HomeMy WebLinkAbout012+
MASTER PLANNED RESORT
Jefferson County Department of
Community Development
September 5, 2007
APPENDICES
d ,rl*l['l{
r,ltf,\I
\.^*
I
I
\
t'
\t ,l
m =-t+l!)
T
D
II,
I A
t D !
-MARINA AND GOLF RESORT-
T
I
T
I
t
I
I
t
I
t
I
T
I
I
l
I
T
I
I
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
Appendix 3
Appendix 4
Appendix 5
Appendix 6
Appendix 7
Appendix 8
Appendix 9
Appendix 10
Appendix List to DEIS
For the Master Planned Resort, Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Historic Reference site plan and topography maps of American Campground
M arina Imp act Analys is, 8 I I 5 I 06, prepared by GeoEngineers
Shoreline Characterization Report, 8 13 I 06, prepared by GeoEngineers
Soils and Geology Evaluation, Sll0l0T prepared by Subsurface Group
Water Supply and Groundwater Impact Analysis,6126106, revised 8114107,
prepared by Subsurface Group
Transportation Impact Study,8l28l07, prepared by Transportation Engineering
Northwest
Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment,7120106, prepared by GeoEngineers
Cultural Resource Assessmentfor the Proposed Pleasant Harbor Marina and
Golf Resort, Jefferson County, WA,6130106, prepared by Westem Shore Heritage
Services
Wetland Delineation, 7 120 I 06, prepared by GeoEngineers
Example of a Notice of Mariners with map showing restricted or closed areas of
Dabab Bay (DBRC)
s7s77-000 l/LEG ALt 347 3797 .t
I
I
t
I
T
I
I
T
I
I
T
t
I
I
I
I
T
I
t
$,'v't"t
t,
I
I
I
I
I
T
T
T
I
T
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
t
I
I
r
I
t
ti
,
A\7
Itr
<i,
--:;'-f
_l
S TORAGEWA
il
| :\
7/
o
o
oooog
l./
'a,a.
.y.a-L EEid:-a_r5I
..4'-iE
4,e- VACiiu,v VAa:tE_
.:)!s -AL!47'Q:\!
a<. .,. .....,. ,',L
<=Y-4*.1:
I
!t
-1
w4:E3_ziEyi€€''P' , --d--
_. L-
i ii:
)a lt:
i /.,.
'-l
I
i
,l
I
I
IDEtsA i T (G,
N ,.,,- Bif
{I
I
\
t
'a
I
- : i.11, 4- ---;- 4 t - 1 - -.;.
rt.
APPENDIX I
8L ACI( POIHT
'.J,.
:i,
:;iH
c'J
.(
:
i
I
t
I
t
I
.,-.&
1t!f1,
:. .i.
i(i
!,i.
.a#b\
l. t a 2r,J'
t.a-e.C I aoltE
d.- b+. + ytP,
,nr-3a?, t6,
r;'
, l,I
'I
. .,PBlLrrfl[anYGqiIrEF'LrxE i{,Ailj
-
t:t'
ll
I
I
i'
i:
I
t.
I
j
i
I
l
i
i
I
i
:
I
I
I
I
,ff.f/ Ptz /a te^-.*q dU
I
j
i
t-tco0
1i:lI 'l,llli,l
'ilj
I
trr!
Irl
r"..1.,i
1i't'i';11,|1fi,,'||r,ir'r,iiilttrtl
'lti,l'rl1L,r,rl'll, : ll ,'ir,!
t.,rj,ri;
irl',1,1
.l:t'',..,'ir
i,tllllrrrr
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l!,:lrrl
irlitrl"r
'l'
RepoRr
Menlue luplcr Anluvsrs
Punsrurr HaRaoR MaRrul euo
Golr ResoRr
BRtttNott, Wlsuucrot
Aucusr 15,2006
Fon
Stlresrurur GoRponalcitt
II'
FileNo.12677-001-0iAPPENDIX 2
I
I
I
I
t
T
I
I
T
t
t
T
!
I
I
I
t
I
T
I
I
J
Marina lmpact Analysis
File No. 12677-001-03
August 15, 2006
Prepared for:
Statesman Corporation
7370 Sierra Morena Boulevard Southwest
Calgary, Alberta Canada T3H 4Hg
Attention: Garth Mann
Prepared by
GeoEngineers, lnc.
1550 Woodridge Drive SE
Port Orchard, Washington 98366
(360) 769-8400
GeoEngineers, !nc.
Greg
Environmental Scientist
Wayne S. Wright,
Principal
GJA:WSW:jl
ORCH:\ I 2\ I 267700 I \03\Finals\l 267700 I 03R3.doc
One copy submitted
Disclaimer: Any electronic form, facsimile or hard copy of the original document (email, text, table, an<Vor figure), if provided, and any
attachments are only a copy of the original document. The original document is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official
document ofrecord,
Copyright@ 2006 by GeoEngineers, Inc. All rights reserved.
File No. 12677-001-03
T
I
t
T
T
I
t
I
I
t
T
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
Teeue or Courerurs
tNTRODUCTtON.............
PROJECT LOCATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION......
PROJECT SCOPE
SITE DESCRIPTION.....
METHODS
PAPER INVENTORY
FIELD RECONNAISSANCE ...
RESULTS...
WATER QUALITY....
DrscusstoN.................
SHORELINE
WATER QUALITY....
FlsH...........
WILDLIFE...
MARINE MAMMALS
SHELLFISH AND MISCELLANEOUS MARINE INVERTEBRATE ....
INVASIVE SPECIES
RECOMMENDATIONS...
LtM tTATtONS.................
REFERENCES...............
List of Tables
Table 1. DOH Fecal Coliform Water Quality Data from 11l8l2}00lo 1212112005.....
Table 2. GeoEngineers Water Quality Data at 1 Meter
Table 3. GeoEngineers Water Quality Data from 3 to 9 Meters
List of Figures
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Figure 2. Marine Survey Water Quality Samples Map
Figure 3. Recreational Shellfish Beach Closures Map
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A- SITE PHOTOGRAPHS ....
APPENDIX B _AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS
Paoe No.
1
1
1
I
2
2
2
2
3
3
4
5
5
b
7
7
7
7
8
I
I
3
4
4
A-
B-
1
1
.A-4
.B-9
File No. 12677-001-03
August 13,2006
Page i GeoEneweeaslQ
T
I
T
t
T
I
I
T
I
t
T
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
T
Reponr
Mnrurul lupncr Aunuvsrs
PreeseNr Hengon MaRtNe ano Golr ResoRr
Bruutott, WnsHlNeroN
Fon
Sreresman GoRponATroN
INTRODUCTION
GeoEngineers, Inc (GeoEngineers) was contracted by Statesman Corporation to perform a marine impact
analysis associated with the Pleasant Harbor Marina (marina) and marine areas located inside Pleasant
Harbor in Jefferson County south of Brinnon, Washington. Comments received from various scoping
meetings raised concerns that increased boat traffic within the existing marina could potentially result in
impacts to nearshore habitat within the harbor and surrounding Hood Canal. GeoEngineers evaluated the
existing marina and shoreline habitat within the marina and identified some of the potential impacts
which may result from increased marina usage.
