Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout041816_cabs01JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA REQUEST TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Philip Morley, County Administrator z l' DATE: April 18, 2016 RE: Government -to -Government Consultation Meeting with the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe STATEMENT OF ISSUE: This is a government to government consultation meeting between the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe and Jefferson County, focused on the Tribe's issues with regard to the proposed Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort. The Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe has requested this meeting and the County Commissioners wish to have such a meeting. ANALYSIS: The Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe is the successor in interest to Indian bands and tribes who signed the 1855 Treaty of Point No Point. The Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort is within the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe's Adjudicated Usual and Accustomed Area and Traditional and Historic Use Area. In recognition of the Tribe's unique status, a government -to - government consultation meeting is both appropriate and welcomed by the County Commissioners. In 2008, the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners adopted Ordinance No. 01-0128-08 amending the County Comprehensive Plan to designate a Master Planned Resort (MPR) in Brinnon in the Pleasant Harbor and Black Point areas, and imposing certain conditions on the subsequent development of the MPR. Since then, the Pleasant Harbor Marina & Golf Resort, LLP (Pleasant Harbor) has been working to develop a plan for developing the Master Planned Resort. On December 9, 2015 a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (FSEIS) was issued by the County on Pleasant Harbor's proposed development, as the SEPA document to accompany a set of proposed draft Development Regulations and a draft Development Agreement, both of which were subject to potential amendment and adoption by the Board of County Commissioners after public hearing(s). On December 16 the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe sent a letter to the Jefferson County Planning Commission and Department of Community Development (DCD) raising issues they believe were not satisfactorily addressed in the FSEIS, and asking for a 60 -day period to work with the County to complete the tribal consultation process. DCD granted this extension. On March 11, 2016 the Tribe's Tribal Historic Preservation Officer Laura Price sent a letter to the Planning Commission and DCD outlining concerns about use of Kettle Ponds B and C and potential damage to Traditional Cultural Properties, including the freshwater within the project area that has direct association with spiritual entities known to the S'Klallam Tribe, and biota subject to historic S'Klallam gathering, and requesting a traditional cultural property evaluation for possible listing on the National Register of Historic Places. On March 15, 2016, the Tribe's Environmental Program Manager Roma Call sent a letter to the Planning Commission and DCD outlining additional concerns about potential impacts to tribal fisheries (including shellfish too), elk herd viability, cultural resources and tribal treaty rights. The letter proposes 13 actions requested by the Tribe, and offers to work with the County to address the Tribe's concerns. On March 23, 2016, Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe Chairman Jeromy Sullivan sent a letter to the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners extending an invitation for a government -to - government consultation meeting to discuss issues with regard to the Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort prior to any decisions by the County on the Development Regulations or Development Agreement. In addition, Ms. Price and Ms. Call attended the Planning Commission's meeting on April 6, 2016, presented the Tribe's concerns to the Planning Commission, and answered clarifying questions by the members. The Planning Commission continues its deliberations on recommendations it may make to the County Commissioners regarding the draft Development Regulations and the draft Development Agreement for the Pleasant Harbor MPR. For the April 6 Planning Commission meeting, DCD staff prepared a "Note to File — March 29, 2016" providing further background information regarding the Port Gamble S'Klallam's concerns. Both the applicant and the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe have the "Note to File." Please find attached copies of the following: 1. March 23, 2016 letter from Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe Chairman Jeromy Sullivan on the government -to -government meeting; 2. March 11, 2016 letter from Tribal Historic Preservation Officer Laura Price; 3. March 15, 2016 letter from the Tribe's Environmental Program Manager Roma Call; 4. March 29, 2016 Note to File from Jefferson County Associate Planner David Wayne Johnson. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Conduct a government -to -government consultation meeting between the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe and the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners and staff. Provide county staff direction for continuing work in consultation with the Tribe. RE W.WED BY: Philip Mor , ounty mi ' or Date AMMUNIR- PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE 31912 Little Boston Rd. NE — Kingston, WA 98346 March 23, 2016 Jefferson County Board of Commissioners: Commissioner Phil Johnson, Commissioner David Sullivan, Commissioner Kathleen Kler 1820 Jefferson St. Port Townsend, WA 98368 Dear Commissioners, 0 On behalf of the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe, I'm extending this invitation to the Board of Commissioners for a government -to -government consultation meeting. The Tribe would like to discuss issues with regard to the proposed Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort in Jefferson County and the potential for significant impacts on cultural resources and treaty rights. Additionally, we request that the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners meet with the Tribe prior to making any decisions on the conditions for the development regulation amendment or developer agreement for the Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort project. We feel it is critical for you to hear and understand the Tribe's concerns in order to make informed decisions regarding this project. We also welcome any other agenda topics that you may want to discuss. We are happy to host the meeting at the Tribe's headquarters at 31912 Little Boston Road NE, Kingston or we could meet at your offices if that is more convenient. Please contact our staff, Destiny Oliver, at (360) 297-6220 to coordinate schedules. We look forward to meeting with you. Sincef iy, Jer y Sullivan Chairman, Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE 41P4 3l0l2Little Boston Road NE * Kingston'. WA 98346 Date: March 11, 2016 Jefferson County Planning Commission 6J1Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, \N&88368 Email: PlatiCoiiini@co.jeffei-soit.wa.tis David Wayne Johnson Pleasant Harbor PSG|Sc/o Jefferson County DCD 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, VVA98360 Email: dwjohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us Re: Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort LLC Master Planned Resort Dear Planning Commission Members and Mr. Johnson, Thank you for the opportunity 6zrthePort Gamble G'KOabmnTribal Historic Preservation Office tnreview and comment onthe proposed Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort LLC Master Planned Resort. The proposed Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort LLC Master Planned Resort is located within the Port Gamble S'Klallarn Tribe's Adjudicated Usual and Accustomed Area and Traditional and Historic Use Area. This proposed undertaking is located in an area of high cultural and historic significance for the Port Gamble S'K|aUannTribe. k|salso located inan area of high probability for encountering cultural resources according to the Washington Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) WISAARD database. Based onpreliminary review ulocation o[the proposed undertaking the Tribe isconcerned that the project proposal to use Kettle Ponds B and C for storing storillwater and treated wastewater could result in significant damages to Traditional Cultural Properties (TCPs) that meet multiple federal criteria that render them eligible for inclusion onthe National Register ufHistoric Places. Criterion BAssociation with the Lives ofPersons Significant inour Past: This area specifically the freshwater within the proposed project area, have direct association with spiritual entities known tnthe S'K|aUaxnTribe. Criterion C. Representative of a Significant and Distinguishable Entity Whose Components May Lack Individual Distinction: Areas within the proposed project area have unique ecological conditions that result in supporting specific biota that supported historic S'Kiallam gathering that has continued into the twentieth century within living memory of Port Gamble 5^K]aUaulTribal members. (380) 297-2646 WO) 831-9921 (360) 297-7097 Criterion D. History of Yielding or Potential to Yield Information Important in Prehistory or History: Based on the high density of Native American Place names that include traditional camp sites and the proximity of the proposed project to two traditional S'Klallam historic and contemporary fisheries and shellfish harvest areas at the Duckabush and Dosewallips River the area has a high probability to yield valuable information to S'Klallam, and broader patterns of Native American history and use of the Hood Canal watershed. The Tribe believes that the uniqueness of the geologic features and oral historical accounts relating spiritual entities linked to the land, the traditional plants harvested generationally by S'Klallam people from the past and within living memory, as well as multiple campsites and Native American place names know in the area, all directly contribute to unique cultural significance of the area that would be impacted by significant modification of the physical environment. The Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe requests to have a traditional cultural property evaluation of the kettle ponds and wetland area to determine their eligibility to the National register and evaluate the impacts the proposed undertakings will have on the cultural integrity of the area and their eligibility to be listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Sincerely, -W—u Laura L. Price Tribal Historic Preservation Officer Cultural Resources Department Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe 360 297-6358 lives@pgst.nsn.us cc: Roma Call Environmental Program Manager, Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe Josh Wisniewski, Ph.D. Anthropologist, Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe Q, PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE 31912 Little Boston Rd. NE — Kingston, WA 98346 41 March 15, 2016 Jefferson County Planning Commission 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 Email: PlanComm@co jefferson.wa.us David Wayne Johnson Pleasant Harbor FSEIS c/o Jefferson County DCD 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend WA 98368 Email: dwjohnsonna,co.jefferson.wa.us Subject: Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, December 2015, Case No's: MLA08-00188, ZON08-00056 Dear Planning Commission Members and Mr. Johnson, On behalf of the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe (PGST), the following comments are provided with regard to the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (FSEIS) and Intent to Amend the Unified Development Code for the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort LLC Master Planned Resort (MPR). We request that Jefferson County continue to work with PGST staff to implement the actions described below. These actions are intended to serve as mitigation for the potentially significant effects of the proposed project on cultural resources and the Tribe's treaty rights and are also consistent with the conditions required under Ordinance No. 01-0128-08. The Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe is the successor in interest to Indian bands and tribes signatory to the 1855 Treaty of Point No Point, 12 Stat. 933.1 Today the Tribe retains deep cultural and economic ties to the surrounding waters and to their fisheries in its usual and accustomed grounds and stations (U&A). More than a century of federal court decisions have fleshed out the components of the treaty right, including the right of access to places, the right to a share of harvest to meet tribal moderate living needs, and the right to protection of fish habitat. Maintaining access to the entire terrestrial and marine landscape'that was used by tribal ancestors is also of critical cultural importance, and helps to define the Tribe's identity. The proposed Pleasant Harbor project is located within the Tribe's U&A, in an area where tribal members depend on fish, shellfish and wildlife. In 2008, the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) adopted Ordinance No. 01-0128-08, listing 30 special conditions to be required for development approval under the Comprehensive Plan amendment to allow a Master Plan Resort within an area zoned Rural Residential. "Consultation with the Tribes regarding cultural resources, and possibly one kettle preserved as a cultural resource," is included as a requirement in the list of conditions for development approval. The BOCC ordinance also requires a document to be executed or recorded with the County Auditor, reflecting the developer's written 1 United States v. Washington, 459 F. Supp. 1020, 1039 (W.D. Wash. 1978) (hereinafter Boldt 11). Q, PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE 31912 Little Boston Rd. NE — Kingston, WA 98346 understanding with and among the local tribes, as well as other entities, in order to maintain site integrity and to assure traditional tribal access to cultural properties and activities. The BOCC ordinance also requires the applicant to develop a wildlife management plan focused on non -lethal strategies in the public interest in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife and local tribes. The other special conditions for development approval focus on additional measures for environmental protection and other issues also of concern to the Tribe. With the release of the FSEIS for this