rc L-DNC> PL TS . e Co r Ham. n ,��: - -Ms iI (it0Ny +{fls Sf}rr_) —rftel `THE \CI g `1 Pi�cv ON FILL AT -r1-1 5-1—i - C,. }}-- w.A_5 nef2c„vE o lr70n Hoch-k-, ' ( ' 15`18 . 11-4c--- SInB:�c.c_c L r' f LT.S Pu_< ��, � Cu(zrL'E4-4 7 AN t? F Lt-lug-t-- e l✓ -r 17-TC v Ft ti 0 C M Pi r 'T T E t LS�'P-■A (. --__r Pc-r -O o 0 -t. 1 r S 'teaES No--r FALL (.. t-r-tt1 ru —, tip—► eLpriNi .5 FEVic(A) . Cow 1.;,5S10r _?crii ta?k---) 0c�T T NApvnc srac■FrL c-E-Fer_ENCt= T_ -it-lc Seee flafJ te,\'AL o ^r4tE L1/47, s-r6.4,',ce DF [-g--0(.utI, uAT e- wccH 04v3fL wt TN°L'T -7-CarlACst -TO -c Elvv ;Ni pA T (AVpfLf1eLi1(>J Vs . 7-\-t-L_ iSSu.E --vb RE_ cTE.(Z.rwAtP et—r -Al-te Vk en e--+ &X_Fli:t3p�p1�TA ST �- E ^ �sH1C4� iS Aoe- Ct\4A-Cy of ias f ONO) 0P ICg_ F��6Tti I c 1 \IhF -14e E--/YS tt` L'1' r- i -y re-PI -1-6 AP e 6-Lt,-hTE--L' f r'-O J t n t • ,1, -T Ftl- Pr 2,0 `'f,o rNI o f T -5 1-ON ft_A i , 6I+C-c PC--Hi 1J V•io Virzi TEL—NS - 01i n1■ cra i b f'IZJ ViPeP S__ ' i H C ,�S-r erne 3:), a , �} INC. MoN;,Tog•nIS rt. o6-ARti. --v DA-re Is Nib-1- Lie N fr RiO sZUNMN(,`-, °C-- aefgove,"' .gj — I- - CalYtn'sSStorle i . INEle-C— A ,sECrIJ'JTS OF a-rtc- rE M■QQ VOLTo(2-in :- Tk f t 1J PLC 114 c��c�,Q 19 TN�7 6,12' re-of°seer AS PFtv-� cF 7-1+15�i5 PLf}r- te : SS C.A L , tiv bi-roRkNG Wt-11.1 -( s . f rt0 -THE 10, 1ktf, AS (1Zak.,i9--cP B)-^ T})e. fbLt-u-c $ [ors Tj oLS 4# AFANC- -3 ve\-W 7 $cH? ' � r � .vim (�EU��n�af7 M 1.TDP-itN O . At.t- Lkkr)LOk,- L'3$-T-c2 Co • ELL As CorvT;r46-E0Cy 0I--- V+ �� S' 3k4.---c' P`�M ,-- ) -T H l s -�o ,.S N,- T Go N,st I-Rt`T-C fi Cb MrF'(.E i E. U F1Ps-goJEb too Ni -Fo1'-t (si C l F-oGg-Am A-,5 -3)ETcr2i' ti -n- Gt'O1,\T [tic ■P- Co NF( 9c r;,--r 74rtrcr yaue,_ eVAi_vATiar., usii L.AL BE • vAO12b --}f f\ C Tti THC 1�t•- TS OF C-S= e■ N yo y —C1 Me- p •'7> -rOC '57oC--rl,kr;Ty -ID rP--1cesd . SO4 ce rzct� yt _s \.ti cNo∎ vv N12-1.0 / -S . c • C cis-c'TAy Jefferson Couey Fire Protection"District #3 , �FEFtSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FIRE CHIEF Shary Irwin r ' R.Kent DeWitt Harry Morrison S I N C F 1965 John Parker Roy Raudebaugh ADMIN.ASST. Herb Stowe Mandy Plumb DISTRICT 101 South Point Road, Port Ludlow, Washington 98365 (206) 437-2899 Fax (206) 437-0117 Date: May 17 , 1994 RECEIVED To: Jefferson County Development Review Team MAY 191994 JErPERSON COUNTY From: Jefferson County Fire Commissioners, District No. 3 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Re: Development projects within Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 3 In response to notification of the following proposed project recently received from your office: CREEKSIDE As a result of recent and proposed developments, Jefferson County Fire Protection District No. 3 has been experiencing a significant weakening of our ability to maintain our current level of service, let alone implement planned improvements to our service level on time. Because of this impact, we have determined that the Fire District should receive mitigating compensation from developers either under SEPA or under the requirements of the Subdivision Law of the State of Washington. The following three items should be considered as required mitigation for development impacts for developers proposing projects within Fire District No. 3. They are as follows: [] All multi-family and/or commercial occupancies are to be built with appropriate sprinkler systems installed. [] A SEPA/Subdivision Mitigation Fee of$550 per residential unit (i.e.: $1,100 for a duplex.) This would be for subdivisions being supplied with fire hydrants and adequate fire flow; an increase to $1,000 would be necessary for developments not being served by fire hydrants and adequate fire flow, or, as an alternative to the increased fee, required installation of residential fire sprinkler systems. [] A SEPA/Subdivision Mitigation Fee for commercial space of 50 cents per square foot of building. (This would require establishment of a process to be implemented during plan approval that would trigger this fee at time of issuing a building permit.) 94DOC\DE VFEES • • Without receiving this offsetting mitigation under SEPA and/or the Subdivision Law, Jefferson County Fire District No. 3 will not be able to handle the anticipated increased demand for services associated with the above proposed development. zlakt/ Paiote/v John Parker,Chairman s, J iti f c_ citc Rox'Raaudeebaugh, CominisSioner H tow:1 ommissioner / Q4// /a mson, Commissioner Dean Crawford;`Commissioner 94DOC\DEV FEES JEFFERSON TRANSIT 1615 W.Sims Way,Port Townsend, WA 98368 206/385-4777 February 5, 1993 Craig Ward Director, Jefferson County Planning and Building Department P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Subject Creekside Subdivision Application LP05-92 Dear Mr. Ward: Jefferson Transit has reviewed the environmental checklist for the Creekside preliminary plat and has the following comments: As indicated in the document, Jefferson Transit does provide transit service along Paradise Bay Road past the site. For residents of Creekside to use public transit however the stops at Oak Bay Road and South Bay Lane are impractical and unsafe to access as pedestrians. A bus pullout with sufficient space for a few Creekside residents to park their vehicles in a park and ride mode at the intersection of the new collector road and Paradise Bay Road would mitigate this problem. Alternatively a pedestrian walkway from the development to a pullout along Paradise Bay Road would achieve the same end. Pedestrian and bicycle amenities are encouraged within the development and along the new collector road to encourage residents to use nonmotorized forms of transportation for local circulation. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposed development. Sincerely, Jeff Hamm, General Manager JH/jth cc Steve Iden, Operations Supervisor, Jefferson Transit EXHIBIT /0 1 Olympic Pnvironmental Pouncil P. O. Box 1906, Port Townsend , WA 98368 (206)379-8442 (206)681-2642 Ai:37U E . 11,94- 3e- on County Commissioners Jeff on Chunty Courfnoux. Fort WA 5E368 Dear Commissioners ; The following: is our resocnee to information oresentso and as=ertions mAde ty Foce R "-2717CE.s durinc the march 21st anh Aaril 4th hearings of our aoaeal of the Creeks -ice ano Ironwood 1 . A treat deal of Pope Resturcee arents suboortino the contention that trey have amhle water rights to meet t:e ,0= of these Proposec suocivisions rely on Tables 1 , 5, arto of the FEIE of the Port l_udlow Develotment Procram . Mr . Cunninonam specifically told you that vou must rely on that information , since the County had accepted the FEIS, and it haOn ' t been onallenced in court. We dissaree with that conclusion . WAC 1 -97-11- 00 (2 ) (b ) tjj) is nhe EEFA occe =o1=hificA.ily =h3.1= out For DNSs Cr EISs . preoaration of a new threshold determination or suaplemental EIE is required if there are : — (ii) New information indicating a proposal 's probable significant adverse environmental impacts . (This incluces discovery of misrepresentation or lack cf material disclosure . ) " P . Attachment H to this will illustrate the confu=ion . ( if not misrepresentation ) created by Taties 1 , 4 , 5, and e of the FEIE , and continued by Pope Resources representatives verbally at the hearings . In essence, two entirely different measurements of well usaoeicapabilitiet are comoined in the tables , which creates a misleading picture of the "recommended usace , " and "presently available" amount of water . Continuous tumoina rates in GPM are used For the North Aquifer wells , based on actual ceoaoilities of the wells to produce . For wells 413 end *14 in the South Aauifer , however , instantaneous (or maximum) withdrawal rates in GPm are used . IF the GPM razes for the -latter were aiven in terms of continuous rates as oalculatsa from the afpy (acre feet per year ) allowed by tne water richts . the total recommendeo usace on a continuous des i would be a maximum of ZIE ohm, not the 530 glom shown in the table= . Even EIE coal is hioh, since well *14 is on a monitoring program, due to suspected saltwater intrusion problems , and may not be able to produce at the level of the paper richts pending for the well There is no actual water right on Well # 1 at this time, even thouh it is presentec as an "availaale water resource . " Taking Well * - out of the picture would reduce the available water by an addirio al 3 gom. Abundant Life Seed Foundation•Admiralty Audubon•Black Hills Audubon•C.A.U.S.E.•Friends of aah Tai Lagoon•Friends of the Elwha* Friends of the Foothills• No Oil Port•Olympic Park Associates •Olympic Rivers Council • Protect the Peninsula's Future • Quilcene Ancient Forest Coalition•Save Our State Park•Trinity United Methodist Church•Wash.Native Plant Society-Oly.Chap. • Wild Olympic Salmon • • . Usinc the f inure of EIS Cam as the more accurate "presently available' amount in Table 6 , compared to PR's awn projected use upon bu_ld_ut, shows that there is a deficit of 29 tom . (ecual to a 143 afpy water richt) . Pope has overes_ima ___ their t available water by more than 100Y.. Apples do not equal oranges , and sustainable c ontinuous pt_moind rates do not eaual instantaneous oumpinc rates . 3) Clifford Hansen . from Robinson & Noble , in a lengthy attempt to explain u sLi^pic!P. n taro }-io:,ts' vs . "primary ribnts' on April 4=.^ totally confused the distinction . P'ope 's written response included their 4. _ /94 memo to Jim Pearson bears rope t c as it s y in their �i� :.e.,:o o v i.:a ej.:�_ �i'1_ , a� it C teal states that suoolef?ie _si rihhts (such as Well 17. and 14 ) do not affect the total supply that can be withcrawn . 4 ) Mr . Hansen also told the Commissioners on April 4th tin the Department OT Health was obligee by law to use "historic rags in determining water needs and that f'ode has established those historic rates at 160 cpd . We Question whether those historic figures based on 10 year averaces, are realistic or valid for -pro lectii o rates for the future . Not only have the co='ulati'on and tenancy patterns of the Ludlow Development chanced dramatically. the des idea Lion of Ludlow as an Urban Growth Area will mean even more profounc chances . c. Concerning the i'=sake Cf " otenti=1 adverse impacts =❑ the water _ source" , if cur analysis is Co: : c_ � Tope will be o_itOea to S??k more water to meet their current obligations . The options in the P` S for meetinc a water deficit are not feasible, riven the lack of water rights (As disc1'== in Attachment C of our original presentation on March El , 1994) , and the DOE's stance towards iscuinc further water riohts in the South Aquifer (Don Davidson , 12/2/92) . It is clear that further drilling in the South Acuifer would threaten the water resource . We look forward to meeting on April 2 DOH y Agri 1�_ with DOE and representatives , to clear Up interpretations . math`-da wales , and definitions that have confused and obscured the issues in this rase . Sincerely . Yi H c.'v . ill v V` • • • GI . , Table 1. Although the wells currently have adequate drawdown reserve, continuing North Aquifer water levels should be averted by reducing production. The existence tie between the north and south delivery systems should allow for this reduction by for the loss with increased production from the South Aquifer. Table 1 . Existing ground water resources L1R GAL'1, Previously Revised Covst U6 us recommended recommended Peak pow, P(10 o. -�-�o usage * usage * Capacity * * 2.0 gFvy, Well 2 38 gpm 20 gp 150 gpm 10 Well 3 15 10 100 35 Well 4N 50 0 � 57 35 130 Well 13 135 135 140 1 0 3 © Well 14* * * 300 300 300 ® Well 1 * * * 30 30 50 2:18 Total 575 gpm 530 gpm 870 gpm * Continuous pumping rate. * * Actual instantaneous pumping rate from recent test. * * * Wells not currently in use. Q w e,11 1'7 wo,+er rt4 = �D copy = 5 v., coh r VOV S © w ell 1 - }� it = t to 1 411‘i = 10°1P ® v�e_tl t = 5 a vy - 3 3? S Tc4 reccwwtev�c� rake. = b53?"* +6 r N cr'ti". JiNq V 1 ceY 4 stws Ot'� y JEFFERSON COUNTY PERMIT CENTER 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 JEFFERSON COUNT1 BOARt OF COMMISSIONERS PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT AGENDA July 5, 1994 ITEM: Consideration of Hearing Examiner' s recommendation for preliminary plat and zoning approval of LP05-92 Creekside Long Plat; Pope Resources, applicant. -- STAFF: James W. Pearson, Associate Planner PROPOSAL Creekside Long Plat; LP05-92 . Subdivision of 34 acres into 61 single family lots. The proposal includes requests for variances from the Subdivision Ordinance design standards for roadway widths and private roads. HEARING EXAMINER RECOMMENDATION A public hearing was conducted by the Hearing Examiner on May 17 , 1994 for the referenced proposal. Upon consideration of the testimony presented through the hearing process, the Hearing Examiner recommends approval of the referenced preliminary plat and variances. A copy of the Hearing Examiner ' s report is attached. REQUESTED ACTION The Board should review the Examiner' s report and decide whether to concur with his recommendation to approve the preliminary plat or to hold its own hearing to review the proposal, take testimony, and develop findings and conclusions. Pursuant to Subdivision Ordinance Section 6. 210, at the meeting on July 5, 1994 the Board should set a date to adopt or reject the Examiner's recommendation. Staff recommends July 11, 1994 . C: \BOCC\Agenda.PPA Building Environmental Health Development Review Public Works Building Permits Septic Permits Subdivision, Zoning Road Approach 379-4450 Water Review & Shoreline Permits Permits &Addresses Inspection Hotline 379-4450 379-4463 379-4450 379-4455 1-800-831-2678 FAX: (206) 379-4451 1 • • OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR JEFFERSON COUNTY ) LP05-92 RE: Applications by Pope Resources: ) "Creekside" Preliminary Plat, ) FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, 61 single-family detached lots ) AND RECOMMENDATION on 34 . 09 acres. ) Variance from subdivision road ) design standards. ) ) SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL AND RECOMMENDATION Proposals Subdivision: The applicant is seeking to subdivide 34 . 09 acres into 61 single family lots, with an average lot size of 6, 360 square feet. Open Space proposed to be dedicated will be approximately 21.92 acres, or 64 . 3% of the site. Variances: a. Roadway width, Sec. 6. 203 (4) , Road Design Standards; b. Private road requirements, Sec. 6. 203 (13) , Road Design Standards. Recommendations 1. APPROVE the roadway width variance [Sec. 6. 203 (4) ] . 2 . APPROVE the private road variance [Sec. 6. 203 (13) ] . 3 . APPROVE the preliminary plat of Creekside. FINDINGS OF FACT BACKGROUND INFORMATION Applicant: Pope Resources Applicant's Address: PO Box 1780, Poulsbo, WA 98370 Property Address: Not assigned (Adjacent to Paradise Bay Road) . "Creekside" Preliminary Plat Pope Resources,Applicant Findings, Conclusions LPus"gz - I - and Recommendations • Property Locations The project site is located in the unincorporated community of Port Ludlow, westerly of Paradise Bay Road and the Inner Harbor development. Legal Description: Tax Parcels 821 173 001 and 002 and 821 174 001 within the West Half of Section 17 , Township 28 North, Range 1 East. Zoning: General Use Comprehensive Plan Map Designations The Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan Optimum Land Use Map designates the site as Suburban Area. Property Description: The property contains 34 . 09 acres. It has an irregular shape. The site is undeveloped. Access to the property is by way of Creekside Drive off of Paradise Bay Road. Creekside Drive is not within the plat boundary. The proposal site has steep slopes on the east and north. The portion of the site proposed for residential lots occupies a moderately sloping plateau approximately 100 ' in elevation above the Paradise Bay Road. Surrounding Conditions: The site is bounded on the east by Paradise Bay County Road. The area easterly of Paradise Bay Road has been developed for single family residences. The area to the north, south, and west is unplatted forest land. Utilities and Services: Water Ludlow Water Company Sewer Ludlow Sewer Company Transportation Jefferson Transit Drainage Facilities Jefferson County Public Works Schools Chimacum School District PROCEDURAL INFORMATION Applicable Plans: Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan: Chapter 7, County-wide Growth, pages 32-34 ; Chapter 7, Housing and Residential Development, pages 35-38 ; Chapter 7, Utilities, pages 41-43 ; Chapter 7, Transportation/Circulation, pages 44-48 ; Chapter 10, Optimum Development Map. "Creekside" Preliminary Plat Pope Resources,Applicant Findings,Conclusions LPOS-912 -2- and Recommendations Authorizing Ordinances: Jefferson County Subdivision Ordinance No. 04-0526-92 : Section 6, Long Subdivisions; Section 10, Variances. Jefferson County Interim Zoning Ordinance No. 1-016-92 : Section 8, General Use Zone; Section 9, Conditional Use; Section 11, Variances and Exceptions; Administrative Rules, Subsection VI (Multi-family) . Jefferson County Hearing Examiner Ordinance No. 1-0318-91: Section 12 . Hearing Date: May 17 , 1994 Site Visits May 17, 1994 Notices: Mailed: May 9, 1994 Posted: May 6, 1994 Published: May 4 , 1994 (Port Townsend-Jefferson County Leader) SEPA: The Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Port Ludlow Development Program was issued by Jefferson County on April 5, 1993 . This document is intended to provide general environmental analysis and recommended mitigation measures for Pope Resources Port Ludlow Development Program. The EIS provides important information and mitigation measures regarding issues such as groundwater, schools, fire and emergency services, and traffic. After site specific environmental review a Final Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance was issued by Jefferson County on February 14 , 1994 . The Final MDNS was appealed to the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners. A public hearing to take testimony regarding the environmental effects of the proposal was held by the Board on March 21 and April 4 and 13 , 1994 . The Board upheld the Final MDNS, and issued their Order on June 6, 1994 . Testimony: The public hearing was opened on May 17, 1994, at 2 : 00 p.m. , in the Public Works Conference Room. After the hearing procedures were explained, testimony was accepted. All testimony was taken under oath. Jim Pearson, Associate Planner for the Department, presented the Staff Report [Exhibit 1] , and summarized the several requests. Mr. Pearson explained the status of SEPA, and requested that the public hearing be held open administratively until the Board completes its final Order. "Creekside" Preliminary Plat Pope Resources, Applicant Findings,Conclusions LPO5,12 -3- and Recommendations • S Mr. Pearson testified that the staff recommended conditions were similar to those he believed had been determined by the Board. Linda Mueller, Pope Resources, testified . Dave Cunningham, Pope Resources, testified regarding water supply and source issues, arguing that the Board had explored the subjects in depth. Mr. Cunningham submitted and spoke from a letter dated May 17, 1994 , entered as Exhibit A. To be assured that the Examiner' s file was complete, he asked that Linda Mueller be allowed to check the documents, and later confirmed that the file was complete. Paula Mackrow, Olympic Environmental Council, did not testify at this public hearing, but had testified on the preliminary plat application of "Ironwood" immediately before this public hearing. She had asked that her testimony and submitted environmental documents be duplicated for this record: In order to highlight two most pertinent letters from the SEPA review, she had submitted letters from the OEC signed by Steve Hayden. She had argued that there is not adequate water at recommended use levels to expand the Ludlow plats at this time. Exhibits 12 - 14 are copies of Exhibits B - D from LP06-92 . Wendi Wrinkle, Secretary, Shine Community Action Council, testified in opposition at this public hearing and had testified on the preliminary plat of "Ironwood" with duplicative comments. Exhibit 15 is a copy of Exhibit E from LP06-92 , and is a concise statement of her arguments. Bob Montgomery, P.E. , principal author of the Water Plan, testified in rebuttal testimony that the Water Plan was approved by the Wa State Health Department in 1989 . The Plan had forecast 1,700 connections by 1998 . There are now about 950 connections, slightly less than forecast for now. Connections to the system are consistent with plan in terms of source, storage, and transmission mains. The public hearing was closed at 2:50 p.m. , provided that the record be held open to receive the Board's Order on the SEPA appeal. Exhibits: Exhibits entered as part of Staff Report Package: Exhibit 1: Staff Report for "Creekside" Preliminary Plat. Exhibit 2: Jefferson County Long Subdivision Application, January 15, 1993. Exhibit 3: Proposed Preliminary Plat Map of "Creekside". Exhibit 4: Variance support letter from Linda Mueller, Pope Resources, dated May 10, 1994. Exhibit 5: Letter from Larry Smith, Pope Resources Support Services, dated January 14, 1993, regarding water system. "Creekside" Preliminary Plat Pope Resources,Applicant Findings,Conclusions LPO5-92 -4 - and Recommendations 1 • • Exhibit 6: Letter from Larry Smith, Pope Resources Support Services, dated January 14, 1993, regarding sewer system. Exhibit 7: Final Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance and Lead Agency Status, dated February 14, 1994. Exhibit 8: Letter from Larry Fay, Environmental Health, dated May 10, 1994. Exhibit 9: Memo from Carter Renner, Public Works, dated May 10, 1994. Exhibit 10: Letter from Jeff Hamm, Jefferson Transit, dated February 5, 1993. Exhibit 11: Memo from James Pearson dated May 12, 1994, transmits Exhibit 10. Exhibits entered during Public Hearing: Exhibit 12: Letter from Steve Hayden, Olympic Environmental Council, to the Jefferson County Commissioners, dated March 21, 1994, together with seven attachments: A: "Principal Port Ludlow Area Acquifers" - map from Port Ludlow EIS. B: "Port Ludlow Community Development Growth Analysis" - 10/27/93. C: "Ludlow Water Co. Well Info" D: Letter (1st page) from Don Davidson, DOE, dated 12/2/92. E: Letter from Karl Johnson, WA State Dept of Health, dated 12/2/92 . F: Letter from Don Davidson, DOE, dated 1/12/94. G: Letter from Mark Huth, Prosecuting Attorney, to Don Davidson, dated 2/11/94. Exhibit 13: Letter from Steve Hayden, Olympic Environmental Council, to the Jefferson County Commissioners, dated April 8, 1994, together with one additional attachment: H: "Table 1. Existing ground water resources" - annotated. Exhibit 14: Memo from Paula Mackrow, Olympic Environmental Council, dated May 17, 1994, read in testimony. Exhibit 15: Letter from Wendi Wrinkle, Secretary, Shine Community Action Council, dated May 17, 1994, together with four attachments: Ex 1: Memo from Wa Dept of Health dated June 21, 1993, with issue paper. Ex 2: Letter from Wa Dept of Health dated December 2, 1992. Ex 3: Excerpt from paper by Robinson & Noble. Ex 4: Excerpt from Jefferson County Subdivision Ordinance. Exhibit 16: Letter from Dave Cunningham, Pope Resources, dated May 17, 1994 together with five attachments: Ex A: A report entitled Evaluation of the Impact of Planned Future Development on Port Ludlow Ground Water Resources, January 1993. Ex B: Minutes from Jefferson County Board of Commissioners' 4/13/94 public hearing. Ex C: Table entitled "Water Rights vs. Obligations, 4/8/94. Ex D: Title page and Figure 6 from Water System Plan for Ludlow Water Company, 3/15/89. Ex E: Correspondence from Ludlow Water Company dated January 14, 1994. "Creekside" Preliminary Plat Pope Resources, Applicant Findings, Conclusions LPO5-92 - 5 - and Recommendations Received June 7, 1994: Exhibit 17: Order Modifying SEPA MDNS for Preliminary Plat of "Creekside" dated June 6, 1994. Exhibit 18: Letter from Wendi Wrinkle dated May 20, 1994. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Preliminary Plat Proposals: 1. The Development Review Division has made a detailed analysis of the proposal 's consistency with the applicable Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning Code provisions. The analysis is contained in Exhibit 1 "Creekside" Preliminary Plat Staff Report: Section E. Staff Findings and Conclusions, Nos. 1 through 46 (Staff Report pages 3 through 16) . The Hearing Examiner has reviewed the proposal and the evidence of record and concurs with and hereby adopts the Findings and Conclusions Section E. , Nos. 1 through 46, except as may be specifically modified by the following Findings and Conclusions under "Issues: " Subdivision Variance Requests: 2 . The Development Review Division has made a detailed analysis of the proposal ' s consistency with the applicable Subdivision Ordinance Section 6 . 301 (2) provisions. The analysis is contained in Exhibit 1 "Creekside" Preliminary Plat Staff Report: Section F. Subdivision Variance Request #1, Findings and Conclusions Nos. 1 through 9 (Staff Report pages 16 and 20) , Variance Request #2 , Findings and Conclusions Nos. 1 through 6 (Staff Report pages 18 and 19) . The Hearing Examiner has reviewed the proposal and the evidence of record and concurs with and hereby adopts the Findings and Conclusions Section F. Groundwater Resources Issue: 3 . The Jefferson Subdivision Ordinance and Chapter 58 . 17 RCW require that a new plat be served by an adequate potable water supply. Water systems can be thought of as a hierarchy: a. Water Source - in this case ground water resource; b. Water Storage - reservoir or storage tanks to even out demand flows, usually over several days. c. Transmission Mains - major pipes used to move water throughout the service area, usually without regard to pressure and without direct service connections; d. Distribution Mains - water mains distributing to service lines, engineered to maintain flows and pressure, also used to serve fire hydrants; and e. Service Lines - usually privately owned lines between the water meter and the building being served. "Creekside" Preliminary Plat Pope Resources, Applicant Findings, Conclusions LPO5-92 - 6- and Recommendations ! Item a. (water source) is dependent on factors outside the control of the applicant -- or the County for that matter. While legal authority rests with Washington State Departments of Ecology and Health, the real issue is whether the ground water resource -- a finite resource -- is sufficient. Items b. through e. can be accomplished by choice, although there is a significant range in cost between water reservoirs and service lines. 4 . The SEPA process, in particular the appeal public hearings held by the Board, specifically addressed this water resource issue. The Board concluded that water availability in the aquifer was sufficient. The Board also concluded from evidence in the record that sufficient water rights exists to use the available water. 5. The correct parties were involved in the appeal hearings to assure that there was opportunity for complete testimony. 6. The Board reached proper conclusions based on the facts before them. 7 . The SEPA review is duplicative and preempts the same review required under the Subdivision Ordinance for this water supply aspect of assuring "adequate potable water supply" to the proposed lots to be platted. Preliminary plat considerations require the local health department to assess the water supply system, and the local health department has the responsibility to recommend approval of the water supply system prior to final plat approval. [RCW 58 . 17 . 150 (1) ] This distinction is important because parties opposing the plat argue that the Washington State Department of Health is required to approve the water supply system at the preliminary plat stage. While the local health deparment has the statutory responsibilty, they will make their recommendation in conformance with State regulations. Groundwater Resource Monitoring Issue: 8 . A groundwater resource monitoring program is critical to document the condition of the aquifer and to understand the effect of new development. 9 . The purpose of a monitoring program is long range and should assume a sufficient margin of error such that any indication of adverse change will allow for continued services to committed building programs. A monitoring program should not, and is not, used to justify additional water removal. Summary Conclusions: 10. The Creekside preliminary plat is well designed with a high ratio of dedicated open space (64 . 3% of the site) . The street and lot layout are sensitive to the topography. The staff ^Creekside^ Preliminary Plat Pope Resources,Applicant Findings, Conclusions LP0S-92 - 7- and Recommendations • recommended conditions and the SEPA Mitigations will be adequate to assure compatibility with the surroundings. 11. The applicant concurs with the staff recommended conditions. 12 . As noted under "Groundwater Issues" above, the SEPA review and mitigations adequately address the issues. 13 . The governing criteria for a preliminary plat are met. RECOMMENDATION Based on the findings and conclusions above, it is the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner to APPROVE the Preliminary Plat Application of Pope Resources for "Creekside" and to APPROVE the requested Subdivision Variance, both approvals subject to the following conditions (as also recommended by Staff) : Roadway Width Variance (Sec. 6.203 (4) Conditions: 1. Based on the requirements of Section 10. 40, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall submit documentation from Fire Protection District #3 demonstrating that adequate provision for fire and emergency vehicle access to Lots 27-29 has been incorporated into the design of the access over Tract B. 2 . Based on the requirements of Sections 6 . 205 and 10. 40, the applicant shall dedicate a seven foot wide utility easement across the front of Lots 27 and 28 to Lot 29 . Such easements may be made by separate recorded easement, declaration of easements, or dedication of easements and by graphic portrayal on the final plat. Private Road Variance (Sec. 6.203 (13) Conditions: 1. Based on the requirements of Sections 10. 302 and 10. 40, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall submit to the Public Works Department for review and approval a private road maintenance agreement for the access road across Tract B. The maintenance agreement shall be established either by recording of a separate instrument and referencing said instrument or by establishing said agreement by declaration on the long subdivision final plat. Subdivision Conditions: 1. Based on the requirements of Sections 6. 203 and 6. 301, road and intersection plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. All road construction shall comply with the standards of and be performed under the inspection of the Jefferson County Department of Public Works prior to final plat approval, except as otherwise allowed under Subsection 6. 50 Bonds. "Creekside" Preliminary Plat Pope Resources,Applicant Findings,Conclusions LPo3-02 -8 - and Recommendations S S 2 . Based on the requirements of Section 6. 302 and the mitigative measures of the Final MDNS, the proponent shall submit the required drainage, stormwater management, and temporary erosion and sedimentation control plans to the Public Works Department for review and approval and shall implement said plans as required. 3 . Based on the requirements of Section 6. 304 , prior to final plat approval the proponent shall document that road signs have been installed in accordance with Jefferson County standards; road names have been approved by the Public Works Director; and traffic signs and safety devices have been installed in accordance with Washington State highway traffic control standards as approved by the Public Works Director. 4 . Based on the requirements of Section 6. 305, prior to water system expansion construction, if required by the appropriate state agency, the applicant shall submit engineered construction design plans for review and approval. Construction of the water system expansion shall be either completed prior to final plat approval, or as an option, the applicant may post a County approved surety to guarantee construction of system expansion. 5. Based on the requirements of Section 6. 306, prior to sewer system construction, if required by the appropriate state agency, the applicant shall submit engineered construction design plans for review and approval. Construction of the sewer system expansion shall be either completed prior to final plat approval, or as an option, the applicant may post a County approved surety to guarantee construction of system expansion. 6. Based on the requirements of Section 6. 307, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall submit documentation from Fire Protection District #3 demonstrating that fire protection measures are in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Uniform Fire Code, and the recommendations of the Fire District consistent with State law. 7 . Based on the requirements of Section 6. 309 , prior to final plat approval the proponent shall provide documentation that the Public Works Department has been furnished all documents and calculations necessary to determine the accuracy of surveys, that road monuments directly related to the plat have been constructed of materials as per Jefferson County standards, and that road monuments have been set in such a manner that future road development or utility installation shall not disturb the accuracy of their position. 8. Based on the requirements of Section 6. 50, the applicant shall arrange for the inspection of all required improvements with the Department of Public Works, the Planning Department, or Health Department, whichever is responsible. Inspections shall be requested by the applicant "Creekside" Preliminary Plat Pope Resources, Applicant Findings,Conclusions LPO5-92 - 9 - and Recommendations 411 411 at such stages as indicated by the appropriate department. The applicant shall be required to pay all costs of work incidental to approval of the subdivision before final approval is granted. 9 . Based on the requirements of the Jefferson County 911 Emergency Locator System Ordinance, prior to final plat approval address plates for the lots shall be located in accordance with Ordinance provisions. 