Pno.lecr LocnnoN
The proposed development is located on the Olympic Peninsula adjacent to Hood Canal in Sections 15
and 22 of Township 25 North, Range 2 West of the Willamette Meridian in Jefferson County (Figure 1).
The subject property, herein referred to as the site, consists of approximately 250 acres and is partially
developed. [t is located in the Skokomish-Dosewallips Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA l6) and is
part of the East Olympic and Hood Canal fuver Basins.
The proposed project site is located on Black Point, which extends east approximately I mile into Hood
Canal, and the southwestern shoreline of Pleasant Harbor, a shallow cove located north of Black Point.
The peninsula consists ofhills, ravines and deep kettles shaped by glacial processes. The surface geology
consists of Vashon-age till, outwash and ice-contact sediments underlain by pre-Vashon non-glacial
stratified deposits (Subsurface Group, [nc. draft Site Geology map 2006). A portion of the project area is
currently being used as an RV Resort (Pleasant Harbor RV Resort) with developed roads, RV pads with
water and electricity and restrooms located through out the developed area of the site. A commercial
marina and store are located along the Pleasant Harbor shoreline. State Route (SR) l0l transects the site,
PRolecr DEscRrPTroN
The Statesman Corporation intends to develop a mixed-use resort development on the subject property.
However, the exact location and details of the development have not been defined at the time of this
work. Therefore, we have not evaluated potential impacts of the proposed multi-use development.
Pnouecr Scope
GeoEngineers collected pertinent water quality data for Pleasant Harbor and the existing marina. This
data collection included information about water quality and shellfish in Pleasant Harbor. Shellfish
closure zones established by the Washington State Department of Health (DOH), marine water quality
data records from Jefferson County Department of Health, Washington State Department of Ecology
(Ecology), Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and local Tribes were sought and
collected as available. This data is summarized in this report for easy review and evaluation. Data
relating to the existing marina operation was also collected as available and summarized. The water
circulation patterns of Pleasant Harbor were collected from current and tidal records. The boating
File No. 12677-001-03
August 13,2006
Page I GeoExe rxesnstrl
movement around the piers and docks was also recorded and examined to determine the route of havel in
the harbor.
A field assessment of Pleasant Harbor and the marina environment was conducted to assess the existing
conditions to obtain information on the areas of concern and to obtain site photographs. The marine
survey was conducted from a boat and included water quality measurements as well as wildlife
observations. The field survey also documented general characteristics in the harbor.
We have prepared this impact analysis report to describe the anticipated impacts to water quality as a
result of increased marina usage. This report also offers suggestions and marina operation altematives to
reduce and minimize additional impacts from increased boater use of the Pleasant Harbor Marina.
Srre DescRrPTloN
The site is bordered to the south by the Hood Canal of the Puget Sound. The eastern edge of the site is
bordered by forested land and several single-family residences. The northem portion of the site is
bordered by light residential housing and most of the western edge is bordered by SR 101. The project
area is composed of four sections (Figure l). Section 1, the largest of the sections, is 220.1 (+) acres,
located on the southwest portion of Black Point, east of SR 101 and south of Black Point Road. Section 2
is a narrow strip of land (7.8 + acres) that runs along the east to southeastern side of SR l0l and
immediately north of Black Point Road. Section 3 encompasses the commercial marina and associated
parking area (9.8 + acres) on the southern side of SR l0l and Section 4 is the triangular shaped 11.9 (+)
acres located to the north of Section 3 on the northern side of SR 101 .
The marina is located along the northwestern shore of Pleasant Harbor in Section 3 and is an all-weather,
deep-water harbor in the Hood Canal. The marina offers a network of docks and piers and 3l I boat slips
including 12 slips that can accommodate vessels up to 150 feet in length. Further development of the
marina is not anticipated as part of the proposed project by Statesman Corporation, but the proposed
resort development may cause an increase in marina traffic.
METHODS
Pepen lNvenronv
GeoEngineers conducted a search for pertinent and applicable data prior to beginning field activities
including maps, plans, surveys, studies and shoreline inventories. Information was obtained relating to
water quality and shellfish data for Pleasant Harbor and the Hood Canal. These resources include
information from the marine water quality data records and shellfish closure zones established by DOH
(DOH 2006b), long-term marine water quality data from Ecology (Ecology 2003), WDFW Priority
Habitat and Species (PHS) maps (WDFW 2006), Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
ShoreZone Inventory data (DNR 2001) and the WDFW technical reports on shellfish resources in the
Puget Sound (WDFW 2005). We reviewed the l98l United States Geological Survey (USGS) map and
topographic maps. We also reviewed recent aerial photographs of the site and shoreline to determine
changes in cover and land use practices that have occurred in and around Pleasant Harbor (USGS 1981,
USGS 1990 and Ecology 1994).
Frelo RecoNnlrssANcE
GeoEngineers biologists performed a field reconnaissance to inventory land and marina use, shoreline
modifications and collect watff quality samples from Pleasant Harbor on April 26 and,27, June 19 and
July 3, 2006 as part of the inventory process to spot-check and supplement existing information. The
field reconnaissance started at 10:00 AM and ended at 5:00 PM on all days. The weather was partly
File No. 12677-001-03
August 13,2006
Page 2 GeoErcneees_1Q
cloudy to sunny all days and the temperature ranged from 60oF to 80oF. The reconnaissance on July 3
was conducted from a boat to obtain the necessary water quality measurements from inside and outside of
Pleasant Harbor. The existing nearshore utilization was observed and recorded within the harbor.
Structures, such as docks, piers, floats, bulkheads, groins, boat ramps and natural shoreline features were
photographed and noted. Fish and wildlife observations were also made during the field assessment. A
photographic record was taken to document existing shoreline and marina conditions and to supplement
the narrative discussion presented in this report. Photographs documenting shoreline conditions in
Pleasant Harbor are located in Appendix A.
RESULTS
Pleasant Harbor is a deepwater harbor along the western edge of the Hood Canal, l8 nautical miles south
of the Hood Canal floating bridge, near Brinnon, Washington. The Hood Canal is a deep (500-600 feet
depth), nalrow fiord, 60 miles in length (University of Washington - Hood Canal Dissolved Oxygen
Program IUW-HCDOP] 2006), that connects the rivers and streams of the eastern Olympic and western
Kitsap Peninsula's to the Puget Sound and ultimately to the Pacific Ocean.