project, it is questionable as to whether Jefferson County's Community Development Department (DCD) made a good faith effort to consult with the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe. In order to meet the BOCC special conditions in Ordinance No. 01-0128-08, we understood that Jefferson County would work directly with PGST during the development of the FSEIS, including the supporting documents in the appendices. However, the Tribe was not consulted during the development of the FSEIS and our comments were not incorporated. The FSEIS Volume 2 Appendix O includes a Proposed Plan for Archeological Monitoring and Inadvertent Discovery Protocol, DAHP Response to the Cultural Resource Plan and the Skokomish Tribe's Response to the Cultural Resource Plan. However, this section does not go nearly far enough to resolve PGST's concerns and to mitigate project effects with regard to cultural resources and tribal treaty right impacts. The Centennial Accord (1989) and the New Millennium Agreement (1999)2 established a basic framework and provide the general foundation for relations between the Tribes and Washington State. The Government -to -Government Implementation Guidelines3 were developed in order to provide a consistent approach for state agencies and tribes to follow in implementing the Accord, and are applicable to local governments. In the context of the government -to -government consultation process, we expected the Jefferson County DCD to work with us to address the concerns raised at the February 2015 meeting and in our written comments. Yet PGST was not consulted after the February meeting and was not provided with any schedule or notification of the FSEIS prior to its release. We find the Jefferson County DCD consultation process with the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe to have been both inadequate and negligent. As stated in our previous comments in 2001, 2006, 2007 and 2015 regarding this project, we are concerned about the potential for adverse effects on cultural resources and treaty rights from the loss of wetlands and rare kettle ponds, increased traffic, intensity of land use for commercial and residential development, significant alteration of hydrology, clearing and grading, increased impermeable surface, use of persistent pollutants, and other proposed project effects. The MPR project would be located in an aquifer recharge area and would significantly impact kettle ponds and wetlands. The project proposes to remove 20,700 sq. ft. of wetland and associated buffers in and around the largest kettle, Kettle Pond B, for the purpose of creating a control pond for storing stormwater and treated wastewater. The Kettle Pond B wetland 2 Governor's Office of Indian Affairs: http://www.goia.wa.gov/government-to-government/data/agreement.htm 3 Governor's Office of Indian Affairs Implementation Guidelines: http://www.goia.wa.gov/government-to- governm ent/D ata/gui del ines.htm PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE 114 31912 Little Boston Rd. NE — Kingston, WA 98346 would be cleared of vegetation, filled and lined. The proposal provides inadequate compensatory mitigation for these effects with the plan to manufacture a wetland in existing Kettle Pond C that would also serve as a stormwater runoff basin for the project. Impacts to flora and fauna in the Kettle Ponds and wetlands would likely have significantly adverse effects on both cultural and natural resources. Additionally, we are very concerned about the effects of persistent pollutants on water quality in groundwater, wetlands and streams from the proposed use of pesticides, fungicides and other chemicals in the project area, and potentially the Hood Canal, Duckabush and Dosewallips River systems during overflow events. The project would remove 55% of existing trees and native vegetation replacing it with impermeable surfaces and landscaping. The project also has the potential to impact wildlife, including a migrating elk herd in the project area. It would increase vehicular traffic along highway, roads and parking lots and would degrade water quality in Hood Canal through stormwater runoff, impacting the Tribe's fish and shellfish resources. The developer commissioned a study of the number of jobs expected to be created as a direct or indirect result of the MPR. However, an analysis of the risks to fisheries, an existing economic base in the area for tribal members and others, was not incorporated into the study. The proposed compensatory mitigation in the FSEIS does not effectively and sufficiently offset these effects. Due to the potential for significant impacts to tribal fisheries and cultural resources we request that Jefferson County work with the developer and PGST staff to implement the following mitigation actions, and meet the requirements of Ordinance No. 01-0128-08. A. Cultural Resources Protection and Stewardship Action 1: Preserve Kettle Ponds B and C and adjacent wetlands for a traditional property evaluation and the protection of cultural resources. Conduct a traditional cultural property evaluation to determine the eligibility of the kettle ponds and wetlands to the National register. Evaluate the impacts of the proposed project on the cultural integrity of the area and its eligibility to be listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Redesign stormwater and wastewater management plans to avoid the destruction of wetlands and the alteration and use of Kettle Ponds B and C for stormwater and treated wastewater storage. Action 2: Schedule a site visit with PGST staff to view the kettle ponds and other areas of cultural significance. Action 3: Provide a biological inventory of plants, amphibians, birds and other species that are currently present in Kettle Ponds B and C and those that were likely present prior to timber harvesting and other disturbances. Action 4: Consult with PGST Cultural Resource Dept. staff to schedule site monitoring, particularly during ground disturbing activities. Action 5: Develop a Stewardship Plan that provides for the restoration of traditional plants in the project area and the opportunities for tribal access to cultural resources. According to oral tradition and knowledge, the Brinnon area, including Pleasant Harbor, holds cultural resources of great value to the Port Gamble S'Klallam people. Uncommon geological PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE 3!X# 31912 Little Boston Rd. NE — Kingston, WA 98346 features, such as kettle ponds, are often linked to spiritual and cultural knowledge that is passed through the generations. The area was known as an important place for gathering and processing traditional foods and materials needed to support a productive livelihood. The area was known for its abundant provisions of reeds and other thrush materials. The Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) has provided a separate letter describing the significance of the site as a traditional cultural property and challenging the DAHP determination, which did not involve any consultation with the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe's TPHO officer. The proposed action would impact the integrity of this site, which by oral accounts has cultural and spiritual significance and contributes to regional Native American history. Based on historic Native American place names, camping locations, and oral traditions regarding spiritual entities associated with the landscape, the site has the potential to yield more information about the unique history and use of the area by the S'Klallam people. The site is representative of unique geology and unique plant communities and has been actively used within living memory for traditional plant gathering and cultural practices. We have great concern with the continued diminution of cultural resources linking the Tribe's ancestral ties to the land and water. To see its natural resources, such as the rare kettle ponds, forever changed is deplorable to tribal members. The Tribe seeks to preserve and restore its natural landscapes in order to reserve the ability to teach its children and future generations the traditional knowledge and culture that defines it. The County should work with tribal staff to plan and implement the stewardship of these resources. B. Shellfish Resources Protection and Management Action 6: Consult with PGST Natural Resources Dept. staff to develop and implement a plan for the protection and restoration of tribal shellfish resources. This will include the following: a) Protection of tidelands adjacent to the project area, b) Shellfish seeding and enhancement on Duckabush and Dosewallips River beaches where tribal members harvest, and c) Response plans in the event of any water quality incidents or other project - related activities that would result in a downgrade of shellfish harvesting areas by the Washington State Department of Health. The Black Point Resort will be located between two public beaches (the Duckabush and the Dosewallips) which provide both significant commercial and ceremonial/subsistence harvest opportunities to the Tribes with Usual and Accustomed fishing rights in the area. The two delta flats are two of the three most important intertidal areas to Tribal harvesters based on acreage available, habitat available and existing natural manila clam and pacific oyster production. The Duckabush and Dosewallips tidelands combined supply over 75% of tribal resource for pacific oysters from public tidelands. The increase in visitors, both temporary and permanent residents, is expected to increase the harvest pressure on the Duckabush and Dosewallips tidelands. Natural recruitment of bivalves M Annemb- PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE 440 31912 Little Boston Rd. NE – Kingston, WA 98346 in Hood Canal is sporadic and increased pressure from additional harvesters without an annual enhancement will result in a decline in the existing resource over time. In addition, both tidelands have areas of concern to the Washington Department of Health (DOH). In 2015, DOH reported that one water sampling location on Dosewallips and two locations on Duckabush were in Threatened status and an additional location on each tideland were falling into Concerned status. Additional system overflows into the Duckabush or contaminated stormwater runoff from the increase in impervious areas could result in poor water quality in the rivers leading to problems with shellfish on the tidelands. A closure of these tidelands by DOH due to water quality issues would have a cultural and economic impact on the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe, C. Wildlife Protection and Habitat Management Plan Action 7: Consult with PGST/Point No Point Treaty Council wildlife biologist to develop and implement a plan for the protection of wildlife and the restoration of wildlife habitat. The purpose of the plan is to provide protective actions for wildlife, including keeping the elk herd from crossing the highway to enter the project area. The plan will also provide information regarding vegetation and habitat preservation in natural areas. We are concerned about impacts to the elk herd that forages to the West of this project area in the lower end of the Duckabush River Valley and the development of an "attractive nuisance" in the form of highly alluring elk and deer forage opportunities. The construction of lawns and fairways proposed as part of this MPR will create an "attractive nuisance" that will increase the frequency at which elk cross highway 101. Coupled with the projected increase of more than 4,000 vehicle trips per day, the "attractive nuisance" poses a significant risk to human health and the viability of the elk herd. The FSEIS Habitat Management Plan was not developed in consultation with the Tribe and does not fulfill the wildlife safety and damage control objectives of the 2008 BOCC ordinance (Ordinance No. 01-0128-08, 63.1). Although the Habitat Management Plan describes the placement of an exclusion fence to discourage elk from utilizing the site, a more comprehensive Wildlife Management Plan is required. An adequate Wildlife Management Plan must describe how the elk will be discouraged or prevented from crossing the highway. GPS and other elk monitoring records reveal that highway 101 is not a barrier to dispersal to the Duckabush elk herd. We know that the elk readily cross the highway just north of McDonald Creek and in the vicinity of Triton Head/Triton Cove. The wildlife management plan should also describe the location, size, and other specifications of the fence or any other deterrents constructed to reduce risks to the elk. Additionally, we need a legitimate Wildlife Management Plan that describes what actions can and will be taken in the event that the fence doesn't work—i.e. what will be done if the elk still manage to get on the property and start damaging greens and fairways. Such actions must NOT include lethal control or state - subsidized monetary compensation. PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE 31912 Little Boston Rd. NE — Kingston, WA 98346 D. Water Quality Protection and Monitoring Plan Action 8: Contact U.S. Army Corps representatives to request a new determination of wetlands jurisdiction for the purposes of USCOE permit review. The 2007 determination (FSEIS Vol. 2 Appendix J.A) expired in 2012 and the document is no longer a valid determination that the wetlands in question are not Waters of the U.S. Action 9: Consult with PGST Natural Resources Dept. staff to develop and implement a plan for the protection of water quality in the project area and in waters adjacent to the project area or amend the existing Draft Water Quality Monitoring Plan to include these protections. This will incorporate the following: a) Water quality monitoring in waters connected to tribal fisheries and shellfish harvesting areas, including monitoring for pollutants, and b) An evaluation of alternatives for constructing additional swales and contours near roadways to redirect stormwater runoff away from Hood Canal, particularly in the areas of Phase 1 construction. Action 10: Revise project management plan to eliminate the use of persistent pollutants and replace them with substances allowed for use under the agricultural national organic program. Provide the draft revised management plan to PGST Natural Resources staff for review and comment. The urbanization of Black Point by the development of the proposed Master Planned Resort (MPR) will increase the prevalence of toxic heavy metals, persistent organic pollutants and other contaminants of emerging concern in this rural area. The increase in the prevalence of these pollutants will likely have a negative effect on fish and shellfish