Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCASP FWHCA 999200606 & 603CRITICAL AREAS STEWARDSHIP PLAN W: LOTS 4 ANIS 5, BLOCK 11 OF TUKEY'S ADDITION PORT TOWNSEND ,Jefferson County, Washington Tax Parcel Nos. 999200606 and 999200603 Prepared For: Mike Kenna 834 Taft Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 Prepared By: :-E AA Joanne Bartlett Wiltermood Associates, Inc. 1015 SW Harper Road Port Orchard, WA 98367 (360) 876-2403 September 8, 2011 I� �(0 F.udIF. SEP 1 5 2011 JEFFERSON COUNTY OF COMMUNITY OFVFI INDEX PAGE 1.0 PROJECT LOCATION 1 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 1 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 4.0 CRITICAL AREAS MAPPING 2 4.1 Department of Natural Resources, Water Type Inventory 2 4.2 National Wetlands Inventory 2 4.3 Jefferson County Critical Area and Habitat Mapping 2 4.4 Washington Department of Ecology, Coastal Atlas and Shore Photos 3 4.5 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Priority Habitats and Species 3 4.6 Critical Areas Identification, On -Site Review 3 5.0 POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 4 6.0 CRITICAL AREA STEWARDSHIP PLAN MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL 5 6.1 Goals of the Shoreline Buffer Enhancement 6 6.2 Shoreline Buffer Widths and Final Contours 6 6.3 Planting Plan 6 6.4 Performance Standards 7 6.5 Monitoring Plan 8 6.6 Maintenance Plan 9 6.7 Contingency Measures 9 6.8 Performance Bond Estimates 10 7.0 LIMITATIONS 11 8.0 REFERENCES 12 1.0 PROJECT LOCATION This project is located on Lots 4 and 5 of Block 11 of Tukey's Addition on Discovery Street in the Cape George area of Jefferson County, Washington. The Tax Parcel Numbers are 999-200-606 and 999-200-603 and these lots are situated in the NE 1/4 Section 31, Township 30 N, Range 1 W. WM. The parcels are downslope of the intersection at Discovery Street and Aldrich Road and are currently accessed via the driveway that provides access to the cabin at 72 Aldrich Road. This report documents conditions and the proposed activities within the 150 foot shoreline buffer for the reduction proposed through the Critical Areas Stewardship Program (CASP). 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION These parcels are currently undeveloped and are situated between beach homes to the north and south. The cabin to the south is at 72 Aldrich Road and is about 89 feet upslope of the bluff. The home to the north is at 183 Aldrich Road and is closer to the top of the bluff. See Figure #1 and Attachment #1 for location of the adjacent homes (Photos 22, 27 and 28). Both parcels are composed of upland forest on terrain that has slopes of 5 to 10% slopes down to the top of the vertical bluff. The upland forest is dominated by Douglas fir with scattered madrona and western red cedar trees with a very dense shrub understory of snowberry (see Attachment #1, Photos 1-12). Ocean spray is a dominant in some locations and serviceberry and Nootka rose appear in the shrub understory at low percentages. The bluff is only a maximum of 20 feet high and is devoid of vegetation with exposed sand and gravel visible on the bluff face (see Attachment #1, Photos 21-25). The beach area is mostly composed of sand with a cobble strip that is a consistent width across these properties but narrows to a point offsite to the south. There is an existing community dock on the adjacent property (at 72 Aldrich Street) that will be used by the future residents of this property to access the beach. There are a series of walking paths that connect the properties and the dock that will continue to be utilized once the home is built on these properties (see Attachment #1, Photos 11, 14, 19 and 20). 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION These properties are each about 9,000 square feet in size (approx. 50 feet wide by 180 feet long) and will be combined to construct one home on both lots. The home will be situated mostly on Lot 4 where it will encompass roughly 1,500 square feet of the properties and portion currently known as Lot 5 will largely remain undeveloped within only a small corner of the house extending onto this lot. The drainfield is proposed at the east end of Lot 4 where it can be placed at least 100 feet from the ordinary high water mark of Discovery Bay (see Figure #1). The home is proposed at an angle so that the southwest corner will be about 30 feet from the bluff and the southeast corner of the house will be about 55 feet from the top of the bluff (see Figure #1). Construction of the home will necessitate removal of between 20 and 30 Douglas fir trees from the homesite and drainfield area, including three fir trees that lie right along the downslope edge of the home. These trees are the closest to the bluff area and are completely surrounded by dense snowberry. Although the driveway to 72 Aldrich Street extends onto the southeast corner of Lot 5, access for the home on Lot 4 is 1 proposed from the north. The new access will extend from an existing driveway and is proposed to avoid clearing more of the vegetation than is necessary to facilitate development on this properties. The walking path will be retained along the top of the bluff to provide access between the existing homes and to the shared dock from this property. Discovery Bay is considered a Type S water according to the Jefferson County Critical Areas Ordinance and requires a 150 foot buffer from the ordinary high water mark per the Jefferson County Code Section 18.22.270. The proposed house is within the 150 foot buffer so a reduction in the buffer will be necessary so the project is proceeding through the Critical Area Stewardship Plan program (CASP) in order to build the home in the buffer. There are no alternatives to placement of the house within the buffer because the 150 foot covers most of both properties and the placement of house 30 feet from the bluff is necessary because the drainfield is required 100 feet from the ordinary high water. Because of the 100 foot setback requirement, the drainfield is located in the upper half of Lot 4, which rules out this location for the home. The homesite construction will result in removal of many conifer trees and the dense shrub understory but the dense understory snowberry will be retained between the home and the bluff to provide a screen between the shoreline community and the future home. The trees and shrubs will be retained elsewhere on the property particularly on Lot 5 so that it will appear that the home has just been set down into the woods near the shoreline. The stewardship plan will involve maintaining the existing vegetation cover provided by the snowberry, ocean spray and serviceberry with a few trees planted to provide some year round cover. The trees will be planted in an area dominated by snowberry outside the areas currently used for onsite recreation (walking paths to dock and between homes). 