10. The applicant shall comply with all mitigative measures of the Final Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance as issued by Jefferson County for the proposed Creekside Long Plat. DATED this 17th day of June, 1994 . Iry Berteig Hearing Examiner for Jefferson County A copy or notice of this Recommendation was transmitted by the Jefferson County Planning Department to the following: Date Transmitted: David Cunningham, Pope Resources, PO Box 1780, Poulsbo, WA 98370 Linda Mueller, Pope Resources, PO Box 1780, Poulsbo, WA 98370 Bob Montgomery, P.E. , c/o Pope Resources, PO Box 1780, Poulsbo, WA 98370 Paula Mackrow, OEC, PO Box 1906, Port Townsend, WA 98368 Wendi Wrinkle, 172 Hubbard Creek Road, Port Ludlow, WA 98365 H. W. Stowe, 191 Windrose Dr. , Port Ludlow, WA 98365 Thomas Foley, 381 Highland Dr. , Port Ludlow, WA 98365 James Brannaman, 563 Pioneer Dr. , Port Ludlow, WA 98365 Julie Jaman, 790 McMinn, Port Townsend, WA 98368 Oliver Gardner, PO Box 65156, Port Ludlow, WA 98365. "Creekside" Preliminary Plat Pope Resources, Applicant Findings, Conclusions LPo5-92 - 10- and Recommendations 51145: C4 -1 y Ac.-c�61V (' c.;L jSNL 1200 l i4 i SH wAy 104- ?og-T LuoLou)/ Ic.+A . C+IS'365 hty .7-c), 19 94 ATT` 4 CPR-4 - E.-ArvN� -- i I IJ 1 1994 PO IJNSc-Nn s C- yJ%'"fJ;i�JiUL:`j' 7E RMi CENTER SU-130 EC-r : An!c °iioNRL CorAnc-r+'r o,\J PP_C:LiivI n1Aay APPi2-001- - OF � =RoNw000 Ad ►? ,C2CE�'—.��PE yo�► C (� TS . REAP--■46- CxA tti wee__ Fou--0 Iti G- I0 F6 -rv\ i S TtG- 1,4 PiTTEn1 12...ECo24 7 OF AP rT‘onIAL CDp'1t('r1\Er�T M°1Vs= � '14G- -T-Re "Cg_EEK-s;06 "kierizi �' SGPC . We :�3E VE �T i5 tfito —t -r Tr— -TNT fzec-4 t s i:.1 Cc WAS i I EL FJ OPEN -11-1e4A Morr' y MAy ? Rn . THCAC i5 Nb Pc(71);11 Oral_ IE-sTitvro� 0 r3L) A P.-at/1 EW 01 C6Mt`'1eNT AL►?-En y oj,1 TAPE a r A y sE(n opi -rtiE 644aue T LD(. PORTS ELU fi NG A-t-Top_oe ) 5/1;c> -rHRTA3).0 ,R - _sierre ENT?r-r`v`t` S4vOtk , ` L plc SEri-r .-gyp GivE. Tea-rif1ONy � 3 Io_s-re 1e19, P...erg seN-rel—v—s F-ors .U•E - wE ePsEa4-r . ,0 .E TLS FiEar ONI AvA((_gaiLiTy- of (7P-0 tkrO -r A b ,SL PA ►SSkE , �i3k W{tS Cl`F3k'- -rf ). v.E . Doe.S NUT ��'(ECZ(rtvsE APeQu C.E. OF .5-T m o e_ PrTES- fa-t v tt�S. d e K-u v!i pE sec v;C,� . L F-gy �(='J� THE Cc�vni�-r.> vtP..01� MErs—rf1L HEALTF\ T . � • Sikto -T T tkiS Cod k(1P-L �0� 1NsCyti �J el-cc. 3). O O. }} . Co u.t-12 e c-r co,+•sE z-V n-j J uS C ER-3 .eTi3e_Er3 `fob hoc, 6- .9. 0 . f - tfol�s EtitLp '1 1 w EU41Lu.m-et 42 0 Ty i- . o41 • LAR Fly :Doc.s N0T HAVL THE I`l8 °I '/LWJW W (rfEg- sy.S 1 AI 01-) Fi LC t'c T T Cc cw T� AIeL c_) "ZT)c E S Nc-r" +\PVE• ('V .cTeta-fV.N oi..1 6 F e1 C,F 4.1.A.t:y ob i t A-c -01 a ST,(T Tt . 0. I1R c S RELC rArr'1 T ` l4iS or_cFl S ,oN prrty .Sum LoN G P LATLS . EKE PPSrorJ is TC5 i M rJy HPS Sf}tr_� -rt1t°r-C `jH 11 g I PLAtJ c,r‘ FI021 AT 'a") • O. . Ii A_S (lef VC) Ek Or_- PS 199F . 1 Nt= $infi3 1-L c t,ar"- flu�T.S Pu-Z -t (1 Cu(24 Apt? rhM T«v �S�P-V� Cis P`i c _000 * Ttdt■ S oES No-r BALI.. t Tki; n) t1AT ek_}iNi R Et iew . CDMMr,SSt6rSEe...�' ikctin 'p (A)03---7- Mar'C SPEC■F;(_ Pe"F NCI TO TIC SEPo fl(�(2- 'u'AL D1= ._fh€ Limits-rGASCe O fl ATEK_ WtTN n4‘,3rrt-- a'AI''rA& 7C' `ZHE eV%)� N tn�r�'r �VAI1..Aa ∎Lr fi1/4-) YS . T t ISs - Tii`. p e-rEP_(vvtSEp rt T `TRC- K&A '4t N &x-F101:13 Pr--c ()A S I E 1-∎ t S Ao e Gtv,Rcy o f 1-40 nic) A lCg-- pod? T14E CXis 1tx yS1"rt11 1-15 Ap a_Lt.-pre.L fl -o HL- pi psn ■--1;tl t i d F E-5 CLA-TS . 6NLe Phi / • • A►tiO C-0 NcisTCrtT W\Ttk 1 FIE RCc t( Mart TS OF C–Xp,MiNfi1io,J -PF-0 CC-sS et NI getsTeo . Des c45.- e∎6 ; rJ rn t - y o ya vs-C— –ri ME- pri•J,c75 rHt= tivf>Li L re-6 ccsse S',N ccf2 y yon s 0\111,0"2 D\ruv,j)Lek- �w EN 0 i-6412-LE. / S . c • A •C • Sec -rAILy • • 4.igsoN c' ti JEFFERSON COUNTY PERMIT CENTER O 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 �`S'fING (206) 379-4450 FAX: (206) 379-4451 1-800-831-2678 JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT AGENDA March 21, 1994 ITEM: Public Hearing to consider appeal of a Final Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance for Creekside Long Plat LP05-92 ; Pope Resources, applicant STAFF CONTACT: James W. Pearson, Associate Planner BACKGROUND The referenced threshold determinations have been appealed to the Board of Commissioners. As per the requirements of the County SEPA Ordinance, the Board's review is de novo. PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: Creekside Long Plat LP05-92 . Subdivision of 34 . 09 acres into 61 lots for detached single family residences. Lots would range in size from 5, 870 square feet to 7 , 790 square feet. Average lot size would be 6, 360 square feet. The proposed subdivision would be accessed off of Paradise Bay Road by Creekside Drive. It would be served by internal roadways on 50' rights-of-way ending in 50' radius cul-de-sacs. 21. 92 acres would be in undeveloped dedicated open space. The proposal would be served by the Ludlow Water Company and Ludlow Sewer Company for water and sewer, respectively. The proposal includes provision of temporary and permanent storm water management facilities . PROJECT RECORD Attached for your review are copies of the following documents from the project record: Section A: * Long subdivision application * Environmental checklist; * Proposed plat and vicinity map; * Letters from Mr. Larry Smith regarding provision of water and sewer services; • * Letter from Larry Smith and attached information regarding the Port Ludlow Water system and groundwater resources to supply the system; * Pages 14 , 18, and 20 of Appendix N Revised Groundwater Report, Final EIS Port Ludlow Development Program. Section B: * Notice of appeal of Final MDNS by Steve Hayden for the Olympic Environmental Council. Section C: * Final Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance issued on February 14 , 1994 ; * Planning staff report dated December 20, 1993 which analyzes the proposal, considers comments, recommends preliminary and final threshold determination and mitigation measures, and includes the determination of the responsible official; * Preliminary Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance issued on December 22 , 1993 ; * Addendum to Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance for construction of Creekside Drive issued on May 11, 1993 . Section D: * Comments regarding the proposal from the Jefferson County Public Works Department, Jefferson Transit, Fire District #3 , Point No Point Treaty Council, and members of the public; * Comment letter from the Washington Department of Ecology dated September 20 , 1993 and January 10, 1994 regarding the proposed Ironwood Long Plat LP06-92 . (Note: Ecology did not comment on Creekside. However, since both of the plats would be served by the same water system, the comments regarding the water system and groundwater resources are applicable to Creekside. Mitigation #10 from the MDNS for Ironwood corresponds to mitigation #10 for Creekside. ) Section E: Responses to the Preliminary MDNS from the applicant and members of the public. ISSUES The applicant raised several objections to the mitigating conditions in the preliminary MDNS . (See Pages 19-21 of the staff report in Section C. ) Of particular note is the objection to the use of criteria in the Washington Department of Ecology's Stormwater Management Manual because the County has not specifically amended the SEPA Ordinance to adopt the Manual. Staff refers the Board to the Public Works Department memo to Jim Pearson dated January 18 , 1994 in Section D regarding Pope Resources comments on the Teal Vista plat which also address this issue. This memo sets forth the procedure that was used to adopt the Stormwater Manual and also references the supporting sections of the Subdivision Ordinance. Staff recommends that the mitigation measure requiring the use of the criteria in the Stormwater Manual be retained. 2 The Olympic Environmental Council's appeal did not indicate the issues it intends to raise on appeal. However, since the WEC's comment letter states that the subdivision should not be approved until the availability of adequate water has been established, staff assumes that this issue will be addressed in the appeal. Staff refers the Board to the following material regarding groundwater resources and projected water use: * Material regarding groundwater resources and projected uses in Section A; * Response to the WEC's comment on Page 21 of the staff report in Section C; * Ecology comment letters dated September 20, 1993 and January 10, 1994 in Section D. A Water Plan was approved by Ecology which includes water service to the area of the proposed plat. Domestic water supply is proposed from existing Ludlow Water Company wells including Wells 13 and 14 (Groundwater permits G2-25816 (1985) and G2-27492 (1991) , respectively. In their September 20, 1993 letter regarding the proposed Ironwood Plat, the Department of Ecology stated: It is our understanding that this development will be supplied by the Ludlow Water Company. Adequate water rights have been secured for this project. . .The Department of Ecology encourages the development of public water supply systems, whether publicly or privately owned, to provide water to regional areas and developments. Ecology's Water Resources Program is responsible for issuing groundwater permits. In their January 10, 1994 letter commenting on Ironwood Plat, they state that "the Water Resources Section concurs with Mitigation Condition #10. This refers to the following mitigation measure required for both Ironwood and Creekside: In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to ground water resources and to document the condition of the aquifers used as domestic water sources, the proponent shall conduct a groundwater resource monitoring program. The scope of the program shall be mutually agreed upon by the proponent and Jefferson County prior to final plat approval . Monitoring shall include static groundwater levels and saltwater intrusion. If groundwater monitoring indicates an inadequate yield to support development of the proponent's projects, the proponent and/or the County shall immediately notify the Washington State Department of Ecology to request action or investigation pursuant to RCW 90 . 44 which provides authority for resolution of conflicts involving allocation of groundwater supplies. In the event that this situation occurs no additional plats which withdraw water from the South Aquifer shall be approved by Jefferson County until the groundwater adequacy issues have been resolved. 3 4 i Staff recommends retaining the mitigation measure requiring groundwater monitoring and finding that the proposal as conditioned is not likely to result in a significant adverse impact to groundwater. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION Planning staff's recommendation for a final mitigated determination of nonsignificance is contained in the staff memo dated December 20, 1993 with response to comments dated February 11, 1994 . Staff recommends retaining the Final MDNS . The Board should consider this recommendation in light of the testimony presented at the public hearing. C: \BOCC\Agenda. SEP 4 • • SECTION A 1 f r • JEFFERSON COUNTY LONG SUBDIVISION APPLICATION The Washington State Boundaries and Plat Act (RCW 58.17) requires that divisions of land for sale or lease comply with the provisions of the Jefferson County Subdivision Ordinance. The purpose of this Act and Ordinance is to ensure that potential purchasers have lots with adequate access, water supply, sewage , disposal, legal description of land, etc., and the general taxpayers of the County will not later have to t1' unnecessarily contribute toward those development costs. The Ordinance requires that long subdivisions c (the division of land into five or more lots, tracts, parcels, or sites) within the unincorporated area of tt V,, °$' Jefferson County be reviewed with criteria established by the Ordinance. A parcel of land eligible for long i = subdivision includes commercial, industrial, or residential land use(s). \i c 00 ,a "= c APPLICANT: Pope Resources ADDRESS: PO Box 1780, Poulsbo, Washington 98370 TELEPHONE: (home) (business) 206-697-6626 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE: Linda Mueller, Land Use Planner ADDRESS: Same as above. TELEPHONE: (home) (business) 206-697-6626 ext. 529 DIRECTIONS 1. Answer all questions completely. Please print or type. Contact the Jefferson County Planning Department for aid in filling out this application and for instructions on further administrative procedures required to complete its processing. 2. Attach any additional information(reports,studies, maps, illustrations,leases, permits, etc.)that may further describe the proposed development or may be required by Jefferson County, in addition to the preliminary or final plat. 3. Check with appropriate agencies to determine if the proposed development requires additional permits or approvals. An accepted plat under the Jefferson County Subdivision Ordina=e does not excuse a developer from complying with other local, state, or federal ordinances, regulations, or statutes applicable to the proposed development. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION GENERAL LOCATION: In the community of Port Ludlow, approximately 1 /2 mile south of Oak Bay Road on the west side of Paradise Bay Road . across from the Inner Harbor Village Condominiums. LEGAL (from property tax statement): The East Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 17, Township 28 North , Range 1 East. WM; Tax Parcel Numbers 821173001 , 821173002, 821174001 OWNERSHIP: Applicant: XxOwner _Lessee _Contract Purchaser _Other Owner Name & Address: SUBDIVISION DESCRIPTION SUBDIVISION NAME (if known): "C reeks ide" LAND USE (identify as commercial, residential, industrial, etc.): Residential APPLICATION IS FOR: x PRELIMINARY PLAT FINAL PLAT NOTE: Applications for a long subdivision which upon initial inspection appear to be Insufficiently prepared to provide a basis for adequate review will be returned to the applicant. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I hereby declare, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the foregoing information and all attached information is true and correct. c Yr49- ,C(22-Ze_) � rcy�v /�/ 93 (Applicant or Authorized Representative) (Date) • JEFFERSON COUNTY PRELIMINARY LONG PLAT CHECKLIST GENERAL: The preliminary long plat shall consist of a preliminary subdivision map including a vicinity map. Eight (8) copies of the preliminary long plat, consisting of one (1) or more pages, shall be submitted. It shall be no larger than 18" by 24" inches, to scale, and prepared to clearly portray the nature of the development. VICINITY MAP: The general location of the subdivision shall be depicted in an area approximately 3" by 3" inches, drawn in a corner of the preliminary long plat map, and indicate the location of the proposed development to the nearest geographical feature(s) (community, water body, major road, mountain, valley, etc.). PRELIMINARY PLAT MAP: Submitted with this application are eight (8) copies of the full size plat map including a reduced copy (81" by 14" or 11" by 17") of the preliminary plat and other required material containing the following data: o Vicinity map. o North arrow & scale. o Location of fire hydrants including o Subdivision name. fire & school district identification. o Name, address, and phone number of 0 Greenbelt or open space, including official subdivision representative. location and size. o Developer's name and address. o Acreage allocated to parks, open o Names & addresses of adjacent space, greenbelt, or common area, property owners. and percentage of total acreage. o General location & description. o Method of solid waste disposal. o Topography with a contour interval 0 Designated trails of the Jefferson of five (5) feet. County Park, Recreation, and Open o Approximate lot dimensions and Space Plan within vicinity of numbers. proposed subdivision. o Total acreage and lots per gross 0 Jefferson County Comprehensive acre. Plan optimum land use map o Number of lots including maximum, designation. average, and minimum lot sizes. 0 Completed environmental checklist o Acreage allocated to lots and (pursuant to RCW 43.21C percent of total acreage. Washington State Environmental o Length of roads to be created. Policy Act). o Existing and proposed road widths. 0 Existing restrictions and covenants o Cul-de-sac radius. (when applicable). o Acreage allocated to roads and o Proposed restrictions and covenants percent of total acreage. (when applicable). o Indication as to public or private o Encumbrances (easements, road system. encroachments, etc.). o Road right-of-way width and typical o Written recommendations from cross sections. Washington State Department of o Outstanding natural features Transportation when a proposed long (water courses, tree lines, etc.) subdivision is located adjacent to of the property to be platted and the right-of-way of state highways. adjacent property. o Written approval from the Washington o Soil log holes; soil investigation State Department of Ecology when sites. any part of a proposed long o Drainage plan. subdivision is located within a o Water, sewage disposal, and other flood control zone. utility plans. 0 Subdivision fees of $350 plus $5 o Source of water supply. per lot. o Sewage disposal method. o7 OS/01/92 sauaam c , , , -----____,.....N. , )"\. -.,„...,. , .._____--77",-.. / / .--"N , ./) j \ ,__Ili di i c-----..z.,„--..,;,.---; ...,_,//, ' \\A \\- „ 44,61- ‘, , , ,)-).,-, I" „. ,„, T � a 8 II filli /(/6 N.,,,, , (N.. ---....„:"Y‘',, ILI% . .E”. 4 ,i."..,,..."S 21\.,,,, ,,, ..,.."....„„..:..„...-) 1 ' I D 1) 72.\:‘,.‘''..`\ vr'' akt 1 ',t .. <6 paar \ \\.,.... N\-'''.\\ \ ) �, , ,)• ,mom — _____,..---'"":,-/ , / ...,-- L, . r.,--" j Ansj.. , .`-' ''''' i 41311F., , r)ej*J j -____,•;,---------,:-..--- ,-----' -----Vi ) 47--pli _ ' , ‘'''Er 4,1 N'''-..,:;, •-•\\ \ 'cC j I ,.--- \ ,?...,,,jar ..1 / ,._..., 6 , ( • ..,gri(,.... (. c - ,,,,>."-----.1._„.., •,•4', AllIVO\ 't,:'' '. \\\ ( K ))// liOrlili \\ gt, . iiI h;* 7.;'1.7.' 1-....--.-"'"•-,'''',.„,AT ...t* ''s:. `:„1-' 4‘.,,7f nWV1 r''. . ..\■' ''.''' .1 . " : ) \ \ /71 (it '.$+.".'":„ Ift---""--- wr- - , 4"tiz'.:„.„-...;,---, ..r_. .. ) y() , ) ..... '',......."`"- -.,..,-,,,,,- � 1 \ \, ' V \4 \ I 1—'-•-.____----•-••. ------------...-` ��-_. ..,: ti ice--• _ __ �. --"_S •-�_..�•.--_•! \ � /�'-+�.J, g) �\ \\ ! ----- —r'r• ;Y--"M1 '. \�� _`_–t+ J ' -"* ( r r/ J M :,,�`��' �..n� °ta---- 1. it L "' l — _ ..� 11 ;- i \ xi d 1 d f .7.',' 1 i ti 11 if I\1, y i N- t le 7i Y I ► 1 g fi 1 1 , i § § § Q ,� viH �� a Y H , tr, P v A� R a a as r � eaa 911 )<� r `/ i 1 1 1 t roppi... ,, `„ ; , F. n x 1 S s b _.. . .�. r ! l F i Y — ' . M '.n °`rbi of • i i POPE RESOURCES ESM inc. '� 4 onw FHm¢UM Soto. Miff Yewla meaty PM ro"1 M „% 34004 91h AVENUE SO., SLOG. A O M FEDERAL WAY, WASHINOTON GOODS �4 .ti, L 1 ;, i A X 2 S JEFFERSON COUNTY PRELIMINARY PLAT iVASHINOTON -!!,' ' PHONE: [2O0] a38-6113 t • • al) w Ludlow Water Company 781 Walker Way Port Ludlow, Washington 98365 Phone(206) 437-2213 Phone(206) 437-2101 Fax (206) 437-2522 January 14, 1993 Mr. Jerry Smith Jefferson County Planning and Building Dept. P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 RE: CREERSIDE - DIVISION I Dear Mr. Smith: The water system for the above referenced plat is designed and will be constructed in compliance with Washington State Department of Health rules and regulations. Bonding has been posted to secure construction of the system. Once constructed, the system will be owned, operated and maintained by Ludlow Water Company. Adequate quantity and quality of water will be made available to serve sixty one (61) family residences within the plat. Sincerely, arry Smith Manager of Support Services c: Greg McCarry, Pope Resources David Cunningham, Pope Resources Pope Resources A Limited Partnership 70 Breaker Lane Port Ludlow,Washington 98365 (206)437-2101 FAX(206)437-2522 January 14, 1993 Mr. Jerry Smith Jefferson County Planning and Building Dept. P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 RE: CREEKSIDE - DIVISION I Dear Mr. Smith: The sewer system for the above referenced plat is designed and will be constructed in compliance with Washington State Department of Ecology rules and regulations. Bonding has been posted to secure construction of the system. Once constructed, the system will connect to the expanded Wastewater Treatment Plant and will be owned, operated and maintained by Pope Resources. This letter is a commitment of adequate plant capacity for sixty one (61) family residences within the plat. Sincerely, Larrymith Manager of Support Services c: Greg McCarry, Pope Resources David Cunningham, Pope Resources NM • Pope Resources A limited Partnership 781 Walker Way Part Ludlow,Washington 98365 (206)437-2101 FAX(206)437-2522 March 4, 1994 Hiller West Elements of Planning 12019 J./2 20th N.E: Seattle, WA 98125 _ Dear Mr. West: Pursuant to our recent telephone conversations please find the following enclosed: 1. Approval of Ludlow Water Company Comprehensive Water System Plan(one page) 2. Well No. 14 Report of Examination (four pages) 3. Well No. 14 Permit to Appropriate Water (two pages) 4. Well No. 13 Certificate of Water Right (two pages) 5. Approval of Port Ludlow Comprehensive Sewer Plan We have exhausted our supply of extra copies of the Water and Sewer System plans; however, we can loan you copies for reproduction if you wish. Please contact me at (206) 37-2101 with questions. Sincerely, Larry Smith Manager of Support Services LS:pam cc: L.Mueller 4111 70NOFF ;iCr,arc J . 'hamoSCr; rc �_ii'c� +I+ -eCretary DEPARTMENT Of- ,SOCIAL AND HEALTH 'DERtiICES livr• :i;J. :vJ.r.rlturl O"+S ifie April 17 , 1989 . 1t 1 ;99i Joe Murry Ludlow Water Company 721 Walker Way Port Ludlow , WA 98365 Subject: Ludlow Water Company Comprehensive Water System Plan Dear Mr. Murry: Our -office has reviewed the Ludlow-Water. Company Comprehensive Water System Plan dated March 15 , 1989 . Since it adequately addresses the topics required by WAC 248-54-065 , the plan is hereby APPROVED. Please keep in mind that the plan must be updated within 5 years, or sooner, if a revised plan . is necessary due tc significant changes in the water system or its service area. Thank you for your effort in preparing the water system plan. Sincerely, Carole Richmond Associate Planner / Simon Tung, P. E. Regional Engineer Enclosure cc: Robert A. Montgomery. P.E. r STATE OF WASHINGTON • DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY • • REPORT OF EXAMINATION TO APPROPRIATE PUBLIC WATERS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON ❑ surface Water S..w,S..roorduw..n ur.pv..in+.d CF.a.r It?,t„d W..Nrgmn Av IY17.and t. 4.r_n Sasses.w Ms nay and rp�.dn.a Cr ao.rvn.n a EwOOYJ Ground Water ,..»a ti.crndw.al u.pohbm a a..PIw__Law d Wrrge,b I9d.snd Am.rdlnrn e.r.ea d u.we.wa nduwpn d ..o.F.2.5 a F-�•v1J rr._ATY OATE APPUCATSCN MAZER FERIAS'M.WBER CERTIFICATE NUMBER February 13, 1989 G2-27492 FAME Pope Resources AOCAESS WTRM) RT•) OTATE) OP COOEI 781 Walker Way Port Ludlow Washington 98365 PUBLIC WATERS TO BE APPROPRIATED SOURCE Well No. 14 TRERARP OF OF SUFFICE WATEFGI MAXIMUM=BC FEET PER SECOND MAIIIAUM GALLONS PEA MWTTTE MU/AR0 ACFEFEET PER YEAR 300 161 Supplemental QUANTITY TYPE OF USE PEA M OF USE 161 acre-feet per year Community domestic supply As needed Supplemental Supplemental to existing rights for 1414 services plus other water uses as listed in the report of exam LOCATION OF DIVERSION/WITHDRAWAL APPROSsAaTE LOCATION OF CIVFRW.tiN1TNOPAWN. 400 feet west and 450 feet north of the southeast corner of Section 21. LOCATED WTRIR!HMALLE3T LEGAL S UBOQYSIOM SECTION TOWT6Fi R RANGE. OR W.)W.M W.R.I.A. COIWTY SE'/.SE%A 21 2,8 1E 17 Jefferson RECORDED PLATTED PROPERTY LOT BLOCK OF APSE NAME OF PLAT OR EWTgM LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY ON WHICH WATER IS TO BE USED Area served by the Ludlow Water Company. All within Sec. 8, 9, 16, 17, 20 and 21 of T. 28 N., R 1 E.W.M., in Jefferson County. REPORT OF EXAMINATION F DESCRIPTION QF 4.41�" 4111 . Well No. 14: 8-inch x 526 feet. The well will fill a 2200,0000+0,gallon storage tank and distribute through 8-inch mains. c DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE BEGIN PROJECT By TH18 OATS 1 CaNPTETE PROJECT BY T/6 DUTE: WATE9 PUT TO FU..USE BY THS O4TE: Started August 1, 1991 August 1, 1992 REPORT BACKGROUND: The priority date of this application is February 13, 1989. On that date Pope Resources of Port Ludlow, Washington, filed for a permit under the provisions of Chepters 90.03 and 90.44,Revised Code of Washington (RCW), to appropriate public ground water from a well in the amount of 300 gallons per minute (gpm) for _ community domestic supply. A legal notice of the applicant's proposed appropriation was prepared by staff and mailed to the applicant with publication instructions. Public notice was published on March 29 and April 5, 1989, and appeared in the"Port Townsend/Jefferson County Leader"newspaper. No formai.objections were received as a.result of the public notice. However, concerns about seawater intrusion, as a result of pumping this well, have been informally expressed by the water commissioners for the Jefferson-Oat. Water District No. 1 well. INVESTIGATIONS: - I conducted a field examination of this project on April 26, 1990. The applicant was not present during the site visit. Previous water rights exist for several other wells which are part of the water system serving the Port Ludlow community. The water right history is as follows. Well No. 2, water right No. G2-00194, is for 150 gpm and 120 acre-fee ptr year. • Well No. 3, water right No. 02-00193, is for 110 gpm and 88 acre-feet penyear. {� Well No. 4a, water right No. G2-21542, is for 23 gpm and 30 acre-feet pen year. i Well No. 9,water right No. G2-21543, is for 46 gpm and 70 acre-feet per raw Well No. 4N, water right No. G2-25627, is for 150 gpm and,122 acre-fee(peeyeae. Well No. 1,water right No.G2-25627,was for 50 gpm and 5 acre-feet/rut-mss CANCIEJ.LED January 13, 1986. Well No. 12,water right No. 02-25817,was for 180 gpm and 30 acre-ferA ie.it was CANCEI J.FD January 13, 1986. Well No.13,water right No.G2-25816,is for 175 gpm and 35 acre-feet pet year primary supply and 45 acre-feet per year supplemental to existing rights. Surface water right No. S2-00926 is for diversion of 1.2 cubic feet per secor>tit. and 308 acre-feet for irrigation of a golf course during the irrigation season of May 1 to October 1. This iu16ce water right is not related to the other wells for domestic supply. The current certificates allow for a total of 654 gpm and 465 acre-feet per}Far for domestic supply which is enough to supply 1384 services when calculated at 300 gallons per day ix- service. Well No. 14, water right No. G2-27492, is the well in question under thi: application. The project site is located two miles southeast of Port Ludlow,Washingto,. 'tore Hood canal is approximately 5150 feet to the east with Paradise View Estates housing community along sae;uore. Land immediately around the site is undeveloped. Jefferson County maintains a well for the Paradise VI/w Estates that is Approximately 4200 feet away. r Well site No. 14 is on top of a hill with a land elevation of 440 feet above: a level. The well in question (well No. 14)is completed to a depth of 87 feet below sea level. The top cf the e. screens are 67.6 feet below sea REPORT OF EXAMINATION .2. No.G2-27492 Report Continued • • level, and when pumping well No. 14 at 300 gallons per minute, a pumping water level of about 19 feet below sea level is achieved. The well nearest to well No. 14 on this system is well No. 13 which is approximately 790 feet away. Well No. 13 was completed to a depth 66 feet below sea level. The results of a 7-day aquifer test show that Wells 13 and 14 are definitely pulling from the same source and interfere with one another. During that aquifer test well 13 was pumped at a rate of 135 gpm. At the end of the test,well 14 experienced a draw down of 0.38 feet. From an evaluation of the area geology,well logs, and the use of determination methods described in Groundwater Pumping Tests,W.C.Walton, 1987;I find that the Jefferson County well to the southeast is also located in the same aquifer as wells 13 and 14. If well 14 is pumped at 300 gpm over a six month period the Jefferson County well will experience a drawdown of approximately one foot. Because of the depth, amount of water to be withdrawn,and proximity of Well 14 to sea water atri other wells, I am concerned about sea water intrusion, especially in the Jefferson County well. To reduce the impact of sea water intrusion I recommend this well and the Jefferson County well be tested for chloride concentration once every three months. If the chloride concentration exceeds 125 mg/1 in either well, the withdrawal rate must be reduced lo lower the chloride level to below 125 mg/I. To predict the amount of water needed on a yearly basis for the community of Port Ludlow I used both established figures used by Ecology, and actual levels as described on pages 12-18 in the "Water System Plan for Ludlow Water Company" by Klohn Leonoff Inc., to determine yearly maximum water quantities. The following table is the average daily water requirements for Port Ludlow through the year 1998. USE NUMBERS AND RATES GALLONS PER DAY Single/Multi family houses 1414 x 200 gpd 282,800 Rental Condos 64 x 150 gpd 9,600 Harbor Master Rest. 3 x 290 seats x 12 gpd 10,440 Golf Club and Pro Shop 3 x 60 seats x 12 gpd 2,160 10 employees x 15 gpd 150 Offices 180 employees x 15 gpd 2,700 Beach Club 3 x 200 seats x 12 gpd 7,200 7 employees x 15 gpd 105 Indoor Pool 24,900 cf/y 511 Outdoor Pool 11,390 cf/y 234 Hotel 125 rooms x 50 gpd 6,250 RV Park 40 units x 150 gpd 6,000 Marina 300 slips x 15 gpd 4,500 Conference/Community Centers 51,000 s.f. x 0.15 gpd ---• 7,650 Total 340,300 gpd Total acre-feet per year is 381 i ` 1 In addition, there are 15 acres at the Harbor Master Restaurant and Beach Club that need irrigating and will be allowed 30 acre-feet at 2 acre-feet of water per acre during the irrigation season of May 1 to October 1. The total annual water requirement amounts to 411 acre-feet of water. The water requirement for a community domestic system of this nature should not exceed average daily uses as listed in the table above and should not exceed 411 acre-feet of water per year. REPORT OF EXAMINATION -3- No. G2-27492 Report Continued • • Because the Ludlow Water Company already has been allowed 465 acre-feet of water per year under existing water rights, the amount of water withdrawn by the entire system may not exceed 465 acre-feet. Therefore, Well No. 14 is not appropriated any additional or primary water rights, but may provide supplemental water to the system. Based on an average of 8 hours per day that Well No. 14 will operate, the maximum amount of water this well can supplement the system is 161 acre-feet per year. CONCLUSIONS In accordance with Chapters 90.03 and 90.44 RCW, I find there is water available for appropriation from the source in question, the appropriation is a beneficial use and will not impair existing rights or be detrimental to public welfare. RECOMMENDATIONS I recommend approval of this application ar-d issuance of a permit to allow appropriation of 300 gpm from well No. 14 for community domestic supply- The period of use is year round as needed. The total annual withdrawal shall not exceed 161 acre-feet supplemental to existing rights. Approval is subject to the following provis=ons: Well No. 14 and the Jefferson County Water District No. I well (Water Right No.G2-26422) shall be tested for chloride concentration once every three months. If the chloride concentration exceeds 125 mg/1 in either well,.the withdrawal rate at Well No. 14 shall be reduced to lower the chloride level to below 125 mg/1. Installation and maintenance of an acce s port as described in Ground Water Bulletin No. 1 is required. An air line and gauge may be installed in addition to the access port. The use of the waters to be appropriated under this application will be for a public water supply. The State Board of Health rules require every owner of a public water supply to obtain written approval from the Office of Water Supply, Department of Health, Mail Stop LD-i1, Building 3, Olympia, Washington 98504, prior to any new construction or alterations of a public water supply. A certificate of water right will no' 1•e issued until a final investigation is made. The Water Resources Act of 197' specifies certain criteria regarding utilization and management of the waters of the state in the best public interest. Favorable consideration of this application has been based on sufficient waters available, at least during portions of the year. However, it is pointed out to the applicant that this use of water may be su`)ject to regulation at certain times, based on the necessity to maintain water quantities sufficient for preservation of the natural environment. Historical water use and water level data for all wells owned and operated by Ludlow Water Company shall be submitted to Ecology by July 1, 1991. Thereafter, monthly summaries of water use and water level data shall be submitted to Ecology -in an annual basis during the month of January. Please send meter summaries, water levels, and n:sults of chloride concentration to the following address: Department of Ecology, 7272 Cleanwater Lane, Olympia, Washington, 98504-6811. Under RCW 90.03.005 and 90.54.020(6) conservation and improved water use efficiency must be emphasized in the management of the state's water resources, and must be considered as a potential new source of water. Accordingly, as part of the terms on this permit, the applicant shall prepare and implement a water conservation plan approved by Ecology before Ecology issues a water right certificate. The standards for such a plan are vailable faro he Departments of Health and Ecology. REPORTED BY: '! DATE: February 5, 1991 The statutory permit fee for this application is $20.00. REPORT OF EXAMINATION No.G2-27492 DEPARTMENT OF',ECOLOGY PE • TO APPROPRIATE PUBLIC WATERS E STATE OF WASHINGTON ❑ Surface Water MGM .sua.wwu dOUpM'1l.La.alWrl+no�b�tell.uM.mwmw mv.u.ru e+tiw one nE,MOw! eM t�,pwrwa d Empvy.l Ground Water r. da.cwa.n<.WV,EM mw.S LA.PM,x+,L..Si~Ova,led NU .w.nwm.no m..M,.25 n»mw.m,rowm,.S B,.D.P..n.W a Ecm9E.l PROEM EATS APNC.4 KARMA MBER PEW.1n NUMBER I CERTIFICATE NUMBER February 13, 1989 (G2-27492 1 G2-27492 P NAME Pope Resources AOCRESS A 781 Walker Way Port Ludlow Washington 98365 The applicant is,pursuant to the Report of Examination which has been accepted by the applicant,hereby granted a permit to appropriate the following described public waters of the State of Washington,subject to existing rights and to the limitations and provisions set out herein. PUBLIC WATERS TO BE APPROPRIATED SOURCE Well No. 14 TgBNARY OF OF SUFfACE WATERS) MA.WU■CUBIC FEET Pei SECOND MAAMUM GALLONS PER'ANNE wa ju ACRE-FEET PER YEAR 300 x161 Supplemental GUMMY..TYPE OF USE PERIOD CF USE • 161 acre-feet per year Community domestic Supply As needed Supplemental Supplemental lo existing . rights for 1414 services plus other water-uses as listed.in --the report of exam LOCATION OF DIVERSION/WITHORAWAL APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF OWER.ek4WTIHCFAWAI. 