resources inhabiting Black Point and the surrounding areas, including the Dosewallips and Duckabush River Estuaries. Developing a stormwater and wastewater remediation system may reduce the effects of these pollutants. To ensure the functionality of this type of system, extensive and regular, discharge, ambient water and biota tissue monitoring will be required. Unfortunately, we are unaware of any working examples of this type of system. Our concern with regard to the construction of an urban development in this rural area is clearly illustrated by the pollution related loss of 36,000 acres of shellfish beds throughout Puget Sound. The geochemical processes occurring at the seawater/groundwater interface form a critical transition zone, which provides essential ecological functions driven by sediment -associated biota. A reduction in the hydraulic conductivity between the wetlands located within the proposed MPR and the nearshore environment surrounding Black Point will likely affect the chemical constituents available to biota inhabiting this area. For instance, an increase in salinity could negatively affect the productivity of Pacific oysters (C. gigas). E. Unified Development Code and Development Agreement Action 11: Include the above actions in the Jefferson County Code as an amendment to the Unified Development Code. Action 12: Include the above actions as a requirement in the development agreement. Q, PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE 31912 Little Boston Rd. NE — Kingston, WA 98346 Action 13: Include the final compilation of the plans and measures described in the above actions as an appendix to the FSEIS. Although FSEIS covers potential environmental effects to some extent, we are concerned that it does not go nearly far enough to resolve the potentially significant impacts to tribal treaty rights and cultural resources. We look forward to working with you to address these concerns. Please contact me with any questions at (360) 297-6293. Thank you. Sincerely, SGP Roma Call Environmental Program Manager Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe 7 k�Q50N CSG JEFFERSON COUNTY w DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 621 Sheridan Street I Port Townsend, WA 983681 Web: www.ca.ieff .wa.usbommunihIevefooment Tel: 360.379.4450 1 Fax: 360.379.4451 1 Email: .W .wa.us Building Permits & Inspections I Development Consistency Review I long Range Planning I Square One Resoune Center NOTE TO FILE — March 29 2016 RE: Pleasant Harbor MPR Phase II —Staff Response to Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe (PGST) letter dated March 15, 2016 (attachment #1) Staff and the Planning Commission received the attached letter, and for the record, staff is providing this response as a way to address the issues contained in the letter. This Note to File will be provided to the Planning Commission prior to its public meeting of April 6, 2016. As part of the Phase I approval for a Comprehensive Plan amendment to designated property for a future MPR, the Board of County Commissioners imposed 30 conditions of approval (Ordinance No. 01- 0-0128-08). Staff made clear, and the applicant agreed that meeting the conditions prior to signing the development agreement, was the responsibility of the applicant. Also, the concerns of the PGST stated in their letter dated March 15, 2016 related to Cultural and Natural Resources, concerns that were thoroughly analyzed in the SETS as required by SEPA. Consultation with the PGST: The following actions were taken by the Applicant and Staff to meet the above state and local requirements, including any requirement to consult with tribes: 1. The Consultant who drafted the Cultural Resources Management Plan sent letters to all six local tribes including the PGST requesting consultation on identifying cultural resources on-site (attachment #2). The Skokomish Tribe was the only one to respond. 2. On May 11, 2012, the applicant sent the PGST the Cultural Resources Management Plan dated March 27, 2012 (attachment #3). The PGST did not respond to this request to review and/or comment on the plan. 3. In order to facilitate coordination and consultation with the Tribes, staff elicited the assistance of the State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation who sent Staff a letter dated January 14, 2013 (attachment #4) confirming that "three tribes had concurred with the plan and three others did not comment." 4. On November 19, 2014, Staff released the draft SEIS for public and agency comment. The PGST was sent the notice of availability on November 18, 2014. 5. Staff received a comment letter on the Draft SEIS from the PGST on January 5, 2015 (attachment #5 — date stamp of 2014 in error). The letter requested "the opportunity to consult more directly with the project applicant and Jefferson County." As such, staff contacted the Tribal representative Roma Call and scheduled a meeting on-site. 6. On February 18, 2015, Staff and the Project Manager, Craig Peck met with representatives of the PGST to discuss their concerns. As we recall, the topic of cultural resources and the Kettles was not discussed, but water quality, shellfish and elk were. At the conclusion of the meeting, Tribal Representative Roma Call asked if the Tribe could submit a request to the County to include additional monitoring for water quality. Staff agreed to review any request submitted by the Tribe, and indicated there would be time for them to submit their request. 7. DCD does not provide notice to interested parties that the Final SEIS is about to be released and SEPA does not require that such notice of impending Final SEIS publication be provided. 8. On December 9, 2015 the final SETS was released ten months after the meeting with the PGST, sufficient time for PGST to submit their request. The release of the final SEIS included a four page response to the PGST's comments on the Draft SEIS (attachment #6) 9. On December 16, 2015, staff received a letter (attachment #7) regarding a 60 day request to "complete the Tribe's consultation." The letter also confirms that, "although the document (FSEIS) covers potential environmental effects to some extent, we are concerned that it does not go nearly far enough to resolve the potentially significant impacts to tribal treaty rights." 10. On January 22, 2016, The Planning Commission and staff agreed to grant the PGST 60 days to "complete the tribal consultation process," as requested (attachment #8). 11. On March 15, 2016, the PGST submitted the subject letter (attachment #1) requesting that "Jefferson County work with the developer and the PGST to implement the following mitigation actions, and meet the requirements of Ordinance No. 01-0128-08" (the 30 conditions of approval). From the perspective of DCD, the March 15, 2016 letter formally concluded the consultation process between the PGST and Jefferson County which began on February 18, 2015. Conclusions.- Based onclusions: Based upon the attached correspondence, DCD concludes the consultation process between PGST and Jefferson County began on February 18, 2015 and was completed on March 15, 2016 with submission of the subject letter (attachment #1). The task now is to "continue to work with the developer and PGST staff" to determine which proposed actions items warrant implementation Although the PGST acknowledges that the FSEIS "covers potential environmental effects to some extent," it is clear that the PGST believes the SEPA analysis and proposed mitigation, while presumed to be compliant with State law, does not meet the environmental protection standards the Tribe asserts are necessary to protect tribal treaty rights. Ordinance No. 01-0128-08 The following conditions of approval under Ord No. relate to the PGST: j) Tribes should be consulted regarding cultural resources, and possibly one kettle preserved as a cultural resource. Staff Comment: The word "should" indicates that discretion is allowed, while the word "shall" is mandatory (JCC 17.05.040 Port Ludlow MPR Code). Applicant Compliance: The applicant collaborated with the Skokomish Tribe in preparation of the Cultural Resource Management Plan (attachment #3) and letters requesting consultation were sent to the PGST and other local Tribes prior to drafting the plan. Kettle C will be preserved as part of the proposal. k) As a condition of development approval, prior to the issuance of any shoreline permit or approval of any preliminary platthere shall be executed or recorded with the County Auditor a document reflecting the developer's written understanding with and among the following: Jefferson County, local tribes, and the Department of Archaeology and Historical Preservation, that includes a cultural resources management plan to assure archaeological investigations and systematic monitoring of the subject property prior to issuing permits; and during construction to maintain site integrity, provide procedures 21 Page regarding future ground -disturbing activity, assure traditional tribal access to cultural properties and activities, and to provide for community education opportunities. Staff Comment: Since the Maritime Village was relocated outside the Marina, and no new development will take place within Shoreline jurisdiction, no shoreline permits are likely to be required or applied for. Also, the applicant could process the development zones and residential areas with a Boundary Line Adjustment instead of a Plat, unless there would be a sale or lease of new parcels. However, the intent of this condition is to ensure that cultural resources are protected. Applicant Compliance: The Cultural Resource Management Plan (attachment #3) is intended to comply with this condition, however, it does not appear to contain provisions for notification of Tribes to assure traditional tribal access to cultural properties and activities, or to provide for community education opportunities. Staff Recommendation: revise the Cultural Resource Management Plan in consultation with the PGST to include provisions for notification of Tribes of ground disturbing activities, to assure traditional tribal access to cultural properties and activities, to provide for community education opportunities, and to ensure that contact information is current. This revised Plan would be recorded with the Auditor and referenced as a requirement in the Development Agreement. 1) A wildlife management plan focused on non -lethal strategies shall be developed in the public interest in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife and local tribes, to prevent diminishment of tribal wildlife resources cited in the Brinnon Sub- Area Plan (e.g., deer, elk, cougar, waterfowl, osprey, eagles, and bear), to reduce the potential for vehicle collisions on U.S. Highway 101, to reduce the conflicts resulting from wildlife foraging on high-value landscaping and attraction to fresh water sources, to reduce the dangers to predators attracted to the area by prey or habitat, and to reduce any danger to humans. Staff Comment: Staff agrees with the PGST that the wildlife management plan and the Habitat Management Plan are not the same thing. Applicant Compliance: The applicant has not complied with this condition and will need to consult with the local Tribes and the Department of Fish & Wildlife when drafting the plan. Staff Recommendation: This plan shall be required prior to land disturbing activity for Phase 1B SEPA In addition, proposed JCC 17.80.050 Environmental review for Resort Plan development requires additional environmental review for all project level applications which requires completion of a SEPA checklist, notice to Tribes, among others, and a SEPA determination. Should the determination require more environmental study such as a Supplemental EIS, the Tribes will have the opportunity to be involved in the scoping of that environmental study. Staff Recommendations: Beyond the recommendations above, staff recommends the following to satisfy the concerns of the PGST and others: The applicant may adopt any or all of the following options and the County may only require implementation of such options or mitigations as are necessary to comply with one or more of the 30 conditions listed in Ordinance #01-0128-08 at Finding #63. Applicant's options include: 1. Redesigning the stormwater and wastewater management systems to completely avoid the use of Kettles B & C, or in the alternative; 31 Page 2. Implement and complete Actions 2 thru 5 of the subject letter, to include educational opportunities related to the uniqueness of these geologic features. 3. Implement and Complete Action steps 8, 9 & 10 of the subject letter. 4. Implement and Complete a combination of 1 & 3 above or 2 & 3 above. 5. Meet with the representatives of PGST and arrive at a different set of mutually agreeable mitigations that address the concerns the PGST expressed in the March 15, 2016 letter. 6. Reduce the number of residential units proposed to 445 - half of the 890 approved units under Phase 1 and Ordinance #01-0128-08. 