4.0 CRITICAL AREAS MAPPING 4.1 Department of Natural Resources, Water Type Inventory. The Department of Natural Resources, Water Type Inventory, Forest Practices Activities Resource Services designates the shoreline portion of this site as a Type S Water. See Figure 2 for site located on the Water Type Inventory Map. 4.2 National Wetlands Inventory The US Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory, Gardiner Quadrangle as viewed on the Wetlands Mapper website indicates the shoreline portion of this site as Estuarine, Intertidal, Unconsolidated Shoreline, Regularly flooded (E2USN), which is not considered wetland. There are no vegetated areas along this area of beach to indicate the presence of saltmarsh conditions. There are no wetlands mapped on or within 300 feet of the property. See Figure 3 for site located on the National Wetlands Inventory. 4.3 Jefferson County Critical Area and Habitat Mapping The Jefferson County Critical Area and Habitat Maps viewed on the on-line mapping server indicate the presence of wildlife habitat along the shoreline portion of this and the adjacent properties. The nature of the habitat is not identified on the map but it is likely the habitat is mostly for fishes, orcas, eagles and other species that are or have been on the endangered species list. See Figures 4 and 5 for site located on the Jefferson County on Aerial photo and Critical Area and Habitat Map. 2 4.4 Washington Department of Ecology, Coastal Atlas and Shore Photos According to Department of Ecology Coastal Atlas maps, eelgrass beds are mapped along this portion of the Discovery Bay shoreline with patchy fringe beds extending from Aldrich Road to the north and continuous beds mapped south of Aldrich Road. No eelgrass was observed during the field visit on August 12, 2011. See Figures 6 and 7 for Shore Photos and Coastal Atlas photos of the site. 4.5 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Priority Habitats and Species The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitats and Species website was viewed to determine the level of priority habitat available in the shoreline and upland communities in the vicinity of this project and whether priority species are found in these areas. A priority habitats and species report has been included with this report in Attachment #2. The report states that there is an eagle nest in the vicinity that is known as the Chevy Chase nest and that eagles utilize the shoreline community for a portion of their life cycle. The Jefferson County maps (Figures 4 and 5) represent the habitat mapping for eagle use as depicted by the orange circles. The report also states that there are forage fish breeding areas in this area of Discovery Bay that include sand lance, pacific herring and surf smelt. Hardshell clam and pacific geoduck are species that are also present in the intertidal area of Discovery Bay. 4.6 Critical Areas Identification, On -Site Review The shoreline waters of Jefferson County and specifically in Discovery Bay are considered Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (FWHCA) because there is usage by many species listed endangered, threatened or sensitive by the federal and state governments. These species include Chinook salmon (Threatened), summer steelhead (Threatened) and bull trout (Threatened) among the fish species and orcas (Endangered) and humpback whales (Endangered) among sea mammals. There may be nesting areas available for marbled murrelets (Endangered), spotted owls (Endangered) and bald eagles (currently delisted due to recovery but still considered important) in the vicinity of this site. The tide was at -0.8 during the August 12, 2011 site visit and photos taken looking from the shoreline and from a floating dock (grounded during the low tide) to document conditions along the shoreline community (Attachment #1, Photos 21-23 and 26-29). The photos indicate that the beach is mostly sandy with a band of rocky cobble beginning about 50 feet water -ward of the bluff and extending mostly to the northwest. There are logs collecting at the base of the bluff but they represent a thin band that probably do not provide much in the way of nesting or protection habitat (see Photos 21-23). The bluff itself is largely un - vegetated with only one location where a Douglas fir is growing low on the bluff. It appears that this tree must have slid down the bluff during an historic slide to its current position and has been growing in this location for many years. The coastal atlas photos reviewed between the 1977 and 2006 indicate the presence of the fir in its current position so if it is a result of a slide, it occurred more than 30 years ago. 3 It is likely that most if not all of the listed species utilize the portion of shoreline lying along this property for part of their respective life cycles. None of the terrestrial species appear to utilize the trees or area at the top of the shoreline buffer for perching or nesting as the trees are not more than 50 feet tall with trunks that range in diameter from 6 inches to 2.5 feet. There may be occasional perching by eagles, herons, kingfishers and the like but regular perching and use of the shoreline trees of this property is not indicated. There are no trees on this property that appear to have raptor nests so nesting is likely not occurring. Marbled murrelets and spotted owls are likely not utilizing the areas on or adjacent to this property because there is no old growth forest in the vicinity and this area has suburban residential development all along this portion of the Discovery Bay shoreline. Species exclusively found in the waters of Discovery Bay are utilizing the area at the base of the high banks as part of their habitat and there are no stream waters or other access points to habitat on the upland portion of this or nearby sites. The gravelly/sandy bluff of this property do not support native vegetation and therefore, there is no water shading along the ordinary high water mark to keep shallow waters cool. There are some nooks and crannies amongst the beach debris along the shore that provide protective areas for fishes that will not be negatively impacted by construction of the home atop the bluff. 