The marina contains 3ll boat slips including 12 that can accommodate vessels up to 150 feet in length.
The marina is equipped with a fuel dock for marine fueling with a sewage pump-out located on the dock.
A second, smaller marina (Home Port Marina) is located east of the Pleasant Harbor Marina near the
entrance of the Harbor. This marina does not have fueling or sewage disposal services. The closest
marina to Pleasant Harbor that has similar facilities is located more than 4 miles away on the west shore
of the Hood Canal in Seabeck, Washington. Marinas are limited on the Hood Canal and Pleasant Harbor
acts as an important fueling, mooring and sewage disposal site for boaters on the canal.
Waren Qullrv
The DOH has a water quality monitoring station, # 293, in the Hood Canal near the mouth of Pleasant
Harbor to measure bacteria levels used to determine shellfish closure zones (DOH 2005). This station
next to Pleasant Harbor "meets standards but some concerns"; however, the DOH has prohibited shellfish
harvesting in Pleasant Harbor. This decision is based on sanitary concerns with any shellfish grown in an
area adjacent to a marina (DOH 2006a). This decision is not likely to change due to the risk of shellfish
containing harmful biotoxins and pollutants to humans. Commercial and recreational shellfish harvesting
is not allowed in prohibited areas.
Table 1. DOH Fecal Goliform Water Quality Data from 111812000 to 1212112005
Station Range Geometric Mean
organlsms/100m1
Eslimated 90th Percentlle
organisms/100m1
Standard <14 <43
#293 1.7 -7.8 2.3 4.0
GeoEngineers conducted water quality sampling in four locations in Pleasant Harbor and one outside the
entrance near the DOH monitoring station on July 3,2006. The samples were obtained from a boat and
sampling locations were determined in the field. Samples were taken at two depths: the first was within I
meter of the surface and the second was within 0.5 meters above the bottom of the marine floor or to the
extent of the sampling equipment (approximately 9 meters). Our measurements included: pH,
conductivity (Cond), turbidity (Turb), dissolved oxygen (DO), temperature (Temp), salinity (Sal), total
dissolved solids (TDS), specific gravity (or) and oxidation reduction potential (ORP). Figure 2 shows the
approximate locations of our sample locations.
File No. 12677-001-03
August 13,2006
Page j GeoEueweeeslQ
\
Table 2. GeoEngineers Water Quality Data at 1 Meter
Table 3. GeoEngineers Water Quality Data from 3 to 9 Meters
Note:
No data from a deep setting was recorded at Location 4 due to shallow depth.
Location pH
Cond
(m S/cm)
Turb
(Nru)
DO
(m g/L)
Temp
(c)
Sal
(Y"l
TOS
(s/L)CE
ORP
(mv)
1 8.57 37.1 20.9
45.4
10.43 20.48 2.35 zz.b 16 19
2 8.55 36.3 9.20 20.78 2.31 22.2 16 81
3 8.53 36.5 21.9 10.45 20.34 2.32 22.3 16 54
4 8.5s 40.0 31.4 11.56 19.15 2.54 24.3 't8 64
5 8.46 41.3 53.3 11.05 16.45 2.66 25.3 19 73
Location pH
Cond
(m S/cm)
Turb
(Nru)
DO
(m g/L)
Temp
(c)
Sal
%l
TDS
(s/L)(rE
ORP
(mv)
1 8.57 39.9 29.4 12.12 16.65 2.49 23.1 19 6
2 8.29 41.6 114.0 10.11 15.06 2.66 25.4 20 96
3 8.38 41.5 661.0 't2.35 16.75 2.66 25.4 19 67
5 8.39 43.2 96.7 11.78 12.81 2.78 26.5 21 80
D!SCUSSION
The number of slips at the Pleasant Harbor Marina will not increase as a result of the proposed resort.
However, boating traffic and movement in the harbor is expected to increase from the general public over
time as a result of several factors. Two marinas currently exist in the northern half of the harbor. Neither
marina is scheduled for expansion at this time but demand for marina space is increasing throughout the
Puget Sound (BST Associates 2003). A new boat launch is being constructed by the WDFW on the
western side of the harbor. This boat launch will require a fee to launch a boat and it is scheduled to open
in the fall of 2006. This new boat launch will attract more boaters to launch and moor their vessels in
Pleasant Harbor. All of Pleasant Harbor is designated as a no-wake zone. Pleasant Harbor Marina
typically receives about 1,000 guest moorages per year (Pleasant Harbor Marina 2006). There has been
no dredging of Pleasant Harbor in the past 20 years and there are no plans for any marina expansion
located in Pleasant Harbor (Pleasant Harbor Marina 2006).
It is possible that boating traffic in Pleasant Harbor may increase as a result of the proposed development
from folks coming to visit the resort and attractions in the Hood Canal through various marketing
endeavors and population growth in the general Hood Canal region. Increased volume of boating traffic
in the harbor may impact water quality from pollution related to sewage disposal, grey water disposal,
bilge pumps, spilled fuel and trash. The proposed development plans on reducing the potential impacts
from these pollutants through the implementation and use of conservative marina covenants and
regulations and direct community involvement. The proposed development plans to increase awareness
and conhol polluting factors through the institution of strict covenants and regulations in its marina
through the implementation of the Pleasant Harbor Yacht Club that will exhibit environmental
stewardship and pride. The proposed development will also replace the old effluent disposal system with
an advanced heatment system to minimize the risk of contamination to the surrounding environment.
File No. 12677-001-03
August 13,2006
Page 4 GeoEneweeaslQ
The new boat launch built by the WDFW will most likely increase the volume of boaters launching in the
harbor. However, the proposed development is not associated with this boat launch. Therefore, the
proposed development cannot be held responsible for the actions taken by boaters using the launch,
boating in the harbor or mooring at other marinas and docks in Pleasant Harbor. The marina will
encourage other boaters and marinas not related to this development to adhere to Washington State
boating regulations and to improve their respective boating practices, policies and standards.
SxoRelrNE
Shoreline areas within the marina are not armored, but rather naturally composed of cobbles, gravels,
sand and sediment (Appendix A - Photo 1). The majority of the shoreline in Pleasant Harbor contains
natural berms and vegetation (Photo 2). The Home Port Marina shoreline contains a riprap seawall to
allow for additional parking close to the water (Photo 3). A Washington State Park overnight moorage
dock with a size of 218 square feet is located in the northeastern corner of Pleasant Harbor and contains a
sewage disposal facility (Washington State Parks 2006) (Photo 4). Pleasant Harbor also contains 10
private docks along its shoreline (Photo 5). A functioning public boat launch is located at the western
edge of Pleasant Harbor (Photo 6). The WDFW was constructing a new public boat launch in the
southwestern corner of Pleasant Harbor at the time of all of our field reconnaissance (Photo 7).