400 feet west and 450 feet north of the southeast corner of Section 21. LOCATED MAIN fLAMIEBTIEGLL SJCA OQ SECTION TCNKNr N. RANGE W.COW)w.LL WM.R COUNTY SE'/SEVs 21 28 lE 17 Jefferson RECORDED PLATTED PROPERTY LOT ROCK OF ROAE NAME OF FLAT CA AOMORI LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY ON WHICH WATER IS TO BE USED Area served by the Ludlow Water Company. All within Sec.8,9, 16, 17,20 and 21 of T.28 N.,R 1 E.W.M., in Jefferson County. • • PERMIT • DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORKS •ell No. 14: 8-inch x 526 feet. The well will fill a 20cTalton storage tank and distribute through 8-inch mains. DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE BMW P J[CT BY THIS OATE: CO aETE P J€CT BY nits DATE: WATER PUT 1A PUT TO 1F Or Ties DATE. Started I August 1, 1991 I August 1, 1992 PROVISIONS - Installation and maintenance of an access port as described in Ground Water Bulletin No. 1 is required. An air line and gauge may be installed in addition to the access port. An approved measuring device shall be installed and maintained in accordance with RCW 90.03.360,WAC 508- ; 64-020 through-040(installation,operation,and maintenance requirements are attached). It{ Well No. 14 and the Jefferson County Water District No. 1 well(Water Right No.G2-26422)shall be tested for chloride concentration once every three months. If the chloride concentration exceeds 125 mg/I in either - well,the withdrawal rate at Well No. 14 shall be reduced to lower the chloride level to 125 mg/I. The Water Resources Act of 1971 specifies certain criteria egarding utilization and management of the waters of the state in the best public interest.Use of water may be subject to regulation at certain times,based on the necessity to maintain water quantities sufficient for prese ation of the natural environment. Historical water use and water level data for all wells owne and operated by Ludlow Water Company shall be submitted to Ecology by July 1, 1991. Thereafter,monthly summaries of water use and water level data shall be submitted to Ecology on an annual basis during the month of January. Please send meter summaries,water levels,and results of chloride concentration to the following address: Department of Ecology,7272 Cleanwater Lane,Olympia,Washington,98504-6811. Under RCW 90.03.005 and 90.54.020(6),conservation and improved water use efficiency must be emphasized in the management of the state's water resources,and must be considered as a potential new source of water. Accordingly,as part of the terms of this permit,the applicant shall prepare and implement a water conservation plan approved by Ecology before Ecology issues a water right certificate. The standards for such a plan are available from the Departments of Health and Ecology. A certificate of water right will not be issued until a final investigation is made. 771ir permit shall be subject to cancellation should the permittee fail to comply with the above development schedule and/or fail to give notice to the Department of Ecology on forms provided by that Department documenting such compliance. Given wider my hand and the seal of this office at Olympia, Washington, this 17th day of Anril 19 91 . • Christine 0. Gregoire, Director Department of Ecology • ENGINEERING DATA OK JO by k- PERMIT -2- No.02-27492 P J r • • • _ !� STATE OF W;x NOTON 5911 8 ( DEPARTMEN COLOGY CERTIFICATE OF WATER RIGHT Surface Water em=netcEdo amid d nNee vprovsnioa gat lCof re or f 1h7e,Dw,r nnof eWna6nron o o l 1917, nd ® Ground Water amendment,,flneta nld the'ule andrreaub an,of Sri..DAawmnasjt Ecologyy.)19<5,and PRIORITV DATE APPLICATION NUMBER PERmIT NUMBER �E CERTIFICATE NUMBER February 24, 1981 G 2-25816 C 2-25816 ' G 2-25816 C • NAME POPE AND TALBOT DEVELOPMENT INC. ADDRESS IETREETI ICITYI (STATE( 1L 3SQOEI PO Box 75 Port Ludlow Washington YB CS This is to certify that the herein named applicant has made proof to the satisfaction of the Department of Ecology of aright to the use of the public waters of the State of Washington as herein defined.and under and specifically sublect to the provisions contained in the Permit issued by the Department of Ecology,and that said right to the use of said waters has been perfected ( in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington,and is hereby confirmed by the Department of Ecology and entered of record as shown.but is limited to an amount actually beneficially used. I 1 PUBLIC WATER TO BE APPROPRIATED SOURCE well No. 13 1 TRIBUTARY OF(IF SURFACE WATERS( MAXIMUM CUBIC FEEL PER SECOND MAXIMUM GALLONS PER MINI II 1(MAXIMUBMDACRE•FEET PER TEAR QUANTITY,TYPE OF USE.PERIOD OF USE continuously 80 acre-feet per year community domestic supply y t (35 acre-feet per year primary) 1500 services (45 acre-feet per year supplemental) _ f LOCATION OF DIVERSION/WITHDRAWAL • APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF DIVERSION—WITHDRAWAL 1247 feet west and 220 feet north of the Southeast corner of Section 21. LOCATED WITHIN(SMALLEST LEGAL SUBDIVISION( SECTION tOW NSHIP N. RAN? E.OR W.I WM. w.R..A. C U SEIESEIE I 21 128 1 E 117 .�eteteraon L. RECORDED PLATTED PROPERTY LOT OLOCN OF(GIVE NAME OF PLAT OR ADDITION) LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY ON WHICH WATER IS TO BE USED All of Sections 9, 16, 17, 20 and SEIsSEIE of Section 21, T. 28 N., R. 1 E.W.M. in Jefferson County. ^•rga Iii VOLv7LL.i::�-PAGEdi`..g2 • OOFOF IAL RECORDS IC • Sll7 -BR CHG °H . PATRICIA H.MI APP JEFFERSOtI COUR11 AUDITOR a ' . V0C 213 294 IEEE REVERSE SIDE) CERTIFICATE SOY Mo-t-P tn.,a-ell it 1 r ■ ■ PROVISIONS • • • "Total annual withdrawal under all rights shall not exceed 500 acre-feet per year." The access port shall be maintained at all times on the well (s). The Water Resources Act of 1971 specifies certain criteria regarding utilizatior. and manage- ment of the waters of the State in the best public interest. Issuance of this certificate was based on sufficient waters available, at least during portians of the year. However, it is pointed out to the certificate holder that his use of the water may be subject to regulation at certain times, based on the necessity to maintain water quantities sufficient for preservation of the natural environment. When the chloride concentration exceed 250 mg/L, the withdrawal rate shall be reduced or the pump setting raised to reduce the chloride level to below 250 mg/L. • • • i I ' The right to the use of the water aforesaid hereby confirmed is restricted to the lairds or place of use herein described,except as provided in RCW 90.03.380.90.03.390.and 90.44.020. This certificate of water right is specifically subject to relinquishment for Defuse of water as provided in RCN 90.14.180. Given ender my hand and the seal of this office at Olympia, Washington.this..6th daY of....January I 'l.!c;...,19`li tt ANDREA BEATTY RINIKER, Director 'T I De ar ent of E o.gy e nemegryna owrw ', < , J�.. / Os {_'e•�lam/A '.�•. .•,. ..•.,.r,''. 1"ar "H'ab'et 'R8 'anal Nan.a:-r FOR COUNTY USE ONLY • \a,14/ 14 Table 1. Although the wells currently have adequate drawdown reserve, continuing declines in North Aquifer water levels should be averted by reducing production. The existence of an inter- tie between the north and south delivery systems should allow for this reduction by making up for the loss with increased production from the South Aquifer. Table 1 . Existing ground water resources Previously Revised recommended recommended Peak usage * usage * Capacity * * Well 2 38 gpm " 20 gpm 150 gpm Well 3 15 10 100 Well 4N 57 35 130 Well 13 135 35 140 1114*** 300 300 300 ell 1 *** 30 30 50 Total 575 gpm 530 gpm 870 gpm Continuous pumping rate. ** Actual instantaneous pumping rate from recent test. *** Wells not currently in use. Robinson & Noble, Inc. n+-`gR4AAi li.?i41lmF.W'ffv..+eis!?::n A^"tl.a? f. P: Y+q`^.^•i . •• •...- ".... K'YhO.s+i ti:+.r^YMr.. ..itMTMJ<n✓'}£.... .eu-"., ' 0 0 18 1 CAPACITY TO SERVE UNBUILT LOTS To determine if the future capacity of the existing system can serve the 877 unbuilt lots, Table 5 was developed. Table 5 compares the future capacity of the system with the future need of the 877 sold, but unbuilt lots in the existing Port Ludlow developments. The peak quarter and day rates are estimates based on the multiplication factors determined from historical data. The peak quarter rate is historically 1.5 times the yearly average rate. For the peak day rate, the historic data shows a factor of 2 times the peak quarter rate. The comparison in Table 5 shows that the existing system can adequately supply the 877 sold, but unbuilt lots. Table 5. Capacity to serve sold, but unbuilt lots in gpm. OW Yearly Peak Peak Average Quarter Day Use Use Use ill Projected use l-- for 877 lots 97 * 146 * * 292 *** Existing system 120 180 360 * * * III usage _ — — Total 217 326 652 ' Presently 530 530 870 it.- Available — _ — Surplus 313 204 218 1 I * Based on single-family rate of 160 gpd per connection. * * Using a factor of 1 .5 times the yearly average rate. ** * Using a factor of 2 times the peak quarter rate. III I Robinson & Noble, Inc. I I • • P 20 Table 6. Impacts to ground water resource from buildout program. Average use in gpm Peak Peak II Yearly Quarter Day 531 Single- 59 88 177 * I family 169 Multi- 23 35 69 * I family 1 47,500 sq. ft. 8 ** _ 13 *** - 25 Commercial space Total program 90 136 271 P usage Existing usage 217 326 652 II plus 877 lots _ _ _ �" Total future 307 462 923 need Presently 530 530 870 11 Available Surplus or 223 68 (53) **** 0 (Deficit) 0 * Based on a factor of 2 times the peak quarter rate. * * Based on 250 gpd per 1 ,000 sq. ft of office space. * * * Based on a factor of 1 .5 times the yearly ave. rate. * ** * 53 gpm equals 76,320 gpd. 1 II I Robinson & Noble, Inc. 0 • • SECTION B S Olympic Environmental Council P.O. Box 1906, Port Townsend, WA 98368 (206)379-8442 (206)681-2642 JEFFERSON COUNTY PLANNING R, Ruit rnNG DEPT_ "EB221994 February 22 . -'9; Director , Planning & Building Department Jefferson County PO Box. 1220 Port Townsend , WA 99268 To whom it R yconcern ; This letter is to advise you that the Olympic Environmental Council hereby appeals the Final Mitigated Det=rmination of '4on-S i gn if icance for Creeksisle Long Plat. (LP-05-92) issued by Your department on February 14. 1994. We request that you set a date for this appeal and notify us of the date at the above address. • Sinnccerreely , /y//j_f_ Steve Hayden • Abundant Life Seed Foundation•Admiralty Audubon*Black Hills Audubon*C.A.U.S.E."Friends of Kah Tai Lagoon Friends of the Elwha*Friends of the Foothills• No Oil Port*Olympic Park Associates *Olympic Rivers Council * Protect the Peninsula's Future* Quilcene Ancient Forest Coalition*Save Our State Park•Trinity United Methodist Church*Wash.Native Plant Society-Oly.Chap. * Wild Olympic Salmon • • SECTION C �� WEIR FACILITIES INVENTORY (WFI 4TE ARINTE� • r n w�,�.,5v�,•,m�n )• BOATED raHealth Environmental Health Read Instructions on back before completing l7ATF I'Pn3TFO: 17/10/q- . . . .,, s 71. SYSTEM ID NO. 2. COUNTY GROUP TYPE WRIA WFI COMPLETED BY TITLE 6;.7n:.1 J FFFR4I7N -A COm8 17 . 3. SYSTEM NAME DAY TELEPHONE DATE LLIC'LOW '.:,TER Cr.. STREET ADDRESS - 8. SUBMITTED NEW SYSTEM NO CHANGE REACTIVATE FOR — — 7`?1 '(A I K F Q WV(Y SYSTEM NAME CHANGE- UPDATE DELETE . P.O.BOX(IF APPUCABLE) 'OLD SYSTEM NAME•ENTER ONLY IF CHANGING WITH THIS WFI ',PI -1ALKE2 '.1,1Y CITY STATE LP CODE SYSTEMS SERVING ANY RESIDENTS(PEOPLE LIVING IN OP ' A�]��T >;II(JLy11 q 1;.,5—9747 DWELLING SERVED BY THE SYSTEM),COMPLETE THIS SECTIO �;,*, 4. OWNER'S NAME(LAST,FIRST) OWNER NO. 9. NUMBER ACTIVE RESIDENTIAL 10.NUMBER ACTIVE RESIDENTIAL CONNECTIONS POPULATION i 0 ri I (1W wATFR en 41134 STREET ADDRESS 914 1 I .: 3 5 7P1 W4LK(Lq 'AAY P.O.BOX(IF APPLICABLE) SYSTEMS SERVING ANY NON-RESIDENTS(LE,TRAVELERS '.b- .'3.. . . ' ' . • - . EMPLOYEES,STUDENTS,ETC.),COMPLETE BIBS SECTION:_,, +..,.. CITY STATE ZIP CODE 11.NUMBER NON-RESIDENTIAL CONNECTIONS PrI T t 11111 `l'A .l& q0.A6c—')79J Tg 5. SYSTEM CONTACT PERSON TITLE 12.ENTER AVERAGE DAILY NON-RESIDENTIAL POPULATION 5441 A 4,, e S S C IL — `�V r SERVED FOR EACH MONTH.MAKE ENTRY FOR EACH MONTH DAY TELEPHONE ` EVENING TELEPHONE JAN 0 Aaa 1 9)xav 201 o^T• 12? yfZ —) I. r. -. 7_ . - .£6 - 93 MAY 155 w� -.22I1 "0v 101 S. OWNERSHIP 7- PREDOMINANT CHARACTERISTIC.'... mPR JUNE �s£a. ' (CHECK ONE ONLY)' ' (CHECK ONE ONLYF'^' 1 4 1 7`0 .18 3 A 1 13.DOES THE SYSTEM SERVE AT LEAST 25 OF THE SAME NON-RESIDENTS FOR 4 OR MORE DAYS PER WEEK FOR AT LEAST 180 DAYS PER YEAH? PRIVATE NON-PROFIT RESIDENTIAL ' PRIVATE FOR-PROFIT RECREATIONAL YES X I NO ) LOCAL GOVERNMENT , BUSINESS/INDUSTRIAL/ AGRICULTURAL/COMMERCIAL WATER DI TRI T) LODGING/FOOD SERVICE 14. TOTAL NUMBER 15.DISTRIBUTION RESERVOIR(S) WATER DISTRICT) STATE SCHOOL/DAY CARE CONNECTIONS METERED TOTAL CAPACITY FEDERAL OTHER(CHURCHES ETC.) 913 8 9 5,0 0 0 GALLONS I 10:•• 17.SOURCE NAME 18.SOURCE .. 19.USE 20. 21. 22.WELL- 23.SOURCE, 24.SOURCE LOCATION.: SOURC CATEGORY'. TREATMENT ` DEPTH CAPACITY - NUMBER+' 2 • UST UTIUTY'S NAME FOR SOURCE w O Z IF SOURCE IS PURCHASED OR '0 w o Q 9 INTERTIEt),UST SELLER'S ID* w z z (FEET) (GPM) 1./4,1/4 SEC. TWP RNG. 31g AND NAME USING FOLLOWING z FORMAT:'XXX%XX/NAME w T <'�' ,�'Z g o SEC. NO. �S; EXAMPLE:77050Y/SEATTLE yH T. LL 0 3i3 T i/ z of ZpwZp zoz 4nJ o 1¢11 ~O S3r�ilaZ�'1 0 W ZUri ,ii Nu SO1 ELL J2 X K. Y K 245 135 SW/SE 08 28N OlE SO2 WELL ::3 X X Y K 257 100 NE/SE 08 28N 01E S03 WELL a4A I `JACTIWE 07/23/1992 . SO4 WELL w4'y X X Y X 389 138 SW/SW 09 28N 01E SOS 4ELL t:13 X X Y X 464 150 SE/SE 21 23N 01E SO6 WELL x'14 X X Y X 505 300 SE/SE 21 23N OlE I _ MINIMUM REQUIRED BACTERIOLOGICAL SAMPLING SCHEDULE;--+�rro a'i'.pr - : 25. 26. JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 2 2 1 7 7 2 1 2 7 t NO.APPROVED SERVICES(PER PLANS) . - DATE OF LAST SANITARtyV,E)Y/T{ ,1 non BY DOH r LHD SYSTEM IN CRITICAL WATER SUPPLY SERVICE AREA?l YES NO GW MGMT AREA? I YES I NO EcR LHD 'SE ONLY EFFECTIVE DATE RETRO.CHANGES SIGNATURE OF DOH REVIEWER DATE • LOCAL HEALTH DOH 331-011(Rev.5/92) _ • ///1/1414. TO ' LARRy FNye ORur : wear) WRY ri k t 6 GPL-72 PORT LUDLOW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 10-27-93 GROWTH ANALYSIS A clear and concise definition of land uses which have been and are proposed for the Port Ludlow Community is not readily available in the Jefferson County Planning office. Such a document will now be required for constructive planning of future development within the community . - This document has been developed from a study of the records in the Jeffferson County Planning Department, of applications filed by Pope Resources and an on-site investigation of the current status of the development within the community as of this date . This document supercedes one filed with the Jefferson County Planning Department in February, 1992, by the GPLCC without any response from the County. . CLASSIFICATION OF PARCELS: Bgild-uo No . NsL_ 121 U ni s as. sZf. aukJilx.i_sija Title_ Bldgs ._ Single-F . Multi-F . Comm. 10-27-93 North Bay D-I , A-1 72 72 (-29)* - 28 D-I , A-2 63 63 43 D-I , A-3 54 54 (-54 )* 20 D-I , A-4 106 106 (-59)* 25 D-I , A-5 29 29 13 D-II , A-1 64 64 32 D-II , A-2 104 104 39 D-II , A-3 235 235 138 D-III 87 87 44 D-IV 80 80 50 D-V 18 18 9 North Bay D-VI 12 12 2 N . Bay Village/Scott 4 4 0 Inn at Port Ludlow 5 5 0 Sub-total North of Bay = 933 933 443 Note : * Of the 142 lots that had water and no sewer service there are • now 109 lots that have not yet been approved for septic system i Inner Harbor Village, Div. II 14 14 10 Div. III 19 19 8 Ludlow Point Tracts 15 15 Ludlow Point Village 36 36 34 Ludlow Point Village,Div . IV 23 23 0 Ludlow Beach Tracts I 30 30** Ludlow Beach Tracts II 4 4** ilimm Ludlow Beach Lots I 21 21** UU : 1_7 Ludlow Beach Short Plats 9 9** ; 51 Bayview Village, D-I 40 40 ? L D-I I 18 18 .'" co j = i 52 D-IlI 18 18 - J D-IV 16 18 Li Q s < South Bay Village , D-I 5 5 L w D-II . 18 18 LI ~ - i 42 D-III 34 34 ce Greenview Village 17 17 6 Teal Lake Village 99 99 21 - 1 - III III Creekside Village,D-I 61 61 (36% of FEIS ) 0 Deer Hollow Village 30 30 0 Fairwood Village 15 15 6 Fairway Village 4 4 4 Ironwood Village 53 53 0 Sub-total South of Bay = 599 599 234 Total Single Family Units = 1532 1532 677 Note ** : These lots are not served by water or sewer utilities . North Bay No . I 30 y o . 5 30 1 North Bay No . II 4 24 24 Admiralty No . I. 13 41 41 Admiralty No . II 6 24 , ••24 Ludlow Bay Village 15 53 ( 3x2, 2x3,5x4., 3x5 and 1x7) " 0 Inn at Port Ludlow 1 35 ' 0 North Bay Village/Pope 3 9 • 0 Sub-total North of Bay = 48 216 119 Inner Harbor Village Condominium Duplexs 8 16 ) Condominium Fourplexes 8 32 30 Duplexes 4 8 ] Fairway Village 5 18 (4x4 and 1x2) 16 Highland Greens Condominium 4-plex 2 8 8 Condominium 6-plex 5 30 30 Springwood Village 21 68 ( 8x2 and 13x4) 0 Ironwood Village 13 42 (5x2 amd 8x4 ) 0 Sub-total South of Bay = 66 220 84 Total Multi-Family Units = 114 436 203 Ludlow Bay Village . Marina -- Office, Support & Fuel Service 3 3 3 Restaurant/Bar 1 C.4 2 2 North Bay Village Sewage Treatment Plant 1 LS) v _ � 1 1 Ludlow Maintenance Comm. 2 > ? ' u 2 2 Conference Center/Admin . 1 ) e1 2 2 Pope Resources -- Utilties 1 Lt '-4 i = 1 1 -- Admin . 1 z 1 1 . Walker Way Mini-Storage 1 L w 1 1 Ludlow Village LL -, .,_ Construction Contractor,, Travel , Real Estate 1 3 3 Lanudry, Maintenance and Real Esate 1 3 3 Retail -- General Store 1 1 1 -- Rest Rooms 1 1 - 2 - --JaAh Pos Office 2 2 Deli/Stout • 2 2 -- Retail Spaces 1 3 3 Pope Office Building 1 6 6 Recreation Vehicle Park 1 26*** 26 • Loomis Office Building 1 3 3 Inner Harbor Village South Bay Rec . Center 1 1 1 US West Service Center 1 1 1 Log Dump 1 1 1 Ludlow Point Village ' Yacht Club out-station 1 1 1 South Bay Village John L . Scott Realty 1 1 1 Golf Course -- Club House 1 1 1 -- Cart Shop 1 1 1 -- Maint . Bldg . 1 1 1 Total Commercial Units = 26 26*** 45 .71 Note *** : The RV Park is a commercial installation , but it has been designated a temporary, low-cost housing for employees .in the community to mitigate absence of low-cost housing. re- quired per S .E . P . A . and G.M .A . SUMMARY OF PERMITTED USES AS OF 27 OCTOBER, 1993 : ` Total Buildings included = 1672 Single-F . Multi-F . ' Comm. I Breakdown of Uses (Units) _ *** 1558 436 71 Total Approved Units = 2039 Current Build-out = 951 Total potential residential population based on 2 per unit = 3936 Build-out actual = 1760 Applications approved between February 1992 and October 1993 include : Single-F . Multi-F . Comm . Inn at Port Ludlow 5 53 Inner Harbor - Div . III 19 , Ludlow Point - Div . IV 23 Creekside Village 61 Deer Hollow 30 Fairwood Village 15 Fairway Village 2 2 Springwood Village 68 Ironwood Village 53 42 North Bay Village/Scott/Pope 4 9 Conference Center 1 Ludlow Village -- Loomis Bldg . 3 194 174 4 IEC �FI %, E , JAN 18 1994 - 3 - HEALTH DEPT. MAR-12-1998 10:20 JEFF CO PERMIT CENTER 360 379 4451 P.03 .w� ... .r...- _ :-.. . . • • it Names of adjacent Certification areas for the . subdivisions Health, Public Works and Signed, acknowledged Planning Departments stating certification by fee simple that the ion o plat is in owners and others with en compliance wit al<-of g_ z 10 interest in the property �4 subdly sWonreauirerne_1r ts_4f_ that creation of subdivision / the Jefferson County � -is by iris free will I ubdivision Ordinance and sit consent conditions for final plat . y,_ I-or 0-Vats-containing a approvals ded" n, certification Certtfi—cation by County )( s all provide wording for o� Treasurer that al( property (` dedication, of streets and taxes have been paid • for other areas shown on the V Certification of approval by plat to the public or some, DL the Board of County other party Commissioners For public dedications the at/ Certification of.filing by the certification shall contain `� County Auditor �i a waiver by the owners and ", Notifications: when 'r'�SL /� their assigns of all claims applicable as pertaining to IIi� for damages which may occur �i - on-site sewage disposal, j Q u� r to adjacent properties by utility districts, unstable • the construction, drainage, 114 i 1,e25 slopes, or other conditions of and maintenance of said road Q 1. -F– final plat approval. Each or area _kb numbered accordingly and 4. When required, the worded per the subdivision t!� certification shall contain ordinance and/or conditions /fir a waiver of the right of ri. Plat identification as direct access to any street easement, covenant, or from any property gs restriction for type filed under Auditor's record • (number, volume & page) ?�. Declaration and/or Current plat certification dedication of easements Q� confirming the title of the -label easements for land as described and shown on ingress/egress and/or final pl utility installation and cllthe A $5000 recording fee, maintenance payable to the Jefferson- - Declaration of covenants or County Auditor, shall RecaiQ/ r Q 7, restrictions-state any accompany the final 1.plat covenants or restrictions on final plat NOTE: Applications for long subdivision which upon initial inspection appear to be insufficiently prepared to provide a basis for adequate review will be returned to the applicant. ACKNOWLEDGMENT I h= by •eclare, to the best of by knowledge and belief, the foregoing information a d all •ached Infor ltio• is true and correct. / (ap.lice or authorized representative ' (dat ,t TOTAL P.03 __ ITEM # c,2 MFR-12-1998 10:19 JEFF CO PERMIT CENTER 360 379 4451 P.02 MAR 18 APPENDIX D FINAL LONG PLAT CHECKLIST GENERAL: The final long plat, consisting of one (1) or more pages, shall be based upon a complete survey and contain an accurate map of the subdivided land. The final long plat shall contain the appropriate certifications, notifications, and any pertinent supplemental information. Each sheet shall be an 18" by 24" acceptable mylar. All lettering and drawing shall be in permanent black ink and must include original signatures. A marginal line shall be drawn completely around each sheet,. leaving an open margin of 2" on the left with 1/2" on the remaining sides. FINAL LONG PLAT MAP: Submitted with this application are five �5) paper copies including the final long plat map reproducible original and other required material consisting of the following: • ?kG gVicinity sketch of the area ^ Location of all control the subdivision is located monuments found and OL X. Legal description of the established at controlling lend contained within the corners of the parcel being subdivision subdivided and within the dt 2( Engineering scale and north subdivision arrow % Boundary of the subdivision 15/ Name of subdivision and with complete bearings and sequential numbering of lineal dimensions: depicted subdivisions filed by with heavier lines division v Length and bearings of all Oj Section, township, and range straight lines, including of subdivision including the radii, arcs and semi municipal or county line -tangents of all curves within or adjacent to the Length of each lot line • subdivision including bearings and other 07C Shoot numbering and total data necessary for the number of sheets in the set location of any lot line in � x Location of all the field • C monuments/other evidence i Location, width, center used as ties to establish line, and name of all roads subdivision boundary within and adjoining the �/� subdivision C.re. Location and width of all Certification ay licensee easements, shown with lines, land surveyor, registered by and a description of the the State of Washington easement purpose stating the long plat is OL,4 Private roads shall be based upon an actual survey labeled and the courses and 04 .Z Numbers assigned to all lots distances and all required and blocks within the stakes and monuments are subdivision placed in the ground • viii • �.- 4;-, JEFFERSON COUNTY - iPLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT pppp -% re , Imo- r�fs, ` P.O. Box 1220 F' :fi,,4 9f FT-#. s Port Townsend, Washington 98368 rr - 11711} i. }k `' - + L' ne yy Planning(206)385-9140 t'':".;4::,f:',..,-1 it ,� . Building(206)385-9141 _— FAX(206)385-9357 JEFFERSON COUNTY COURTHOUSE Craig Ward, Director FINAL MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE AND LEAD AGENCY STATUS DATE: February 14, 1994 PROPONENT: Pope Resources PROPOSAL: Creekside Long Plat LP05-92. Subdivision of 34.09 acres into 61 lots for detached single family residences. Lots would range in size from 5,870 square feet to 7,790 square feet. Average lot size would be 6,360 square feet. The proposed subdivision would be accessed off of Paradise Bay Road by Creekside Drive. It would be served by internal roadways on 50' rights-of-way ending in 50' radius cul-de-sacs. 21.92 acres would be in undeveloped dedicated open space. The proposal would be served by the Ludlow Water Company and Ludlow Sewer Company for water and sewer, respectively. The proposal includes provision of temporary and permanent storm water management facilities. PROJECT LOCATION: The proposal site is a portion of the West Half and the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 28 North, Range 1 East, W.M. The proposal site is located in Port Ludlow westerly of Paradise Bay Road, Inner Harbor Village Condominiums Phases 2 and 3, and the plat of Ludlow Point Village Division 2. MITIGATION MEASURES: A 1. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, the proponent shall ''It' submit an engineered drainage_and storm water management plan and report to the Jefferson County Public Works Department for review and approval. The plan shall include temporary and permanent erosion control measures and shall incorporate the Creekside Long Plat - Final MDNS Page 1 storm water drainage criteria of the Washington State Department of Ecology Storm Water Management Manual (current edition). The plan shall be of sufficient detail to clearly illustrate that the Best Management Practices utilized are adequate to treat and control runoff. The plan shall also: * be designed and implemented to control dust and mud; stabilize the construction area, including entrances and roadways; prevent surface water runoff from entering areas to be cleared and graded; and prevent sedimentation from entering the waters of Port Ludlow Bay; * specify that revegetation of exposed soils would be completed as soon as possible after construction to reduce exposed or erodible soils; and * specify measures and parties responsible for maintenance of permanent storm water management facilities. The temporary erosion control and storm water management plan shall be reviewed and approved prior to any clearing or grading on the site. The final storm water management plan shall be reviewed and approved and facilities installed prior to final plat approval. 2. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, native vegetation shall be maintained on open space areas. P�9i- 3. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, the extent of soil disturbance associated with major clearing and grading activities shall conform to the guidelines and timing restrictions set forth in the Washington State Department of Ecology Pe,/- Storm Water Management Manual (current edition). Prior to any clearing and grading on A - the site, the proponent shall submit a construction phasing plan to the Jefferson County Public Works Department for review and approval. 4. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, the proponent shall establish a Maintenance Covenant as part of the Restrictive Covenants to ensure that the Au) drainage system is maintained in accordance with the proponent's approved plans. The Maintenance Covenant shall be reviewed and approved by the Jefferson County Public Works Department prior to final plat approval. 5. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, temporary erosion control and storm water structures shall be inspected at least once per week during the fh,J construction period and sediment shall be removed from sedimentation ponds as necessary to ensure proper functioning. Disposal of sediment materials shall be subject to the approval of the Public Works Director in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and County regulations. 6. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, the proponent shall designate a qualified individual or firm who shall be responsible for ensuring that erosion pvt and sedimentation control devices are correctly installed,that Best Management Practices are correctly implemented, and that BMP methods and maintenance schedules are followed; for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of practices and recommending modifications to the drainage plan as necessary if monitoring reveals that the practices Creekside Long Plat Final MDNS Page 2 are not effective; and for ensuring that reports and inspections are coordinated with the Jefferson County Department of Public Works. 7. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts related to soils and water, prior to it,tei. s1 . conducting land disturbing activities on individual lots, the owner shall submit a small n a c parcel temporary erosion and sedimentation control (TESC) plan to the Jefferson County , Public Works Department for review and approval. Development of individual lots shall be -0 4carried out in conformance with the TESC plan. A notice to this effect shall be placed on pa c the final plat. 8. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to marine water quality, the proponent shall continue and expand the existing Water Quality Monitoring Program which documents nonpoint effects on the Class AA "Extraordinary" water quality designation of Port Ludlow Bay under the direction of Jefferson County. The program shall ensure the performance of water quality control features and provide for upgrading, as necessary. tt A The program shall include monitoring at appropriate background stations (i.e., Ludlow 5 Creek and the intermittent streams on site and inner Port Ludlow Bay). The program shall allow for adjustment of monitoring stations and water quality monitoring parameters �`^ ) . depending on location of development activity and monitoring findings. On-going n� monitoring shall include evaluation of the proposed BMPs and testing of shellfish and \ sediment as appropriate. Ambient monitoring and storm event monitoring shall be conducted. The scope of work for each subsequent year's program shall be submitted to Jefferson County for review and approval by November 1 of the preceding year. If the monitoring indicates that the proponent's activities are causing a reduction in the water quality standards of Port Ludlow Bay below the Class AA "Extraordinary" designation, the proponent shall in its annual report so advise Jefferson County. 9. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to marine water quality, the proponent shall conduct a sewage treatment plant monitoring program which documents the effects of the development program on the capacity of the secondary sewage treatment plant. .C\ The monitoring shall record the number of connections, effluent volume, and effluent quality. It is acknowledged that the sole authority to monitor and regulate operation of the N sewage treatment plant rests with the Washington Department of Ecology. Nothing in this . mitigating measure is intended to supersede or conflict with the requirements of the sk ,� proponent's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. WA- 002120-2 issued pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act and companion statutes. Results of this monitoring shall be transmitted to the Jefferson County Planning and Building Department and the Washington Department of Ecology by March 15 of each year. 10. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to ground water resources and to td document the condition of the aquifers used as domestic water sources, the proponent shall conduct a groundwater resource monitoring grogram. The scope of the program 4 shall be mutually agreed upon by the proponent and Jefferson County prior to final plat approval. Monitoring shall include static groundwater levels and saltwater intrusion. If Creekside Long Plat Final MDNS Page 3 • rg oundwater monitoring indicates an inadequate yield to support development of the proponent's projects, the proponent and/or the County shall immediately notify the Washington State Department of Ecology to request action or investigation pursuant to .,V RCW 90.44 which provides authority for resolution of conflicts involving allocation of groundwater supplies. In the event that this situation occurs no additional plats which withdraw water from the South Aquifer shall be approved by Jefferson County until the groundwater adequacy issues have been resolved. �✓ order gp , �i' development of to the avoid plat,si the proponent nificant adverse shall imset aside acts five to spaces housing at prior their to RV park for uscommencing e - by program related construction workers. The number of spaces shall be adjusted based An their use by construction workers and timing of individual development projects. 