5.0 POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT This CASP has been prepared for the two lots on Discovery Street and Aldrich Road that will be combined and a single home with parking and drainfield will be constructed. This impact discussion includes impacts that could result from homesite construction, which include the installation of the drainfield and the proposed parking area over which a carport may be constructed in the future. Impacts of development typically result from introduction of noise and light that are generated during and following construction and the increase in runoff generated on new impervious surfaces. The impact of noise and light can result in a reduction of habitat usage by wildlife species when construction is proposed close to the critical area particularly when there is no vegetation between the construction site and habitat areas. In the case of this project, the noise and light impacts to habitat within Discovery Bay will be minimal because the site is about 20 vertical feet above the ordinary high water mark of Discovery Bay and dense thickets of snowberry and less dense scattered thickets of ocean spray and serviceberry will be maintained between the homesite and top of the bluff. The noise during construction will cause species to move to another location along the shoreline habitat and they will return once the construction noise has ceased. Long term noise impacts will be minimal as the site is in a residential area and the future activities on site will not increase the noise levels above what currently occurs particularly in this area of Discovery Bay. It seems in general, this area is very quiet even with somewhat intense development along Discovery Bay. The light generated on the site will be filtered by the existing shrub vegetation that lies along the top of the bluff and alongside the walking path where it crosses Lot 4 (see Attachment #1, Photos 11, 12 and 20) so that night time lights will not shine down into the waters directly and will not affect night activities of species. 11 This project will use methods to minimize the impact to the critical area including vegetation removal only to facilitate placement and construction of the house, drainfield and parking areas and construction of a relatively small footprint home on the two existing platted lots. Vegetation not within the building site, parking or drainfield areas will be retained and will continue to function as part of the well vegetated shoreline buffer. Lawn and ornamental landscaping are not proposed as part of this project so there will be little if any use of fertilizers and other harmful pollutants and there will be minimal water quality impact on Discovery Bay. Storm drainage had not been addressed at the time this report was prepared although some discussion was made of using infiltration methods to encourage the downward percolation of storm water generated on the rooftops and the parking area. The area of impervious surface will be well under 5,000 square feet (home is 1,500 square feet and parking area is approximately 1,500 square feet). Judging by the soil exposed along the bare bluff face, the soils are gravelly to sandy and seem permeable so infiltration of storm water may be the best option. No clay or silt soil was observed and no seepage was observed from the slope to indicate a shallow hard pan that would prevent complete downward percolation through the site soils. Storm water on this property should not negatively impact the bluff or its stability if the proper disposal methods are utilized. 6.0 CRITICAL AREA STEWARDSHIP PLAN MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL The Critical Area Stewardship Plan (CASP) requirements of the Jefferson County Code specify that the goal of the management plan "...is to maintain or enhance the existing functions and values of the associated watershed while addressing the needs and desires of the property owner." The property is such that there is no option for construction of the house within the 150 foot shoreline buffer. The house is proposed below and west of the drainfield, which is required at least 100 feet from the shoreline so there is no feasible alternative to the current site plan. The home will be positioned between 30 and 55 feet from the top of the bluff and about 35 to 65 feet from the ordinary high water mark of Discovery Bay. Clearing will be necessary in the building site, drainfield and parking area but the remainder of these parcels will be left in its current condition. Because clearing is confined only to the building site area, which is mostly on Lot 4, and much of the existing forest on Lot 5 will be retained, the CASP proposes to maintain the existing dense snowberry thickets and scattered ocean spray/serviceberry clumps between the homesite and top of the bluff. The only onsite grading will take place in the building site to excavate for the foundation and to grade the parking area upslope of the house. Since high quality shrub vegetation will remain between the house and top of the bluff, vegetation installation will be minimal and will entail planting a few conifer trees southwest and northwest of the house. The trees will be installed within areas of existing snowberry to encourage development of a forest canopy. Otherwise, the CASP proposes to maintain existing areas of native vegetation and to remove any non-native invasives. Mowing will continue along the top of the bluff as shown in the photos to keep the area open for enjoyment and view from the house. W1 6.1 Goals of the Shoreline Buffer Enhancement Typically, the goal of setback or buffer enhancement is to improve the vegetation community so that it provides a more protective buffer than current site conditions allow. In the case of this project, there is good vegetative cover in much of the reduced buffer and the goal of the plan is to maintain the existing snowberry, ocean spray and serviceberry coverage because it will continue to provide high quality noise and light screening. The walking path will be maintained as it currently exists because it provides access to the community dock on Lot 6 as well as to each of the homes in this area. Continued dominance by native plants species is a second goal of the plan and to meet that goal, Scot's broom and blackberry will be removed where they currently exist. There are a couple of Scot's broom plants on the shoreline bluff and these will be removed to prevent this species from becoming established and the mowing at the top of the bluff will facilitate its regular removal. Follow up maintenance and monitoring is required to ensure that the installed plants survive and grow per the prescribed performance standards, which include 100% plant survival rate and less than 10% cover by invasive plants species on the entire site by the end of the proposed 3 to 5 year monitoring period. 