A small riprap revetment has been constructed along the south side of the entrance to Pleasant Harbor at a
private residence (Photo 8). Several residences on the Hood Canal shore just north of Pleasant Harbor
have lowbank seawalls composed of riprap and cement. Riprap groins were also observed along the north
shoreline just outside of the harbor. These groins extend perpendicular from the residents' bulkheads
altering the natural movements of sediment and beach material from wave action along the shoreline
(Photos 9 and l0). Aerial shoreline photos from Ecology's website (1994) of Pleasant Harbor are
presented in Appendix B.
Pleasant Harbor was identified to contain five unnamed seasonal tributaries in the vicinity of the site
along the shoreline. These five tributaries were identified to be non-fish-bearing streams through the site
due to impassible fish barriers and gradients above 16 percent. These tributaries are discussed in detail in
the report titled Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort Wetland Delineation (GeoEngineers 2006b).
Wlren Qullrv
A shallow sill, approximately 150 feet deep, exists at the entrance of the Hood Canal that restricts the
exchange of water between the Hood Canal and the Puget Sound. It is estimated that water exchange
within the Hood Canal takes a magnitude of two years to completely flush (UW-HCDOP 2006). Studies
conducted by the University of Washington have identified that the restricted circulation of the water
within the Hood Canal coupled with a high input of nutrients from numerous natural and non-natural
sources have led to serious water quality issues in the marine waters of the canal ([JW-HCDOP 2006). A
detailed discussion of water quality outside of Pleasant Harbor in the vicinity of the site is found in the
report titled, Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort Shoreline Characterization (GeoEngineers 2006c)
High levels of nutrients, such as nitrate, create increased biomass of mainly algae that eventually die and
fall to the bottom where they begin to decompose. This decomposition consumes available dissolved
oxygen in the lower layer of shatified water. Fish and other marine organisms require certain levels of
dissolved oxygen to survive. Low levels of dissolved oxygen in Hood Canal have caused periodic fish
kills recorded as early as the 1960s. Current dissolved oxygen levels are the lowest in recorded history
(Puget Sound Action Team 2000). Shellfish resources including mussels, clams and oysters were
observed within Pleasant Harbor and in the vicinity of the Pleasant Harbor Marina (Photo 11).
File No. I 2677-001-03
August 13,2006
Page 5 GroEr,renrrensl
Water circulation in Pleasant Harbor is limited by a narrow, 100 feet, and shallow, l0 feet, inlet located at
the east end of the harbor. The harbor area itself ranges from 30 to 40 feet in depth (Pleasant Harbor
Marina 2006). The harbor water levels fluctuate with the tides and currents of the Hood Canal. The
water quality samples taken by GeoEngineers presented in Tables 2 arrd 3 support tidal flushing of
Pleasant Harbor. The level of pH varied by less than 0.28 inside and outside of the harbor. Dissolved
oxygen levels were within 2.36 mglL in the upper sampling layer and within 2.24 mg/L in the lower
sampling layer throughout all monitoring locations. Water temperatures inside of the marina were 3 to
4'C higher than the water quality samples taken outside of the harbor; however, this is expected to occur
in shallow harbors such as Pleasant Harbor (Curley 2002 and University of Washington 2005). The
salinity levels in Pleasant Harbor were also lower than those observed outside of the harbor. This lower
salinity value can be attributed to circulation in combination with precipitation, groundwater and seasonal
and perennial freshwater input on the shoreline of the harbor (Curley 2002 and University of Washington
2005). Even though Pleasant Harbor has a narrow inlet and there are two marinas located in the harbor,
water quality data suggests that the harbor is flushed by the tides on a regular basis to obtain the same
water quality levels of the Hood Canal.
Frsn
The Hood Canal contains many fish species in the shoreline environment throughout its reach. Pleasant
Harbor is connected to the Hood Canal through a narrow and shallow passage located on the east end.
Fish presence is assumed to occur in Pleasant Harbor during certain times of the year. There are five
streams that flow through Sections 2 and 3 of the site. However, none of these streams contain fish
habitat accessible from the site. Priority anadromous fish species that may occur along the shoreline in
Pleasant Harbor include chinook salmon (Oncorhynchtts tshavvytscha), chum salmon (Oncorhynchus
keta), coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch), pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha), steelhead
(Oncorhynchus mykiss) and bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus). The Duckabush River is located
approximately I mile to the southwest of Pleasant Harbor on the opposite side of Black Point. The
Duckabush River is documented to support chinook, chum, coho, pink salmon, steelhead and the
historical use of bull trout. One unnamed creek is located approximately 500 feet north of the Duckabush
River and is documented to support chum, coho and steelhead (WDFW 2006). Due to the presence of
spawning and rearing fish habitat within 2 miles of Pleasant Harbor, salmonids and bull trout are expected
to be present during certain times of the year according to their growth stage. Pleasant Harbor is listed as
nearshore marine designated critical habitat for chinook and chum salmon, as well as bull trout.
Forage fish are important food sources for salmonids and bull trout. Surf smelt (Hypomesus pretiosus),
sand lance (Ammodytes hexapterus) and Pacific herring (Clupea harengus pallasi) are present in Pleasant
Harbor during certain times of the year. There is no forage fish spawning habitat located in the harbor
itself but there is a sand lance spawning area on the northern side of the inlet to the harbor. There is a
sand lance spawning area on the east side of Black Point. Surf smelt and Pacific herring spawning areas
are documented in the intertidal zone on the southeastern tip of Black Point (WDFW 2006).
Eelgrass habitat is located throughout the entire shoreline of Black Point and Pleasant Harbor (DNR
2001). The WDFW PHS maps (2006) identiff the northern shoreline in Pleasant Harbor to contain thick
eelgrass patches. Eelgrass is listed as important habitat for the growth and maturation of salmonid species
in marine environments (WDFW 2004). The southern portion of Pleasant Harbor is listed as priority
estuarine habitat by the WDFW (2006). A detailed discussion of anadromous and resident fish in the
project vicinity is located in the report titled Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort Fish and Wildlife
Habitat Assessment (GeoEngineers 2006a). Forage fish presence discussion in the intertidal area
surrounding Black Point is located in the Shoreline Characterization report (GeoEngineers 2006c).