6 �' In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to housing, prior to commencing klt).., development of the plat, the proponent shall notify its contractors that space is available at its recreational vehicle park so long as contractors' employees are working full-time on Port Ludlow projects. The proponent shall also monitor contractors' usage of the RV park, make appropriate adjustments for reserved spaces, and report to Jefferson County on an annual basis as to the effectiveness of this mitigation. < in order to avoid significant adverse impacts to transportation, the proponent shall conduct a traffic monitoring in cooperation with the Jefferson County Public Works Department to assess the impacts of the Creekside Plat and other Development Program plats on the State and County roadway system. The monitoring shall record trip generation,traffic counts on selected roadways, and level-of-service conditions at selected IVintersections. The proponent shall be responsible for employing a qualified traffic engineer " to design and direct the traffic monitoring program in cooperation with other appropriate public agencies. The cost of retaining the traffic engineer shall be at the proponent's sole expense. Results of the monitoring shall be submitted to Jefferson County by March 15 of each year. --- 14. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to transportation, if traffic monitoring indicates that intersection improvements are necessary at the Paradise Bay Road/Teal '� Lake Road intersection, the proponent shall enter into an agreement with the Jefferson County Public Works Department to contribute a share of the required funds that is proportionate to the impacts generated by the Creekside Plat. 15. As necessary in order to minimize temporary construction traffic, the proponent in ijf coordination with the Jefferson County Public Works Department shall designate truck routes and designate work hour restrictions. 16. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to school facilities, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall pay to the Chimacum School District $43210 per lot to be applied toward provision of school facilities. Payment may be arranged through a voluntary agreement. Creekside Long Plat Final MDNS Page 4 17. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to fire and emergency services, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall pay to the Jefferson County Fire District#3$193.00 per lot to be applied toward provision of fire and emergency services. Payment may be arranged through a voluntary agreement. These mitigation measures are intended to eliminate probable significant environmental impacts identified by Jefferson County through the EIS for the Port Ludlow Development Program and review of the Environmental Checklist submitted by the proponent, inspection of the site by Jefferson County Planning and Building Department staff, and from public comments. These impacts are to: * Soils related to erosion of soils cleared during construction of access roads, cul-de- sacs, and homesites; * Water related to soil erosion and construction of impervious surfaces resulting in increased storm water runoff containing contaminants and sediment; * Housing related to the availability of housing due to an influx of workers employed in construction of the project; * Transportation due to traffic generation and decline in the level of service at intersections; * Schools related to the Chimacum School District's capacity to provide adequate educational facilities for students that would be generated by the proposal; * Fire and emergency services related to Fire Protection District #3's capacity to provide fire and emergency services. Jefferson County policies which address these impacts are contained in the Jefferson County SEPA Implementing Ordinance, the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan, the Jefferson County Subdivision Ordinance, and the policies and standards of the Jefferson County Public Works Department. Specific policies are cited in the project record. NOTICE OF LEAD AGENCY: Jefferson County has determined that it is the lead agency for the above-described proposal. NOTICE OF NONSIGNIFICANCE: Jefferson County has determined that the above- described proposal conducted in conformance with the mitigation measures listed above would not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment, and an environmental impact statement is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the Jefferson County Planning and Building Department and an inspection of the site, and consideration of comments submitted in response to the Preliminary Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance issued on December 22, 1993. COMMENT PERIOD: This final determination is issued pursuant WAC 197-11-340(2)(f). Jefferson County has considered comments on its preliminary mitigated determination of nonsignificance. There is no additional comment period. Any appeal of this determination on the basis of noncompliance with the provisions of Chapter 43.21C RCW (State Creekside Long Plat Final MDNS Page 5 , Environmental Policy Act) must be submitted in writing on or before 5:00 PM Monday February 24, 1994 to the Director, Jefferson County Planning and Building Department (P.O. Box 1220, Port Townsend, WA 983.8)-for consideration by the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners. td,/ ../ , (l _alt id J. - Holt: ., 'A ting Director effe�• ounty Planning and Building Department Creekside Long Plat Final MDNS Page 6 recommended conditions and the SEPA Mitigations will be adequate to assure compatibility with the surroundings. 11. The applicant concurs with the staff recommended conditions. 12 . As noted under "Groundwater Issues" above, the SEPA review and mitigations adequately address the issues. 13 . The governing criteria for a preliminary plat are met. RECOMMENDATION Based on the findings and conclusions above, it is the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner to APPROVE the Preliminary Plat Application of Pope Resources for "Creekside" and to APPROVE the requested Subdivision Variance, both approvals subject to the following conditions (as also recommended by Staff) : Roadway Width Variance (Sec.6.203 (4) Conditions: 1. Based on the requirements of Section 10.40, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall submit documentation from Fire Protection District #3 demonstrating that adequate provision for fire and emergency vehicle access to Lots 27-29 has been incorporated into the design of the access over Tract B. Based on the requirements of Sections 6. 205 and 10. 40, the applicant shall dedicate a seven foot wide utility easement across the front of Lots 27 and 28 to Lot 29 . Such easements r �r may be made by separate recorded easement, declaration of easements, or dedication of easements and by graphic portrayal on the final plat. Private Road Variance (Sec. 6.203 (13) Conditions: 1. Based on the requirements of Sections 10. 302 and 10 . 40, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall submit to the Public Works Department for review and approval a 0(A) private road maintenance agreement for the access road across Tract B. The maintenance agreement shall be established either by recording of a separate instrument and referencing said instrument or by establishing said agreement by declaration on the long subdivision final plat. Subdivision Conditions: 1. Based on the requirements of Sections 6. 203 and 6. 301, road and intersection plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Department. All road construction shall comply with the standards of and be performed under the inspection of the Jefferson County Department of Public Works prior to final plat approval, except as otherwise allowed under Subsection 6.50 Bonds. "Creekside" Preliminary Plat/ /jm.b1 i ? / + // // Pope Resources,Applicant Y i Findings, Conclusions LPO5-92 -8- and Recommendations 2 . Based on the requirements of Section 6. 302 and the mitigative measures of the Final MDNS, the proponent shall submit the required drainage, stormwater management, and temporary erosion and sedimentation control plans to the Pu rks De. artment for review and approval and shall implement said plans as required. 3 . Based on the requirements of Section 6. 304, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall document that road signs have been installed in accordance with Jefferson County standards; road names have been approved by the Public Works Director; and traffic signs and safety devices ha a" been --- installed in accordance with Washington State highway traffic control standards as approved by the Public Works Director. 4 . Based on the requirements of Section 6 . 305, prior to water system expansion construction, if required by the appropriate state agency, the applicant shall submit engineered construction design plans for review and approval. Construction of the water system expansion shall be either completed prior to final plat approval, or as an - option, the applicant may post a County approved surety to guarantee construction of system expansion. 5. Based on the requirements of Section 6. 306, prior to sewer N.D system construction, if required by the appropriate state agency, the applicant shall submit engineered construction design plans for review and approval. Construction of the sewer system expansion shall be either completed prior to final plat approval, or as an option, the applicant may post a County approved surety to guarantee construction of system expansion. (:3 Based on the requirements of Section 6. 307, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall submit documentation from Fire Protection District #3 demonstrating that fire protection measures are in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Uniform Fire Code, and the recommendations of the Fire District consistent with State law. 7 . Based on the requirements of Section 6 . 309, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall provide documentation that Pik the Public Works Department has been furnished all documents 1 and calculation , necessary to—d"dEermine the accuracy of surveys, that road monuments directly related to the plat have been constructed of materials as per Jefferson County standards, and that road monuments have been set in such a manner that future road development or utility installation shall not disturb the accuracy of their position. 8. Based on the requirements of Section 6. 50, the applicant shall arrange for the inspection of all required /V W improvements with the Department of Public Works, the Planning Department, or Health Department, whichever is responsible. Inspections shall be requested by the applicant "Creekside" Preliminary Plat Pope Resources, Applicant Findings,Conclusions LPO5-92 - 9- and Recommendations . at such stages as indicated by the appropriate department. The applicant shall be required to pay all costs of work incidental to approval of the subdivision before final approval is granted. 9 . Based on the requirements of the Jefferson County 911 Emergency Locator System Ordinance, prior to final plat approval address plates for the lots shall be located in accordance with Ordinance provisions . 10. The applicant shall comply with all mitigative measures of the Final Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance as issued by Jefferson County for the proposed Creekside Long Plat. DATED this 17th day of June, 1994 . Iry Berteig Hearing Examiner for Jefferson County A copy or notice of this Recommendation was transmitted by the Jefferson County Planning Department to the following: Date Transmitted: David Cunningham, Pope Resources, PO Box 1780, Poulsbo, WA 98370 Linda Mueller, Pope Resources, PO Box 1780, Poulsbo, WA 98370 Bob Montgomery, P.E. , c/o Pope Resources, PO Box 1780, Poulsbo, WA 98370 Paula Mackrow, OEC, PO Box 1906, Port Townsend, WA 98368 Wendi Wrinkle, 172 Hubbard Creek Road, Port Ludlow, WA 98365 H. W. Stowe, 191 Windrose Dr. , Port Ludlow, WA 98365 Thomas Foley, 381 Highland Dr. , Port Ludlow, WA 98365 James Brannaman, 563 Pioneer Dr. , Port Ludlow, WA 98365 Julie Jaman, 790 McMinn, Port Townsend, WA 98368 Oliver Gardner, PO Box 65156, Port Ludlow, WA 98365. "Creekside"Preliminary Plat Pope Resources,Applicant Findings, Conclusions LPO5-92 - 10- and Recommendations • • SECTION D • JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS y\' �' 1820 Jefferson Street -; � P.O. Box 1220 .14,a t Port Townsend, WA 98368 �, (206) 385-9160 Gary A. Rowe, P.E., Director Robert G. Nesbitt, PE., County Engineer MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Building Department FROM: Carter Renner Tom Morello Scott Kilmer DATE: February 5, 1993 SUBJECT: SEPA Review, Creekside long plat LP05-92 Upon review of the environmental checklist for the Creekside Subdivision, the Department of Public Works has identified the following environmental impacts: Section 20 of the checklist refers to Water Run-Off (including storm water). This impact is addressed by the policies in the Jefferson County Implementing Ordinance: State Environmental Policy Act. The department advises that the following mitigation measure be implemented to alleviate the impact: The proponent shall submit an engineered drainage and storm water plan and report to the Jefferson County Public Works Department for review and approval. The plan is to include temporary and permanent erosion control measures. The drainage plan must incorporate the storm drainage criteria of the Washington State Department of Ecology Storm Water Management Manual (current edition). The plan shall be of sufficient detail to clearly illustrate the "Best Management Practices" utilized are adequate to treat and control the runoff. Section 70 of the checklist refers to Transportation (new roads or improvements to existing roads). This impact is addressed by the policies of the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 7: GOALS AND POLICIES, Transportation and Circulation. The department advises that the following mitigation measure be implemented to alleviate the impact: Road and intersection plans are currently under review by the Public Works Department, and must meet final approval by the department. All road construction shall comply with the standards of and be performed under the inspection of the Jefferson County Department of Public Works. The Department of Public Works reviews the checklist only for impacts associated with issues within the scope of its regulatory authority. We do not represent that the above limits potential impacts in areas of concern. 100 io Recycled Paper r -I-,. . , • I DEP/IMF-NT OF PUBLIC WORKS • POLICY Title: MINIMUM STORM WATER REQUIREMENTS Policy No.s c D Pw Intent: 10-26-1 The intent of this policy is to promote the application of uniform storm water design standards, Issues: ° Jefferson County requires storm water/drainage/erosion control plans be developed by a project proponent, submitted to, and of Public Works prior to final County sub divisional by development Department project, a conditional use �' �i09� of a snbdlvtsioaai development review. hon, or a project undergoing environmental Policy Statement: To determine the appropriate standards to require the project proponent to use in developing a Storm water/draina$e/erosion control Public Works currently uses the following per' the Diem of Department of Ecology Storm Water docnmet3ts: 'washington State State Department of Transportation Management draulics M� ; and.Washington Highway Y Mamtal". Pnb11c Works Policy: The Department of Public Work shall use the current editions of Washington State Department of Ecology Storm Water Mane 'Washington State Department of Management Highway Fiydr`, and Manual" far.determining the applicable design standards. �� Approved as to form: kutb " /%4/9 Prosecuting Attorney Date . -Reviewed and Approval Recommended: • obert Nes.ttt bate ' County Engineer Approved: } J Director of Public Works ate Ti ITAL F.01 • JEFFERSOIPCOUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS y 1820 Jefferson Street PO. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 { (206) 385-9160 Gary A. Rowe, P.E., Director Robert G. Nesbitt, P.E., County Engineer MEMORANDUM TO: Jim Pearson =.ry 2 4 1994 ull Permit Center JEFFERSON COUNTY FROM: Bob Nesbitt PERMIT CENTER Carter Renner DATE: January 18, 1994 SUBJECT: TEAL VISTA--RESPONSE TO POPE RESOURCES LETTER OF JANUARY 6, 1994 I have the following responses to Mr. Cunningham's letter as per your request. Mitigation #1: Although the Department of Public Works did not draft the specific language Mr. Cunningham refers to, the department does use the Storm Water Management Manual in reviewing all development applications, and makes SEPA and application responses based upon the criteria in the manual. The department takes the position that the use of and reference to the manual is covered by policy (see "Department of Public Works Policy JCDPW 10-26-1 Minimum Storm Water Requirements") adopted October 10, 1992, and by reference in Ordinance 7-84, the Implementing Ordinance : State Environmental Policy Act, which states, in Section 8.20 (4) (c) (2,10): "(c) The county adopts by reference the policies in the following county plans, resolutions, ordinances and standards: 2. Jefferson County Subdivision Ordinance. 10. All other county resolutions, ordinances, plans, and guidelines effective after the date of this ordinance." The Jefferson County Subdivision Ordinance states (in part) in Section 6.405: "Drainage facilities adequate to prevent erosion, flooding or hazard to the use of the roads, lots, property, or facilities within the long plat, or to adjacent private or public property shall be installed according to a drainage plan approved by the Director of Public Works in accordance 1 100% Recycled Paper • • with County standards." In addition, the Storm Water Management Manual states: "I-1.3.1: Local Stormwater Program Basic Stormwater Program for All Counties and Cities The 1992 revisions to the PSWQMP changed the implementation of Ecology's program from a rules-based program to one implemented through language contained the int Plan. RCW 90.70.070 (1) states 'In conducting planning, regulator, and appeals actions, the state agencies and local governments identified in the plan must evaluate, and incorporate as applicable, subject to the availability of appropriated funds or other funding sources, the provisions of the plan, including any guidelines, standards and timetables contained in the plan.' " Consequently, the department disagrees with Mr. Cunningham's statement that "...the criteria contained within said document cannot be used as a basis to exercise substantive authority and mitigation." Mitigation #3: The same response as for Mitigation #1 applies. Mitigation #6: The department has no objection to specifying that the mitigation pertains only to the construction phase. The CCRs (see Mitigation #4) cover post- construction maintenance. Mitigation #7: The same response as for Mitigation #1 applies, with the following additional comments. The department does require adherence to the minimum standard shown in the Storm Water Management Manual for new development, called "Small Parcel Minimum Requirements", shown in Section I-2.3. This requirement is placed upon the development of the lots and is the responsibility of the lot owner. The manual states: "The following new development shall be required to control erosion and sediment during construction, to permanently stabilize soil exposed during construction, to comply with Small Parcel Requirements 1 through 4, and to prepare a Small Parcel Erosion and Sediment Control Plan: (a) Individual, detached, single family residences and duplexes. (b) Creation or addition of less than 5,000 square feet of impervious surface area. (c) Land disturbing activities of less than one acre." ( ) g Mitigation #8: The department has no comment. Mitigation #9: The department agrees. Mitigation #11: This department will confer with Pope Resources regarding traffic impacts associated with increased traffic on Teal Lake Road. Mitigation #12: This mitigation can be omitted. 2 • . • • Mitigation #13: This mitigation can be omitted. 3 S Oh If. JEFFERSON TRANSIT IVA 1615 W.Sims Way,Port Townsend, WA 98368 206/385-4777 February 5, 1993 Craig Ward Director, Jefferson County Planning and Building Department P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Subject: Creekside Subdivision Application LP05-92 Dear Mr. Ward: Jefferson Transit has reviewed the environmental checklist for the Creekside preliminary plat and has the following comments: As indicated in the document, Jefferson Transit does provide transit service along Paradise Bay Road past the site. For residents of Creekside to use public transit however the stops at Oak Bay Road and South Bay Lane are impractical and unsafe to access as pedestrians. A bus pullout with sufficient space for a few Creekside residents to park their vehicles in a park and ride mode at the intersection of the new collector road and Paradise Bay Road would mitigate this problem. Alternatively a pedestrian walkway from the development to a pullout along Paradise Bay Road would achieve the same end. Pedestrian and bicycle amenities are encouraged within the development and along the new collector road to encourage residents to use nonmotorized forms of transportation for local circulation. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposed development. Sincerely, .i� e � General Manager JH/jth cc Steve Iden, Operations Supervisor, Jefferson Transit • �CtIOn D!g�t�, et0 1 eilOr Oir •40 AIL Jefferson County P.O. Box 65003, Port Ludlow,WA 98365 District Office: 437-2899 Training/Safety: 437-2236 February 2, 1993 Jefferson County Commissioners P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Re: Deer Hollow LP10-92 and Creek Side LP05-92 Dear County Commissioners: In reference to the above developments, this is to inform you that Jefferson County Fire District #3 opposes any further development being approved until such time as the programmatic draft E.I.S. is completed. Fire District #3 considers any additional development by Pope as creating a cumulative impact to the Fire District. Sincerely, (— John D. Parker Chairman Fire District Board of Commissioners JP:jm cc: Craig Ward 410 410 (®D Point No Point Treaty Council �wt � ei Port Gamble S'Klallam • Lower Elwha Klallam • Jamestown Klallam • Skokomish ��� JEFFERSON COUNTY PLANNING 8 BUILDING i'EDT. FEB 17 1993 February 11, 1995 Craig Ward, Planner Jefferson County P. G. Box 1220 Pori. Townsend, Washington .'ear Mr. Ward. I am writing in regard to the "Creekss.de" and "Deer Hollow" subdivisions proposed by Pope Resources and pending State Environmental Policy Act Review. I believe that the Planning Department is acting in accordance with SEPA law regarding "phased review" in deciding ti suspend a SEPA decision on these specific projects until the Fin l Environmental Impact Statement covering the greater Port Ludlow area has been approved. To conduct SEPA review on specific projects before the general plan is completed will certainly open the County up to an unnecessary and expensive litigation. gSincerely, QQ�� ep. Bahis Habitat Biologist. Port Gamble S'Klallam Fisheries Office • 31974 Little Boston Road • Kingston, Washington 98346 • (206) V7-4792 4 .--/1 P Zee //2/At 0 1 Public Notices 5 PA RC(, Y/L NOTICE OF PENDING G SEPA 2W� -be -W THRESHOLD DETERMINATION "CREEKSIDE" SUBDIVISION POPE RESOURCES,APPLICANT ' ' .i , ! 7y LP05-92 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that 77\� IBC(,� I/t� Pope Resources has applied to ��L -(.4_ Jefferson County for approval of a long subdivision. The proposal includesthe following: (1) 61 single-family detached Ca / 1(r! V1.t'CL �/J v a residential lots; / (2)22 acres of open space; J�( -�j o� / / , (3)sanitary mmu sewer; �i�1� Cf fte 7ll.tiG/' t%? L' (4)community water;and (5) stormwater runoff detained on- site. ,�J �� ,' / ' The proposal evie sl is subject to the !� (/Y/' T/;c /��I1:LI/C � 4/YL2 f- following reviews byJefferson County: (1) Environmental review and threshold determination under the n State Environmental Policy e Act kJIY�L� (SEPA); and (2) Subdivision review under the Jefferson County Subdivision Ord- inance. �� Information on the proposal is ' available from the Jefferson County Planning and Building Department(PO Box 1220,Port Townsend,WA 98368). j �/� ,� / ,COMMENTS concerning SE PA 1/1"� > - 7 a -Zt- LZ 4.environmental review for this / proposal must be submitted to the G/� Planning Department by FRIDAY, v/l ,dL , /(���a,(_�� FEBRUARY 5, 1993. •/ 1 r r � THRESHOLD DETERMINATION on this proposal WILL NOT BE MADE /�� �I �� /ll until the FINAL PROGRAMMATIC /���f` 1 L GvL.e ..(/ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATE- GL MENT has been issued by Jefferson County. � A HEARING regarding subdivision ��' i 2%2o�-L-C !yam A �A eJ review under the Jefferson County later date. Ordinance will be held at a the date. Notice will be given prior to Jd� _ �� &I o , the hearing. ��/(.,� %�C�`�C/r /eV /OZ. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The / proposal site is located in the Poe �� �/J i/ Ludlow community,approximately 1/2 `c-e-[u mile south of Oak Bay Road on the west side of Paradise Bay Road,within Section 17,Township 28 North, 27 t �� � ` '�/�C.L g '7// • 1 East, WM. 079 9 1-1-27 • 4-12-etta /Lrietil, ‘4.-K__IL_eAc J.e 1(,;i=�%�o DPI , l/ i /(12e lieJe (L2hd/e4691524- lef? i(lejlyja? 4e6 ,,144/L14-&), 90 �h� �/j,/ . GPL-54 GREATER PORT LUDLOW COMMUNITY COUNCIL 04-04-93 P .O . Box 65456 Port Ludlow, WA 98365 Mr . Craig Ward , Director Jefferson County Planning Department P .O . Box 1220 v, ,, ,1 Port Townsend , WA 98368 r . RE : Notice of Pending SEPA Environmental Review/Threshold Deter- mination for "Deer Hollow" and " *. e" Subdivision Appl- ications . Dear Mr . Ward : Those citizens in the Port Ludlow Community who have been sup- porting the Jefferson County Commissioners in their efforts to provide an Environmental Impact Statement for current and future development in Port Ludlow over the next ten years wish to make the following comments requested in the reference Notices . 1 . We fully support the development of an appropriate Environ- mental Impact Statement which will provide necessary controls on potential environmental impacts and yet permit the applicant to attain maximum utilization of the infrastructure which is being provided in the development . 2 . We fully support the Planning Department 's position that the taking of any action as defined in WAC 197-11-704( 1)(a) and ( 2)(a)( i) should not occur until at least seven days after issuance of the Port Ludlow Program FEIS as stipulated in WAC 197-11-460( 5) . This position supports our findings in a meeting with Mark Huth on 10-20-92 as indicated in a letter from our Counsel Mark Beaufait to Mark Huth dated 11-02-92 . The Threshold Determinations might have flaws or omissions without full consideration of FEIS findings . 3 . We respectfully recommend that there be a Notice of an extension of time for completion of the FEIS which is per- mitted under WAC 197-11-460(6) since it is apparent that the FEIS will not be completed within the sixty days defined in this section of the WAC . 4 . We also respectfully suggest that there be an immediate ex- tension of your contract with Susan Thomas as EIS Coordinator so that she may take over administration of the development of the FEIS in the manner defined within the terms of her con- tract and those of the EIS Preparation Contract between the Jefferson County Commissioners and Applicant per the clause permitting renegotiation of this contract . It appears that the Applicant has been assuming this responsibility since Jan . 1 , which may be inappropriate . Very n/./ - y yours, fiver 'ardner , Acting President CC : Mark Huth Mark Beaufait i • transmittal memo 7671 r'of Me*• Post-R-brand tax ll//�- • w. .. _. _ - -r_rcmnt-nnE-rvl-OF`ECOLOGY P.O.BOX 47600.• Olympia, Wi rE }j7 S0 3D6)459,-6000 September 20, 1993 • PLANNING 8, BUILDING DEPT. SEP 2 3 1993 . Mr. Craig Ward Jefferson County PO Ros: 1220 Port Townsend WA 98368-0920 Dear ir. Ward: ` Thank yoU for the opportunity to comment during tr,e prethreshold consultation for the division o.. 34..2: acres into 70 residential lots east of Highland Drive proposed by Pope Resources (LP-06- 92) . We reviewed the document and have the following comments. • 1. Wetland buffers act to filter surface runoff, . reduce • orosion, screen adjacent noise, light and activity; and protect • • • critical habitat for wetland dependent species. Our review of available studies indicates that effective buffer widths range • from 50 feet to 300 feet, depending upon the values provided by • the wetland, the topography, soLls, existing vegetation, and the proposed adjacent land use. In some instances, enhancement of an • existing: buffer, such as planting of native vegetation, or constructing a fence, can improve the protection of wetland functions. In light of this, it may be appropriate to increase the proposed buffer widths. 2. Iii order to protect the wetland and buffer from construction ir..pacts, ' we recommend installation and maintenance of a fence at the wetland buffer perimeter prior to and during all clearing and construction activities. If a fence is not appropriate, we recommend that the wetland buffer be conspicuously flagged in the • ' field to. ciearly define the urea in which no work should occur. • . 3 . Stormwater runoff contains many pollutants which have an adverse impact on aquatic systems. Use of a natural system such as a wetland or pond in lieu of stormwater runoff treatment is not permitted under the State Water Pollution Control Act, Chapter 90.48 RCW. All runoff discharged into a receiving water, including wetlands, must be treated prior to discharge. TO further protect water quality and to maintain the other functions of buffers around wetlands and streams, we additionally recommend • that runoff be adequately pretreated before discharge into such . buffer areas. • • • • SEP-24-1993 0E:z4 P.01 . Mr. Craig Ward • September 20, 1993 page Two 4 . Suggested methods of treatment include the use of • infiltration, presettling basins, grassed swales, API or CPI-type oil/water separators, and wet ponds. We recommend the use of a _ i detention basin and or grass-lined swales to filter, runoff. Two hundred feet of crass-lined swale with less than 5 percent slope has been proven effective in removing particulate and hydrocarbon pollutants. This type of biofiitration has been shown to be more effective in improving water quality than most vault oil/water _ separator, systems. We recommend that the proposal be required to meet the standards of the Stormwater Management Manual for the pi et Sound Basin:. - 5. It is our understanding that this development Will be supplied by the Ludlow Water Company_ Adequate water rights have been secured for this project. 6. The Department of Ecology encourages the development of public water supply systems, whether publicly or privately owned, i to provide water to regional areas and developments. If you have any questions on comments i through 4, please call Mr. Mark Bentley with the Wetlands Program at (206) 493-9262 . Questions on comments 5 and 6, should be directed to Ms. Jill • VanHulle of the Water Resources Program at (206) 5B6-5560- Sincerely, ' "-- lis; Barbara J. Ritchie . Environmental Review Section BJP.:tky 93-6681 cc: Mark Bentley, Wetlands . Jill VanHulle, SWRO ' Sarah Barrie, SWRQ • ( SE P-24-1993 EA 24-149.: 09'54 P.02 • JEFFERSON COUNTY } z>. PLANNIN( & hU IWING DEPT. JAN 131994 STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY P.O.BOX 47606 • Olympia, } hingfan 98504.7600 • (206)459-6000 January 10, 1994 Mr. Craig R. Ward Jefferson County PO Box 1220 Port Townsend WA 98368 Dear Mr. Ward: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the determination of nonsignificance for the Ironwood subdivision proposed by Pope Resources (Lk 6-9L) . we reviexea the environmental cnecJlist ana have the following concerns. • The Water Resources Program concurs with Mitigation Conditions #10. If you have any questions, please call Ma. Jill Van Hulle with the Water ,Resources Program at (206) 586-5560. Sincerely, 71/14,-4P4- igt;Z:z M. Vernice San`te Environmental Review Section MVE' 93-9098 cc: Jill Van Hulle, SWRO • Sarah Barrie, SWRO • • • 0 • Jf14-1994 12:48 P.02 • • SECTION E NTY • JEFFERSON))pOG DEPT. PLAN' JAN 14 1994 Pope Resources A Limited Partnership 19245 Tenth Avenue Northeast P.O.Box 1780 Poulsbo,Washington 98370-0239 (206)697-6626 (206)697-1156 FAX January 13, 1994 Mr. Craig Ward, SEPA Responsible Official Jefferson County Planning & Building PO Box 1220 Port Townsend WA 98368 Re: "Creekside" MDNS Comments Dear Mr. Ward: Following is our response to the Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance for our "Ironwood" preliminary plat: MITIGATION #1. The County has not amended its Ordinance No. 7-84 (Implementing Ordinance: State Environmental Policy Act) to include the Washington Department of Ecology's Stormwater Management Manual. Consequently, the criteria contained within said document cannot be used as a basis to exercise substantive authority and mitigation. MITIGATION #3. See comment on Mitigation #1. MITIGATION #7. There is no specific environmental information clearly identified in any document related to this proposal which indicated potential significant, adverse impact will accrue to soils or water on the site from individual lot development. This measure should �1 ',VAC 97 1 6 /"S)(1..) -. be deleted inasthuch as it does not comply with vJr?,C 1y;-it-o6G��1�,u�. MITIGATION #14. Creekside traffic is not directed toward this intersection. This mitigation measure should be deleted. No environmental document on this proposal indicates clearly identified adverse environmental impacts on the Paradise Bay/Teal Lake intersection. Indeed, environmental documents confirm that said intersection will function at efficient service levels with the development of this specific project. MITIGATION #15. This measure should be deleted since County approval of road plans is required in Sections 6.309 and 6.40 of the Subdivision Ordinance and will also be expressed in plat conditions. In prescribing the rules for imposing mitigation measures, WAC 197-11-660(1)(e) requires that, "Before requiring mitigation measures, agencies shall consider whether local, state, or federal requirements and enforcement would mitigate an identified significant impact." Mr. Craig Ward January 13, 1994 Page 2 MITIGATION #16. This measure should be deleted. There area no significant adverse environmental impacts related to construction traffic clearly identified in any environmental document on this proposal. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Sincerely, ciL Linda Mueller Land Use Planner LM:ph • Olympic Environmental Council P.O. Box 1906, Port Townsend, WA 98368 (206)379-8442 (206)681-2642 January 13 , 1994 Craig Ward , Director JEFFERSON COUNTY Planning and Building Department PL4NNING &BUILDING DEPT. Jefferson County P .O. Box 1220 JAN 1 3 1994 Port. Townsend , WA 98368 Dear Craig : I would like to offer the following comments an the proposed MDNS on Creekside Long Plat, # LP705-92 and the Ironwood Subdivision , 4* LP-06-9P . 1 ) It is the position of Olympic Environmental Council that these subdivisions should not be approved until the availability of adequate water is established . There have been serious questions raised about the long-term ability of the so-called south aquifer that are the intended source of water for this development to meet the needs of these and other proposed subdivisions in the area The MDNS for these two projects contain the same language than a previously approved project (Springwood Subdivision ) has , as "mitigation" for possible adverse impact on the South Aquifer . This mitigation reguiresPope Resources to "dOcument the condition of the aquifers used as domestic water sources . . . . If groundwater monitoring . indicates an inadequate yield to support development of the hroponent's projects [note the plura13 . . . no additional plats which withdraw water from the South Aquifer shall be approved by Jefferson County until the groundwater adequacy issues have been resolved . " (mitigation # 10 in both of the current DNS 's . emphasis added Citing this monitoring requirement from the programmatic EIS does not constitute mitigation , nor justify the conclusion that this development will not have a significant adverse impact on the •ground water resources . It is nonsensical for the County to continue approving subdivisions which rely on an aquifer while the monitoring of that very aquifer to establish viability is in progress . The County should require the proponent to establish that adequate potable water exists before approving this subdivision . Sincerely , Steve Hayden Abundant Life Seed Foundation•Admiralty Audubon'Black Hills Audubon•C.A.US.E.•Friends of Kai Tai Lagoon •Friends of the Elwha•Jefferson County Watershed Council•No Oil Port'Olympic Park Associates•Olympic Rivers Council*Protect the Peninsula's Future•Quilcene Ancient Forest Coalition*Save Our State Park• Trinity United Methodist Church•Wash.Native Plant Society-Oly. Chap.•Wild Olympic Salmon' i • LAC." FPsyG REGAKvitsd: Forz.T '-3EVrtoPptEtJr• wa g. SERtncE FRAM. WENnt Lott; Nr-LE 43'7 Z--5']S Z-ftt,j, t$,1994 L ARt2.%4 i NCLISCD Ftao A Cot" Of -me i bt-w'c * AtmALysis m) 1514E $y mot,Gt,A5 'PoR- 114 &•t°. L. C. C • ( G-C rb -t LuoyoP3 CaNN*14t 'T`? CJNNc L) T . W1L- . 4ttjtE., y t& ACC VI-Fire F• bt� �1 •Ft& Ctne-f -r ANO PLAN Ep �EJEt .»PntENT arl4i , 1113 A y orts fr_occ3sep St Nett -To-co 146'6n To se A.e p •Fi Gtt 5 Ts Slt- otos -rb 'TAL P►efat i6P thNl rS 'to a _ C X03 °► , Arse CtAK-R-6o-r 31tiLV atin`T I") $E q5 ( Of Ac� bwec-ri sS (-ALL Mc o(L D=1:1v■c, CA S / WANKS., ( tan; W 12:,,,y--Lc JAN 18 1994 HEALTH DEPT. B•KRUTENAT 2069155 P. 02 , AV *N-t! aN C'PI'I Cr W(3 19 10 44..E'<120 U1N1 e p P -1' FFgi2soN COvNrt �SdtJ �'GRNNtrJ(r t M . Wc--NP; W tsKlam, 17-S-03 ft(. / IoIf 4a2�r• L ta.k 11-,,,A •et 6.366 3 A& (. ( c.,_, 1 AM c,JFtT4oa -r-t. C,urA, .f.:A "- 0 N TIA.X. Surst,t%.)�sIdc,1S , Cg.C.64( sio . R4PP--001,-)ao ; N -nNg.. Po10-..1 L...u174_0c....1 Gdl-of+ T AR-c,rr1 71-1C, APCa._kq C� o T+1 W A^C2.__.ski C-rer:- M 'The f a 0--f Lu v w w+ .Sys-1-. r,. -‘.fa s 11' b .S 4 C e`i e'G f; Ye.er K-- '►N Avm i Li6, °Q L-- 1,3 \--1-. rt ` cam+ k -S i ti ‘e--. '-i ir, 6 CCU t_p r r,-%E1,l7 .s )cC.l� E; p TR‘a, i R. E- STING W OtTEice ` G-V S ^-D 1k 6 ..` } Pri --Me Ca►n %'/ Pk NQ CE: 5 e `T" °FFt 1 HPoC Re.Ge-:,A ct'Pl N--S 'Foe- c'kkrA L■ C.- w 0-re-K._ sysT t;M_S pre C fl Li ti ,54,15 S'(Ps N'Z r Pr-rI EN C(.G fit'A 3 GS .z. --Nt N yon wt L L F ‘i N' -C-A, F\ Guc_.G'..s --gyp :-.13.E.766.10 ill Cwe PA r5k'1....i T G-% vCANJ THE. ofl 4Z. Car,mr 71- M.L0 -CS r.)c-, ,v\6 W AT'E. elk cr -r-5 -r o tatiitri 13 i vJL-'N.ry ; w - �-1 N w � PERMITNCENNTER F ' • • 1 r JEFFERSON COUNTY F A s" ., ,----= f i _ _: 7 _ PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT s. I 4, 4"''. N '''''`-ft`j _ 1 . ,`i:__,,_ r. 4.' i__.... ...,$: ;....128. fi P.O. Box 12 0 *'' 4,$.0 .; ,r g s`�i� 1. Port Thwnsend, Washi ton 98368• ' Fill t h.•;'1,-"1- 1 k Planning(206)3$5-9140 t t3 b Building(206)385-9141 J. —:. . A -_--, - ;____ ;___ FAX(206)385-9357 JEFFERSON COUNTY COURTHOUSE Craig Ward, Director PRELIMINARY r MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE AND LEAD AGENCY STATUS DATE: December 22, 1993 PROPONENT: Pope Resources PROPOSAL: Creekside Long Plat LP05-92. Subdivision of 34.09 acres into 61 lots for detached single family residences. Lots would range in size from 5,870 square feet to 7,790 square feet. Average lot size would be 6,360 square feet. The proposed subdivision would be accessed off of Paradise Bay Road by Creekside Drive. It would be served by internal roadways on 50' rights-of-way ending in 50' radius cul-de-sacs. 21 .92 acres would be in undeveloped dedicated open space. The proposal would be served by the Ludlow Water Company and Ludlow Sewer Company for water and sewer, respectively. The proposal includes provision of temporary and permanent storm water management facilities. PROJECT LOCATION: The proposal site is a portion of the West Half and the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 28 North, Range 1 East, W.M. The proposal site is located in Port Ludlow westerly of Paradise Bay Road, Inner Harbor Village Condominiums Phases 2 and 3, and the plat of Ludlow Point Village Division 2. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1 . In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, the proponent shall submit an engineered drainage and storm water management plan and report to the Jefferson County Public Works Department for review and approval. The plan shall include temporary and permanent erosion control measures and shall incorporate the storm water drainage criteria of the Washington State Department of Ecology Storm Water Management Manual (current edition). The plan shall be of sufficient detail to clearly illustrate that the Best Management Practices utilized are adequate to treat and control runoff. The plan shall also: * be designed and implemented to control dust and mud; stabilize the construction area, including entrances and roadways; prevent surface water runoff from entering areas to be cleared and graded; and prevent sedimentation from entering the waters of Port Ludlow Bay; Creekside Long Plat Preliminary MDNS Page 1 • • * specify that revegetation of exposed soils would be completed as soon as possible after construction to reduce exposed or erodible soils; and * specify measures and parties responsible for maintenance of permanent storm water management facilities. The temporary erosion control and storm water management plan shall be reviewed and approved prior to any clearing or grading on the site. The final storm water management plan shall be reviewed and approved and facilities installed prior to final plat approval. 2. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, native vegetation shall be maintained on open space areas. 3. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, the extent of soil disturbance associated with major clearing and grading activities shall conform to the guidelines and timing restrictions set forth in the Washington State Department of Ecology Storm Water Management Manual (current edition). Prior to any clearing and grading on the site, the proponent shall submit a construction phasing plan to the Jefferson County Public Works Department for review and approval. 4. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, the proponent shall establish a Maintenance Covenant as part of the Restrictive Covenants to ensure that the drainage system is maintained in accordance with the proponent's approved plans. The Maintenance Covenant shall be reviewed and approved by the Jefferson County Public Works Department prior to final plat approval. 5. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, temporary erosion control and storm water structures shall be inspected at least once per week during the construction period and sediment shall be removed from sedimentation ponds as necessary to ensure proper functioning. Disposal of sediment materials shall be subject to the approval of the Public Works Director in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and County regulations. 6. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, the proponent shall designate a qualified individual or firm who shall be responsible for ensuring that erosion and sedimentation control devices are correctly installed, that Best Management Practices are correctly implemented, and that BMP methods and maintenance schedules are followed; for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of practices and recommending modifications to the drainage plan as necessary if monitoring reveals that the practices are not effective; and for ensuring that reports and inspections are coordinated with the Jefferson County Department of Public Works. 7. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts related to soils and water, prior to conducting land disturbing activities on individual lots, the owner shall submit a small parcel temporary erosion and sedimentation control (TESC) plan to the Jefferson County Public Works Department for review and approval. Development of individual lots shall be carried out in conformance with the TESC plan. A notice to this effect shall be placed on the final plat. 8. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to marine water quality, the proponent shall continue and expand the existing Water Quality Monitoring Program which documents nonpoint effects on the Class AA "Extraordinary" water quality designation of Port Ludlow Bay under the direction of Jefferson County. The program shall ensure the performance of water quality control features and provide for upgrading, as necessary. The program shall include monitoring at appropriate background stations (i.e., Ludlow Creek and the intermittent streams on site and inner Port Ludlow Bay). The program shall allow for Creekside Long Plat Preliminary MDNS Page 2 • • adjustment of monitoring stations and water quality monitoring parameters depending on location of development activity and monitoring findings. On-going monitoring shall include evaluation of the proposed BMPs and testing of shellfish and sediment as appropriate. Ambient monitoring and storm event monitoring shall be conducted. The scope of work for each subsequent year's program shall be submitted to Jefferson County for review and approval by November 1 of the preceding year. If the monitoring indicates that the proponent's activities are causing a reduction in the water quality standards of Port Ludlow Bay below the Class AA "Extraordinary" designation, the proponent shall in its annual report so advise Jefferson County. 9. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to marine water quality, the proponent shall conduct a sewage treatment plant monitoring program which documents the effects of the development program on the capacity of the secondary sewage treatment plant. The monitoring shall record the number of connections, effluent volume, and effluent quality. It is acknowledged that the sole authority to monitor and regulate operation of the sewage treatment plant rests with the Washington Department of Ecology. Nothing in this mitigating measure is intended to supersede or conflict with the requirements of the proponent's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. WA-002120-2 issued pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act and companion statutes. Results of this monitoring shall be transmitted to the Jefferson County Planning and Building Department and the Washington Department of Ecology by March 15 of each year. 10. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to ground water resources and to document the condition of the aquifers used as domestic water sources, the proponent shall conduct a groundwater resource monitoring program. The scope of the program shall be mutually agreed upon by the proponent and Jefferson County prior to final plat approval. Monitoring shall include static groundwater levels and saltwater intrusion. If groundwater monitoring indicates an inadequate yield to support development of the proponent's projects, the proponent and/or the County shall immediately notify the Washington State Department of Ecology to request action or investigation pursuant to RCW 90.44 which provides authority for resolution of conflicts involving allocation of groundwater supplies. In the event that this situation occurs no additional plats which withdraw water from the South Aquifer shall be approved by Jefferson County until the groundwater adequacy issues have been resolved. 11 . In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to housing, prior to commencing development of the plat, the proponent shall set aside five spaces at their RV park for use by program related construction workers. The number of spaces shall be adjusted based on their use by construction workers and timing of individual development projects. 12. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to housing, prior to commencing development of the plat, the proponent shall notify its contractors that space is available at its recreational vehicle park so long as contractors' employees are working full-time on Port Ludlow projects. The proponent shall also monitor contractors' usage of the RV park, make appropriate adjustments for reserved spaces, and report to Jefferson County on an annual basis as to the effectiveness of this mitigation. 13. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to transportation, the proponent shall conduct a traffic monitoring program in cooperation with the Jefferson County Public Works Department to assess the impacts of the Creekside Plat and other Development Program plats on the State and County roadway system. The monitoring shall record trip generation, traffic counts on selected roadways, and level-of-service conditions at selected intersections. The proponent shall be responsible for employing a qualified traffic engineer to design and direct the traffic monitoring program in cooperation with other appropriate public agencies. The cost of retaining the traffic engineer shall be at the proponent's sole expense. Results Creekside Long Plat Preliminary MDNS Page 3 • • of the monitoring shall be submitted to Jefferson County by March 15 of each year. 14. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to transportation, if traffic monitoring indicates that intersection improvements are necessary at the Paradise Bay Road/Teal Lake Road intersection, the proponent shall enter into an agreement with the Jefferson County Public Works Department to contribute a share of the required funds that is proportionate to the impacts generated by the Creekside Plat. 15. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to transportation, road and intersection plans shall be submitted to the Jefferson County Public Works Department for review and approval. All road construction shall conform to the standards of and be performed under the inspection of the Jefferson County Public Works Department. 16. As necessary in order to minimize temporary construction traffic, the proponent in coordination with the Jefferson County Public Works Department shall designate truck routes and designate work hour restrictions. 17. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to school facilities, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall pay to the Chimacum School District $437.10 per lot to be applied toward provision of school facilities. Payment may be arranged through a voluntary agreement. 18. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to fire and emergency services, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall pay to the Jefferson County Fire District #3 $193.00 per lot to be applied toward provision of fire and emergency services. Payment may be arranged through a voluntary agreement. These mitigation measures are intended to eliminate probable significant environmental impacts identified by Jefferson County through the EIS for the Port Ludlow Development Program and review of the Environmental Checklist submitted by the proponent, inspection of the site by Jefferson County Planning and Building Department staff, and from public comments. These impacts are to: * Soils related to erosion of soils cleared during construction of access roads, cul-de-sacs, and homesites; * Water related to soil erosion and construction of impervious surfaces resulting in increased storm water runoff containing contaminants and sediment; * Housing related to the availability of housing due to an influx of workers employed in construction of the project; * Transportation due to traffic generation and decline in the level of service at intersections; * Schools related to the Chimacum School District's capacity to provide adequate educational facilities for students that would be generated by the proposal; * Fire and emergency services related to Fire Protection District #3's capacity to provide fire and emergency services. Jefferson County policies which address these impacts are contained in the Jefferson County SEPA Implementing Ordinance, the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan, the Jefferson County Subdivision Ordinance, and the policies and standards of the Jefferson County Public Works Department. Specific policies are cited in the project record. NOTICE OF LEAD AGENCY: Jefferson County has determined that it is the lead agency for the above-described proposal. Creekside Long Plat Preliminary MDNS Page 4 • • NOTICE OF NONSIGNIFICANCE: Jefferson County has determined that the above-described proposal conducted in conformance with the mitigation measures listed above would not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment, and an environmental impact statement is not required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the Jefferson County Planning and Building Department and an inspection of the site. COMMENT PERIOD: This determination is issued pursuant WAC 197-11-340(2). Jefferson County will not act on the above-described proposal for at least fifteen days from the date of this determination. Comments must be submitted by THURSDAY JANUARY 13, 1994 to the Jefferson County Planning and Building Department (PO Box 1220, Port Townsend, Washington 98368; Telephone (206) 385-9140). ig R. W rd, Director Jefferson County Planning and Building Department Creekside Long Plat Preliminary MDNS Page 5 S Threshold Determination Routing DNS, environmental checklist, staff report, and site plan to: Washington State Department of Ecology Washington State Department of Natural Resources Washington State Department of Transportation Washington State Department of Wildlife Chimacum School District Jefferson County Fire District No. 3 Peter Bahls, Port Gamble S'Klallam Fisheries Olympic Environmental Council DNS and staff report to: Jefferson County Public Works Department Jefferson County Health Department Jefferson Transit Applicant Notice of DNS: APOs Interested Parties (See comment letters) Port Townsend-Jefferson County Leader Ibis Determination of Nonsignificance was mailed to the above agencies and parties on I C_ev'sv\ ) c 2Z , 1993. By L. ac' C Title 0_ C:\PopePlat\Crekside.DNS Creekside Long Plat Preliminary MDNS Page 6 r JEFFERSON COUNTY•_l ,fs i PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT �,. J 1 ,� ra. T 1 T- ' t P.O.,3 ' Box 1220 I -. 1 5 : ar T}.. Port Townsend, Washington 98368 tI ' ,,;" _ =? Planning(206)385-9140 ties �i� ,y,vy+s--... Building(206)3185-9141 Zi 7 - - -- = FAX(206)385-9357 JEFFERSON COUNTY COURTHOUSE Craig Ward, Director MEMORANDUM To: Craig Ward, Planning Director/SEPA Res ons ' le Official From: James W. Pearson, Associate Planner Date: December 20, 1993 Re: Request for Threshold Determination under the Rules of the State Environmental Policy Act (WAC 197-11) Applicant: Pope Resources Proposal description: LP05-92 Creekside Long Plat. Subdivision of 34 . 09 acres into 61 lots for detached single family residences. Lots would range in size from 5, 870 square feet to 7 , 790 square feet. Average lot size would be 6, 360 square feet. The proposed subdivision would be accessed off of Paradise Bay Road by Creekside Drive which is outside of the boundary of the proposed plat. It would be served by internal roadways on 50' rights-of-way ending in 50' radius cul-de-sacs. Lots 27- 29 would be served by a private deadend drive constructed on a 30' easement. 3 .26 acres would be taken up by roads and the private drive. 21. 92 acres would be in undeveloped dedicated open space. The proposal would be served by the Ludlow Water Company and Ludlow Sewer Company for water and sewer, respectively. The proposal includes provision of temporary and permanent storm water management facilities. Legal Description: The proposal site is a portion of the West Half and the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 28 North, Range 1 East, W.M. Project location: The proposal site is located in Port Ludlow westerly of Paradise Bay Road, Inner Harbor Village Condominiums Phases 2 and 3 , and the plat of Ludlow Point Village Division 2 . Site Inspection: November 11, 1993 Environmental Data: * Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Port Ludlow Development Program issued by Jefferson County April, 1993 . * Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance for the construction of Creekside Drive issued by Jefferson County May 11, 1993 . A. PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: This section is intended to supplement the Environmental Impact Statement for the Port Ludlow Development Program and the applicant's environmental checklist with information from Planning Department sources and comments and to analyze the proposal in order to identify potential environmental impacts. Information available in the environmental checklist is not repeated in this document unless it is necessary to do so as part of staff's analysis. * EARTH The Soil Survey for Jefferson County indicates that the soils on site are Olete-Alderwood complex and Everett series. They are gravelly, well-drained loam soils with slopes from 0-30% . The environmental checklist indicates that there are 100% slopes on open space areas. The Olete soils are underlain by basalt formations. Runoff is slow to medium and soil erosion hazard is slight to moderate. The portion of the site proposed for residential lots occupies a moderately sloping plateau approximately 100' in elevation above the Paradise Bay Road. There is an existing unimproved road that provides access off of the Paradise Bay Road to the site. This road is on the alignment of the 60 ' wide right-of-way for Creekside Drive that would be constructed to serve the site. Construction of this road has been reviewed previously and a mitigated determination of nonsignificance issued on May 11, 1993 . There would be clearing, grading, and filling to construct roads, driveways, residences, and utilities. The proposal includes implementation of a storm water management plan and dedication of open space on most areas of steep slopes. Staff Recommendation: Based on the information provided in the environmental checklist, the information and analysis contained in the Development Program 2 EIS, and the comments of the Public Works Department, staff concludes that the proposal is likely to result in significant adverse impacts to Earth as the result of erosion of soils exposed during the construction of roads, driveways, residences, and utilities. These impacts should be avoided by implementing the following mitigation measures developed through the Programmatic EIS process and recommended by the Public Works Department: * The proponent shall submit an engineered drainage and storm water management plan and report to the Jefferson County Public Works Department for review and approval. The plan shall include temporary and permanent erosion control measures and shall incorporate the storm water drainage criteria of the Washington State Department of Ecology Storm Water Management Manual (current edition) . The plan shall be of sufficient detail to clearly illustrate that the Best Management Practices utilized are adequate to treat and control runoff. The plan shall also: * be designed and implemented to control dust and mud; stabilize the construction area, including entrances and roadways; prevent surface water runoff from entering areas to be cleared and graded; and prevent sedimentation from entering the waters of Port Ludlow Bay; * specify that revegetation of exposed soils would be completed as soon as possible after construction to reduce exposed or erodible soils; and * specify measures and parties responsible for maintenance of permanent storm water management facilities. The temporary erosion control and storm water management plan shall be reviewed and approved prior to any clearing or grading on the site. The final storm water management plan shall be reviewed and approved and facilities installed prior to final plat approval. * Native vegetation shall be maintained on open space areas. * The extent of soil disturbance associated with major clearing and grading activities shall conform to the guidelines and timing restrictions set forth in the Washington State Department of Ecology Storm Water Management Manual (current edition) . Prior to any clearing and grading on the site, the proponent shall submit a construction phasing plan to the Jefferson County Public Works Department for review and approval. * Temporary erosion control and storm water structures shall be inspected at least once per week during the construction period and sediment shall be removed from sedimentation ponds as necessary to ensure proper functioning. Disposal of sediment materials shall be subject to the approval of the Public Works Director in accordance with applicable federal, state, and County regulations. * Prior to commencing grading on the site, the proponent shall designate a qualified individual or firm who shall be responsible for ensuring that erosion and sedimentation control devices are 3 III 411 correctly installed, that Best Management Practices are correctly implemented, and that BMP methods and maintenance schedules are followed; for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of practices and recommending modifications to the drainage plan as necessary if monitoring reveals that the practices are not effective; and for ensuring that reports and inspections are coordinated with the Jefferson County Department of Public Works. * Prior to conducting land disturbing activities on individual lots, the owner shall submit a small parcel temporary erosion and sedimentation control (TESC) plan to the Jefferson County Public Works Department for review and approval. Development of individual lots shall be carried out in conformance with the TESC plan. A notice to this effect shall be placed on the final plat. Analysis of the information provided in the Development Program EIS and of soils and slopes on the site, review of road construction plans and erosion and sedimentation control measures and inspection of their implementation by the Public Works Department, and consideration of the proposed open space dedication and recommended mitigation measures indicate that significant adverse impacts due to soil erosion can be avoided. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to Earth is not necessary. * AIR Staff recommendation: No significant adverse environmental impacts have been identified. No mitigation measures are recommended. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to Air is not necessary. * WATER Staff Recommendation: Based on the information provided in the environmental checklist, the information and analysis contained in the Development Program EIS, and the comments of the Public Works Department, staff concludes that the proposal is likely to result in significant adverse impacts to Water related to: * Erosion of soils and increased runoff from impervious surfaces that would carry sediments and pollutants into surface waters; and * Depletion of ground water resources due to increased provision of water to this proposal and other projects proposed in the ten year development program. These impacts should be avoided by implementing the mitigation measures listed above for Earth as well as the following mitigation measures developed through the Development Program EIS process: * The proponent shall continue and expand the existing Water Quality Monitoring Program which documents nonpoint effects on the Class AA "Extraordinary" water quality designation of Port Ludlow Bay under the direction of Jefferson County. The program shall ensure the performance of water quality control features and 4 provide for upgrading, as necessary. The program shall include monitoring at appropriate background stations (i. e. , Ludlow Creek and the intermittent streams on site and inner Port Ludlow Bay) . The program shall allow for adjustment of monitoring stations and water quality monitoring parameters depending on location of development activity and monitoring findings. On-going monitoring shall include evaluation of the proposed BMPs and testing of shellfish and sediment as appropriate. Ambient monitoring and storm event monitoring shall be conducted. The scope of work for each subsequent year's program shall be submitted to Jefferson County for review and approval by November 1 of the preceding year. If the monitoring indicates that the proponent' s activities are causing a reduction in the water quality standards of Port Ludlow Bay below the Class AA "Extraordinary" designation, the proponent shall in its annual report so advise Jefferson County. * The proponent shall conduct a sewage treatment plant monitoring program which documents the effects of the development program on the capacity of the secondary sewage treatment plant. The monitoring shall record the number of connections, effluent volume, and effluent quality. It is acknowledged that the sole authority to monitor and regulate operation of the sewage treatment plant rests with the Washington Department of Ecology. Nothing in this mitigating measure is intended to supersede or conflict with the requirements of the proponent's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. WA-002120-2 issued pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act and companion statutes. Results of this monitoring shall be transmitted to the Jefferson County Planning and Building Department and the Washington Department of Ecology by March 15 of each year. Based on the ground water analysis contained in the Development Program EIS, staff concludes that the proposal could have a significant adverse impact on ground water resources. However, this impact can be avoided by implementing the following ground water monitoring measure developed through the Programmatic EIS process and required as a mitigation measure for the proponent's Plat of Deer Hollow and, if necessary, requiring the proponent to take actions to ensure an adequate supply of potable water: * In order to document the condition of the aquifers used as domestic water sources, the proponent shall conduct a groundwater resource monitoring program. The scope of the program shall be mutually agreed upon by the proponent and Jefferson County prior to final plat approval. Monitoring shall include static groundwater levels and saltwater intrusion. If groundwater monitoring indicates an inadequate yield to support development of the proponent's projects, the proponent and/or the County shall immediately notify the Washington State Department of Ecology to request action or investigation pursuant to RCW 90. 44 which provides authority for resolution of conflicts involving allocation of groundwater supplies. In the event that this situation occurs, no additional 5 411 410 plats which withdraw water from the South Aquifer shall be approved by Jefferson County until the groundwater adequacy issues have been resolved. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to Water is not necessary. * PLANTS No endangered or rare plant species have been identified on the site. Staff recommendation: No significant adverse environmental impacts have been identified. No mitigation measures are recommended. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to Plants is not necessary. * ANIMALS No priority species or habitats have been identified on the site. Staff recommendation: No significant adverse environmental impacts have been identified. No mitigation measures are recommended. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to Animals is not necessary. * ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES Staff Recommendation: No significant adverse environmental impacts have been identified. No mitigation measures are recommended. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to Energy and Natural Resources is not necessary. * ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Staff Recommendation: No significant adverse environmental impacts have been identified. No mitigation measures are recommended. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to Environmental Health is not necessary. * NOISE Staff Recommendation: No significant adverse environmental impacts have been identified. No mitigation measures are recommended. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to Noise is not necessary. * LAND AND SHORELINE USE Staff Recommendation: The proposal is subject to plat review to determine consistency with the applicable portions of the Comprehensive Plan and Subdivision Ordinance. * HOUSING Staff Recommendation: The Development Program EIS finds that the Port Ludlow Development Program of which this proposal is a component could have 6 411 411 significant impacts related to the availability of housing due to an influx of workers employed in construction and operation of program development projects. The EIS proposes the following two mitigation measures intended to avoid these impacts: * Pope Resources could designate a minimum of 20 spaces at their existing RV park at the Port Ludlow commercial area for year-round use by construction workers generated by the development program; and * Pope Resources could develop a mobile home park within commuting distance of Port Ludlow to provide affordable housing opportunities for employees generated by the development program. Because this proposal is one of the first development program projects, it is not clear to what extent housing impacts will occur. A mitigation measure for previous Pope Resources plats in the development program area have required Pope Resources to set aside five spaces at their RV park for use by program related construction workers. The number of spaces will be adjusted based on their use by construction workers and timing of individual development projects. This should be required for this proposal also. In addition the requirement for Pope Resources to notify its contractors that space is available at its recreational vehicle park, monitor contractors' usage of the RV park, make appropriate adjustments for reserved spaces, and report to Jefferson County on an annual basis as to the effectiveness of this mitigation should also be required. Analysis of the information provided in the Development Program EIS and consideration of the recommended mitigation measures indicate that significant adverse impacts related to Housing can be avoided. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to Housing is not necessary. * AESTHETICS Staff Recommendation: No significant adverse environmental impacts have been identified. No mitigation measures are recommended. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to Aesthetics is not necessary. * LIGHT AND GLARE Staff Recommendation: No significant adverse environmental impacts have been identified. No mitigation measures are recommended. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to Light and Glare is not necessary. * RECREATION Staff Recommendation: No significant adverse environmental impacts have been identified. No mitigation measures are recommended. Additional analysis of the 7 411 411 proposal and its effects related to Recreation is not necessary. * HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION The site is on uplands that are more than 500' back from and at a substantially higher elevation than the shoreline which is where Native American archeological resources are typically located. The proponent in conjunction with a professional archaeologist, local tribes, and the State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation has prepared a protocol for use by construction workers in the event that archaeological resources are discovered on site. Staff recommendation: No significant adverse environmental impacts have been identified. No mitigation measures are recommended. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to Historic and Cultural Preservation is not necessary. * TRANSPORTATION Staff recommendation: The Development Program EIS finds that the Port Ludlow Development Program of which this proposal is a component would have significant impacts related to traffic generation and declines in level of service at the Paradise Bay Road/SR104 , Teal Lake Road/SR104 , SR19/SR104 and Paradise Bay Road/Teal Lake Road intersections. The Washington Department of Transportation has expressed their preference for routing addition traffic from Port Ludlow to the SR19/SR104 intersection instead of to Paradise Bay Road and Teal Lake Road. In order to achieve this, SR19/104 intersection improvements would be necessary. The WDOT has not developed a conceptual plan or a capital improvement plan with cost estimate and schedule for this intersection. Traffic studies do not indicate that the Creekside Plat itself would have a significant adverse impact on the SR104/SR19 intersection. The EIS projects that subsequent monitoring may indicate that Development Program plats would have a significant impact on this intersection. In this event mitigation could be required that is commensurate with the I identified impacts or plat approval could be denied. The identified impacts should be avoided by implementing the following mitigation measures recommended by the Public Works Department and developed through the Development Program EIS process: * The proponent shall conduct a traffic monitoring program in cooperation with the Jefferson County Public Works Department to assess the impacts of the Creekside Long Plat and other Development Program plats on the State and County roadway system. The monitoring shall record trip generation, traffic counts on selected roadways, and level-of-service conditions at selected 8 410 410 intersections. The proponent shall be responsible for employing a qualified traffic engineer to design and direct the traffic monitoring program in cooperation with other appropriate public agencies. The cost of retaining the traffic engineer shall be at the proponent's sole expense. Results of the monitoring shall be submitted to Jefferson County by March 15 of each year. * If traffic monitoring indicates that intersection improvements are necessary at the Paradise Bay Road/Teal Lake Road intersection, the proponent shall enter into an agreement with the Jefferson County Public Works Department to contribute a share of the required funds that is proportionate to the impacts generated by the Creekside Plat. * Road and intersection plans shall be submitted to the Jefferson County Public Works Department for review and approval. All road construction shall conform to the standards of and be performed under the inspection of the Jefferson County Public Works Department. Road approach permits shall be obtained from the Public Works Department and approaches developed to the standards set forth in the permit. * As necessary in order to minimize temporary construction traffic, the proponent in coordination with the Jefferson County Public Works Department shall designate truck routes and designate work hour restrictions. Analysis of the information provided in the Development Program EIS and consideration of the recommended mitigation measures indicate that significant adverse impacts to the State and County road system due to traffic generated by the proposal can be avoided. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to Transportation is not necessary. * PUBLIC SERVICES Staff recommendation: The Development Program EIS finds that the Port Ludlow Development Program of which this proposal is a component would have significant adverse impacts on the Chimacum School District's capacity to provide educational facilities. The Chimacum School District has informed Jefferson County that they do not have adequate existing capacity to provide educational facilities to additional students. The District would incur approximate annual operating costs of $5, 164 and capital costs of $8 , 888 per student. The EIS also finds that the Port Ludlow Development Program of which this proposal is a component would have significant adverse impacts on the Jefferson County Fire District No. 3 's capacity to provide fire and emergency services. On September 13 , 1993 the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners considered the issues of providing adequate school facilities and 9 • fire and emergency services related to Pope Resources' Plat of the Inn at Port Ludlow. After considering testimony from the Chimacum School District, Fire District #3 , and County staff, the Board determined that adequate provision could be made by requiring Pope Resources to pay the School District $437 . 10 per lot to provide school facilities and to pay the Fire District $193 . 00 per lot to provide fire and emergency services. Payment is required prior to final plat approval. This action by the Board was subsequently adopted by the Board as a SEPA mitigation measure in order to avoid significant impacts related to Pope Resources' Deer Hollow Long Plat. These measures should also be required as mitigation for school and fire district impacts related to this proposal. The proponent proposes to design and construct water systems with flow volumes and hydrants sufficient to meet fire protection standards and to design and construct roads to County standards. Further review of the proposal to ensure consistency with fire protection standards would occur during plat review. Additional mitigation measures to ensure this are not necessary. Analysis of the information provided in the Development Programmatic EIS and consideration of the recommended mitigation measures indicate that significant adverse impacts to the Chimacum School District and Jefferson County Fire District No. 3 can be avoided. Additional analysis of the proposal and its effects related to Public Services is not necessary. B. COMMENTS FROM AGENCIES, THE PUBLIC, AND TRIBES The department has received written comments from the following agencies, persons, or tribes in response to its Notice of Pending Threshold Determination regarding the referenced proposal. Copies of written comments are attached. * Jefferson Transit commented that it would not practical for Creekside residents to use the transit stops at Oak Bay Road and South Bay Lane. There should be provision for a bus pull out on the Paradise Bay Road that has sufficient space for a few Creekside residents to park their vehicles or for a pedestrian walkway from the development to a pullout along Paradise Bay Road. Staff response: This does not constitute a significant adverse impact. A mitigation to this effect is not recommended. Staff notes that the Subdivision Ordinance requires that plats make adequate provision for transit stops. Staff recommends that this be considered during plat review. * Greater Port Ludlow Community Council, Jefferson County Fire Protection District #3, and Point No Point Treaty Council supported the County's determination not to issue a threshold determination 10 411 411 until after the Final Development Program EIS is issued. * E. Zahn stated that irresponsibly overpopulating aliens have invaded California, driving Californians northward. She does not believe that there is adequate provision for sewers, water, and power. She thanked this department for wisdom. Staff response: Comments noted. See sections regarding water, energy, and utilities. C. PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF RECOMMENDATION Potential Significant Adverse Environmental Impacts: After review of the Environmental Checklist and other available material and inspection of the site, Planning staff recommends consideration of the following potential significant adverse environmental impacts to: * Soils related to erosion of soils cleared during construction of access roads, cul-de-sacs, and homesites; * Water related to soil erosion and construction of impervious surfaces resulting in increased storm water runoff containing contaminants and sediment and depletion of ground water resources due to increased provision of water to this proposal and other projects proposed in the ten year development program; * Housing due to the influx of construction workers; * Transportation due to traffic generation and decline in the level of service at intersections; * Schools related to the Chimacum School District's capacity to provide adequate educational facilities for students that would be generated by the proposal; * Fire and emergency services related to Fire Protection District #3 's capacity to provide fire and emergency services. County policies which address these impacts are contained in the Jefferson County SEPA Implementing Ordinance, the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan, and the Jefferson County Subdivision Ordinance, and the Jefferson County Public Works Department Standards. The following SEPA Ordinance policies apply: * 6.210 Goals 1. To protect life and property from flooding, uneven settlement, landslides, erosion, and other disruptions that may be associated with environmentally sensitive areas. 2 . To recognize the unique natural constraints and characteristics of sensitive areas and to maintain or enhance the quality of such areas. 3 . To avoid needless public and private costs from actions within environmentally sensitive areas resulting in negative impacts such as damage to life and property. 4 . To promote public health, safety, and the general welfare. * 6.220 Policies 1. Proposed actions within environmentally sensitive areas 11 . . should be managed according to the severity of natural characteristics and constraints. 3 . The existing vegetative cover should be maintained on all project sites to the greatest extent feasible. Where removal of vegetation is necessary, a reasonable effort shall be made to replant vegetative cover, stabilize the soil, and prevent erosion. 5. Land surface modifications should not induce excessive erosion, destabilize adjacent lands, or unnecessarily scar the landscape. 6. The use of cluster design proper surface water management, and other mitigative measures should be used to avoid development in unsuitable lands and minimize hazards to life and property. 8. The modification of marsh and wetland areas should be avoided. 9. Significant wildlife habitats should be protected from the deleterious effects of proposed actions. 10. Project design should avoid impacts to areas of ponding, highly compressible soils, and steep slopes. 11. In landslide areas and on unstable slopes, land modifications should not be allowed without a favorable geologic investigation by a qualified soils engineer or engineering geologist that demonstrates that hazardous conditions do not exist or that mitigative measures can ensure safety to life and property. * 8.20 Substantive Authority (4) (a) The County shall coordinate plans, functions, programs, and resources to the end that the state and its citizens may: (i) Fulfill the responsibility of each generation as trustee of the environment for succeeding generations; (ii) Ensure for all the people of Washington safe, healthful, productive, and aesthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings; (iii) Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risk to health or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences; and (iv) Preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage. The following Comprehensive Plan policies apply: * Countywide Growth Policies: 1. The natural beauty and "liveability" of Jefferson County should be a primary consideration in the location, timing, and quantity of growth. Natural amenities identified as important to the County's character and well-being should be considered. 5. The taxpaying public of Jefferson County should not bear the costs of private development. Developers should assume the costs of roads, water systems, and other amenities necessary to make their projects operational. * Residential Development Policies: 3. Concentration of residential development should be related to 12 411 411 employment centers, transportation systems, and public facilities. The provision and close proximity of roads, utilities, drainage, emergency services, drainage, garbage disposal, schools, and other community services is deemed necessary to sound residential development. 4 . Residential development should be located, designed, and constructed with respect to such natural conditions as soil capability, geologic features, probability of flooding, and topography. 5. Ground water resources, ground water recharge areas, and beaches should be protected from residential wastes. 13 . Residential developers should assume all direct costs of their projects such as roads, access, parking, surface drainage, water and sewer systems, etc. The taxpaying public of Jefferson County should not bear the future costs of private development due to inadequate initial construction. * Transportation and Circulation Policies: 2 . Transportation and circulation facilities should be located, designed, and installed to meet reasonably foreseeable future needs. 5. Facilities associated with transportation and circulation should be located and designed with respect to such natural features as topography, soils, geology, floodplains, streamways, shorelines, marshes, and aquifer recharge areas. The following Subdivision Ordinance policies apply: 6.304 Schools and Schoolgrounds: Provision of school sites or construction of additional classrooms may be required as a condition of final plat approval. 6. 305 Transit\School Bus Stops: Applications shall be reviewed to determine whether transit or school bus stops are necessary to promote public access to safe and convenient travel. 6.307 Open Space Land: A minimum of 10% of the total gross area of the subdivision shall be designated as open space by dedication on the plat or recording of a separate instrument. 6.307 Roads: Roads shall be designed with appropriate consideration for existing and projected roads, anticipated traffic volumes and patterns, topographic and drainage conditions, public convenience and safety, and the proposed uses of the land served. Engineering design shall conform with officially adopted Jefferson County road standards. 6.402 Off-site Traffic Impacts: The Public Works Director may require preparation of a traffic impact study to determine the potential for off-site traffic impacts on existing roads. Based on the findings of the traffic study, the applicant may be assessed a traffic impact fee to offset costs incurred by the County in upgrading off-site roads affected by the subdivision. Impact fee shall be proportionately based and accurately reflect the additional burden upon existing off-site roads. 6.405 Drainage: Drainage facilities adequate to prevent erosion, flooding, or hazard to the use of the development shall be installed according to a drainage plan approved by the Public Works 13 III III Director. 6. 408 Fire Protection: Applicants for long subdivisions where the smallest lot is less than two acres shall provide adequate fire protection measures in accordance with the Uniform Fire Code and local fire district recommendations. Planning Department Staff Recommendation: Planning staff has reviewed the referenced proposal, the EIS for the Port Ludlow Development Program, the environmental checklist, public comments, and other available material and has inspected the site. Staff recommends finding that the information in the record is sufficient to evaluate the proposal. Based on the preceding analysis, staff recommends finding that the identified significant environmental impacts are likely to occur and can be avoided by adequate mitigation measures. Staff therefore recommends issuing a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance for the proposal with the following mitigation conditions: 1. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, the proponent shall submit an engineered drainage and storm water management plan and report to the Jefferson County Public Works Department for review and approval. The plan shall include temporary and permanent erosion control measures and shall incorporate the storm water drainage criteria of the Washington State Department of Ecology Storm Water Management Manual (current edition) . The plan shall be of sufficient detail to clearly illustrate that the Best Management Practices utilized are adequate to treat and control runoff. The plan shall also: * be designed and implemented to control dust and mud; stabilize the construction area, including entrances and roadways; prevent surface water runoff from entering areas to be cleared and graded; and prevent sedimentation from entering the waters of Port Ludlow Bay; * specify that revegetation of exposed soils would be completed as soon as possible after construction to reduce exposed or erodible soils; and * specify measures and parties responsible for maintenance of permanent storm water management facilities. The temporary erosion control and storm water management plan shall be reviewed and approved prior to any clearing or grading on the site. The final storm water management plan shall be reviewed and approved and facilities installed prior to final plat approval. 2 . In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, native vegetation shall be maintained on open space areas. 3 . In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, the extent of soil disturbance associated with major clearing and grading activities shall conform to the guidelines and timing restrictions set forth in the Washington State Department of Ecology Storm Water Management Manual (current edition) . Prior to any clearing and grading on the site, the proponent shall submit 14 i • a construction phasing plan to the Jefferson County Public Works Department for review and approval. 4. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, the proponent shall establish a Maintenance Covenant as part of the Restrictive Covenants to ensure that the drainage system is maintained in accordance with the proponent's approved plans. The Maintenance Covenant shall be reviewed and approved by the Jefferson County Public Works Department prior to final plat approval. 5 . In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, temporary erosion control and storm water structures shall be inspected at least once per week during the construction period and sediment shall be removed from sedimentation ponds as necessary to ensure proper functioning. Disposal of sediment materials shall be subject to the approval of the Public Works Director in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and County regulations. 6. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, the proponent shall designate a qualified individual or firm who shall be responsible for ensuring that erosion and sedimentation control devices are correctly installed, that Best Management Practices are correctly implemented, and that BMP methods and maintenance schedules are followed; for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of practices and recommending modifications to the drainage plan as necessary if monitoring reveals that the practices are not effective; and for ensuring that reports and inspections are coordinated with the Jefferson County Department of Public Works. 7 . In order to avoid significant adverse impacts related to soils and water, prior to conducting land disturbing activities on individual lots, the owner shall submit a small parcel temporary erosion and sedimentation control (TESC) plan to the Jefferson County Public Works Department for review and approval. Development of individual lots shall be carried out in conformance with the TESC plan. A notice to this effect shall be placed on the final plat. 8 . In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to marine water quality, the proponent shall continue and expand the existing Water Quality Monitoring Program which documents nonpoint effects on the Class AA "Extraordinary" water quality designation of Port Ludlow Bay under the direction of Jefferson County. The program shall ensure the performance of water quality control features and provide for upgrading, as necessary. The program shall include monitoring at appropriate background stations (i.e. , Ludlow Creek and the intermittent streams on site and inner Port Ludlow Bay) . The program shall allow for adjustment of monitoring stations and water quality monitoring parameters depending on location of development activity and monitoring findings. On-going monitoring 15 . 4 shall include evaluation of the proposed BMPs and testing of shellfish and sediment as appropriate. Ambient monitoring and storm event monitoring shall be conducted. The scope of work for each subsequent year's program shall be submitted to Jefferson County for review and approval by November 1 of the preceding year. If the monitoring indicates that the proponent's activities are causing a reduction in the water quality standards of Port Ludlow Bay below the Class AA "Extraordinary" designation, the proponent shall in its annual report so advise Jefferson County. 9 . In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to marine water quality, the proponent shall conduct a sewage treatment plant monitoring program which documents the effects of the development program on the capacity of the secondary sewage treatment plant. The monitoring shall record the number of connections, effluent volume, and effluent quality. It is acknowledged that the sole authority to monitor and regulate operation of the sewage treatment plant rests with the Washington Department of Ecology. Nothing in this mitigating measure is intended to supersede or conflict with the requirements of the proponent's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. WA-002120-2 issued pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act and companion statutes. Results of this monitoring shall be transmitted to the Jefferson County Planning and Building Department and the Washington Department of Ecology by March 15 of each year. 10. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to ground water resources and to document the condition of the aquifers used as domestic water sources, the proponent shall conduct a groundwater resource monitoring program. The scope of the program shall be mutually agreed upon by the proponent and Jefferson County prior to final plat approval. Monitoring shall include static groundwater levels and saltwater intrusion. If groundwater monitoring indicates an inadequate yield to support development of the proponent's projects, the proponent and/or the County shall immediately notify the Washington State Department of Ecology to request action or investigation pursuant to RCW 90. 44 which provides authority for resolution of conflicts involving allocation of groundwater supplies. In the event that this situation occurs no additional plats which withdraw water from the South Aquifer shall be approved by Jefferson County until the groundwater adequacy issues have been resolved. 11. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to housing, prior to commencing development of the plat, the proponent shall set aside five spaces at their RV park for use by program related construction workers. The number of spaces shall be adjusted based on their use by construction workers and timing of individual development projects. 12 . In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to housing, prior to commencing development of the plat, the proponent shall notify 16 . . its contractors that space is available at its recreational vehicle park so long as contractors' employees are working full-time on Port Ludlow projects. The proponent shall also monitor contractors' usage of the RV park, make appropriate adjustments for reserved spaces, and report to Jefferson County on an annual basis as to the effectiveness of this mitigation. 13 . In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to transportation, the proponent shall conduct a traffic monitoring program in cooperation with the Jefferson County Public Works Department to assess the impacts of the Creekside Plat and other Development Program plats on the State and County roadway system. The monitoring shall record trip generation, traffic counts on selected roadways, and level-of-service conditions at selected intersections. The proponent shall be responsible for employing a qualified traffic engineer to design and direct the traffic monitoring program in cooperation with other appropriate public agencies. The cost of retaining the traffic engineer shall be at the proponent's sole expense. Results of the monitoring shall be submitted to Jefferson County by March 15 of each year. 14 . In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to transportation, if traffic monitoring indicates that intersection improvements are necessary at the Paradise Bay Road/Teal Lake Road intersection, the proponent shall enter into an agreement with the Jefferson County Public Works Department to contribute a share of the required funds that is proportionate to the impacts generated by the Creekside Plat. 15. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to transportation, road and intersection plans shall be submitted to the Jefferson County Public Works Department for review and approval. All road construction shall conform to the standards of and be performed under the inspection of the Jefferson County Public Works Department. 16. As necessary in order to minimize temporary construction traffic, the proponent in coordination with the Jefferson County Public Works Department shall designate truck routes and designate work hour restrictions. 17 . In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to school facilities, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall pay to the Chimacum School District $437 . 10 per lot to be applied toward provision of school facilities. Payment may be arranged through a voluntary agreement. 18. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to fire and emergency services, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall pay to the Jefferson County Fire District #3 $193 . 00 per lot to be applied toward provision of fire and emergency services. Payment may be arranged through a voluntary agreement. 17 D. DETERMINATION OF THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: I have reviewed and considered the referenced proposal, the environmental checklist, public comments, other available material, and the Planning Department's staff memo and recommendation. I hereby : issue a Determination of Nonsignificance. issue a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance. issue a Determination of Significance. determine that I do not have sufficient information upon which to make a threshold determination and direct Planning Department staff to obtain additional information on the proposal. Z _ / '�> aig Wa d, Dire" or Date III 18 Date: February 11, 1993 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS BY AGENCIES, TRIBES, AND THE PUBLIC: The department has provided the referenced threshold determination to the Department of Ecology, agencies with jurisdiction, affected tribes, and local agencies and political subdivisions and has notified the public as required by the State Environmental Policy Act Rules WAC 197-11-340 and 197-11-510. This memorandum summarizes written comments received by the department regarding the referenced threshold determination. It also presents staff's response to these comments. Copies of written comments are attached. * Pope Resources made the following comments: Comment: The County has not amended its SEPA Implementing Ordinance to include Ecology's Stormwater Management Manual. Therefore the criteria in the Manual cannot be the basis for mitigations #1 and #3 . Staff response: SPEA Ordinance Section 8.20 4 . (c) 10 . Substantive Authority adopts all County resolutions, ordinances, plans, and guidelines effective after the date of the Ordinance. The use of the Stormwater Manual is based on adopted Public Works Department policy that was reviewed by the Prosecuting Attorney. See memo from Public Works dated January 18, 1994 . The mitigations should be retained as modified. I also note that in the past the proponent has argued strenuously that mitigation measures should be applied consistently (as appropriate) for their proposals as well as those of other proponents. Consistency with the Stormwater Manual has been a requirement of all projects previously reviewed under the Development Program EIS and is a standard mitigation measure intended to avoid impacts related to erosion and sedimentation. If the mitigation measure is not retained, staff recommends that prior to the issuance of a final threshold determination, the proponent should be required to submit a drainage and storm water management plan for review by the Public Works Department to determine whether the controls proposed are adequate to avoid impacts related to soils and water. The mitigation should be retained. Comment: No specific information has been provided that identifies significant adverse impacts to soils or water related to mitigation #7 . Staff response: The mitigation measure was required in order to avoid impacts to soils and water that were identified in the staff report from review of the environmental checklist, site plan, and the Port Ludlow Development Program EIS. The identification of significant adverse impacts related to erosion and sedimentation was one of the major factors leading to the County's determination 19 410 410 of significance for the proponent's overall development in Port Ludlow. In this particular instance average lot size is 6, 360 square feet. There are 61 lots covering 8.9 acres. In consideration of the small size of the lots, development of individual residences would result in clearing and grading of a significant portion of each lot. The portion of the overall site that would be cleared and graded for residences is greater than the area that would be cleared and graded for roadway construction. These lots are immediately adjacent to very steep slopes and seasonal watercourses that drain to Ludlow Creek and Ludlow Bay. The mitigation should be retained. Comment: Mitigation #14 which requires improvements to the Paradise Bay Road/Teal Lake Road intersection by the proponent should be deleted since no significant impacts to this road have been identified. Creekside traffic would not be directed towards this intersection. Staff response: The Port Ludlow Development Program EIS discusses impacts to this intersection attributable to Development Program projects. It notes the potential need for improvements to accomodate northbound traffic on Teal Lake Road and for left turn lanes on Paradise Bay Road. Existing traffic patterns (travel to SR104 via Teal Lake Road and Paradise Bay Road and travel to the golf course) support the assumption that Creekside residents will travel through this intersection. This mitigation is contingent and only requires a contribution from the proponent that is proportionate to the impacts from the Creekside plat based on traffic monitoring. This mitigation should be retained. I also note that in the past the proponent has argued strenuously that mitigation measures should be applied consistently (as appropriate) for their proposals. This mitigation has been required previously for the Inn at Port Ludlow, Deer Hollow, and Springwood plats. Comment: Mitigation #15 which requires Public Works Department approval of road and intersection plans should be deleted since this is provided for by the Subdivision Ordinance Sections 6. 