6.2 Shoreline Buffer Widths and Final Contours The required shoreline buffer width is 150 feet from a Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area and through the CASP process the shoreline buffer is being reduced to accommodate the home 37 to 62 feet from the ordinary high water line of Discovery Bay. The home is proposed on sloping terrain and this terrain will be maintained on the property so there will be no change to the contours. Grading will be confined to the home site area and will only include activities that are necessary to facilitate excavation of the foundation for the home and installation of the drainfield. It will also be necessary in the parking area but again will not change the general contours of the site. 6.3 Planting Plan The planting plan proposes minimal vegetation installation because much of property will remain vegetated and there is good vegetation cover between the homesite and top of the bluff on Lot 4. To encourage development of a conifer tree overstory, 3 Douglas fir trees (Pseudotsuga rnenziesii) will be installed in a triangular shaped area of snowberry that lies upslope of the intersection of the walking paths near the southwest corner of Lot 5. This area is visually documented in Photos 13 and 14 of Attachment #1 and the planting area will extend between the fir tree in Photo #13 to the walking path in Photo #14. The trees in the background of Photo #13 are within the proposed building site so will be removed, however, the lone tree in the foreground will be retained as will the ocean spray that is visible just this side of the background trees. Four Douglas fir trees will be installed in the snowberry cover between the home and the shoreline bluff and they will be positioned in such a way as to maintain the view from the future home so will be placed mostly around the area northwest of the house. These trees will be planted mostly in the area documented in Photos 10 and 11 and mainly left of the photographer with one or two in the area shown in Photo #10. The walking path will be maintained and no trees will be installed within or water -ward of the path. The trees will be obtained as 2 gallon individuals so that they are at a height that is C1 above the snowberry cover and small openings will be created in the snowberry cover to allow installation of the trees. Native vegetation existing in these locations will otherwise be maintained to ensure cover by native plants within the reduced buffer. Plant installation is not proposed in any other location of the site because of the dense cover by existing plants and because while any other plants would be installed within the 150 foot buffer, they would not improve conditions of the reduced buffer areas. Planting is not proposed on the bare grassy area documented in Photos 19 and 20 because vegetation does not appear to be successful in this area judging by the general lack of shrubs or trees. Planting any additional plants could also cause problems for the stability of the bluff. This area is regularly mowed of grasses and native honeysuckle and will be necessary in the future to maintain the walking path and to reduce establishment of non-native plant species. Plant installation is highly recommended during the winter months (October 15`h to March 15`h) when the plants are dormant so that they are in the ground at the start of spring growing season. They can be installed during any time of the growing season provided they are regularly watered to ensure survival. Plant installation should also occur after home construction is completed to ensure they are not inadvertently impacted. In general, the plants will be laid out by hand at a spacing of 8 to 10 feet. They will be installed by digging a one to two foot diameter hole and placing the plug from the pot into the ground once the soil around the plug is loosened. The hole will then be backfilled with the dug out soil and loosely packed down around the plug. The biologist will visit on-site prior to installation to verify that the species, quantity, and sizes of the plants are correct and each plant is healthy and free of disease. The biologist shall also assist with placement of plants in the areas specified on the site plan. An as -built drawing and report shall be prepared upon completion of the plant installation and submitted to Jefferson County Department of Community Development (DCD) to document the final plant species and totals and to show the final location of the installed plants. Follow-up monitoring shall commence after submittal/approval of the as -built and will occur once at the end of each of the three growing seasons for following plant installation. 6.4 Performance Standards Since this CASP proposes to maintain the existing shrub vegetation cover within the reduced shoreline buffer and to encourage a conifer canopy in two locations as well as keep cover by non-native invasives to a minimum, the performance standards essentially focus on the success of the installed plants with regard to survival rate and percent cover of non-native invasive plants. The following performance standards have been developed for this GASP: 1. Survival Rate -Every Monitoring Year • 100% survival of installed plants in the two planting areas. The main objective of this enhancement plan is to supplement the native volunteers that are to remain within the reduced buffer. 7 2. Non -Native Invasive Coverage -Every Monitoring Year -Entire Site • Although this site does not have much cover by invasive plant species, the CASP will require that there be less than 10% cover by non-native exotics, including but not limited to English ivy, Himalayan blackberry, and Scot's broom. The Scot's broom currently growing on the bluff will be removed to prevent it from becoming established elsewhere on the property. 