File No. 12677-001-03
August 13,2006
Page 6 GeoEneneeaslQ
Wn-ourre
Wildlife presence and use of Pleasant Harbor was evaluated through a thorough review of available
literature, as well as site investigations. The USFWS identifies several listed species that may occur
along non-coastal marine shoreline in Jefferson County. These species include bald eagles (Haliaeetus
leucocephalrs) and marbled murrelets (Brachyramphus marmoralas). Non-listed species include osprey
(Pandion haliaetus) and several different species of waterfowl, Bald eagles are expected to be present in
Pleasant Harbor. Many mature trees suitable for perching are present along the shoreline. At the time of
the site visits, bald eagles and osprey were observed perching and foraging along the Pleasant Harbor
shoreline (Photo l2). A detailed discussion about wildlife use in the vicinity of Pleasant Harbor is found
in the fish and wildlife habitat assessment (GeoEngineers 2006a).
Mnnrxe Mlurunls
Killer whales (Orcinus orca) are not expected to be present in Pleasant Harbor during any time of the
year. The Hood Canal is not proposed as critical habitat for killer whales (71 FR 34571-64588). Harbor
seals (Phoca vitulina) are expected to occur in Pleasant Harbor year round. Visual observations were
noted during the site visits (Photo 13).
Sneurrsu AND MrscELLANEous Mlntre lNveRreaRAre
Shellfish harvest is prohibited within Pleasant Harbor due to elevated pollution levels (DOH 2006).
DOH cautions that clams, oysters and mussels from this beach are not fit for human consumption at any
time. The overall health of the shellfish resources in the adjacent portions of the Hood Canal is good,
with only a few harvest advisories and one shellfish closure in the area. The shellfish closure nearest to
the closed waters of Pleasant Harbor is located more than I mile north in the Hood Canal along the
shoreline of Brinnon, Washington (DOH 2006). DOH maps (2006) are included with this report (Figure
3), which identi$ shellfish beach closures due to biotoxins or pollution in the vicinity of Pleasant Harbor,
A review of available literature identifies no presence of priority shellfish, sea urchin (Strong1tlocentrotus
spp.), dungenous crab (Cancer magister) or pandalid shrimp (Pandalus spp.) located in Pleasant Harbor
(WDFW 2006). However, presence of these species is documented in the water of the Hood Canal
surrounding Black Point. Priority marine species may be present in Pleasant Harbor during certain times
of the year. A detailed discussion of marine species in the vicinity of the site is found in the shoreline
characterization report (GeoEngineers 2006c). Pacific oysters were observed in the intertidal zone along
the shoreline in Pleasant Harbor.
Ittvlsve Specles
Club tunicate (Styela clava) is a non-native invertebrate that is found subtidally on hard surfaces such as
pilings, marina floats, shellfish growing structures and other artificial substrates. Club tunicate prefers
sheltered harbors, bays and inlets containing hard surfaces and has infested marinas such as Pleasant
Harbor (Washington Sea Grant 2006). In their natural environment in Korea and Japan, predators and
competitors balance and restrain their growth. However, when transported to areas that lack this
balancing relationship, these organisms grow and reproduce rapidly, forming dense communities and
crowding and out competing other marine species. Several organized dives have been performed to
remove any observed club tunicate on the bottom of boats in Pleasant Harbor. The best method to
eradicate club tunicate is to remove them by hand during their earliest stages of growth.
File No. 12677-001-03
August 13,2006
Page 7 GzoExeweeaslQ
RECOMMENDAT!ONS
Improvements to the Pleasant Harbor Marina as part of the proposed development will likely result in
increased marina usage and boater haffic. The covenants for the marina will need updating to
accommodate the higher demand for marina utilities such as fuel, sewage disposal, grey water disposal,
trash removal and moorage. New covenants for the marina will need to be created and implemented to
ensure the safety of the marina environment and help protect water quality in Pleasant Harbor.
Due to the confined nature of Pleasant Harbor, Best Management Practices and covenants are
recommended for use in the marina. These recommendations are listed below:
o Vessels moored in the marina should be tied up at all times to prevent accidental drifting or
collision with other boats.
o There should not be any material, including fenders, bumpers and satellite dishes, attached to
marina structures without approval of the marina director.
o Cleaning of fish or sea life shall be prohibited within the controlled access areas of the marina.
o The marina shall have the right to inspect any vessel at any time.
o Excessive noise that might disturb other tenants or wildlife will not be allowed.
. All vessels moored in the marina must be seaworthy.
o There shall be no discharge of sewage in U.S. waters. Boat owners should use holding tank pump
out and potly-dump stations located at the marina. The marina should have restroom and shower
facilities on shore for marina residences.
o Do not dispose of contaminated bilge water back into the marine waters.
r All fueling operations must take place at the fueling pier.
o Fuel storage or transfer shall be prohibited on marina floats, docks, piers and storage lockers.
o No storage shall be permitted on docks including storage of oily rags, open paints or other
flammable or environmentally hazardous materials.
o Painting, scraping and refinishing of boats shall be limited to minor repairs when in the water.
Any minor repairs must employ a containment barrier that prevents debris from entering the
marine waters.
L!MITATIONS
GeoEngineers has performed this Marina Impact Analysis of Pleasant Harbor, Washington in general
accordance with the scope and limitations of our proposal. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and
budget, our services have been executed in accordance with the generally accepted practices for Shoreline
Characterization in this area at the time this report was prepared. No warranty or other conditions,
express or implied, should be understood.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Statesman Corporation, their authorized agents and
regulatory agencies following the described methods and information available at the time of the work.
No other party may rely on the product of our services unless we agree in advance to such reliance in
writing. The information contained herein should not be applied for any purpose or project except the one
originally contemplated.
File No. 12677-001-03
August 13,2006
Page I GcoExenzeeslQ
REFERENCES
7l FR 34571-64588. 2006. 50 CFR Part 226. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administraion.
Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Southern Resident
Killer Whale. Federal Register, Vol. 71, No. 115.
BST Associates. 2003. "Port of Bremerton Marina Demand Assessment," PowerPoint Presentation
prepared for the Port of Bremerton. March 2003.
Curley, T. 2002. Nantucket Harbor Water Quality Synopsis. <http://www.nantucket-
ma.gov/departments/marine/Harbor%20Water2002.pdD. (Accessed August I l, 2006).
GeoEngineers, [nc. 2006a. Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort Fish and Wildlife Habitat
Assessment.
GeoEngineers,Inc. 2006b. Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort Wetland Delineation.
GeoEngineers,Inc, 2006c. Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort Shorelinc Characterization.
Pleasant Harbor Marina. 2006. Personal Communication with marina store attendtant via telephone on
August 3,2006.
Puget Sound Action Team. 2000. Frequently asked questions about Hood Canal dissolved oxygen
problems.
http ://www.psat.wa. eov/Prosrams/hood_canal/hc_faq. htm
(Accessed July 18, 2006)
United States Geological Survey. 1981. Brinnon, Washington; l:24000,7.5-minute quadrangle.