7. Take no action in response to the March 15, 2016 sent to DCD by the PGST. Jefferson County recognizes the PGST as a specific party of interest, and as such will be notified of all project level development applications that require notice, including any SEPA Threshold Determination as outlined in proposed JCC 17.80.050. Jefferson County cannot grant the PGST any special provisions under the development regulations that are not granted to other parties, nor can it codify requirements before determining what those requirements are. 41 Page PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE 31912 Little Boston Rd. NE — Kingston, WA 98346 Jefferson County Planning Commission 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 Email: P1anComm@co.jefferson.wa.us David Wayne Johnson Pleasant Harbor FSEIS c/o Jefferson County DCD 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend WA 98368 Email: dwiohnson(aco jefferson.wa.us Attachment #1 4, Subject: Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, December 2015, Case No's: MLA08-00188, ZON08-00056 Dear Planning Commission Members and Mr. Johnson, On behalf of the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe (PGST), the following comments are provided with regard to the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (FSEIS) and Intent to Amend the Unified Development Code for the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort LLC Master Planned Resort (MPR). We request that Jefferson County continue to work with PGST staff to implement the actions described below. These actions are intended to serve as mitigation for the potentially significant effects of the proposed project on cultural resources and the Tribe's treaty rights and are also consistent with the conditions required under Ordinance No. 01-0128-08. The Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe is the successor in interest to Indian bands and tribes signatory to the 1855 Treaty of Point No Point, 12 Stat. 933.' Today the Tribe retains deep cultural and economic ties to the surrounding waters and to their fisheries in its usual and accustomed grounds and stations (U&A). More than a century of federal court decisions have fleshed out the components of the treaty right, including the right of access to places, the right to a share of harvest to meet tribal moderate living needs, and the right to protection of fish habitat. Maintaining access to the entire terrestrial and marine landscape that was used by tribal ancestors is also of critical cultural importance, and helps to define the Tribe's identity. The proposed Pleasant Harbor project is located within the Tribe's U&A, in an area where tribal members depend on fish, shellfish and wildlife. In 2008, the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) adopted Ordinance No. 01-0128-08, listing 30 special conditions to be required for development approval under the Comprehensive Plan amendment to allow a Master Plan Resort within an area zoned Rural Residential. "Consultation with the Tribes regarding cultural resources, and possibly one kettle preserved as a cultural resource," is included as a requirement in the list of conditions for development approval. The BOCC ordinance also requires a document to be executed or recorded with the County Auditor, reflecting the developer's written 'United States v. Washington, 459F. Supp. 1020, 1039 (W.D. Wash. 1978) (hereinafter Boldt 11). PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE 31912 Little Boston Rd. NE — Kingston, WA 98346 understanding with and among the local tribes, as well as other entities, in order to maintain site integrity and to assure traditional tribal access to cultural properties and activities. The BOCC ordinance also requires the applicant to develop a wildlife management plan focused on non -lethal strategies in the public interest in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife and local tribes. The other special conditions for development approval focus on additional measures for environmental protection and other issues also of concern to the Tribe. With the release of the FSEIS for this project, it is questionable as to whether Jefferson County's Community Development Department (DCD) made a good faith effort to consult with the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe. In order to meet the BOCC special conditions in Ordinance No. 01-0128-08, we understood that Jefferson County would work directly with PGST during the development of the FSEIS, including the supporting documents in the appendices. However, the Tribe was not consulted during the development of the FSEIS and our comments were not incorporated. The FSEIS Volume 2 Appendix O includes a Proposed Plan for Archeological Monitoring and Inadvertent Discovery Protocol, DAHP Response to the Cultural Resource Plan and the Skokomish Tribe's Response to the Cultural Resource Plan. However, this section does not go nearly far enough to resolve PGST's concerns and to mitigate project effects with regard to cultural resources and tribal treaty right impacts. The Centennial Accord (1989) and the New Millennium Agreement (1999)2 established a basic framework and provide the general foundation for relations between the Tribes and Washington State. The Government -to -Government Implementation Guidelines3 were developed in order to provide a consistent approach for state agencies and tribes to follow in implementing the Accord, and are applicable to local governments. In the context of the government -to -government consultation process, we expected the Jefferson County DCD to work with us to address the concerns raised at the February 2015 meeting and in our written comments. Yet PGST was not consulted after the February meeting and was not provided with any schedule or notification of the FSEIS prior to its release. We find the Jefferson County DCD consultation process with the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe to have been both inadequate and negligent. As stated in our previous comments in 2001, 2006, 2007 and 2015 regarding this project, we are concerned about the potential for adverse effects on cultural resources and treaty rights from the loss of wetlands and rare kettle ponds, increased traffic, intensity of land use for commercial and residential development, significant alteration of hydrology, clearing and grading, increased impermeable surface, use of persistent pollutants, and other proposed project effects. The MPR project would be located in an aquifer recharge area and would significantly impact kettle ponds and wetlands. The project proposes to remove 20,700 sq. ft. of wetland and associated buffers in and around the largest kettle, Kettle Pond B, for the purpose of creating a control pond for storing stormwater and treated wastewater. The Kettle Pond B wetland Z Governor's Office of Indian Affairs: http://www.goia.wa.gov/government-to-govemment/data/agreement.htm 3 Governor's Office of Indian Affairs Implementation Guidelines: http://www.goia.wa.gov/government-to- govemm ent/Data/guidel ines.htm 2 PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE Lm* 31912 Little Boston Rd. NE — Kingston, WA 98346 would be cleared of vegetation, filled and lined. The proposal provides inadequate compensatory mitigation for these effects with the plan to manufacture a wetland in existing Kettle Pond C that would also serve as a stormwater runoff basin for the project. Impacts to flora and fauna in the Kettle Ponds and wetlands would likely have significantly adverse effects on both cultural and natural resources. Additionally, we are very concerned about the effects of persistent pollutants on water quality in groundwater, wetlands and streams from the proposed use of pesticides, fungicides and other chemicals in the project area, and potentially the Hood Canal, Duckabush and Dosewallips River systems during overflow events. The project would remove 55% of existing trees and native vegetation replacing it with impermeable surfaces and landscaping. The project also has the potential to impact wildlife, including a migrating elk herd in the project area. It would increase vehicular traffic along highway, roads and parking lots and would degrade water quality in Hood Canal through stormwater runoff, impacting the Tribe's fish and shellfish resources. The developer commissioned a study of the number of jobs expected to be created as a direct or indirect result of the MPR. However, an analysis of the risks to fisheries, an existing economic base in the area for tribal members and others, was not incorporated into the study. The proposed compensatory mitigation in the FSEIS does not effectively and sufficiently offset these effects. Due to the potential for significant impacts to tribal fisheries and cultural resources we request that Jefferson County work with the developer and PGST staff to implement the following mitigation actions, and meet the requirements of Ordinance No. 01-0128-08. A. Cultural Resources Protection and Stewardship Action 1: Preserve Kettle Ponds B and C and adjacent wetlands for a traditional property evaluation and the protection of cultural resources. Conduct a traditional cultural property evaluation to determine the eligibility of the kettle ponds and wetlands to the National register. Evaluate the impacts of the proposed project on the cultural integrity of the area and its eligibility to be listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Redesign stormwater and wastewater management plans to avoid the destruction of wetlands and the alteration and use of Kettle Ponds B and C for stormwater and treated wastewater storage. Action 2: Schedule a site visit with PGST staff to view the kettle ponds and other areas of cultural significance. Action 3: Provide a biological inventory of plants, amphibians, birds and other species that are currently present in Kettle Ponds B and C and those that were likely present prior to timber harvesting and other disturbances. Action 4: Consult with PGST Cultural Resource Dept. staff to schedule site monitoring, particularly during ground disturbing activities. Action 5: Develop a Stewardship Plan that provides for the restoration of traditional plants in the project area and the opportunities for tribal access to cultural resources. According to oral tradition and knowledge, the Brinnon area, including Pleasant Harbor, holds cultural resources of great value to the Port Gamble S'Klallam people. Uncommon geological PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE 10* 31912 Little Boston Rd. NE — Kingston, WA 98346 features, such as kettle ponds, are often linked to spiritual and cultural knowledge that is passed through the generations. The area was known as an important place for gathering and processing traditional foods and materials needed to support a productive livelihood. The area was known for its abundant provisions of reeds and other thrush materials. The Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) has provided a separate letter describing the significance of the site as a traditional cultural property and challenging the DAHP determination, which did not involve any consultation with the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe's TPHO officer. The proposed action would impact the integrity of this site, which by oral accounts has cultural and spiritual significance and contributes to regional Native American history. Based on historic Native American place names, camping locations, and oral traditions regarding spiritual entities associated with the landscape, the site has the potential to yield more information about the unique history and use of the area by the S'Klallam people. The site is representative of unique geology and unique plant communities and has been actively used within living memory for traditional plant gathering and cultural practices. We have great concern with the continued diminution of cultural resources linking the Tribe's ancestral ties to the land and water. To see its natural resources, such as the rare kettle ponds, forever changed is deplorable to tribal members. The Tribe seeks to preserve and restore its natural landscapes in order to reserve the ability to teach its children and future generations the traditional knowledge and culture that defines it. The County should work with tribal staff to plan and implement the stewardship of these resources. B. Shellfish Resources Protection and Management Action 6: Consult with PGST Natural Resources Dept. staff to develop and implement a plan for the protection and restoration of tribal shellfish resources. This will include the following: a) Protection of tidelands adjacent to the project area, b) Shellfish seeding and enhancement on Duckabush and Dosewallips River beaches where tribal members harvest, and c) Response plans in the event of any water quality incidents or other project - related activities that would result in a downgrade of shellfish harvesting areas by the Washington State Department of Health. The Black Point Resort will be located between two public beaches (the Duckabush and the Dosewallips) which provide both significant commercial and ceremonial/subsistence harvest opportunities to the Tribes with Usual and Accustomed fishing rights in the area. The two delta flats are two of the three most important intertidal areas to Tribal harvesters based on acreage available, habitat available and existing natural manila clam and pacific oyster production. The Duckabush and Dosewallips tidelands combined supply over 75% of tribal resource for pacific oysters from public tidelands. The increase in visitors, both temporary and permanent residents, is expected to increase the harvest pressure on the Duckabush and Dosewallips tidelands. Natural recruitment of bivalves 4 PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE to* 31912 Little Boston Rd. NE - Kingston, WA 98346 in Hood Canal is sporadic and increased pressure from additional harvesters without an annual enhancement will result in a decline in the existing resource over time. In addition, both tidelands have areas of concern to the Washington Department of Health (DOH). In 2015, DOH reported that one water sampling location on Dosewallips and two locations on Duckabush were in Threatened status and an additional location on each tideland were falling into Concerned status. Additional system overflows into the Duckabush or contaminated stormwater runoff from the increase in impervious areas could result in poor water quality in the rivers leading to problems with shellfish on the tidelands. A closure of these tidelands by DOH due to water quality issues would have a cultural and economic impact on the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe. C. Wildlife Protection and Habitat Management Plan Action 7: Consult with PGST/Point No Point Treaty Council wildlife biologist to develop and implement a plan for the protection of wildlife and the restoration of wildlife habitat. The purpose of the plan is to provide protective actions for wildlife, including keeping the elk herd from crossing the highway to enter the project area. The plan will also provide information regarding vegetation and habitat preservation in natural areas. We are concerned about impacts to the elk herd that forages to the West of this project area in the lower end of the Duckabush River Valley and the development of an "attractive nuisance" in the form of highly alluring elk and deer forage opportunities. The construction of lawns and fairways proposed as part of this MPR will create an "attractive nuisance" that will increase the frequency at which elk cross highway 101. Coupled with the projected increase of more than 4,000 vehicle trips per day, the "attractive nuisance" poses a significant risk to human health and the viability of the elk herd. The FSEIS Habitat Management Plan was not developed in consultation with the Tribe and does not fulfill the wildlife safety and damage control objectives of the 2008 BOCC ordinance (Ordinance No. 01-0128-08, 63.1). Although the Habitat Management Plan describes the placement of an exclusion fence to discourage elk from utilizing the site, a more comprehensive Wildlife Management Plan is required. An adequate Wildlife Management Plan must describe how the elk will be discouraged or prevented from crossing the highway. GPS and other elk monitoring records reveal that highway 101 is not a barrier to dispersal to the Duckabush elk