6.5 Monitoring Plan Monitoring is required as a follow-up to the planting plan to ensure the performance standards are met and Jefferson County is currently requiring a 5 year monitoring program. This CASP specifies 5 years of monitoring per the current requirement but would like to propose that if the plants experience 100% survival over the first three monitoring years and the reduced buffer remains dominated by native plant species, the project be considered complete and in compliance with no monitoring requirement for Years 4 and 5. Monitoring will take place at the end of the summer (August or September, which is considered the end of the growing season) so that the plants have had a chance to grow through the entire growing season. The performance standards will be monitored by examining the planting areas to document whether the standards are met on the site. Each planting area will be monitored for survival rate in their entirety and smaller monitoring units will not be established. The performance standards will be monitored using the following methods: Performance Standard #1 -Survival Rate -Survival rate will be determined by counting the number of live plants within the planted areas and dividing by the number of plants originally installed (per design and as -built), which will give a percent survival rate for the area. Performance Standard #2 -Cover by Non -Natives -The cover by non-native plants, which on this site will include but is not limited to Scot's broom and blackberry, should be kept below 10%, which is why regular maintenance is required. If the percent cover by non -natives rises above 10%, more intensive maintenance must be conducted. Mowing will be continued along the walking path and at the top of the bluff where it currently occurs to keep the cover by invasives low. An as -built drawing and report will be submitted to Jefferson County DCD to document implementation of the planting plan. The monitoring phase of the project will begin upon submittal and acceptance of the as -built report, which will show the location of the plants installed using photos and maps, upon completion of plant installation. The as -built drawing will be used in the five year follow up monitoring to track the changes in vegetative cover and document the survival rate of the installed plants. Baseline as -built photos will be taken of the planted areas to visually document the changes that occur over the monitoring period. The as -built report will be submitted to Jefferson County DCD within a month of implementation. Monitoring at the end of the growing season will allow the maximum growth and survival of the individual plants to be documented. Photos will be taken of the planted areas from the points established during completion of the as -built so that the same areas are visually EI documented over the entire monitoring period and the changes can be easily compared. The photos and data collected in the buffer will be compiled into a report and submitted to Jefferson County DCD to verify that the plan is developing as designed and is meeting the performance standards. The report will address whether the performance standards are being met during each monitoring year and if the final end of monitoring period standards are going to be met. Monitoring results will determine whether or not contingency measures will be needed. 6.6 Maintenance Plan The site is currently well vegetated with native trees and shrubs and there are no areas of significant invasive coverage. Two Scot's broom plants are growing on the bluff face and these will be removed as part of the CASP proposal. An increase in invasive coverage is not expected to result from construction of the home but mowing is proposed where it currently takes place along the walking path and the top of the bluff, which will keep any invasives from becoming established on this property. The presence of any other native shrub or tree species (Douglas fir, madrona, snowberry, serviceberry, ocean spray, Nootka rose etc.) not specifically planted in the enhancement areas shall be considered part of the plan and will not be removed. Hand watering of the installed plants will be necessary at least one time per week during the summer months of the first years after planting to ensure survival and growth. Watering may be necessary up to three times a week during periods of extremely high summer temperatures. It can be done by hand with a hose or with a sprinkler set up to water during the morning hours. The installed plants may not require regular watering after the third year if they have proven successful in terms of survival and percent cover increases. 6.7 Contingency Measures Although the success of the plan is not ensured, it is likely to succeed because of the size and scope of the project. If for some reason the survival rate is less than 100%, plants that died will be replaced with the same or a similar native species with the approval of the project biologist. Replacement will occur in the dormant season immediately following the growing season in which less than 100% survival was recorded. If the monitoring shows that there is 100% survival of the installed trees over the first three growing seasons, no additional monitoring should be required in Years 4 and 5. Monitoring may be extended by another year if the contingency plan is required. N 6.8 Performance Bond Worksheet Jefferson County requires performance bonds for buffer enhancement plans to ensure the work is completed if the current owners are unable to do so. The following amounts are based on the current costs for plants (per plant), hourly rate for labor and supervision, and total cost of monitoring by a qualified wetland biologist over the five-year period. The performance bond estimates have been divided into two portions; the implementation bond will be released following implementation of the mitigation and acceptance of the as built by Jefferson County DCD and the monitoring/maintenance bond will be released following completion and approval of the final, Year Five monitoring report. If the plants have experienced 100% survival over the first three years and the county considers the project in compliance as a result, the bond shall be released after three years and no additional monitoring or maintenance will be required. 