United States Geological Survey. 1990. Aerial photograph. Available online at:
http:/iwww.terrascrvcrusa.com/image.aspx?T:l&S:ll&Z:10&X:1265&Y:13192&W:3
(Accessed August l, 2006)
University of Washington. 2005. Quartermaster Harbor - Results.
http ://courscs. washin gton. edu/uwtoce05/web g2lqmhresults. htm
(Accessed August 14, 2006).
University of Washington - Hood Canal Dissolved Oxygen Program. 2006. Hood Canal: The Dissolved
Oxygen Issue. Available online at:
http://www.hoodcanal.washineton.edu
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2004. Prioriry habitats and species list. Aquatic Habitat
Program.
http ://wdfiv. wa. govftrab/ah g/
(Accessed August l, 2006)
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife . 2005. Salmon, Marine Fish, and Shellfish Resources and
Associated Fisheries in Washington's Coastal and Inland Marine Watcrs.
File No. 12677-001-03
August 13,2006
Page 9 GeoEneneeaslQ
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2006. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Priority habitat and Species Map-Habitats and Species Map in the Vicinity of T25R02W Sections
l5 and 22.May 19,2006.
Washington Department of Natural Resources Nearshore Habitat Program. 2001. Washington State
ShoreZone Inventory.
Washington Sea Grant. 2006. Club Tunicate, Styela clava.
http://www.wss.washineton.edu/research./ecohealtVsqvelaclavafactshcet.pdf
(Accessed July 27, 2006)
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1994. Shoreline Aerial Photos.
http://apps.ecy.wa. eov/shorephotos/scripts/photoscarch.asp?id:JEF003 8
(Accessed August l, 2006)
Washington State Department of Ecology. 2003. Long-term marine water quality data.
http ://www. ecy.wa. eov/aoos/eap/marinewg/mwdataset. asp?sta I D:72
(Accessed August 2, 2006)
Washington State Department of Health. 2005. Washington State Department of Health Office of Food
Safety and Shellfish Programs. Annual Growing Area Review: Hood Canal #3.
http ://www.doh. wa. sov/ehp/sf/Pubs/eareports/O5hsod3 pdf
(Accessed August 2, 2006)
Washington State Department of Health. 2006a. Food Safety and Shellfish Programs. Growing Area
Classifi cation Program.
http ://www. doh.wa. gov/ehp/sf/ grow. htm
(Accessed August 2, 2006)
Washington State Department of Health.2006b. Recreational Shellfish Beach Closures Due to Biotoxins
or Pollution.
http ://ww4.doh.wa. gov/scripts/esrimap.dll'lname:bioview&Bidn:270287
(Accessed June 30, 2006)
Washington State Parks. 2006. Moorage Location Information. Pleasant Harbor.
http://www.parks.wa.sov/moorage/parks/mooragedetail.asp?location:Pleasant0/o20Harbor
(Accessed August 2, 2006)
File No. 12677-001-03
August 13,2006
Page I0 GeoExeneeesl/
I
I
t
I
t
t
I
I
I
l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Section 4
Section 3
Section 2
01
Section 1
+
it
Quttrrp Fclnt
&'/
Clallam
Grays Hrbor
Notes:
1. The locations of all features shown are approximale.
2. This drawing is for information purposes. lt is intended to assist in
showing features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, lnc.
can not guarantee the accuracy and content of electronic files. The master
file is stored by GeoEngineers, lnc. and will serve as the official record of
this communication.
3. lt is unlawful to copy or reproduce all or any part thereof, whether for
personal use or resale, without permission.
Vicinity Map
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Brinnon, Washington
GeoEucrNEERO Figure 1
-@"
2,000 2,0000
@srce
Feet
Data Sources: lnterstates, state routes, and roads from TIGER 2000.
County boundaries, cities, and walerbodies from Department of Ecology.
Lamberl Conftrmal Conic, Washington State Plane Norlh, Norlh Arneri€n Datum 1983
@ooN
o)c
-ijo
.9.
o)t
i
I/
I
\
)
I
I
I
I
'i
\
t
={1lt---I
JelfcBon
I
I
T
I
I
I
t
I
t
t
I
t
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
t!
,
S
I
(
I
!
+
{/
I
(#+-
/
a
)t
I
I
t
-t
1
.\
t
i
I
I I
I
,l \
fi
I
I i
,1
Isr
7
fi
?6o
!o
tF-'
)
o
ar
I
tl
2o
{
,t
t
r!tz/
"=\t
*r \
\II ,i
:
L-d d
I
I
Marine Survey Water Quality Locations
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Brinnon, Washington
GeoEncrNEERO Figure 2
"4b,
500 0 500
County boundaries, cities, and waterbodies from Department of Ecology
Aerial photograph (June 1994. 1 meter resolution) from Tenaserver
(obtained July 2006)
Site
Data Sources: lnterstates, state routes, and roads from TIGER 2000.
Notes:
1- The locations of all features shown are
Lamb€rt Conlqmd Conrc. Wbshington State Pbne North. North Arntren Datum 19E3,
Grid North
frris sido i6 rocated Soction 15 and 22
ot fowBhip 25 Nodh, Range 2 Wesl,
Jetfe/Eon County, Bdnnoo, Washington
O Water Quality Sample Location and lD
showing features discussed an an attached document. GeoEngineers. lnc.
can not guarantee the accuracy and content of electronic files, The master
lile is stored by GeoEngineers, lnc. and will sene as the oflicial record of
this communi:ation.
reproduce all or any part thereof. whether for
wilhout permission.
3. lt is unlawful to copy or
personal use or resale.
t
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Shellfish harvesting
closure due to pollution)
I
Marine biotoxin or
pollution closure
tt
r\
I rl
4
&r!
\
\
i
Harvest Advisory
,
I
,4
-
..j-8"-/
4
2
)]5 \
t
\
+-
4
..:
::
.(I'-.;.1p:
'.---:-4.{r'.='t-:-- - _-.f i*-=.---i.- : !
' ::;:::; j:.'..-1'-.il: i.: i.:- 1. :,'.'-'-"' t
- - _Q U f t t f E FOI ht
Mason
GBys Harbor
Notes:
1. The locations of all features shown are approximate.
2. This drawing is for information purposes. lt is intended to assist in
showing fealures discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers. lnc.
can not guaranteo the accuracy and content of electronic files. The master
file is stored by GeoEngineers, lnc. and will serve as the official r€cord of
this communication.
3. lt is unlawful to copy or reproduce all or any part lhereof, whether for
personal use or resale, without permission.
Oata Sources: lnterstates, state routes, and roads from TIGER 2000.
Washington State Department of Health Beach Closures as of 6i30/2006.
County boundaries, cilies. and waterbodles from Departmenl of Ecology.