herd. We know that the elk readily cross the highway just north of McDonald Creek and in the vicinity of Triton Head/Triton Cove. The wildlife management plan should also describe the location, size, and other specifications of the fence or any other deterrents constructed to reduce risks to the elk. Additionally, we need a legitimate Wildlife Management Plan that describes what actions can and will be taken in the event that the fence doesn't work—i.e. what will be done if the elk still manage to get on the property and start damaging greens and fairways. Such actions must NOT include lethal control or state - subsidized monetary compensation. PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE 31912 Little Boston Rd. NE - Kingston, WA 98346 . Water Quality Protection and Monitoring Piz rD, nn Action 8: Contact U.S. Army Corps representatives to request a new determination of wetlands jurisdiction for the purposes of USCOE permit review. The 2007 determination (FSEIS Vol. 2 Appendix J.A) expired in 2012 and the document is no longer a valid determination that the wetlands in question are not Waters of the U.S. Action 9: Consult with PGST Natural Resources Dept. staff to develop and implement a plan for the protection of water quality in the project area and in waters adjacent to the project area or amend the existing Draft Water Quality Monitoring Plan to include these protections. This will incorporate the following: a) Water quality monitoring in waters connected to tribal fisheries and shellfish harvesting areas, including monitoring for pollutants, and b) An evaluation of alternatives for constructing additional swales and contours near roadways to redirect stormwater runoff away from Hood Canal, particularly in the areas of Phase 1 construction. Action 10: Revise project management plan to eliminate the use of persistent pollutants and replace them with substances allowed for use under the agricultural national organic program. Provide the draft revised management plan to PGST Natural Resources staff for review and comment. The urbanization of Black Point by the development of the proposed Master Planned Resort (MPR) will increase the prevalence of toxic heavy metals, persistent organic pollutants and other contaminants of emerging concern in this rural area. The increase in the prevalence of these pollutants will likely have a negative effect on fish and shellfish resources inhabiting Black Point and the surrounding areas, including the Dosewallips and Duckabush River Estuaries. Developing a stormwater and wastewater remediation system may reduce the effects of these pollutants. To ensure the functionality of this type of system, extensive and regular, discharge, ambient water and biota tissue monitoring will be required. Unfortunately, we are unaware of any working examples of this type of system. Our concern with regard to the construction of an urban development in this rural area is clearly illustrated by the pollution related loss of 36,000 acres of shellfish beds throughout Puget Sound. The geochemical processes occurring at the seawater/groundwater interface form a critical transition zone, which provides essential ecological functions driven by sediment -associated biota. A reduction in the hydraulic conductivity between the wetlands located within the proposed MPR and the nearshore environment surrounding Black Point will likely affect the chemical constituents available to biota inhabiting this area. For instance, an increase in salinity could negatively affect the productivity of Pacific oysters (C. gigas). E. Unified Development Code and Development Agreement Action 11: Include the above actions in the Jefferson County Code as an amendment to the Unified Development Code. Action 12: Include the above actions as a requirement in the development agreement. Gl PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE A!'O 31912 Little Boston Rd. NE — Kingston, WA 98346 Action 13: Include the final compilation of the plans and measures described in the above actions as an appendix to the FSEIS. Although FSEIS covers potential environmental effects to some extent, we are concerned that it does not go nearly far enough to resolve the potentially significant impacts to tribal treaty rights and cultural resources. We look forward to working with you to address these concerns. Please contact me with any questions at (360) 297-6293. Thank you. Sincerely, Roma Call Environmental Program Manager Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE 31912 Little Boston Road NE • Kingston, XVA 98346 Date: March 11, 2016 Jefferson County Planning Commission 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 Email: PlanComnt@co.jefferson.wa.us David Wayne Johnson Pleasant Harbor FSEIS c/o Jefferson County DCD 621 Sheridan Street, Porl Townsend, WA 98368 Email: dwjohnson@co.jeffcr-son.wa.us Re: Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort LLC Master Planned Resort Dear Planning Commission Members and Mr. Johnson, Thank you for the opportunity for the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribal Historic Preservation Office to review and continent on the proposed Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort LI.0 Master Planned Resort. The proposed Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort LLC Master Planned Resort is located within the Port Gamhle S'Klallant Tribe's Adjudicated Usual and Accustomed Area and Traditional and Historic Use Area. This proposed undertaking is located in an area cif high cultural and historic significance for the Port Gamble S'Klallam 'Tribe. It is also located in an area of high probability for encountering; cultural resources according to the Washington Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation (DAI-IP) WISAARD database. Based on preliminary review of location of the proposed undertaking the Tribe is concerned that the project proposal to use Kettle Ponds B and C for sturing stormwater and treated wastewater could result in significant damages to Traditional Cultural Properties (PCPs) that meet multiple federal criteria that render them eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. Criterion B Association with the Lives of Persons Significant in our Past: This area specifically the freshwater within the proposed project area, have direct association with spiritual entities known to the S'Klallant Tribe. Criterion C. Representative of a Significant and Distinguishable Entity Whose Components May Lack Individual Distinction: Areas within the proposed project area have unique ecological conditions that result in supporting; specific biota that supported historic S'Klallam gathering that has c011linued into the twentieth century within living memory of Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribal members. (360) 297-2646 (800) 831-9921 (360) 297-7097 Kingston Toll Free Fax Criterion D. History of Yielding or Potential to Yield Information Important in Prehistory or History: Based on the high density of Native American Place names that include traditional camp sites and the proximity of the proposed project to two traditional S'Klallam historic and contemporary fisheries and shellfish harvest areas at the Duckabush and Dosewallips River the area has a high probability to yield valuable information to S'Klallam, and broader patterns of Native American history and use of the Hood Canal watershed. The Tribe believes that the uniqueness of the geologic features and oral historical accounts relating spiritual entities linked to the land, the traditional plants harvested generationally by S'Klallam people from the past and within living memory, as well as multiple campsites and Native American place names know in the area, all directly contribute to unique cultural significance of the area that would be impacted by significant modification of the physical environment. The Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe requests to have a traditional cultural property evaluation of the kettle ponds and wetland area to determine their eligibility to the National register and evaluate the impacts the proposed undertakings will have on the cultural integrity of the area and their eligibility to be listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Sincerely, ,/ CAwek 771. '(2 GL� Laura L. Price Tribal Historic Preservation Officer Cultural Resources Department Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe 360 297-6358 lives@pgst.nsn.us cc: Roma Call Environmental Program Manager, Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe Josh Wisniewski, Ph.D. Anthropologist, Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe Attachment #2 i June 23, 2006 CII' r 0 CONFIDENTIAL — NOT FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION Marie Hebert Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe 31912 Little Boston Road NE Kingston, WA 98346 Re: Cultural Resource Reconnaissance for the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort, Jefferson County. Dear Ms. Hebert, Western Shore Heritage Services, Inc. (WSHS) has been retained by Statesman Corporation to conduct a cultural resource reconnaissance for the proposed 253 acre Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort, located on the Hood Canal near the town of Brinnon, Washington (Figure 1). The projecrentails two components: the Maritime Village and the Golf Resort. The Maritime Village will encompass the 290 existing slips within Pleasant Harbor with the additional construction of approximately 150 residential units and reconstruction of the current retail into a 10,000 square foot Maritime Center. 'Me Golf Resort will include the construction of an eighteen -hole golf course with a conference center, spa and approximately 100 condominium units within the complex. Additionally, 800 residential town home units are planned for construction throughout the golf course area. WSHS will be responsible for identifying and determining potential impacts of the proposed development to recorded, unrecorded, and as -yet unidentified cultural resources. WSHS is currently in the process of researching available background information. Research consists of a file search at the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) in Olympia, review of previously recorded cultural resource reports, and review of pertinent published literature and ' ethnographies. Fieldwork will include a visual reconnaissance of the project area to verify background information. Subsurface testing will not be conducted during this phase of the project. In the event the reconnaissance determines a high probability for intact buried cultural resources, subsurface testing will be recommended. Results of the reconnaissance will be presented in a prepared technical report. appreciate your assistance and look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Camille A. Mather Archaeologist C A-8 CONFIDENTIAL - NOT FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION Figure 4. Portion of Brinton, Washington USGS 7.5 -minute quadrangle depicting project areas for the proposed Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort. Reference' Cited Elmendorf, W. W. and A. L. Kroeber 1992 The Structure of Ttvana Culture, With Comparative Notes on the Structure of Yurok Culture. Washington State University Press, Pullman, WA. A9 Attachment #3 308913 US Hwy 101, Brinnon,WA 98320 (360) 796-4611 (800) 547-3479 Fax: (866) 848-4612 PLEASANT HARBOR !,iT) 1',._ W1 - - I -- May 11, 2012 Josh Wisniewski Ph.D Port Gamble 5'Klallam Tribe 31912 Little Boston Rd NE Kingston, WA 98346 Dear Mr.Wisniewski, I'm writing to update you on progress of the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort project near Brinnon, Washington (Jefferson County). We are currently submitting the final reports for the SEIS to Jefferson County DCD. In order to protect known and unknown archaeological and cultural resources , and to comply with Jefferson County Ordinance 01-0128-08 condition 63 (k) as well as state laws governing the protection of those resources (RCW 27.53, RCW 27.44). We are submitting for your review our cultural resources management plan that includes monitoring and inadvertent discovery processes and procedures Please review and submit any comments in writing by June 15 2012. Please contact me by phone (206) 714-1482 or e-mail donCcr„�pleasantharbormarina.com if you have any questions. I look forward to hearing from you. Best Regards Don Coleman Pleasant Harbor Marina lofI Appendix O Proposed Plan for Archeological Monitoring and Inadvertent Discovery Protocol DAHP Response to Cultural Resources Plan Skokomish Tribe Response to Cultural Resources Plan Proposed Plan for Archaeological Monitoring and Inadvertent Discovery Protocol Cultural Resource Consultants, Inc. PROPOSED PLAN FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL MONITORING AND INADVERTENT DISCOVERY PROTOCOL, ARCHAEOLOGICAL MONITORING AT PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA JEFFERSON COUNTY, WASHINGTON AUTHOR: Glenn D. Hartmann DATE: January 12, 2012, revised February 7, 2012, March 27, 2012 LOCATION: Jefferson County, Washington T, R, S: Township 25 North, Range 2 West, Section 15 and 22, Willamette Meridian. PREPARED FOR: Don Coleman Pleasant Harbor Marina 308913 Hwy 101 Brinnon, WA 98320 Pleasant Harbor Marina is requesting periodic archaeological monitoring of construction excavations and other below -fill ground -disturbing activities in Brinnon, Jefferson County, Washington. The Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort is proposed on approximately 257 acres of the 710 -acre Black Point Peninsula along the western side of the Hood Canal. The peninsula is surrounded on the north, south, and east by the waters of Hood Canal. Pleasant Harbor is formed by the west shore of Black Point and the east shore of the mainland. Background Prior archaeological field investigations of the project area did not result in the identification of any prehistoric or historic archaeological resources (Mather et al. 2006; Berger 2008). Subsurface investigations focused on archaeologically sensitive landforms; that is, those environments most likely to contain naturally buried archaeology identified in collaboration with cultural resources staff of the Skokomish Tribe (e.g., kettles, vantage points, the bluff edge). High probability areas in Black Point where buried archaeological deposits might occur (i.e., kettle margins and bases) were sampled using hand -excavated shovel probes. Locations of all probes, shovel scrapes, and wall profiles were mapped on a small-scale project area topographic map (see Mather et al. 2006; Figure 16). In all, 93 shovel probes/scrapes were excavated during the 2006 field investigations with 