66.8a Performance Bond Estimate-Irna)lementation of Piantina Plan 7 Bareroot and/or containerized plants, labor & tax included (based on native plant nursery price list as per planting specs) $140.00 Cost for supervision of project biologist (estimated: 2 hours @$110/hr) Supervision of wetland grading and plant installation 220.00 As -Built design and letter 550.00 Total for Implementation Phase $910.00 6.8b Performance Bond Estimate-Monitorin Year One Monitoring 550.00 Year Two Monitoring 550.00 Year Three Monitoring 550.00 Year Four Monitoring 550.00 Year Five Monitoring 550.00 Maintenance !Twice Yearlv Weed Removal and watcrina Year One Maintenance 200.00 Year Two Maintenance 200.00 Year Three Maintenance 200.00 Year Four Maintenance 200.00 Year Five Maintenance 200.00 Total for Monitoring/Maintenance Phase $2,550.00 10 7.0 LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared for Mike Kenna. This Critical Areas Stewardship Program was prepared in accordance with the Jefferson County Critical Areas Ordinance for Fish and Wildlife Habitat Research using information collected on the Internet and from client information gathered in his research of the requirements and necessary permits from governmental agencies. Given the constraints of schedules and scope of work, Wiltermood Associates, Inc. warrants that the work performed is in accordance with the criteria in effect at the time this report was prepared. The results and recommendations of this report represent professional opinion based upon the information provided by the client, and observations made during study of the site and conditions. The final decision as to the validity or accuracy of this report is to be made by Jefferson County Department of Community Development and/or consultants hired to review the information. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Signed Joanne Bartlett Biologist t 8.0 REFERENCES Hitchcock, Leo C. and Cronquist, Arthur. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press. 1973. 730 pp. Jefferson County Unified Development Code, Title 18, Land Use Districts, Chapter 18.25, Shoreline Master Program. Jefferson County Critical Areas Mapping Website. http://iii,,tps.co-jefferson.wa.us/servlet/com.esrigLap. Lyons, C.P and Merilees, Bill. Trees, Shrubs, and Flowers To Know in Washington and British Columbia. Lone Pine Publishing. 1995. 375 pp. Pojar, Jim and MacKinnon, Andy. Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast; Washington, Oregon, British Columbia, & Alaska. Lone Pine Publishing. 1994. 527 pp. US Fish and Wildlife Service Wetlands Digital Data -National Wetlands Inventor . http://wetiandsfws.er.usgs.gov/NWI/index.htmi Washington Department of Ecology Coastal Atlas Website. http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/sma/atlas home.html Washington Department of Ecology Shoreline Photos Website. http://apps.ecy.wa.gov/shorel2hotos/ Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Priority Habitats and Species Website l7 ttp:Hwd t w. wa.g oov/mapping/phs/ Washington Department of Natural Resources, Forest Practices Application Review System website. http:Hfortress.wa.gov/dnr/appl/Fparsl�,'Iewer.htm 12 Map Output PI _ --- .. _... ,., , , ,,,,,,, —1.un ui NruMu a IIST Di Syn1DOIS use0. Page 1 of 1 FOREST PRACTICE ACTIVITY MAP TOWNSHIP 30 NORTH HALF 0, RANGE 1 WEST (W.M.) HALF 0, SECTION 31 Application #: FIGURE #2 Thursday, August 18, 2011 10:25:22 AM NAD 83 Contour Interval: 40 Feet http://fortress. wa.gov/servleticom.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=fparsactbw&ClientVersion... 8/18/2011 FIGURE #3 � m 9 Q LL g rrw fit • � , +� .�.. _ roti -�, u J J J FIGURE 4 JEFFERSON COUNTY WETLAND INVENTORY AND SHORELINE DESIGNATION Tax Parcel No. 999-200-606 Green polygon represents mapped estuarine wetland, which is actually beach and does not meet the criteria for jurisdictional wetland. The blue line represents the Conservancy Shoreline Designation (per Jefferson County). l J J FIGURE 5 JEFFERSON COUNTY FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT AREAS Discovery Bay Mapping for Tax Parcel No. 999-200-606 Orange polygons represent known Fish and Wildlife Habitat Areas. The orange areas some of which are circular indicate the presence of eagle and other bird nests around which are the designated habitat areas. Area extending north to south along the shoreline on the east side of Discovery Bay appears to map the eelgrass beds that are mapped by the Department of Ecology Coastal Atlas and these may be also represented by the fish and wildlife habitat area map. L � C� ha 51 \ i d! i 4 1 1 1 l 11 4! For Informational Purposes Only Jefferson County does not attest to the accuracy of the data contained herein and makes no warranty with respect to its correctness or validity. Data contained in this map is limited by the method and accuracy of its collection. Features depicted on this map must be verified in the field. 4 \ 1 I Y •i t 1 - Site r .. 4! For Informational Purposes Only Jefferson County does not attest to the accuracy of the data contained herein and makes no warranty with respect to its correctness or validity. Data contained in this map is limited by the method and accuracy of its collection. Features depicted on this map must be verified in the field. I -j FIGURE 6a WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY COASTAL ATLAS PHOTOS JUNE 23, 2006 2 "'A' ir irE 14lra Y M y 1-'.. A, '�� , r �. ��'I•t y(,%.�4 S.,?��4�� ,y., t: t•��•° � � _� Vii. X � `.��+�I #' t _ This coastal atlas photo was taken in June 2006 and the site is fully forested with the existing homes and docks in the locations indicated. The parcel is currently forested with a narrow clearing between the forest edge and the top of the bluff, which according to the site plan (Figure #1), is between 18 and 20 feet above sea level. The clearing, which is used as a trail by local residents, is visible between the existing house to the north and the existing house and dock to the south. The portion of the bluff on this property is relatively un -vegetated because it is vertical but there are a few ocean sprays, a Douglas fir that appears to have moved down the slope with an historic slide and a few Scot's broom. There is no significant vegetation cover along this portion of the shoreline that would provide shaded habitat for fishes even though this area is mapped as a forage fish breeding area by the WDFW Priority and Habitat Species maps. i J J FIGURE #6b WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY COASTAL ATLAS PHOTOS May 22, 2001 This coastal atlas photo taken in 2001 and as with the 2006 photo, it shows the general location of the offsite homes, which are the same homes indicated on the 2006 photo. The beach appears to be sandy from this view but it is actually composed of multiple substrates including sand that generally extends well below the tide line and a band of cobble that lies about 50 feet from the base of the bluff. As explained on Figure 6a, the bluff along the onsite shoreline area is mostly un -vegetated because it is vertical with a Douglas fir that