Lambed Conformal Conic, Washington State Plane North. Nonh American Dalum 1983
Recreational Shellfish Beach Closures Map
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Brinnon, Washington
GeoEmcrNEERO Figure 3
I
1,320
Site
0
,.4.*,
Feet
(oooc{
l
iio
_a
o)
E.
ooF-F-(o6t
F
o
U)
o
(f)o
oof.-
f^-(oN
c!
TL
E
oo-
Io
E.o
ido
o
$
Q I)
I
I
(
\,,
)l I
I
I
/
I
I
I
)
fJ
-a \
\
\
t'-
't,320
I
I
t
t
I
1
T
I
I
T
T
t
I
I
J
I
I
I
I
GroEuc r*rr*trt
Appettotx A
Slre PuoroaRAPHs
I
I
I
I
T
t
I
I
I
I
T
I
T
I
I
I
!
I
t
I
I
APPENDIX A
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
Photograph I
Natural shoreline within Pleasant Harbor Marina
Photograph 3
Home Port Marina rip rap seawall
Photograph 2
Natural shoreline within Pleasant Harbor
Photograph 4
Washington State Park overnight moorage dock
August 13,2006
Page A-l GeoExeueeeslQFile No. 12677-001-03
\l'f
_.-
ll
*
*-
,t
.t &ar*--
+.L'
6/
1-
E=
,=I ..t*-
:
Photograph 5
Private docks located within Pleasant Harbor
Photograph 7
New boat launch under construction
Photograph 6
Public boat launch
Photograph 8
Rip rap along southern harbor cntrance
File No. I 2677-001-03
August 13,2006
Page A-2 GeoExetneeaslQ
'I
,t
E
IE
'F'ol
"*, 1l-
-r+
Photograph 9
Private rip rap seawall and groins north of Pleasant
Harbor
Photograph I I
Shellfish near Pleasant Harbor Marina
Photograph l0
Private cement seawall and rip rap groins north of
Pleasant Harbor
Photograph 12
Osprey nest located near Pleasant Harbor
File No. 12677-001-03
August 13,2006
Page A-3 GeoExeueeaslQ
"rl -;l
v ttt^.)ii];,r I
I
i
I
1
I
Photograph 13
Harbor seal observed near Pleasant Harbor Marina
File No. 12677-001-03
August 13,2006
Page A-4 GroErernsens/
-
-E
::--,rii:a.-ilr-
I
GroEruc r*rr*11Q
AppenDx B
Aennt PuotoeRAPHs
:--,--:-.--!a.r=i;lla-l:!:I:::f,.-E=ii1==E4ii;il:-=li:t-1: i:f,:t:::I:=::r;T:ffi::-ff*r*ffit:ZEEE:}:'3:EA
U
D
I
I
I
t
I
I
T
I
T
I
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
t
APPENDIX B
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS
United States Geological Survey. 1994. Aerial Photo.
http://www.terraserverusa.com/imaqe.aspx?T=1&S=10&Z=10&X=2531&Y=26393&W=3
(Accessed July 27, 2006)
File No. 12677-001-03
August 13,2006
Poge B-I
,y
,
T
GeoEneweeaslQ
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1994. Shoreline Aerial Photo.
http://a pps. ecv. wa.qov/s hore photos/scri pts/biq photo. aso? id=J E F0038
(Accessed July 27, 2006)
File No. 12677-001-03
August 13,2006
Page B-2 GeoExetxeeaslQ
tt
F fiE:a
t_r'.r.l
\?I
/
I $_-5 --
L
7 "*
._L='E-
FLt4'f
*rl*I;
i$f'r 1,.. II I
-!
r\.:
r v t
Qt -t
)
)/
T\J FiIrr
t
I
ry :r IIks,
-
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1994. Shoreline Aerial Photo
http ://apps. ecv.wa.q ov/s hotaphotodscripts/biqphotO.aSp? id=J E F0034
(Accessed July 27 ,2006).
File No. 12677-001-03
August 13,2006
Page B-3 GeoExetxe*s1Q
i{-
I
T
all.t,*,
Irl
'*
. ..,*& ..tdffiru \l
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1994. Shoreline Aerial Photo.
http ://apps. ecv.wa.qov/shoreohotos/scripts/biq photo. asp? id=J E F0035
(Accessed July 27 ,2006)
File No. 12677-001-03
August 13,2006
Page B-4 GeoExerl.eeesiQ
*-4..l1
a. ,.
Lt,.}
,.1
T
ll
U
+)---l*1
-J trl
?
;
t
I
I
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1994. Shoreline Aerial Photo.
http://apps.ecv.wa.qov/shorephotos/scripts/biq photo. asp?id=J EF0036
(Accessed July 27 ,2006)
File No. 12677-001-03
August 13,2006
Poge B-5 GeoExeneeeslQ
I l--l
./
:I Y
+:,
t..
t. r-*iJ-
L
a-^,*ra ,,
r)
T
I
i
I
E_}*
-.1r.rt*
-
l' ':t.
,J
t.
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1994. Shoreline Aerial Photo.
http://apps. ecv.wa.qov/shorephotos/scripts/biqohoto.asp?id=J EF0037
(Accessed July 27 ,2006)
File No. 12677-001-03
August 13,2006
Page 8-6 GeoEneneeaslQ
^t
!
- -,! r "fi.
..i
#.''
.f
I
t,.'r tfrsr.Irr.' f .* -*
t I #{E
*l
C
I
I
I
I V
I
,,'
EII-#
-la-.J i+Er-
I
r ^61'
fa
I
:1
t
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1994. Shoreline Aerial Photo
http://a pps. ecv.wa. qov/shoreohotos/scripts/biq photo. asp? id=J EF0039
(Accessed July 27, 2006)
File No. 12677-001-03
August 13,2006
Page B-7 GroErerneens/
I
*
n
I
:
- ,,+-P'.tw
--/
F'r -qn5tF
I
t
I
T
;
,
-
t,
f,r
I E!ry\r Y I
t
t
t
I
I
I
I
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1994. Shoreline Aerial Photo.
http://a pps. ecv. wa.qovlghqrephotos/scripts/biq photo. asp? id=JEF0040
(Accessed July 27, 2006)
File No. 12677-001-03
August 13,2006
Page B-B GeoExeneeaslQ
l:
r.i I
Hn*.
l t
?t!
L.-r-J
1
L
r*#-
I
I
I
t
t
I
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1994. Shoreline Aerial Photo.
http://apps.ecv.wa.qov/shorephotos/scri pts/biq photo. asp?id=J E F004 1
(Accessed July 27, 2006)
File No. 12677-001-03
August 13,2006
Page B-9 GeoExetxeeeslQ
]t ; - r.\' ',
'''
-5
,.
t
r
Efl
|*g,fu"_-1-'".s}
o'lhi
-",3-'l- : . -r.j
'}ll.l
L--
n 1t'l
.\
!t**lf;T
1
T
l
t
t
I
I
I
T
T
I
I
T
I
T
I
I
t
I
(o
oN
0)cl
fi
0)
,9
ot
!,x
E
ooF-F.