27 probes along the southern bluff, 12 probes on high points, 22 probes in kettle basins and 32 probes along the kettle margins and rims. In addition wall profiles were faced in order to assess the local stratigraphy. Subsequent to the initial cultural resource assessment for the project, Berger (2008) conducted archaeological monitoring during geotechnical assessment. Archaeological monitoring of geotechnical explorations did not result in the identification of any evidence of archaeological sites, historic structures, or other features. Conditions and sediments observed during this 710 ERLCX8E AVENUE NE. SUrrE 100 PO Box 10668, BAINORIOGE ISLAND, WA 98110 PHONE 206855-9020 - Infb@crcwa.com episode of archaeological monitoring suggested a low probability for as -yet unidentified archaeological sites. Archaeological Monitoring Archaeological monitoring will include an orientation for the construction crew and machine operators prior to initiating construction. Project personnel would be made aware of the potentials of archaeology within the project area. They will be apprised of their responsibilities during archaeological monitoring, their obligations in the case of an inadvertent discovery and they will be made aware of the inadvertent discovery plan and protocol. Periodic archaeological monitoring is planned during construction excavations and other below - fill ground -disturbing project actions to minimize potential effects to any as -yet unknown human remains and/or intact archaeological deposits. Monitoring would occur at those locations within the project area that have previously beca identified as high probability—kettles, vantage points, the bluff edge --if sediments in these landforms will be affected by ground -disturbing construction. Presently available plans indicate that construction would not occur along the bluff edge. Project maps were reviewed and high probability locations were identified using the earlier analyses of the project area (Mather et al. 2006; Berger 2008), which had tested and monitored geotechnical explorations in these locations (Figure 1). Those areas with greater archaeological potentials were mapped on topographic maps of the project area (Figures 2 and 3). Monitoring is planned for the high probability areas until it can be determined with greater assurance that continual monitoring is not necessary. Monitoring results would be reviewed with DAHP staff and tribal representatives prior to adjusting the monitoring schedule. Archaeological monitoring would entail having an archaeologist present during construction excavation below -fill to observe subsurface conditions and identify any buried archaeological materials that may be encountered. Monitoring will be performed either by a `Professional archaeologist" (RCW 27.53.030 (8)) or under the supervision of a professional archaeologist. The monitoring archaeologist would stand in close proximity to construction equipment in order to view subsurface deposits as they are exposed, and would be in close communication with equipment operators to ensure adequate opportunity for observation and documentation. Archaeological monitoring will seek to identify potential buried surfaces, anthropogenic sediments, and archaeological features such as shell middens, hearths, or artifact -bearing strata. The monitoring archaeologist will inspect project excavations and the recovered sediments for indications of such archaeological resources. The archaeologist will be provided the opportunity to screen excavated sediments and matrix samples when this is judged useful to the identification process. It is not expected that modern fill (e.g., imported culturally -sterile construction fill) or glacial till sediments would be included in screening procedures. Excavated spoils may be examined in the course of monitoring, If cultural materials are observed in spoils piles, it is expected that these would be removed for examination and that the opportunity to screen spoil sediments would be available. CRC Proposed Plan for Archaeological Monitoring and Inadvertent Discovery Protocol 1111 L, Pleasant Harbor Marina, Jefferson County, WA Page 2 Archaeological monitoring of construction excavation will proceed until it can be determined with a greater level of confidence that human remains or other cultural resources are not likely to be impacted by construction excavation of the project. The archaeologist will conduct monitoring until native and fill deposits can be confidently isolated and identified based on observed sedimentary exposures. Upon completion of the monitoring, the archaeologist will prepare a report on the methods and results of the work, and recommendations for any necessary additional archaeological investigations, illustrated with maps, drawings, and photographs as appropriate. Contingency Plan In accordance with RCW 27.44 Indian Graves and Records Act, RCW 27.53 Archaeological Sites and Resources, RCW 68.50 Human Remains, and RCW 68.60, Abandoned and historic cemeteries and historic graves, the following protocols will be followed in the event that archaeological materials and/or human remains are discovered: Procedures Upon Discovery of Potential or Actual Culturai Resources 1. Upon discovery of a potential or actual archaeological site, or cultural resources as defined by RCW 27.44 Indian Graves and Records Act, and RCW 27.53 Archaeological Sites and Resources, Pleasant Harbor Marina, its employees, its contractors and sub -contractors shall: (a) Immediately cease or halt ground disturbing, construction, or other activities around the area of the discovery and secure the area with a perimeter of not less than thirty (30) feet until all procedures are completed and the parties agree that activities can resume. If such a perimeter would materially impact agency functions mandated by law, related to health, safety or environmental concerns, then the secured area shall be of a size and extent practicable to provide maximum protection to the resource under the circumstances. Project activities that are not ground disturbing may continue outside the secured perimeter around the findings. No one shall excavate any findings and all findings will be left in place, undisturbed and without analysis, until consultation with DAHP and the Tribe regarding a final disposition of the findings has been completed. In accordance with RCW 27.53.060, no one shall knowingly remove or collect any archaeological objects without obtaining a permit. (b) Notify the Local Government Archaeologist at DAHP and the Tribes of the discovery as soon as possible, but in any event, no later than (24) hours of the discovery. If human remains are found, Pleasant Harbor Marina shall follow notification procedures specified below (see "Human Remains and Associated Funerary Objects"). (e) Arrange for the parties to conduct a joint viewing of the discovery within (48) forty- eight hours of the notification, or at the earliest possible time thereafter, Pleasant Harbor Marina or their authorized representative shall arrange for the archaeologist to attend the joint viewing. After the joint viewing, taking into account any recommendations of the Tribe(s), DAHP, and the archaeologist, the parties shall discuss the potential significance, if any, of the discovery. CRC Proposed Plan for Archaeological Monitoring and Inadvertent Discovery Protocol 1111L, Pleasant Harbor Marina, Jefferson County, WA Page 3 (d) Consult with the Tribes and DAHP on the transfer and final disposition of artifacts. Until the Tribe has a repository that meets the standards of curation established 36 CFR Part 79, artifacts shall be curated using an institution or organization that meets curation standards, selected through consultation with the Tribe. Inadvertent Discovery of Human Skeletal Remains on Non -Federal and Non -Tribal Land in the State of Washington (RCWs 68.50.645.27.44.055- and 68.60.055) 2. If ground -disturbing activities encounter human skeletal remains during the course of construction, then all activity must cease that may cause further disturbance to those remains and the area of the find must be secured and protected from further disturbance. In addition, the finding of human skeletal remains must be reported to the Jefferson County Coroner's Office and Jefferson County Sheriff's Office in the most expeditious manner possible. The remains should not be touched, moved, or further disturbed. 3. The Jefferson County Coroner's Office will assume jurisdiction over the human skeletal remains and make a determination of whether those remains are forensic or non -forensic. If the county coroner determines the remains are non -forensic, then they will report that finding to the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) who will then take jurisdiction over the remains and report them to the appropriate cemeteries and affected tribes. The State Physical Anthropologist will make a determination of whether the remains are Indian or Non - Indian and report that finding to any appropriate cemeteries and the affected tribes. The DAHP will then handle all consultation with the affected parties as to the future preservation, excavation, and disposition of the remains, 4. DAHP will handle all consultation with the affected parties as to the future preservation, excavation, and disposition of the remains if there is no federal agency involved. Confidentiality ofInformation 5. Pleasant Harbor Marina or their authorized representative recognizes that archaeological properties are of a sensitive nature and sites where cultural resources are discovered can become targets of vandalism and illegal removal activities. Pleasant Harbor Marina or their authorized representative shall keep and maintain as confidential all information regarding any discovered cultural resources, particularly the location of known or suspected archaeological property, and exempt all such information from public disclosure consistent with RCW 42.17.300. 6. Pleasant Harbor Marina or their authorized representative shall snake its best efforts to ensure that all records indicating the location of known or suspected archaeological properties are permanently secured and confidential. 7. Pleasant Harbor Marina or their authorized representative shall ensure that its personnel, contractors, and permittees keep the discovery of any found or suspected human remains, other cultural items, and potential historic properties confidential, including but not limited to, refraining such persons from contacting the media or any third party or otherwise sharing information regarding the discovery with any member of the public. Pleasant Harbor Marina or CRC Proposed Plan for Archaeological Monitoring and Inadvertent Discovery Protocol 1111 L, Pleasant Harbor Marina, Jefferson County, WA Page 4 their authorized representative shall require its personnel, contractors and permittees to immediately notify the Lead Representative of Pleasant Harbor Marina or their authorized representative of any inquiry from the media or public. Pleasant Harbor Marina or their authorized representative shall immediately notify DAHP of any inquiries it receives. Prior to any public information release, Pleasant Harbor Marina or their authorized representative, DAHP, and the Tribes) shall concur on the amount of information, if any, to be released to the public, any third party, and the media and the procedures for such a release, to the extent permitted by law. Lead Representative and Primary Contact 8. The lead representatives and primary contacts of each party under this plan are as identified below. The parties may identify other specific personnel before the commencement of any particular project element as the contacts. Pleasant Harbor Marina 308913 Hwy 101 Brinnon, WA 98320 Primary Contact: Don Coleman, Maintenance and Security Supervisor, 206-714-1482 Pleasant Harbor Marina 7370 Sierra Morena Blvd. S.W. Calgary, Alberta Primary Contact: M. Garth Mann, President & C.E.O, 403-256-4151 Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe 1033 Old Blyn Highway Sequim, WA 98382 Primary Contact: Gideon Kauffman Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe 2851 Lower Elwha Rd Port Angeles, WA 98363 Primary Contact: Bill White, Cultural Resources Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe 31912 Little Boston Rd NE Kingston, WA 98346 Primary Contact: Josh Wisniewski Ph.D. Skokomish Tribe North 80 Tribal Center Rd Skokomish, WA 98584 Primary Contact: Kris Miller, Cultural Resources Squaxin Island Tribe CRC Proposed Plan for Archaeological Monitoring and Inadvertent Discovery Protocol 1111L. Pleasant Harbor Marina. Jefferson County, WA Page 5 SE 10 Squaxin Lane Shelton, WA 98584 Primary Contact: Rhonda Foster Suquamish Tribe 15838 Sandy Hook Rd PO Box 498 Suquamish, WA 98392-0498 Primary Contact: Stephanie Trudel Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation PO Box 48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 Lead Representative: Allyson Brooks, State Historic Preservation Officer, 360-586-3066 Primary Contact: Gretchen Kaehler, Local Government Archaeologist, 360-586-3088 Primary Contact for Human Remains: Guy Tasa, State Physical Anthropologist, 360-586-3534 Jefferson County Coroner's Office PO Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Lead Representative: Scott W. Rosekrans, Prosecuting Attorney/Coroner, 360-385-9180 Jefferson County Sheriffs office 79 Elkins Road Port Hadlock, WA 98339 Lead Representative: Tony Hernandez, Sheriff, 360-385-3831 Department of Community Development 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 Lead Representative: David W. Johnson, 360-379-4465 Cultural Resource Consultants, Inc. 710 Ericksen Avenue NE, Suite 100 PO Box 10668 Bainbridge Island, WA 98110 Lead Representative: Glenn Hartmann, Senior Archaeologist/Principal, 206-855-9020 References Cited Berger, Margaret 2008 Archaeological Monitoring of Geotechnical Explorations for the Pleasant Harbor Golf Resort, Jefferson County, Washington. Technical Memo 0804A-1, Cultural Resource Consultants, Bainbridge Island, Mather, Camille, Jennifer Chambers, James Schumacher, and Matthew Gill CRC Proposed Plan for Archaeological Monitoring and Inadvertent Discovery Protocol 1111L, Pleasant Harbor Marina, Jefferson County, WA Page 6 2006 Cultural Resources Assessment for the Proposed Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort, Jefferson County, Washington. WSHS Technical Report #274. Prepared for Statesman Corporation. On file at Cultural Resource Consultants, Inc., Bainbridge Island. CRC Proposed Plan for Archaeological Monitoring and Inadvertent Discovery Protocol 1111 L. Pleasant Harbor Marina, Jefferson County, WA Page 7 J/t/r f Cdl Af 1 N j� Mq K II�N♦nls �♦Y�••+Y• ♦ •wu ' Figure 1. previous testing (Mather et al 2006) ident3Ilea nigh pronaolury areas. CRC Proposed Plan for Archaeological Monitoring and Inadvertent Discovery Protocol 1111L, Pleasant Harbor Marina, Jefferson County, WA Page 8 vwn 7� s • Figure 1. previous testing (Mather et al 2006) ident3Ilea nigh pronaolury areas. CRC Proposed Plan for Archaeological Monitoring and Inadvertent Discovery Protocol 1111L, Pleasant Harbor Marina, Jefferson County, WA Page 8 * r I s • a' lkt f�4 �I �J iS • 6 in •z a U U U a y •��3 f.i,lO. 1 � a U y 1 � s a U Attachment #4 DAHP Response to Cultural Resources Plan ARTMENT OF HAEOLOGY & f.. ORIC PRESERVATION January 14, 2013 Mr. David Johnson Associate Planner Jefferson County 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 Allyson Brooks Ph.D., Director State Historic Preservation Officer In future correspondence please refer to: Log: 081106 -13 -JE Property: Statesman Group Master Planned Resort in Brinnon's Black Point and Pleasant Harbor Marina, Jefferson Co. Re: Concur with Cultural Resource Management Plan for Archaeological Monitoring and Inadvertent Discovery Dear Mr. Johnson: Thank you for contacting the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP). We concur with the attached plan for the Statesman Group Master Planned Resort. Three Tribes have concurred with the plan and three others did not comment. We have no other comments or concerns as long as the attached monitoring and inadvertent discovery plan is implemented during ground disturbing activities for the above project. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Gretchen Kaehler Assistant State Archaeologist (360) 586-3088 gretchen kaehler &dahD.wa,gov cc. Gideon Kauffman, Archaeologist, Jamestown S'Klallam Bill White, Archaeologist, Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe Josh Wisnieweksi, THPO, Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe Kris Miller, THPO, Skokomish Tribe Rhonda Foster, THPO, Squaxin Island Tribe Dennis Lewarch, THPO, Suquamish Tribe Don Coleman, Pleasant Harbor Marina a State of Washington • Department of Archaeology 8 Historic Preservation P.O. Box 48343 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 • (360) 586-3065 www.dohp.wo.gov Skokomish Tribe Response to Cultural Resources Plan Skokomish Indian Tribe N. 80 Tribal Center Road January 14, 2013 Mr. David Johnson Associate Planner Jefferson County 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 Tribal Center (360) 426-4232 FAX (360) 877-5943 Skokomish Nation, WA 98584 RE: Proposed Plan For Archaeological Monitoring And Inadvertent Discovery Protocol For Pleasant Harbor Marina, Jefferson County, Washington. Dear Mr. Johnson: Thank you for contacting the Skokomish Tribal Historic Preservation Office. We concur with the attached plan for the Statesman Group Master Planned Resort. Skokomish Tribe is requesting a schedule of ground disturbing activities so that they (tribes THPO) may have the option to be on site during ground disturbance. We have discussed in the past the importance of this site to the Skokomish people. We have no other comments or concerns as long as the attached monitoring and inadvertent discovery plan is implemented during ground disturbing activities for the above project. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Kris Miller Tribal Historic Preservation Officer Skokomish Tribe (360)426-4232 x 2015 Shlanay 1 @skokomish.org Attachment #5 Letter 3 PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE 44 NATURAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT 31912 Little Boston Rd. NE — Kingston, WA 98346 January 5, 2015 Pleasant Harbor DSE1S c/o Jefferson County DCD JAN 0 5 2014 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend WA 98368 B,ltl ly �, Email: c3i.„^hnKnnco iefferson•waUS JEFF[P92,1y,1 Dear Mr. Johnson, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact l Statement for the proposed Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort The Port Gamble S`Klallam Tribe's (PGST) Natural Resources Department provides the following comments. Due to the potential for significant adverse effects to shellfish, fish, and wildlife we continue to oppose this project and request a meeting to discuss the issues in more detail. The proposed project is located within the Usual and Accustomed area of the Port Gamble 2 S`Klallam Tribe. Tribal members depend on the fish, shellfish and wildlife resources within the project area for their cultural and economic well being. We are concerned that habitat loss and degradation from the proposed project would impact salmon, shellfish and other important species in the area. The Dosewallips and Duckabush rivers and their deltas serve as critical habitat for threatened salmon and other fish, shellfish and wildlife populations valued by the Tribe. Therefore, we are concerned that the proposed project would jeopardize the Tribe's treaty rights to fish and hunt in the project area. As we have stated previously in our 2001, 2006 and 2007 comments on this project, we are 3 concerned with the size and scope of the proposed development. The increase in traffic and intensity of land use will have significant impacts on resources and the DSEIS fails to adequately address these concerns. Water Resources The project site includes a susceptible aquifer recharge area and the potential impacts to local groundwater, stream flows and wetland geology are very significant. Ongoing monitoring of water runoff and its affects on sensitive resources is needed during the construction and operation phases, in addition to an adaptive management plan for making any necessary operational changes. The proposed management plan should require weekly rather than monthly monitoring and should include monitoring for saltwater intrusion. Under the current, plan, steps are identified in the event that saltwater intrusion is detected in neighboring welts, t but no preventative measures are provided. A more comprehensive monitoring plan is needed to protect water resources. Environmentally Sensitive Areas Its a December 21, 2001 joint SEPA comment letter from Point No Point Treaty Council, 5 Jamestown S`Klaliam, Port Gamble S'Kiallam and Skokomish tribes, we highlighted the presence of numerous sensitive environmental features that would be degraded by resort development including unique kettle ponds and streams: In addition, the Washington Dept. of Natural Resources landslide hazard zone maps depict steep, unstable slopes fringing the Black Point V PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE NATURAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT 31912 Little Boston Rd. NE — Kingston, WA 98346 kettle ponds. The proposed project would result in the loss of approximately 20,700 square feet of wetland area and a portion of the wetland buffers associated with Wetlands C and D. The proposal to create wetland area as a mitigation measure does not guarantee the successful replacement and maintenance of this important habitat. Annual monitoring of wetland creation areas is not sufficient for detecting any adaptive management that may be required, Fish and Wildlife Habitat 5 cont. The forested uplands to the northwest of Black Point represent an important elk migration 6 corridor between the Dosewallips and Duckabush river valleys. The proposed development would result in the loss of existing upland wildlife habitat and although the areas of on-site habitat would be retained, we are concerned about the impacts to the elk migration corridor. The SDEIS did not address this issue. The plan includes the monitoring of water quality from the state water quality sampling station 7 at Pleasant Harbor to identify any impacts on fish species. However, additional monitoring stations both on and off site and more preventative measures are needed to adequately protect water quality and existing fish species. We are concerned that once degradation occurs from the project, impacts to spawning and refugia habitat will be irreversible. The plan does not provide any assurance that water quality issues would be adequately resolved. Shellfish Species Tribal members harvest between 13,000 and 21,000 pounds of manila clam and between 13,000 and 48,000 pounds of Pacific oyster from the Duckabush alone. So we are highly concerned about the potential impacts to this important resource. The DSE1S states that with implementation of identified mitigation measures, no significant unavoidable adverse impacts to shellfish would be anticipated. However, the analysis does not consider the increased risk of spills and accidents that would occur with the increase in vessel traffic both on land and in the water. Although the SDEIS describes plans for stormwater to be managed appropriately, the increased risk of discharges from contaminants, turbid waters or sediment as a result of construction and operations must be considered. Given the short timeframe for review of the DSEIS and appendices, this letter represents only a 9 summary of our most critical concerns about the proposed project We request the opportunity to consult more directly with the project applicant and Jefferson County staff to discuss our concerns in more detail. Please contact me at romac@oast.nsn,us to schedule a meeting. Thank you. Sincerely, Roma Call Environmental Coordinator Phone: (360) 297-4792 Fax: (360) 297-4791 2 Attachment #6 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FROM PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE NATURAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT (Letter # 3) Comment 1 Thank you for your comments, your comments are noted. As per this request, a meeting with the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe and Jefferson County Department of Community Development was held on February 18th, 2015. Comte The project is proposing several minimization measures to limit potential impacts to fish and wildlife in the Point Black area. Although only a 150 -foot buffer from the Ordinary High Water (OHW) is required according to the Jefferson County Code, the project is proposing a 200 -foot buffer within the golf course area and is replanting existing degraded riparian areas within the shoreline buffer and will limit access to the shoreline in the area of the golf course. In addition, the project is leaving wildlife corridors (areas of undisturbed vegetation) throughout the golf course area. These corridors will lead to more than 200 acres of relatively undisturbed vegetation on and off site in addition to the existing and created wetland features. For more information on fish and wildlife minimization measures, see the Habitat Management Plan Report (SETS Appendix H). The site is also being designed so there will be no discharges of runoff into Hood Canal; all water will be collected, treated and reused. Comte Comment acknowledged. Traffic issues, including Traffic Volumes and Level of Service were evaluated in Section 3.9 (Transportation) and Appendix L of the Draft SETS. This analysis resulted in the conclusion that no significant impacts would result from the Alternatives, with the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures. See this section of the Final SEIS for further details. Changes in intensity of land use were evaluated in Section 3.92 (Rural Character and Population) of the Draft SETS. As stated in Section 3.12, the Pleasant Harbor resort under the development alternatives would increase the density of development, and establish residential units, vacation units, and commercial and resort related recreational amenities on the site. Activity levels (i.e. noise, traffic, etc. associated with new activity) on the site would increase as a result of development under to the increase in density and associated on-site population (residents and employees) and short-term visitors. This analysis resulted in the conclusion that no significant impacts would result from the Alternatives, with the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures. See this section of the Final SETS for further details. In addition, based on comments received on the Draft SEIS and other factors, an additional development alternative (Alternative 3) has been added for analysis in this Final SETS. Alternative 3 proposes a smaller 9 -hole golf course with associated putting green practice area, as compared to the full 18 -hole golf course assumed under Alternatives 1 and 2. With the smaller golf course, less clearing of vegetation would occur on the site, and more natural area would be preserved. For example, approximately 103 acres (45 percent of the site) would be in natural area under Alternative 3, compared to approximately 31 acres (13 percent of the site) under Alternative 1, and 80 acres (35 percent of the site) under Alternative 2. Pleasant Harbor Final SEIS Comment Letters and Respons F December 2015 9 Exhibit 1 Comment 4 Please see Key Topic 4-2, Saltwater Intrusion, in Chapter 4 of this Final SETS for a discussion on aquifer recharge and potential for aquifer impact. Water runoff during construction would be managed onsite in accordance with all applicable Federal, State and County regulations, as described in Draft SEIS Section 3.2 (pages 3.2-16 and 3.2-17), and in the Grading and Drainage Engineering Report (Peck & Associates, May 16, 2012) included in Appendix E of the Draft SEIS. Either the owner or the contractor would employ a Certified Erosion/Sediment Control Lead (CESCL) who would be onsite during construction to monitor compliance with applicable regulations and permit conditions, and to direct the implementation of contingencies if needed during storm events. The majority of stormwater runoff would be detained and infiltrated onsite. Comment 5 As part of the permit requirements of the project, twice as much wetland will be created as would be impacted; approximately 41,400 sq. ft. of wetland would be created to mitigate for impacts to approximately 20,693 sq. ft. of wetland. The created wetland would be monitored for five or more years to ensure that wetland conditions have been established. If the site is not successful, corrective measures would be taken to ensure that approximately 41,400 sq. ft. of wetland is established. The project will not result in the loss of buffers associated with Wetlands C or D; buffer averaging would be utilized as allowed for in the Jefferson County Code. Wetland C and D buffers would be reduced in some areas and Wetland C and D buffers would be increased in some areas so there is no net loss of wetland buffer habitat. See the Wetland and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan Report for more information (SEIS Appendix J). Annual monitoring is typical of mitigation sites; however, if the site is not deemed successful after five years