slid down with an historic landslide. This photo provides a better view of the bare bluff, which is the section between the Ex. House on the left and the Ex. Dock, and the fir tree on the bluff is about halfway across the bare bluff. J J J J J ATTACHMENT #1 KENNA SITE PHOTOS These photos document the current vegetation coverage within the proposed building site. For the most part the site is forested with a mixed aged stand of Douglas fir in the canopy and dense snowberry in the understory. There are areas of ocean spray (tall shrub in Photos 1, 2 and 4), Nootka rose and serviceberry in the shrub layer but snowberry is the dominant species. Occasional cedar trees and a few madrona are also present in the forest canopy. Photos 5 and 6 are taken from the existing driveway that provides access for the home to the south (on Lot 6) and looks toward the proposed drainfield area. Photo #1 Photo #2 Photo #3 Photo #4 Photo #5 Photo #6 KENNA SITE PHOTOS These photos document the lower limits of the proposed building footprint. They are taken from the southwest corner of the marked house footprint and Photo #7 looks along the north edge of the proposed home (toward the northwest corner of the house) and Photo # 8 looks southerly along the western edge of the house-the southeast corner of the footprint is represented by the orange flag that is barely visible beyond the ladder that is leaned up against the fir tree. The western edge basically lies along the proposed buffer from the shoreline, which is as narrow as 30 feet from the southwest corner and as wide as 55 .feet from the southeast corner of the house. Photos 9 and 10 are taken from the northwest corner of Lot 4 and look in a southerly direction in the reduced shoreline buffer area. The existing path lies along the right edge of Photo #10 and the dense snowberry in both views will remain within the buffer. Photos 11 and 12 document the condition of existing vegetation on both sides of the path, which will remain as part of this proposal. The vegetation on the right edge of Photo #12 will be retained and will be sufficient to protect the shoreline community from noise and light impacts generated on the homesite. Photo #7 Photo #8 Photo #9 Photo #10 Photo #11 Photo #12 KENNA SITE PHOTOS These photos are taken roughly from the southwest corner of Lot 5. Photos 13 and 14 look onto Lot 5 toward the reduced buffer zone, which will remain well vegetated with the snowberries visible in both areas. A few fir trees will be planted in this area as part of the buffer improvement plan. Photos 15 and 16 represent additional views of the existing shrub vegetation community that will remain within the reduced buffer after the home is constructed. Photo #13 J Photo #14 Photo #15 Photo #16 KENNA SITE PHOTOS These photos are taken from near the southwest corner of Lot 5. Photos 17 and 18 look toward the existing cabin on Lot 6 and shows the condition of the vegetation between the cabin and the shoreline bluff. This buffer area is dominated by snowberries with a few scattered trees and basically represents how the buffer will look on Lots 4 and 5 once the home is constructed. Photos 19 and 20 are included to document the condition of the path and bluff from a different viewpoint. As Photo #19 indicates there is minimal vegetation at the top of the bluff in this location most like for natural reasons. This area is mowed to keep grass cover down and it appears that the only native species that grows is the native honeysuckle. While there is some ocean spray in this view, it has not spread to cover more of the bluff and there is no snowberry growing in this location, which indicates that taller shrubs and trees would probably not grow well in this location. The trees on the right half of Photo #20 will be removed from the building site but the shrub vegetation on both sides of the walking path will be retained and will be adequate to screen noise and light impacts generated on the future homesite. i_117q Photo #17 Photo #18 Photo #19 Photo #20 KENNA SITE PHOTOS These photos are taken from the beach below the site and bluff. As they indicate, the bluff is only roughly 20 feet high and is fairly devoid of vegetation except in an occasional scattered shrubs. The beach is primarily composed of sand with a band of cobble rock about 50 feet from the bluff that widens as it continues north and narrows to a point south of the property. The bluff face is composed of gravelly sandy material that appears very stable with no recent evidence of slides or sloughing. Logs are collecting at the base of the bluff but there are not high numbers most likely due to the lack of significant current in this portion of Discovery Bay. Photo #21 Photo #22 Photo #23 Photo #24 Photo #25 KENNA SITE PHOTOS These photos are taken from the floating dock and provide a wide overview of the conditions landward of Discovery Bay. The proposed building site is located just right of the existing homes on the left half of Photo #27 and a close-up view of the building site is provided in Photo #30. The tide was a -0.8 at about 9:30 am on August 12, 2011, which is about the time the site was visited to document conditions. Discovery Bay had a week of minus tides with the lowest tide at -1.1 on August 10, 2011. The low tide revealed a large sand dollar bed, which appears in the lower half of Photo #26 but did not reveal much else in terms of beach/saltwater life. The shrub vegetation at the top of bluff in Photo #30 will be retained and will be sufficient to screen noise and light impacts generated on the new home -the trees will be removed to place the home in this location. Photo #26 Photo #27 Photo #28 Photo #29 Photo #30 ❑ w a z a w a z w a z Ln LL O E r d ❑ N ?Q a) > J ❑ LU M g z ''TA .2 E E v ca U- 16 o W � a N V ❑ c 9 cR 3 a ❑ w a z a w a z w a z Ln LL O E r d ❑ N ?Q a) > J ❑ LU M g z ''TA .2 w a lz a CSHM v v C: Lm y N LL 0T D a ❑ w CL z a w z Q U) U) w w z D U) w a 0 N CNO 00 0 #2 E E E ❑ CO ❑ H 'a N CL > n (A CL n>a n i N to in in N C L (n C !/% C fA fA (q W LL a lL fn a lL (n a it iq a a 0 - LL LL N 0 J N r r _o dcm caCL 73 ZOa. o Z z z a � n z a �a� 0 o o e wN 2 = U) LJ. .