309 and 6. 40. WAC 197-11-660 (1) (e) states that "Before requiring mitigation measures, agencies shall consider whether local. . .requirements. . .would mitigate an identified impact. " Staff response: Public Works does not object to this deletion. See memo from Public Works dated January 18, 1994 . See also response to comment regarding Mitigation #14 . Comment: Mitigation #16 which requires designation of truck routes and work hour restrictions to avoid transportation impacts by the proponent should be deleted since no significant impacts have been identified. 20 • • Staff response: The Port Ludlow Development Program EIS discusses impacts related to truck and construction traffic attributable to construction of Development Program projects. This mitigation measure was proposed in the EIS. See also response to comment regarding Mitigation #14 . This mitigation should be retained. * Olympic Environmental Council made the following comment: Comment: There are serious questions regarding the adequacy of groundwater supplies for the proposal. The County should require that the proponent establish that adequate potable water exists prior to approving the plat. The requirement for groundwater monitoring does not justify the conclusion that the proposal would not have a significant impact on groundwater resources and does constitute adequate mitigation. Staff response: In recommending that significant impacts to groundwater resources can be avoided by mitigation requiring monitoring, staff is relying on the information on groundwater resources contained in the Port Ludlow Development Program EIS and the subsequent mitigation measure developed with the assistance of the Prosecuting Attorney for Deer Hollow and subsequent Pope Resources plats. The EIS documents the groundwater resources that are estimated to be available to serve this and other Development Program proposals (a total of 700 residences and commercial activities) and other uses. (See FEIS Appendix N Revised Groundwater Report by Robinson and Noble) According to the EIS, there is adequate groundwater available for the projected uses by the proponent and other water right holders. The report acknowledges that there is uncertainty surrounding this issue that can only be resolved by groundwater monitoring as withdrawals are increased to serve plats coming on line. This monitoring program is being developed by Robinson and Noble for review and approval by the County. The County has reviewed or is in the process of reviewing five Development Program plats (Inn at Port Ludlow, Deer Hollow, Springwood, Ironwood, and Creekside) with a total of 300 residences in addition to 36 rooms at the Inn. In the context of the EIS projection of available groundwater and the number of units given preliminary plat approval or under review, it does not appear that a significant adverse impact to groundwater resources would result from approval of this proposal. Staff has also discussed this issue with Larry Faye, Environmental Health Director. He states that State law requires the Washington Department of Health to review and approve the water system prior to construction. If the WDH does not concur that existing water rights are adequate to serve this proposal, it will withhold approval. The threshold determination and mitigation #10 should be retained. 21 110 410 * Wendi Wrinkle stated that the Port Ludlow water system has 465 acre feet of available water rights. Their current water commitments exceed capacity of these rights based on State and local requirements for public water systems. Staff response: See response to OEC. PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Planning staff has reviewed the comments received regarding the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance for the referenced proposal. Based on the preceding analysis, staff recommends the following findings: * There is sufficient information in the record to make a threshold determination and that additional information and analysis is not necessary. * Significant new analysis and information regarding probable significant adverse environmental impacts and mitigation measures has been provided by specific commenters identified above. Based on this information and analysis, the mitigation measures should be amended as indicated above. * The identified impacts can be avoided by requiring mitigation measures as recommended above by staff. * County policies that address these impacts are contained in the plans and ordinances listed above. * The Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance should be modified to include the following mitigation measures: 1. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, the proponent shall submit an engineered drainage and storm water management plan and report to the Jefferson County Public Works Department for review and approval. The plan shall include temporary and permanent erosion control measures and shall incorporate the storm water drainage criteria of the Washington State Department of Ecology Storm Water Management Manual (current edition) . The plan shall be of sufficient detail to clearly illustrate that the Best Management Practices utilized are adequate to treat and control runoff. The plan shall also: * be designed and implemented to control dust and mud; stabilize the construction area, including entrances and roadways; prevent surface water runoff from entering areas to be cleared and graded; and prevent sedimentation from entering the waters of Port Ludlow Bay; * specify that revegetation of exposed soils would be completed as soon as possible after construction to reduce exposed or erodible soils; and * specify measures and parties responsible for maintenance of permanent storm water management facilities. The temporary erosion control and storm water management plan shall be reviewed and approved prior to any clearing or grading on the site. The final storm water management plan shall be reviewed and approved and facilities installed prior to final plat approval. 22 2 . In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, native vegetation shall be maintained on open space areas. 3 . In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, the extent of soil disturbance associated with major clearing and grading activities shall conform to the guidelines and timing restrictions set forth in the Washington State Department of Ecology Storm Water Management Manual (current edition) . Prior to any clearing and grading on the site, the proponent shall submit a construction phasing plan to the Jefferson County Public Works Department for review and approval. 4 . In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, the proponent shall establish a Maintenance Covenant as part of the Restrictive Covenants to ensure that the drainage system is maintained in accordance with the proponent' s approved plans. The Maintenance Covenant shall be reviewed and approved by the Jefferson County Public Works Department prior to final plat approval. 5. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, temporary erosion control and storm water structures shall be inspected at least once per week during the construction period and sediment shall be removed from sedimentation ponds as necessary to ensure proper functioning. Disposal of sediment materials shall be Pp subject to the approval of the Public Works Director in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and County regulations. 6. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, the proponent shall designate a qualified individual or firm who shall be responsible for ensuring that erosion and on control devices are correctly installed, that Best sedimentation , Y Management Practices are correctly implemented, and that BMP methods and maintenance schedules are followed; for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of practices and recommending modifications to the drainage plan as necessary if monitoring reveals that the practices are not effective; and for ensuring that reports and inspections are coordinated with the Jefferson County Department of Public Works. 7 . In order to avoid significant adverse impacts related to soils and water, prior to conducting land disturbing activities on individual lots, the owner shall submit a small parcel temporary erosion and sedimentation control (TESC) plan to the Jefferson County Public Works Department for review and approval. Development of individual lots shall be carried out in conformance with the TESC plan. A notice to this effect shall be placed on the final plat. 8 . In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to marine water quality, the proponent shall continue and expand the existing Water 23 Quality Monitoring Program which documents nonpoint effects on the Class AA "Extraordinary" water quality designation of Port Ludlow Bay under the direction of Jefferson County. The program shall ensure the performance of water quality control features and provide for upgrading, as necessary. The program shall include monitoring at appropriate background stations (i.e. , Ludlow Creek and the intermittent streams on site and inner Port Ludlow Bay) . The program shall allow for adjustment of monitoring stations and water quality monitoring parameters depending on location of development activity and monitoring findings. On-going monitoring shall include evaluation of the proposed BMPs and testing of shellfish and sediment as appropriate. Ambient monitoring and storm event monitoring shall be conducted. The scope of work for each subsequent year's program shall be submitted to Jefferson County for review and approval by November 1 of the preceding year. If the monitoring indicates that the proponent's activities are causing a reduction in the water quality standards of Port Ludlow Bay below the Class AA "Extraordinary" designation, the proponent shall in its annual report so advise Jefferson County. 9. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to marine water quality, the proponent shall conduct a sewage treatment plant monitoring program which documents the effects of the development program on the capacity of the secondary sewage treatment plant. The monitoring shall record the number of connections, effluent volume, and effluent quality. It is acknowledged that the sole authority to monitor and regulate operation of the sewage treatment plant rests with the Washington Department of Ecology. Nothing in this mitigating measure is intended to supersede or conflict with the requirements of the proponent's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. WA-002120-2 issued pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act and companion statutes. Results of this monitoring shall be transmitted to the Jefferson County Planning and Building Department and the Washington Department of Ecology by March 15 of each year. 10 . In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to ground water resources and to document the condition of the aquifers used as domestic water sources, the proponent shall conduct a groundwater resource monitoring program. The scope of the program shall be mutually agreed upon by the proponent and Jefferson County prior to final plat approval. Monitoring shall include static groundwater levels and saltwater intrusion. If groundwater monitoring indicates an inadequate yield to support development of the proponent' s projects, the proponent and/or the County shall immediately notify the Washington State Department of Ecology to request action or investigation pursuant to RCW 90.44 which provides authority for resolution of conflicts involving allocation of groundwater supplies. In the event that this situation occurs no additional plats which withdraw water from the South Aquifer shall be approved by Jefferson County until the groundwater adequacy issues have been resolved. 24 • 11. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to housing, prior to commencing development of the plat, the proponent shall set aside five spaces at their RV park for use by program related construction workers. The number of spaces shall be adjusted based on their use by construction workers and timing of individual development projects. 12 . In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to housing, prior to commencing development of the plat, the proponent shall notify its contractors that space is available at its recreational vehicle park so long as contractors' employees are working full-time on Port Ludlow projects. The proponent shall also monitor contractors' usage of the RV park, make appropriate adjustments for reserved spaces, and report to Jefferson County on an annual basis as to the effectiveness of this mitigation. 13 . In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to transportation, the proponent shall conduct a traffic monitoring program in cooperation with the Jefferson County Public Works Department to assess the impacts of the Creekside Plat and other Development Program plats on the State and County roadway system. The monitoring shall record trip generation, traffic counts on selected roadways, and level-of-service conditions at selected intersections. The proponent shall be responsible for employing a qualified traffic engineer to design and direct the traffic monitoring program in cooperation with other appropriate public agencies. The cost of retaining the traffic engineer shall be at the proponent's sole expense. Results of the monitoring shall be submitted to Jefferson County by March 15 of each year. 14. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to transportation, if traffic monitoring indicates that intersection improvements are necessary at the Paradise Bay Road/Teal Lake Road intersection, the proponent shall enter into an agreement with the Jefferson County Public Works Department to contribute a share of the required funds that is proportionate to the impacts generated by the Creekside Plat. 15 . As necessary in order to minimize temporary construction traffic, the proponent in coordination with the Jefferson County Public Works Department shall designate truck routes and designate work hour restrictions. 16 . In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to school facilities, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall pay to the Chimacum School District $437 . 10 per lot to be applied toward provision of school facilities. Payment may be arranged through a voluntary agreement. 25 • 17. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to fire and emergency services, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall pay to the Jefferson County Fire District #3 $193 . 00 per lot to be applied toward provision of fire and emergency services. Payment may be arranged through a voluntary agreement. FINAL DETERMINATION OF THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: I have reviewed and considered the comments received regarding the referenced threshold determination and staff ' s analysis of those comments. It is my determination to: retain the referenced threshold determination. modify the referenced threshold determination as recommended by staff. modify the referenced threshold determination as I direct in the attached memo. withdraw the referenced threshold determination and make a Determination of Significance. .� Q %/ ?2- .me l'oll.V : , Acting Director Date C: \PopePlat\Crekside.SEP I 26 • ,-i -�;' • JEFFERSON OUNTY �, r •. a �, PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT i u M e`+ " l P.O. Box 12 0 .,..f�( !y ,. ', _1 �" fi Port Townsend, Wash ngton 98368 n}{{y �� Planning(206)3 5-9140 4 vr�, I ," .,_t �#-4 — A 1.1 ' Building(206)3 5-9141 sM -_-" Y'�=` FAX(206)385 9357 JEFFERSON COUNTY COURTHOUSE Craig Ward, D'rector FINAL MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE AND LEAD AGENCY STATUS DATE: February 14, 1994 PROPONENT: Pope Resources PROPOSAL: Creekside Long Plat LP05-92. Subdivision of 34.09 acres into 61 lots for detached single family residences. Lots would range in size from 5,870 square feet to 7,790 square feet. Average lot size would be 6,360 square feet. The proposed subdivision would be accessed off of Paradise Bay Road by Creekside Drive. It would be served by internal roadways on 50' rights-of-way ending in 50' radius cul-de-sacs. 21.92 acres would be in undeveloped dedicated open space. The proposal would be served by the Ludlow Water Company and Ludlow Sewer Company for water and sewer, respectively. The proposal includes provision of temporary and permanent storm water management facilities. PROJECT LOCATION: The proposal site is a portion of the West Half and the Southeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 28 North, Range 1 East, W.M. The proposal site is located in Port Ludlow westerly of Paradise Bay Road, Inner Harbor Village Condominiums Phases 2 and 3, and the plat of Ludlow Point Village Division 2. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, the proponent shall submit an engineered drainage and storm water management plan and report to the Jefferson County Public Works Department for review and approval. The plan shall include temporary and permanent erosion control measures and shall incorporate the Creekside Long Plat Final MDNS Page 1 S storm water drainage criteria of the Washington State Department of Ecology Storm Water Management Manual (current edition). The plan shall be of sufficient detail to clearly illustrate that the Best Management Practices utilized are adequate to treat and control runoff. The plan shall also: * be designed and implemented to control dust and mud; stabilize the construction area, including entrances and roadways; prevent surface water runoff from entering areas to be cleared and graded; and prevent sedimentation from entering the waters of Port Ludlow Bay; * specify that revegetation of exposed soils would be completed as soon as possible after construction to reduce exposed or erodible soils; and * specify measures and parties responsible for maintenance of permanent storm water management facilities. The temporary erosion control and storm water management plan shall be reviewed and approved prior to any clearing or grading on the site. The final storm water management plan shall be reviewed and approved and facilities installed prior to final plat approval. 2. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, native vegetation shall be maintained on open space areas. 3. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, the extent of soil disturbance associated with major clearing and grading activities shall conform to the guidelines and timing restrictions set forth in the Washington State Department of Ecology Storm Water Management Manual (current edition). Prior to any clearing and grading on the site, the proponent shall submit a construction phasing plan to the Jefferson County Public Works Department for review and approval. 4. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, the proponent shall establish a Maintenance Covenant as part of the Restrictive Covenants to ensure that the drainage system is maintained in accordance with the proponent's approved plans. The Maintenance Covenant shall be reviewed and approved by the Jefferson County Public Works Department prior to final plat approval. 5. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, temporary erosion control and storm water structures shall be inspected at least once per week during the construction period and sediment shall be removed from sedimentation ponds as necessary to ensure proper functioning. Disposal of sediment materials shall be subject to the approval of the Public Works Director in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and County regulations. 6. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to soils and water, the proponent shall designate a qualified individual or firm who shall be responsible for ensuring that erosion and sedimentation control devices are correctly installed, that Best Management Practices are correctly implemented, and that BMP methods and maintenance schedules are followed; for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of practices and recommending modifications to the drainage plan as necessary if monitoring reveals that the practices Creekside Long Plat Final MDNS Page 2 0 • are not effective; and for ensuring that reports and inspections are coordinated with the Jefferson County Department of Public Works. 7. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts related to soils and water, prior to conducting land disturbing activities on individual lots, the owner shall submit a small parcel temporary erosion and sedimentation control (TESC) plan to the Jefferson County Public Works Department for review and approval. Development of individual lots shall be carried out in conformance with the TESC plan. A notice to this effect shall be placed on the final plat. 8. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to marine water quality, the proponent shall continue and expand the existing Water Quality Monitoring Program which documents nonpoint effects on the Class AA "Extraordinary" water quality designation of Port Ludlow Bay under the direction of Jefferson County. The program shall ensure the performance of water quality control features and provide for upgrading, as necessary. The program shall include monitoring at appropriate background stations (i.e., Ludlow Creek and the intermittent streams on site and inner Port Ludlow Bay). The program shall allow for adjustment of monitoring stations and water quality monitoring parameters depending on location of development activity and monitoring findings. On-going monitoring shall include evaluation of the proposed BMPs and testing of shellfish and sediment as appropriate. Ambient monitoring and storm event monitoring shall be conducted. The scope of work for each subsequent year's program shall be submitted to Jefferson County for review and approval by November 1 of the preceding year. If the monitoring indicates that the proponent's activities are causing a reduction in the water quality standards of Port Ludlow Bay below the Class AA "Extraordinary" designation, the proponent shall in its annual report so advise Jefferson County. 9. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to marine water quality, the proponent shall conduct a sewage treatment plant monitoring program which documents the effects of the development program on the capacity of the secondary sewage treatment plant. The monitoring shall record the number of connections, effluent volume, and effluent quality. It is acknowledged that the sole authority to monitor and regulate operation of the sewage treatment plant rests with the Washington Department of Ecology. Nothing in this mitigating measure is intended to supersede or conflict with the requirements of the proponent's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. WA- 002120-2 issued pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act and companion statutes. Results of this monitoring shall be transmitted to the Jefferson County Planning and Building Department and the Washington Department of Ecology by March 15 of each year. 10. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to ground water resources and to document the condition of the aquifers used as domestic water sources, the proponent shall conduct a groundwater resource monitoring program. The scope of the program shall be mutually agreed upon by the proponent and Jefferson County prior to final plat approval. Monitoring shall include static groundwater levels and saltwater intrusion. If Creekside Long Plat Final MDNS Page 3 • • groundwater monitoring indicates an inadequate yield to support development of the proponent's projects, the proponent and/or the County shall immediately notify the Washington State Department of Ecology to request action or investigation pursuant to RCW 90.44 which provides authority for resolution of conflicts involving allocation of groundwater supplies. In the event that this situation occurs no additional plats which withdraw water from the South Aquifer shall be approved by Jefferson County until the groundwater adequacy issues have been resolved. 11. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to housing, prior to commencing development of the plat, the proponent shall set aside five spaces at their RV park for use by program related construction workers. The number of spaces shall be adjusted based on their use by construction workers and timing of individual development projects. 12. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to housing, prior to commencing development of the plat, the proponent shall notify its contractors that space is available at its recreational vehicle park so long as contractors' employees are working full-time on Port Ludlow projects. The proponent shall also monitor contractors' usage of the RV park, make appropriate adjustments for reserved spaces, and report to Jefferson County on an annual basis as to the effectiveness of this mitigation. 13. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to transportation, the proponent shall conduct a traffic monitoring program in cooperation with the Jefferson County Public Works Department to assess the impacts of the Creekside Plat and other Development Program plats on the State and County roadway system. The monitoring shall record trip generation,traffic counts on selected roadways, and level-of-service conditions at selected intersections. The proponent shall be responsible for employing a qualified traffic engineer to design and direct the traffic monitoring program in cooperation with other appropriate public agencies. The cost of retaining the traffic engineer shall be at the proponent's sole expense. Results of the monitoring shall be submitted to Jefferson County by March 15 of each year. 14. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to transportation, if traffic monitoring indicates that intersection improvements are necessary at the Paradise Bay Road/Teal Lake Road intersection, the proponent shall enter into an agreement with the Jefferson County Public Works Department to contribute a share of the required funds that is proportionate to the impacts generated by the Creekside Plat. 15. As necessary in order to minimize temporary construction traffic, the proponent in coordination with the Jefferson County Public Works Department shall designate truck routes and designate work hour restrictions. 16. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to school facilities, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall pay to the Chimacum School District $437.10 per lot to be applied toward provision of school facilities. Payment may be arranged through a voluntary agreement. Creekside Long Plat Final MDNS Page 4 • • 17. In order to avoid significant adverse impacts to fire and emergency services, prior to final plat approval the proponent shall pay to the Jefferson County Fire District #3 $193.00 per lot to be applied toward provision of fire and emergency services. Payment may be arranged through a voluntary agreement. These mitigation measures are intended to eliminate probable significant environmental impacts identified by Jefferson County through the EIS for the Port Ludlow Development Program and review of the Environmental Checklist submitted by the proponent, inspection of the site by Jefferson County Planning and Building Department staff, and from public comments. These impacts are to: * Soils related to erosion of soils cleared during construction of access roads, cul-de- sacs, and homesites; * Water related to soil erosion and construction of impervious surfaces resulting in increased storm water runoff containing contaminants and sediment; * Housing related to the availability of housing due to an influx of workers employed in construction of the project; * Transportation due to traffic generation and decline in the level of service at intersections; * Schools related to the Chimacum School District's capacity to provide adequate educational facilities for students that would be generated by the proposal; * Fire and emergency services related to Fire Protection District #3's capacity to provide fire and emergency services. Jefferson County policies which address these impacts are contained in the Jefferson County SEPA Implementing Ordinance, the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan, the Jefferson County Subdivision Ordinance, and the policies and standards of the Jefferson County Public Works Department. Specific policies are cited in the project record. NOTICE OF LEAD AGENCY: Jefferson County has determined that it is the lead agency for the above-described proposal. NOTICE OF NONSIGNIFICANCE: Jefferson County has determined that the above- described proposal conducted in conformance with the mitigation measures listed above would not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment, and an environmental impact statement is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the Jefferson County Planning and Building Department and an inspection of the site, and consideration of comments submitted in response to the Preliminary Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance issued on December 22, 1993. COMMENT PERIOD: This final determination is issued pursuant WAC 197-11-340(2)(f). Jefferson County has considered comments on its preliminary mitigated determination of nonsignificance. There is no additional comment period. Any appeal of this determination on the basis of noncompliance with the provisions of Chapter 43.21C RCW (State Creekside Long Plat Final MDNS Page 5 • • Environmental Policy Act) must be submitted in writing on or before 5:00 PM Monday February 24, 1994 to the Director, Jefferson County Planning and Building Department (P.O. Box 1220, Port Townsend, WA 983.: •r-consideration by the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners. #411(17 114 J- -'- Holland, Acting Director effers. County Planning and Building Department Creekside Long Plat Final MDNS Page 6 • • Final Threshold Determination Routing Final MDNS and Response to Comments to: Jefferson County Public Works Department Olympic Environmental Council Applicant Parties of Record Final MDNS Jefferson County Health Department Jefferson County Public Utilities District #1 Washington State Department of Ecology Washington State Department of Transportation Chimacum School District Fire District #3 Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe (Attn: Peter Bahls) This Determination of Nonsignificance was mailed to the above agencies and parties on i 7 f , ?/j 1 i , 1993. BY it 4b .tz Title C:\PopePlat\Crekside.DNS Jac, P . 0. Pc ` s Creekside Long Plat Final MDNS Page 7 • • JEFFERSON COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST "CREEKSIDE" PRELIMINARY PLAT January 15, 1993 PROPONENT: Pope Resources ADDRESS: PO Box 1780, Poulsbo, Washington 98370 TELEPHONE: (business): 206-697-6626, ext 529 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE (contact): Linda Mueller, Planner ADDRESS: Same as above TELEPHONE: (business): PROPOSAL AND PROPERTY DESCRIPTION PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION (describe the proposed development; include all factors that will give an accurate understanding of it's scope and purpose): The proposal is to develop a 61-lot single-family detached residential subdivision on approximately 34 acres. Gross density is approximately 1.79 dwelling units per acre. Lot sizes range from 5,870 square feet to 7,790 square feet, and average 6,360 square feet. Approximately sixty-four percent (64%), or 22 acres, of the site is dedicated open space. All lots will be served by sanitary sewer. Stormwater runoff will be detained on-site. Ludlow Water Company and Ludlow Sewer Company are the water and sewer purveyors, respectively. PROPERTY AND AREA DESCRIPTION: Address: Legal: *Lot: Block: Subdivision: *Tax Parcel: 821173001, 821173002, 821174001 Quarter Sections: East Half of SW Quarter *Section: 17 Township: 28 North Range: 1 East, WM Tax Number: Land Area (dimensions): 34.09 acres General: The project is located in the community of Port Ludlow, approximately 1/2 mile south of Oak Bay Road on the west side of Paradise Bay Road, across from the Inner Harbor Village Condominiums. SCHEDULE (identify beginning and ending dates of the proposal: include phasing): Site development will begin in early 1993 and conclude within the year. OVERALL PLAN (describe any plans for future additions, expansions, or related activities, or plans by others that may affect the proposal): The proposed project is part of the overall Port Ludlow Development Plan. REQUIRED APPROVALS (identify all local, state, and federal approvals required for the completion of the proposal and if any approvals are pending that are related to the proposal): Preliminary and final plat applications by Jefferson County; water system designs by Washington Department of Health; sewer system designs by Washington Department of Ecology; road access, private drive road width variance, and storm drainage designs by Jefferson County Public Works; Hydraulic Project Approval by Washington Departments of Wildlife and Fisheries. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (list any existing or proposed environmental information such as studies or documents related to the proposal): Environmental Impact Statement and technical appendices for the "Port Ludlow Development Plan" (Programmatic EIS). ENVIRONMENTAL COMMENTS EVALUATION EARTH 1. Check the item that describes the site: [ ] flat [X] rolling [X] hilly [X] steep slopes [ ] mountainous [ ] other, identify: 2. What is the steepest slope on the site? Identify the approximate percent of the slope: 100%, located in open space area Tract A. 3. What general types of soils are found on the site (i.e., sand, gravel, peat, or muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland: Olete Alderwood Complex 0-30% Everett gravelly sandy loam 15-30% 4. Are there surface indications or a history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe them: No 5. Describe the purpose, the type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Identify the source of the fill: Construction of roads and utilities and preparation of building sites will require moving approximately -2- S 5. (Continued) 15,000 cubic yards of material. Fill material (15,000 cubic yards) will be generated on-site or from immediately adjoining sources owned by the proponent. 6. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe it: Soil erosion could occur during grading for homesites and during construction of roads and utilities. 7. About what percent of the site would be covered with impervious surfaces after construction of the project (i.e., asphalt or buildings)? 12% 8. Describe proposed measures to reduce or control erosion or other impacts to the earth, if any: During design, only the flattest portions of the site have been utilized for homesites, roadways, and utilities. Facilities designed for sedimentation and erosion control will conform to the Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin, Washington Department of Ecology, February 1992. A stormwater management plan will be submitted prior to final plat approval. During construction and site development trees and brush will be selectively removed; temporary settlement ponds, interceptor diversion ditches; fabric filter fences and hydroseeding will be utilized as necessary. Once the subdivision is built and occupied, stormwater runoff will be controlled through systems which utilize vegetated swales and detention facilities to dampen surges and maintain water quality. -3- • AIR 9. What types of emissions to the air, if any, would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile odors, or industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? Generally describe and give approximate quantities, if known: During site construction, emissions will consist of dust and equipment exhaust. Once the project is completed, low levels of emissions from automobiles and fireplaces or woodstoves will occur. Concentration of pollutants from any or all of these sources will remain well within state or federal standards. 10. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odors that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe them: No 11. Describe proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to the air, if any: Dust suppression by watering will be used during construction if necessary, and retention of substantial amounts of vegetation on the project site. WATER Surface Water 12. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site, including year-round or seasonal streams, salt waters, lakes, ponds, and wetlands? If yes, describe the type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into: An unnamed seasonal stream flows through the eastern portion of the project and is located in open space Tract A. Ludlow Creek is located beyond the north edge of the project. All watercourses in the immediate vicinity flow into Port Ludlow Bay. -4- • • 12. (Continued): Available information on wetlands in the area indicated no wetlands on-site. In the event wetland areas are discovered on-site during the planning and development process, mitigation measures will include: A. Verification and/or delineation by a qualified wetland specialist in areas near proposed construction/development; B. Provision of buffer zones between designated wetland and adjacent proposed development, with site-specific buffer width recommendation by a specialist. Since this application is "vested" under current regulations (i.e., no County wetland ordinance), we would use our expert's buffer width rather than any new ordinance standard that might come to be. C. Provision of Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions to limit use activities; removal of vegetation; dredging or filling; and the application of pesticides, herbicides, and fungicides. 13. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to the described waters (within 200 feet)? If yes, describe the work and attach available plans: A pedestrian trail system may come within 200 feet of Ludlow Creek. No plans are currently available. 14. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed or removed from the surface waters or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Identify the source of the fill materials: None 15. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give a general description and identify the purpose and approximate quantities, if known: No 16. Does the proposal lie within a 100-year flood plain? If so, note the location on the site plan: No -5- • 17. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge: No Ground Water 18. Will ground water be withdrawn or will water be discharged to ground water? Give a general description and identify the purpose and approximate quantities, if known: Development of the project will cause additional ground water to be withdrawn from Ludlow Water Company wells. Approximately 48,800 gallons per day of domestic water will be required upon full buildout. 19. Describe the waste material that would be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (i.e., domestic sewage; industrial waste, identifying the chemicals contained; and agricultural waste). Describe the general size of the system; the number of such systems; the number of houses to be served, if applicable; or the number of animals or humans the system(s) is expected to serve: NA Water Run-off (including storm water) 20. Describe the source of run-off, including storm water. Describe the method of collection and disposal. if any, including any known quantities. Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe it: Stormwater runoff will be generated from impervious surfaces such as rooftops, patios, driveways, parking areas, and roads. Impervious cover will be approximately 12%. A stormwater management system will route runoff from impervious surfaces into detention facilities and eventually into Port Ludlow Bay. -6- 0 • 20. (Continued): Runoff from landscaped areas will occur as sheet-flow and pass through large areas of naturally vegetated open space prior to entering watercourses. 21. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe how: Soil sediments, oil and grease, and nutrients and fertilizers are the waste materials that could enter surface water if left uncontrolled and unmanaged. The degree to which this might occur depends on rainfall conditions, soils and geology, vegetation, slopes, design and maintenance of stormwater systems, and landscape design and maintenance techniques. A stormwater management plan will be submitted prior to final plat approval. 22. Describe proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and run-off water impacts, if any: See Items No. 8 and 20. PLANTS 23. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: [X] Deciduous trees: [X] alder [X] maple [ ] aspen [ ] other, identify: [X] Evergreen trees: [X] fir [X] cedar [ ] pine [ ] other, identify: [X] Shrubs [ ] Grass [ ] Pasture [ ] Crop or grain [ ] Wet soil plants: [ ] cattail [ ] buttercup [ ] bulrush [ ] skunk cabbage [ ] other, identify: [ ] Water plants: [ ] water lily [ ] eel grass [ ] milfoil [ ] other, identify: [ ] Other, identify: -7- S • 24. What kind and amount of vegetation would be removed or altered? The subject property was selectively logged in 1991 under a Class 4 General Forest Practices Application. Most brush and some remaining trees will be removed. 25. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site: None 26. Describe proposed landscaping. use of nature plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Homesites, roadways, and entrances will be landscaped consistent with an overall plan to be prepared by a professional landscape architect. Sixty-four percent (64%) of the site will remain in common open space with special restrictions regarding treatment of vegetation. In addition, removal of vegetation from homesites will be restricted and overseen by an Architectural Review Committee. ANIMALS 27. Check any birds and animals that have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: [X] Birds: [ ] hawk [ ] heron [ ] eagle [X] songbirds [ ] other, identify: [X] Mammals: [X] deer [ ] elk [ ] beaver [X] other, identify: squirrels [ ] Fish: [ ] bass [ ] salmon [ ] trout [ ] herring [ ] shellfish [ ] other, identify: 28. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site: None 29. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain how: No 30. Describe proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Sixty-four percent (64%) of the site will remain in natural open space. Removal of vegetation from homesites will be restricted. -8- • • ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 31. What kinds of energy (i.e., electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) would be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it would be used for heating, manufacturing, etc.: Electricity will be used to meet nearly all energy needs of the project. Individual home heating will likely be supplemented with propane, woodstoves, fireplaces, or passive solar designs. 32. Would the project affect the potential use of solar enemy by adjacent properties. If so, generally describe the affect: No 33. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Clustered site plan to reduce road and utility installations. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 34. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe the hazards: Storage of propane gas for domestic use. 35. Describe special emergency services that might be required: Fire, law enforcement, and emergency medical. 36. Describe proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Domestic propane tanks will be required to be buried or otherwise located in compliance with the Uniform Building and Uniform Fire Codes. -9- • • NOISE 37. What types of noise exist in the area that may affect your project (i.e., traffic, equipment, and operations)? Traffic along Paradise Bay Road and Oak Bay Road. 38. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or long-term basis (i.e., construction, traffic, and operations)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site: Temporary noise will be generated by building and construction equipment (trucks, graders, electric saws, and pneumatic nailing tools). Noise levels of 75 to 85 dba can be expected at construction sites during daylight hours. Once occupied, the project will generate noise types and levels common to the surrounding low density residential community. 39. Describe controlled measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Retention of natural areas of open space; construction activity will be limited to daylight hours only; design of clustered units to emphasize privacy and noise mitigation through vegetative buffers. LAND AND SHORELINE USE 40. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties: The site is partially wooded and undeveloped. To the north and west are vacant lands belonging to the proponent; to the east are residential areas and the South Bay Recreation Center; to the south and southeast is the Port Ludlow Golf Course. 41. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe use: No 42. Describe any structures on the site: None -10- • 43. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what structures? No 44. What is the current comprehensive plan or community development plan designation of the site? Identify the plan: "Suburban" according to the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan. 45. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? NA 46. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify the part: Those parts of the project where slopes exceed 15% . Said areas are allocated as common open space. 47. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Assuming 2 people per dwelling unit, approximately 122 people would reside in the completed development. 48. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None 49. Describe proposal measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: NA 50. Describe proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The proposal is an integral component of the Port Ludlow Development Plan which itself is consistent with the goals and policies of the County Comprehensive Plan. The Port Ludlow Development Plan is the only publicly recognized "subarea" plan in the vicinity of Port Ludlow. The proposal is consistent with the Emergency Zoning Ordinance; applicable policies of the County Comprehensive Plan related to residential development, utilities, and transportation; and the standards of the Jefferson County Subdivision Ordinance. -11- • HOUSING 51. Approximately, how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether the housing is high, middle, or low income: The proposal is to create 61 lots for single-family detached units. The proponent will not be the home builder. Housing will likely be middle to upper-middle income ranges. 52. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether the housing is high, middle, or low income: None 53. Describe proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None AESTHETICS 54. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas? What is the principal exterior building materials) proposed? The project does not propose to construct any buildings. However, the subdivision will be limited to single-family detached residences which will be subjected to a thirty-five (35) feet maximum building height. 55. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None 56. Describe proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Dwellings will be clustered to maximize open space. All utilities will be underground. Restrictive covenants will be impressed upon the subdivision which will control such items as signage; exterior finishes of structures; and removal of vegetation. -12- • LIGHT AND GLARE 57. What type of light or glare would the proposal produce? What time of the day would it mainly occur? Exterior light sources common to low-density residential neighborhoods will be generated. This includes sources such as dwelling units, pathways, and streets. 58. Could light or glare from the project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No 59. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None 60. Describe proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Restrictive covenants will attempt to insure that residential lighting does not extend its effects beyond lot boundaries. RECREATION 61. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Port Ludlow is currently a 24-year old residential and recreational community. Features include the Port Ludlow Golf Course to the south of this proposal, open to public play; the adjacent South Bay Recreation Center; the Port Ludlow Marina, available for public moorage; and nearby tennis courts. In addition, many outdoor activities are immediately available including hiking, fishing, hunting, shellfish picking, etc. The project will also be linked to a community-wide trail system. The Jefferson County Parks Comprehensive Plan designates Paradise Bay Road as a bike trail. 62. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe the displacement: No -13- • • 63. Describe proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreational opportunities to be provided by the project or proponent, if any: The proponent has constructed the nearby Port Ludlow Recreation Center, the sole purpose of which is to provide recreational and social activities for new Port Ludlow residents associated with implementation of the Port Ludlow Development Plan including this project. The Center contains an auditorium for meetings, dinners, musical and theatrical productions; classrooms; arts, crafts, and hobby shops; a swimming pool, jacuzzi, an exercise room, and lockers. A full-time recreational director and staff coordinate social, cultural, educational, and sports events. Recently, an additional 9 holes have been added to the Port Ludlow Golf Course. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION 64. Are there any places or objects listed on or proposed for national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe them: No 65. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, cultural, archaeological, or scientific importance known to be on or next to the site: None 66. Describe proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: A professional archaeologist, in conjunction with local Native American tribes and the State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (OAHP), has prepared a protocol in the event archaeological items are discovered on the project site. These include the following: A. STOP WORK. Do not further disturb the area or remove any materials therefrom. -14- • i 66. (Continued): B. Notify immediately the Director of Planning and Building, 206-385-9140. C. The Director of Planning and building will notify OAHP, 206-753-5010. D. Protect the area from vandals and collectors_ E. Obtain services of a qualified archaeologist to evaluate the site and make recommendations for further work in the area. F. If further excavation or disturbance of the site is necessary, obtain the appropriate permit from OAHP. Proceed only in compliance with terms and conditions of that permit. TRANSPORTATION 67. Identify public streets and highways serving the site and describe the proposed access to the existing street system. Show on the site plan: The site will be accessed from a new collector road to be constructed from Paradise Bay Road, a local arterial. 68. Is the site currently serviced with public transit? If no, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Jefferson Transit's "Kitsap Connection" buses stop at the intersection of Paradise Bay Road and Oak Bay Road, and at South Bay Lane and Paradise Bay Road. 69. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Homesites will each provide space on-site for at least two (2) cars. 70. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe them, indicating whether they are public or private: Approximately one-half mile of new public road and 140 lineal feet of private drive will be constructed. The roads will be constructed in accordance with the standards of the Jefferson County Public Works Department. -15- • • • 71. Will the project use water, rail, or air transportation, or occur in the immediate vicinity of these facilities? If so, generally describe the use: No 72. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur: Residential trip generation rates are six (6) trips per day per residence based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 5th Edition, for single-family detached housing (adjusted for an average household size of 2.0). Total project ADTs are therefore 366 trips per day. These rates are consistent with local data collected by both Jefferson County and the proponent. 73. Describe proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: The clustering of units and construction of pedestrian trails will encourage walking to activity centers and neighbors. 74. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (i.e., fire protection, police protection, health care, schools)? If so, generally describe the results: See EIS for Port Ludlow Development Plan. 75. Describe proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any: See EIS for Port Ludlow Development Plan. UTILITIES 76. Check which utilities are currently available at the site: [X] water [X] electricity [ ] natural gas [ ] refuse service [X] telephone [ ] septic system [ ] sanitary sewer [ ] other, identify: -16- • • 77. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity that might be needed: All utilities will be underground. Water and sanitary sewer will be provided by Ludlow Water Company and Ludlow Sewer Company respectively; telephone by US West; power by Puget Power Company; refuse by Olympic Disposal Company; telecable by PT Cable Company. Construction activities associated with utility installation will be primarily ditching and burying an assortment of pipes, cables, and vaults. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I acknowledge that all information provided in this checklist and all attached material is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I understand the lead agency is relying on this information to make it's decision. In addition, I understand that review under SEPA does not constitute approval of a proposal; compliance with local, state, and federal regulations applicable to the proposal shall constitute approval. (Check with appropriate agencies to determine what approvals are required.) SEPA approval is based on the information I provide. If found inaccurate, approval could be withdrawn. c7ic);i_ e6c? / /Q 9 3 Linda Dahl Mueller pate Land Use Planner -17- L• , • • JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT THRESHOLD DETERMINATION and PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES (REVISED) Applicant: Pope Resources Proposal: To construct a road, Creekside Drive,with a right of way width of 60 feet and being approximately 2,200 feet in length; an approach will be constructed onto Paradise Bay Road (County Road No. 503609). Approximately 63% of the project right of way will be paved. The road will serve up to 250 residential lots at full buildout of the development. Location: The site is located in the Port Ludlow vicinity, in the Southwest quarter of Section 17, Township 28 North, Range 1 East, W.M. The proposed road runs South and West from the access point on Paradise Bay Road. Application: Application for Road Approach Permit was received Sept. 14, 1992. Inspection: Thomas Morello of the Department of Public Works inspected the site on the following dates: September 22, 23, and 24, 1992 October 2, 5, and 15, 1992 November 9, 1992 Summary of Significant Environmental Comments: Earth: The site consists of rolling terrain, with the proposed road site cleared. Surrounding property is currently wooded with a mix of coniferous and deciduous trees and brush. Area soils types are identified by the SCS Soil Survey as Olete-Alderwood complex 0 - 30% slopes, of which about 60% is Olete very gravelly silt loam and 40% is Alderwood gravelly sandy loam. The Olete soil is typically well drained, with moderate permeability. Runoff is slow to medium and the hazard of water erosion is slight to moderate. The Alderwood type is moderately well drained, with permeability above the cemented layer being moderately rapid. A perched water table is above the cemented layer during the winter months. Runoff is slow to medium and the hazard of water erosion is slight to moderate. There are cuts and fills on the site up to 12 feet. Control of potential erosion to these cuts and fills must be addressed by the applicant. This erosion control may include hydroseeding the bank to stabilize the soils. Water: A year-round creek is on site, as well as seasonal drainage areas. Construction activities raise the potential for damage to this creek. Additional stormwater runoff and siltation are a concern. The water quality of Ludlow Bay, into which the on-site creek empties, is not to be affected by construction and maintenance of the project. The proposal area does not abut any shoreline. The area is designated as Land/Shore- suburban by the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan. The vicinity is line Use: designated for development as Sub-Area 15: Golf Course Village by the Port Ludlow Development Plan. This is a residential area, with the additional potential for a 9-hole golf course. Transport- Paradise Bay Road is classified as a minor collector. Total impacts in the ation: area of transportation will take effect after full development of the residential area. Appropriate safety and construction measures are to be taken in compliance with road approach installation permit requirements. Staff Recommendations: The Public Works Department recommends approval of the proposal under a Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance. G:\group\pwplan\devrevu\separev\crikside 1 J • • Proposed mitigation measures: The following mitigative measures have been proposed by the Public Works staff for consideration by the Responsible Official. 1. Temporary and permanent erosion control plans are to be submitted for the approval of the Department of Public Works. 2. A Road and Storm Drainage Plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 3. A Road Design Report shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 4. A Road Approach Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works. All conditions of the permit are to be adhered to. The contractor which performs the work shall be licensed, bonded, and insured within the State of Washington. The Port Ludlow Development Program FEIS discusses items No. 1 & 2 above in Chapter 1, Summary, pages 1-6 through 1-8, "Mitigating Measures", and specified in Appendices D and E. These are stated: STORM WATER 1. Temporary erosion and sedimentation control plans would be prepared following development of final site design and construction phasing plans for the individual development areas. Temporary erosion and sedimentation control features would be designed in accordance with accepted best management practices (BMPs) and could be made subject to review and approval by Jefferson County Public Works Department. Preliminary locations and sizing of ponds have been established. The sizes and locations would be refined following final site design during specific design of individual development projects. 2. A qualified individual would be accountable for correctly installing BMP devices; making sure BMP methods and maintenance schedules are folllowed:and monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of practices. Modifications to the devices or methods would be made as necessary if monitoring reveals that practices are not effective. A third party would periodically inspect the erosion control system. 3. A permanent stormwater drainage system would be developed to control stormwater runoff in accordance with accepted best management practices. This system would be subject to review and approval by Jefferson County Department of Public Works. The system would include detention ponds sized in accordance with applicable, adopted Department of Fisheries, Department of Ecology, and Jefferson County standards. 4. The permanent stormwater drainage system would include a number of water quality control features, such as oil/water separators, biofiltration ponds and grass-lined swales. 5. The drainage system would largely maintain water drainage routes in on-site sub- basins to minimize hydrologic impacts to wetlands and streams. 6. Erosion control structures would be inspected at least once per week, and sediment removed from sedimentation ponds following heavy storms. Supporting Policies and Documents - Jefferson County Road Approach Permit Ordinance - Jefferson County Public Works Policy on Geometric Design of Roads and Streets - Jefferson County Utilities Accommodation Policy (Res. 38-91), Section 10, Paragraph D (requiring that "All work performed within County rights-of-way by contract must be done by a contractor licensed, bonded, and insured within the State of Washington.") - Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin _ Port Ludlow Development Program EIS G:\group\pw plan\devrevu\separev\crikside 2 , • • Determination of Responsible Official I have reviewed and considered the referenced proposal, the environmental checklist, public comments, other available material, and the Public Works Department's staff recommendation. I hereby: [_] issue a Determination of Non-significance. Li/issue a Mitigated Determination of Non-significance. [_] issue a Determination of Significance. [_] determine that I do not have sufficient information upon which to make a threshold determination and direct Public Works staff to obtain additional information on the proposal. Ct c/(4q1 ra—WINO, Planning Director Date G:\group\pw_plan\devrevu\separev\crikside 3 • 0 JEFFERSON COUNTY _; _ : r� - ;�;; .1 .;`� .,:.�� PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT ;„s 4 t� � ,.-rte• , �r.r J'. e T ,- ` 9 + 4 P.O. Box 1220 5t• Port Townsend, Washington 98368 )h1.-t, ' +� Planning(206)385-9140 i j e Building(206)385-9141 FAX(206)385-9357 JEFFERSON COUNTY COURTHOUSE Craig Ward, irector ADDENDUM MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE AND LEAD AGENCY STATUS DATE: May 11 , 1993 APPLICANT: Pope Resources; LP-05-92 CREEKSIDE PROPOSAL: To construct a road, Creekside Drive, with a right of way width of 60 feet and being approximately 2,200 feet in length; an approach will be constructed onto Paradise Bay Road (County Road No. 503609). Approximately 63% of the project right of way will be paved. The road will serve up to 250 residential lots at full buildout of the development. MITIGATIVE MEASURES: The mitigative measures are designed to address impacts identified through the Environmental Checklist submitted by the applicant, field evaluations by the Planning and Public Works Departments, and public comments (including that by other agencies). These impacts are: 1 . Temporary and permanent erosion control plans are to be submitted for the approval of the Department of Public Works. 2. A Road and Storm Drainage Plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 3. A Road Design Report shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 4. A Road Approach Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works. All conditions of the permit are to be adhered to. The contractor which performs the work shall be licensed, bonded, and insured within the State of Washington. The Port Ludlow Development Program FEIS discusses items No. 1 & 2 above in Chapter 1 , Summary, pages 1-6 through 1-8, "Mitigating Measures", and specified in Appendices D and E. These are stated: STORM WATER 1 . Temporary erosion and sedimentation control plans would be prepared following development of final site design and construction phasing plans for the individual development areas. Temporary erosion and sedimentation control features would be designed in accordance with accepted best management practices (BMPs) and could be made subject to review and approval by Jefferson County Public Works Department. Preliminary locations and sizing of ponds have been established. The sizes and locations would be refined following final site design during specific design of individual development projects. 1 • • 2. A qualified individual would be accountable for correctly installing BMP devices; making sure BMP methods and maintenance schedules are folllowed; and monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of practices. Modifications to the devices or methods would be made as necessary if monitoring reveals that practices are not effective. A third party would periodically inspect the erosion control system. 3. A permanent stormwater drainage system would be developed to control stormwater runoff in accordance with accepted best management practices. This system would be subject to review and approval by Jefferson County Department of Public Works. The system would include detention ponds sized in accordance with applicable, adopted Department of Fisheries, Department of Ecology, and Jefferson County standards. 4. The permanent stormwater drainage system would include a number of water quality control features, such as oil/water separators, biofiltration ponds and grass-lined swales. 5. The drainage system would largely maintain water drainage routes in on- site sub-basins to minimize hydrologic impacts to wetlands and streams. 6. Erosion control structures would be inspected at least once per week, and sediment removed from sedimentation ponds following heavy storms. County policies which address these impacts are contained in the - Jefferson County Road Approach Permit Ordinance Jefferson County Public Works Policy on Geometric Design of Roads and Streets - Jefferson County Utilities Accommodation Policy (Res. 38-91 ), Section 10, Paragraph D (requiring that "All work performed within County rights-of-way by contract must be done by a contractor licensed, bonded, and insured within the State of Washington.") Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin - Port Ludlow Development Program EIS LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: The project site is located in the Port Ludlow vicinity, in the Southwest quarter of Section 17, Township 28 North, Range 1 East, W.M. The Proposed road runs South and West from the access point on Paradise Bay Road. NOTICE OF LEAD AGENCY: Jefferson County has determined that it is the lead agency for the above-described proposal. NOTICE OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE: Jefferson County has determined that the above- described proposal would not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment, and an environmental impact statement is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the Jefferson County Planning and Building Department. COMMENT PERIOD: This determination is issued pursuant to WAC 197-11-340(2). Jefferson County will not act on the above-described proposal for at least fifteen days from the date of this determination. Comments must be submitted by May 25, 1993 to the Jefferson County Planning and Building Department (PO Box 1220, Port Townsend, WA 98368). Oraig R. ward, Director Jefferson County Planning and Building Department c: Washington State Department of Ecology Washington State Department of Wildlife 2 • • Washington State Department of Fisheries Washington State Department of Natural Resources Jefferson County Public Works Department Jefferson County Health Department Point No Point Treaty Council Hood Canal Coordinating Council Olympic Environmental Council Audubon Society Port Townsend-Jefferson County Leader Applicant Rep Parties of Record cc: ...11aurielsepalcrikside.td 3