of monitoring, the Washington State Department of Ecology would likely not release the site from monitoring requirements until the site is successful. Alternatives 1 and 2 analyzed in the Draft SEIS were developed to address the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) Ordinance No. 01-0128-08 conditions, including Conditions 63 (h) and 63 (i) that relate to evaluating potential impacts to the kettle features on the site, as reported in Draft SEIS Section 3.2 (Water Resources, page 3.2-18). Also see the Response to Letter 4, Comment 1, below. Alterations to wetlands on the site would require permits and approvals from Ecology and Jefferson County, which would include conditions for wetland creation and adaptive management during the period of establishment. In regards to slope stability of the kettle pond on the site, the project geotechnical consultant inspected the side slopes of the large central kettle feature on the site (Kettle B), and reported "No clear evidence of landslides or smaller debris flows were observed along the margins of the kettle margins or on the steeper slopes in the upland portions of the project site" (Subsurface Group, LLC, December 17, 2008; Section 7.1.4). With construction to convert this kettle to a retention pond for stormwater and for Class A effluent from the wastewater treatment process, the existing 1.51-1:1V side slopes would be flattened to create finished retention pond slopes of 3H:1V to 4HAV, depending on the liner system selected for the project (Subsurface Group, LLC, December 17, 2008; Section 11.5.1). The Final Geotechnical Investigation report is included in Draft SEIS Appendix E. Pleasant Harbor Final SEIS Comment Letters and Responses^ December 2015 10 Exhibit 1 Comte The project is proposing several minimization measures to limit potential impacts to fish and wildlife in the Point Black area. The project is leaving wildlife corridors (areas of undisturbed vegetation) throughout the golf course area. These corridors will lead to more than 200 acres of relatively undisturbed vegetation on and off site in addition to the existing and created wetland features. In addition, a fence will go up along the project boundary to limit elk access to the site. Also, according to the project engineer, cattle guards or similar device would be installed at the entries to further limit the potential of elk coming onto the property. For more information on fish and wildlife minimization measures, see the Habitat Management Plan Report (SETS Appendix H). Comment 7 The Draft SEIS Section 3.2 (Water Resources, page 3.2-8) reports that the project applicant has complied with BoCC Ordinance No. 01-0128-08 Condition 63 (r), having prepared a draft Water Quality Monitoring Plan (included in Appendix F of the Draft SETS) that requires monthly water collection and testing at three sites for offsite pollution, discharge, and/or contaminant loading in Pleasant Harbor. Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort proposes to participate in a program to monitor the potential impact of developments, both private and public, to the water quality of Pleasant Harbor. Performance standards would meet Washington Department of Ecology requirements per WAC 173-201A. The project proposes to coordinate with the Jefferson County Water Quality Department, the Washington State Department of -:Health, the Hood Canal Salmon Enhancement Group, and the University of Washington:..:,to verify acceptable standards for Pleasant Harbor. The proposed monitoring schedule provides for quarterly pre -construction monitoring, monthly monitoring during first and second year construction, quarterly monitoring thereafter in years 3 and 4, with monitoring frequency in year 5 to be determined. Results would be submitted in reports to the Jefferson County Water Quality Department. The Plan commits to notifying the Department immediately of any unacceptable results. In the event that unacceptable test results are found, the Plan states that all property owners surrounding Pleasant Harbor shall be considered partners and act to identify as closely as possible the source and cause. Adaptive management principles in the draft Water Quality Monitoring Plan provide for modifying the plan to add or remove sampling sites, modify the monitoring schedule, update or improve sampling techniques based on new technology, and/or revise parameters to reflect changes in environmental concerns. The draft Water Quality Monitoring Plan is included in Draft SEIS in Appendix F. The methodology and quality assurance guidelines would be established and submitted to the Jefferson County Water Quality Department for approval after the requirements and criteria for this program were approved. Stormwater management systems associated with Highway 101 and Black Point Road would be upgraded during widening and improvements proposed at the entrance to the Resort (see Draft SEIS Figure 2-9). Water quality treatment measures would be installed upstream of discharges from these roadways and from the proposed Marina Village to the unnamed stream that flows through this area of the site. Pervious pavement materials may also be used in the bus turn- around area and Maritime Village parking lot to treat and infiltrate stormwater that falls on these surfaces. These measures are intended to comply with applicable requirements and improve water quality discharges to Pleasant Harbor over existing conditions. Pleasant Harbor Final SETS CommentIetters and Response i•, ,�.�x:aan December 2015 11 Exhibit 1 Comment 8 A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) would be developed and implemented as required under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater regulations for construction sites. Construction techniques will utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize potential impacts to species. In addition, the contractor will prepare a construction Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) Plan for the project according to Washington State Department of Transportation guidance. Any potential spills would be handled and disposed of in a manner that does not contaminate the surrounding area. Adequate materials and procedures to respond to unanticipated weather conditions or accidental releases of materials will be available on site. This will include materials necessary to isolate pollutants from the environment and contain and absorb spills. The SPCC Plan will also ensure the proper management of oil, gasoline and solvents used in the operation and maintenance of construction equipment, and that equipment remain free of external petroleum- based products prior to entering the work area and during the work, as well as for making any necessary repairs prior to returning the equipment to operation in the work area. The SPCC Plan will be consistent with 40 CFR 112.3 as well as the State of Washington Oil Spill Contingency Plan (WAC 173-182). Work would be in compliance with other local, state and federal regulations and restrictions, local critical areas ordinance and land use regulations, Shoreline Master Plan, State Environmental Policy Act, and 401 Water Quality Certification. The alternatives evaluated in this SETS would not directly increase vessel traffic in Pleasant Harbor; however, all operations associated with the existing marina would be required to adhere to all applicable regulations related to water quality and vessel safety. As indicated in section 3.9 of this Final SEIS, no significant traffic safety issues are anticipated under the SEIS alternatives. Traffic volumes under the EIS alternatives would result in Levels of Service within acceptable limits, and would not be anticipated to result in an increase in vehicle accident rates. Comte WAC 197-11-455(6) (SEPA Rules) indicates that the comment period for a Draft EIS shall be 30 days unless extended by the lead agency. WAC 197-11-455(7) indicates that the lead agency may grant an extension of up to 15 days. Consistent with SEPA rules, Jefferson County provided a 45 -day comment period on the Draft SEIS (30 -day requirement plus 15 -day extension), the maximum length of comment period allowed in the SEPA Rules. In addition, as noted in the above response to Comment 1 of this letter, the opportunity to consult more directly with Jefferson County was given, and a meeting was held on February 18th, 2015. F/easant Harbor Final SE4S-.-r Cbmme_nt.L_ etters and Responses December 2015 12 Exhibit 1 PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE 31912 Little Boston Rd. NE — Kingston, WA 98346 Jefferson County Planning Commission 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 Email: PlanComm@co.jefferson.wa.us David Wayne Johnson Pleasant Harbor FSEIS c/o Jefferson County DCD 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend WA 98368 Email: dwiohnsonCaco iefferson.wa.us Attachment #7 DEC 1 Z? iJ Subject: Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, December 2015, Case No's: MLA08-00188, ZON08-00056 Dear Planning Commission Members and Mr. Johnson, With regard to the December 9 Notice of Availability of the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (FSEIS) and Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing and Notice of Intent to Amend the Unified Development Code for the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort LLC Master Planned Resort, I am submitting this letter on behalf of the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe (PGST). While we appreciate the February 18, 2015 meeting, the tribal consultation process is not yet finished. We understood that Jefferson County DCD would work with PGST staff to address the concerns raised at the meeting and in our comments. However, PGST staff were not consulted after the February meeting and were not given any notification of the FSEIS prior to its release. In view of the incomplete consultation process, and as stated in our January 5, 2015 letter, we continue to oppose this project. We request a 60 -day extension of the process in order to allow time to complete the Tribe's consultation. The Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe is the successor in interest to Indian bands and tribes signatory to the 1855 Treaty of Point No Point, 12 Stat. 933.1 Today the Tribe retains deep cultural and economic ties to the surrounding waters and to their fisheries in its usual and accustomed grounds and stations (U&A). More than a century of federal court decisions have fleshed out the components of the treaty right, including the right of access to places, the right to a share of harvest to meet tribal moderate living needs, and the right to protection of fish habitat in all areas of the Tribe's U&A. The proposed Pleasant Harbor project is located within the Tribe's U&A, in an area where tribal members depend on fish, shellfish and wildlife. We are concerned that the proposed project would jeopardize the Tribe's treaty right to fish and hunt in the project area. As stated in our previous comments in 2001, 2006, 2007 and 2015 regarding this project and at the February meeting, we are concerned about the potential for adverse impacts from increased traffic, intensity of land use, and environmental effects. The proposed project would 1 United States v. Washington, 459 F. Supp. 1020, 1039 (W.D. Wash. 1978) (hereinafter Boldt 11). PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE 31912 Little Boston Rd. NE — Kingston, WA 98346 be located in an aquifer recharge area and the potential water quality and water quantity impacts to local groundwater, streams and wetlands are significant. We are concerned about the potential for significant adverse effects to fish habitat and the Tribe's fisheries as a result of these impacts. Additionally, numerous environmentally sensitive features are located within the project area, including unique kettle ponds. We are concerned about the potential adverse effects to these habitats from the proposed stormwater management system. An elk herd forages within the forested uplands to the northwest of the project between the Dosewallips and Duckabush river valleys. We are concerned about the development of highly attractive elk and deer forage from the proposed project lawns and fairways and the risk that the elk will cross the highway to get to the food. Couple that with the projected increase of >4,000 vehicle trips per day on the highway and it poses a significant risk to the viability of the elk herd. We are also concerned about the possible increase in recreational shellfish harvesting from project residents, which would have the potential to impact shellfish habitat and the Tribe's harvest. Tribal members harvest between 13,000 and 21,000 pounds of manila clam and between 13,000 and 48,000 pounds of Pacific oyster from the Duckabush alone. These issues were not satisfactorily addressed in the FSEIS. Although the document covers potential environmental effects to some extent, we are concerned that it does not go nearly far enough to resolve the potentially significant impacts to tribal treaty rights. In order to adequately address the Tribe's concerns, we are requesting a 60 -day period to work with Jefferson County staff as needed to complete the tribal consultation process. We would appreciate your consideration and timely response. Thank you. Si y, Jim0my Sullivan Chair, Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe Attachment #8 David W. Johnson From: Roma Call <romac@pgst.nsn.us> Sent: Friday, January 22, 2016 5:45 PM To: David W. Johnson Cc: Cynthia Koan; David Goldsmith Subject: Re: PGST Tribe's 60 day request David, We very much appreciate the Planning Commission granting more time for the tribal consultation process. PGST staff will be discussing the project with Tribal Council on Feb. 8. Immediately after that meeting I will let you know how the Council would like to proceed. Thank you. Roma Call Roma Call Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe Environmental Coordinator romacc� st.nsn.us cell 360-516-3979 office 360-297-6293 On 1/22/1610:54 AM, David W. Johnson wrote: Roma, The Planning Commission and Staff have agreed to your 60 day request from the January 6, 2016 Planning Commission Public Hearing to complete consultation started during our February 2015 meeting at Pleasant Harbor. Please let me know how you would like to proceed. Thanks! David Wayne Johnson - LEED AP - Neighborhood Development Associate Planner - Port Ludlow Lead Planner Department of Community Development Jefferson County 360.379.4465 Mission: To preserve and enhance the quality of life in Jefferson County by promoting a vibrant economy, sound communities and a healthy environment. `,A SAVE PAPER - Please do not print this e-mail unless absolutely necessary