� c 8 n o o Q W Q aa O 0, 1 g T 12 O& O V F �f] 3 3 c i t;7o E 3 3' � uJ �, a� �,E �,E �' r xr Z_ a _ _ c 3 c a ,� E rn t cc �, a �� �8n >> a cW(� a0 z LP L al L m O O r L Q Q L G G Z IX Q 2 Q U) a a F U p W Q A N 'E w ~ j }�gq rn 0 o m m N o = d a fn � EE E o - � > Co C7 W > � tii ❑ J a F- d w rn o r r r z a¢ zom zco LL z Z ~ > > > o O (n 0 Q w n a C L H 8 8 U m w a wiz rCSc w Z p c a� �n CO N d N N al y y x c a m �� N Dd �`° M �." ca 8 Q D ow z m= m= mi ci0` w w a lz a CSHM v v C: Lm y N LL 0T D a ❑ w CL z a w z Q U) U) w w z D U) w a 0 N CNO 00 0 #2 ui z a a IL a z a 0 LU a z ¢ 0 w a z ¢ 0 N a� •UU p c Z J a� 0 •UCL w CL IL CL 2g z a a IL a z a 0 LU a z ¢ 0 w a z ¢ I z a a z m 4 3 m � c g m z t LL N � Z L• M 2 E L Q 7 N Z 0LLI O 0) V i3 [2 M Lo U) LL m T a) to N LL 12 O LL O w a z ¢ U N Z z W a z a a� •UU z a� cd 3 •UCL CL 2g •U CL La c CL yUn M Z L U)in N N N M U) N N �z N UJ, N J N J a E y J a I E N m N a z a z z a z z a 3 a z z a Li Jai m m U) in N LL N ILL m 12 Q z 12 ¢ z a z z a z ami m m m 3 w 3 m 3 m M m 1�p10 m s 3 m e 3 � � g �a� 2a 00 v 2 x �a ea = 2 2 CL 02 i Z L CO m L CO Z L 0] Z L m ma. L L r I TI S rI rn p r E CZ,) N N N N N V% N N V% � fA E LI E 20 L L� E r- n LI E In L LI E 1� E LI E D �Op N Z iL m` N Z iL N Z [i m` N Z iL `y N o Z ii Z e c a)� in O 0) N E O c ml O O) c ml O O 0) N E a) c a)l O m E m c 4) z O 0) Q) 7 .� O C .� O � Napp (O .� O O «� O Oti N m o m N CO LL Z fn LL Q fn LL Z fn LL O In LLco T T U) T T 2 2 Z ) ) (A Nco fn t fn N In U Ia) LL N LL LL N LL a� m m a, m ast z LL LL IL LL LL I z a a z m 4 3 m � c g m z t LL N � Z L• M 2 E L Q 7 N Z 0LLI O 0) V i3 [2 M Lo U) LL m T a) to N LL 12 O LL O w a z ¢ U N Z z W a z a N 2 CL r O N O N 00O z z m m cd 3 m ct3 2g La c m Z t M Z L �+ M N T �z oZ M O a E y (D o a I E N m 00) E 0c (Q(Qpp}} m 0 0 Z .� O T N fn LL (n LL LL N T N a) m m U) in N LL N ILL m 12 12 LL LL N 2 CL r O N O N 00O wa, O r O w a z a 0 w a I z ¢ 5 O w CL z a y Z 0 w IL z a 0 w 0. z a a a = z 3 a U y Z j O w a z ¢ K tll J a a = z a ,N b)CL 0I d O7 c 3 c 3 a CL Q) a 06 U) 00 Z CL 0) N L d rL A >I T o I N J cn N J tl1 J M J N J op Z a 3 3 a LLL a 3 3 E 3 3 a (i vii ? 4) 1-: O O/ NpN _ E2 IT 12 (o LL LS (n LL ti fn lL Z (D in LVl U) ('n iL N lL N U- 4) co m m 2 1 (L L. LL IL 1 Z Z Z Z Z Cl G m ; CO) 3 m 3 m m co ; m m z Oi Z L m Z L m L t m C� >I ai m � >I N ^I1I � Z aUI N Z QUI 2 nil $ N .M- Z LN � N Z NU m E y E y � E y o I E w o a I E H o E © t1 Z�I Z Z�I a Z�I ZLLI Z�I m z L' cm 0 07 a7 ca 2 cm m m p N E d? cm o p N E N cm O Ol 0D Z (0 cm 0 01 p L m n 0 �° o `.9on a m L° o foo a m L° 7> 3o n o n o ao o :°o o m WO w (O N 0 U) LL � LL U) LL �- (n Cn LL � Z (A LL I� Cn LL n� T 2 Cn 2 Cl) 2 fn Z Cn 2 U) Z V N IL N 11 N IL N 11 N 11 m m m m m LL LL LL LL y Z 0 w IL z a 0 w 0. z a a a = z 3 a U y Z j O w a z ¢ K tll J a a = z a M 2 IL 0 N O C14 co O c c 3 c 3 a a a ¢_ 00 Z L a0 Z L m Z L rL A >I T o I mID 2 cn m o t `r°m cn 2 op L MA) m r LLL Z LL I E :1Z Z y O0)nO ? 4) 1-: O O/ NpN _ E2 12 (o LL LS (n LL ti fn lL Z (D in LVl U) ('n iL N lL N U- 4) co m m 2 1 (L L. LL IL M 2 IL 0 N O C14 co O U , U O Z 0 W a z ¢ U N U O Z J W a z a a c W z a U w U O c Z 0 W LL z U v, CO O Z 0 w a z a D a) N a) N N d m m m m m m m U) U) � � � U CL A E m ami a) E d N V) 41 N N N N J J J J J J J as = as = as COaa = as = as = as = LL N z 3 a z z a z IL 3 a z 3 a 3 a 3 a z z z z z z z �+ p cc") m ai m cd m co m cd m co Co m w m m cd $ m a a A m 0 rn 00)a rn rn v 0I -0 m m m rn 0) ami 83 3 d m g a 2 T z d ¢_ 2 Q d Q m Q m CL 02 i m m L CO Z L CO Z L Co Z L co Z L m w L CO CO L III �I ao al�I N 10 d O d N N c+Y N M aa)i [�j7 Z 00 O Z N O �"' D 2 Q7 4 .. fn N .. O N. .. O N .. O L 7 N " O a 7 N J� P3 ELI ^ ELI ELI ELI ELI `$ ELI ELI a O O g� V1 !A V7 � > N > !A O N p O N E 0 0 zLL z"I zLLI a zLLI zLLI m ZLLI ZU: rZ3 9p c m o f c m c E c m p E c m c m E c m Z c m e O Ol ap O 0� O 0) M 6r/ O tm O `' O 01 N O 01 � N ��i CO)CC) C7 IL 0 c IL 0 Cn IL (n c lL ti (n IL (n lL co ry L7 IL 0 T T N N T T T g 2 Z 2 Z 2 2 2 fn fn fA to (n (O N Lt L L t L L 1A N fn N N N N C CI EL LL IL IL IL LL LL Z IL IL IL IOL IL IL LL LO W 0- z z a a a = z a M ami (a m � 3 ¢ J m Z r Cl) 'n m coli 2 CO L 7 N °2 LI n Z lLl .0 00 n fn IOL C7 T 2 CO N LL m O1 T IL a w U c Z 0 W a. z ¢ U , U O Z 0 W a z ¢ U N U O Z J W a z a a c W z a U w U O c Z 0 W LL z U v, CO O Z 0 w a z a D a) N a) N N d m m m m m m m U) U) � � � U CL A E m ami a) E d N V) 41 N N N N J J J J J J J as = as = as COaa = as = as = as = LL N z 3 a z z a z IL 3 a z 3 a 3 a 3 a z z z z z z z �+ p cc") m ai m cd m co m cd m co Co m w m m cd $ m a a A m 0 rn 00)a rn rn v 0I -0 m m m rn 0) ami 83 3 d m g a 2 T z d ¢_ 2 Q d Q m Q m CL 02 i m m L CO Z L CO Z L Co Z L co Z L m w L CO CO L III �I ao al�I N 10 d O d N N c+Y N M aa)i [�j7 Z 00 O Z N O �"' D 2 Q7 4 .. fn N .. O N. .. O N .. O L 7 N " O a 7 N J� P3 ELI ^ ELI ELI ELI ELI `$ ELI ELI a O O g� V1 !A V7 � > N > !A O N p O N E 0 0 zLL z"I zLLI a zLLI zLLI m ZLLI ZU: rZ3 9p c m o f c m c E c m p E c m c m E c m Z c m e O Ol ap O 0� O 0) M 6r/ O tm O `' O 01 N O 01 � N ��i CO)CC) C7 IL 0 c IL 0 Cn IL (n c lL ti (n IL (n lL co ry L7 IL 0 T T N N T T T g 2 Z 2 Z 2 2 2 fn fn fA to (n (O N Lt L L t L L 1A N fn N N N N C CI EL LL IL IL IL LL LL Z IL IL IL IOL IL IL LL LO W 0- z z a a a = z a M ami (a m � 3 ¢ J m Z r Cl) 'n m coli 2 CO L 7 N °2 LI n Z lLl .0 00 n fn IOL C7 T 2 CO N LL m O1 T IL a g= ❑ w CL z w CL z a co U N Z z ❑ w a z O T g. a ❑ w a lz w a lz m m c 0 0 C06 a y N � J U a ,ai •3i Z ui Z ui Z f/J U N N ®® U N (��0 U V N L N Q Q (fin N t�A U(n N J J J N J N J a s z * a a z z = a a z z CO a a z = a a = N a a a z a z z a (o Y' E E {Fs[ 53+7 7 CO 7 NI c0 CD ZN > z 3 (Ln > CL ll Z N ❑ 2 m 2 Z 2 o ((aa Z :3 0 m cm u, c -E m Co a 01 t U 0. U a a °c Z cc 2. 0. Z a s ¢,� d U d a da b 3a :€ wz mz 2!a R :9g. L mz t mz` L as Z i L LLI N LLyyy :. v 2 n Z Z o C,Z c m m L d N d N N E 7lL �LL Ali Ali ~o I ❑ r `m a`1 c�I G 6 C m1 O 07 U� C 0)1 O O1 0 P N c 0)1 O O1 N E O C 011 N O 01 E > y .� O� .nl O N j .� O n O O 01 O LN USS !n LL N LL (n LL •"' z (n w r❑ Z y N N Cl) UA fn w � y y _m V lL lL LL U- 01 O) N L Z IL lL LLL LLL = w a lz m m c 0 0 C06 a y N � J U a 2 IL LO Z Z Z ®® U (��0 U L Q Q � t�A E 3 c CO)1 N yyc N rL as a`a. mm t m (o Y' E E 7 CO 7 NI c0 CD ZN > z 3 (Ln > CL Z (n Z N ❑ 2 m a 2 o ((aa :3 0 m cm u, c -E m Co 01 01 t U 0. U a a °c UM _ 01 Q cc 2. 0. a s d U 2 IL LO I D) V f0 N LL 6 9 v C N LL `O CL N d O � T 00 !I} � i z `z a z z a z z y. c a a O m = L X11 C d.•' U U 7 7 17 0 03 92 IL 2 Q Q E p� o z E a z 8 z0 IL I � lC d A E r w q�q 20 Q �J } W co W In N v =a rn N C O 10 c U 0 U 2 E a co 2 y L N k d7 OO L C N a g 2 2 l0 C Or-, of c N f0 m c E C C m � c c y N nN v o. Egy3 U CO m 1 C °c z W N N w N - �� O 'CO M M Y CC O 81 O C N a E o m 8 �o m �N f0 O L C N C 8 d N W j 7Z7 C O N N 'N E3a� p�j N N S L U � K U T w a t O ; A w � N L1 O C d C-0 N 2. :p LL 0 0 C j N dj 0 O E cu L cm cu rl cu 3 co /1 co t0 co rn N ch M O r r tC 00 M 00 M r i J J J J