@N
o
o
(f)o
ooF-t-
@N
c!
(L
i
(U
0-
I
Oto
irio
o
Section 4
Section 3
Section 2
0'l
Section 1
J
/I
I
I
I
I
+
c-I
I
I
Qultrro Folnt
.f/
Clallam
Grays Hdbor
Notes:
1. The locations of all features shown are approximate.
2. This drawing is for information purposes. lt is intended to assist in
showing features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, lnc.
can not guarantee the acdrracy and content of electronic liles. The master
lile is stored by GeoEngineers, lnc. and will serve as the official record of
this communication.
3. lt is unlawful to copy or reproduce all or any part thereof, whether for
personal use or resale, without permission.
Data Sources: lnterstates, state routes, and roads from TIGER 2000.
County boundaries, cities, and waterbodies from Department of Ecology.
Lambert Conformal Conic, Washinglon State Plane Norlh, North Americn Oatum '1983
Vicinity Map
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Brinnon, Washington
GroErucrNEERO Figure 1
SITE
2,000
m -{F
0
Feet
)
I
!
L'
\
I
I .-";;---
-4J
,4'./.
,.-:/
2,000
I
I
t
I
I
T
I
I
T
I
I
T
I
T
I
I
I
T
T
\ )+.*'---..ffio
.l
I
/
I
I
4
{
t*+-
*
,.1
I
I,l
t
\!
_.t
-(
,/
i /7
6
/
o
!o r."l
I 7 r
oa
Iw
2 4
l\o
,
Jtz/
F'')
I
f
I q.
Marine Survey Water Quality Locations
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Brinnon, Washington
GeoEmcrNEERO Figure 2
3. lt is unlarvful to copy or reproduc€ all or any part thereof, whether for
personal use or resale. without permission.
Oala Sources: lntectates, state routes, and roads from TIGER 2000.
County boundaries, cities, and waterbodies ftom D€partment of Ecology.
Aerial pholograph (June 1994, 1 meler resolulion) ftom Terraserver
(obtained July 2006)
Lambql Contsmd ConE Wsshinqton State Plsne Norlh, Norlh Amencn Datum 1983.
Grid Ndh
"i-n.
0500 500Site
in an atlached document. GeoEngineers. lnc.
Notes.
l. The locations of all fealures shown are
nle is stored by GeoEngine€c.
this communi:ation.
o, Tornshie 25 tlultt, Rlrlge 2 West,
,/Etletson Co,,,,ay, Ertnnoa, Vlts,hlnglon
O Water Quality Sample Location and lD
Shellfish harvesting
closure due to pollution\
{/i
\
Marine biotoxin or
pollution closure
I
Harvest Advisory
1 \
x +tI
t
\l_t
'l
r'.
2
),ll 5 \I Frtt
\I \
)
n I
D1rt
=\+l+
{
,tR"ij.i;r.:
Jdoc6
M!soil
GEys
Notes:
1. The locations of all features shown are approximate.
2. This drawing is for information purposes. lt is intended to assist in
showing features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, lnc.
can not guarant€g lhe accuracy and contsnt of electronic liles. The master
,il€ is storod by GeoEngineers, lnc. and will serve as the oflicial rocord of
lhis communication.
3. lt is unlawful to copy or reproduce all or any pa.t lhereof, whether for
personal use or resale. without permission.
Data Sources: lnterstates, state routes. and roads from TIGER 2000.
Washinglon State Deparlment of Health Beach Closures as of 6/30/2006.
County boundaries, cilies, and waterbodies from Oepartment of Ecology.
Recreational Shellfish Beach Closures Map
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Brinnon, Washington
GeoErlcrNEE Rse
Site
1,320 '1.320
Lamben Conformal Conic. W6 Stale Plane Norlh. North Amerrcan Dalum 1983
"+
0
Feet
T
T
I
t
t
I
I
I
I
I
T
T
T
I
t
I
I
I
T
E
Nt-
F
Io
V.o
ido
o
TL
e l)
I
\\\
(
I/
-l
I
:/
l
t
t'(/
)
h
\\
)
I 11,
II
)l
1
,rr
BITT
II
a
I
(t
a \
t
Pol?tt
Skeqil
Clallam
CielIn
King
Piorco
Krtl(6
Figure 3
__l
I
I
t
I
t
I
I
I
I
T
I
SnoReuue GxeRncrentzATroN Reponr
Puesanr Hanaon Manrrularo Gotr
ResoRr
BRtttttott, WasxtNcron
Aucusr 3,2006
Fon
Srrresmlx Conponmou
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ri
ll
ri
ii,
,ltt
I
rl
tl
li
I
rt
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
l
I
I
I
. GeoENGr APPENDIX 3
File No. 1 2667-001 -0i
I
I
I
I
T
I
t
T
I
t
I
t
I
I
T
T
T
I
T
I
t
I
t
Shoreline Characterization Report
File No. 12677-001-03
August 3, 2006
Prepared for:
Statesman Corporation
7370 Sierra Morena Boulevard Southwest
Calgary, Alberta Canada T3H 4H9
Attention: Garth Mann
Prepared by:
GeoEngineers, lnc.
1550 Woodridge Drive SE
Port Orchard, Washington 98366
(360) 76e-8400
GeoEngineers, lnc.
a
Greg J.
Envi Scientist
ht, PWS
Principal
GJA:WSWjl
ORCH:\ I 2\l 2677001\03\Finals\l 2677001 03R2.doc
One copy submitted
Disclaimer: Any electronic form, facsimile or hard copy of the original document (email, text, table, and/or figure), if provided, and any
attachments are only a copy of the original document. The original document is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official
document ofrecord.
Copyright@ 2006 by GeoEngineers, Inc. All rights reserved.
T
I
t
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
T
T
I
I
I
T
I
t
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
t
I
TleLe or Gorurerurs
Paqe No.
rNTRODUCT|ON.............
PROJECT LOCATION,.....
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PROJECT SCOPE
SITE DESCRIPTION.........
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
5
5
5
6
6
7
7
7
8
METHODS
PAPER INVENTORY
FIELD RECONNAISSANCE.
CURRENT REGULATORY FRAMEWORK............
SHORELINE JURISDICTION AND JEFFERSON COUNTY REGULATIONS.
Shoreline Management Master Program
Comprehensive Plan, Zoning And Other County Regulations
OTH ER STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS...........
RESULTS
LAND USE PATTERNS.,.
Built Environment ...
Public Access
Natural Shoreline Featu res.
Forage Fish.............
Shellfish
Groundwater Seeps,...........
WATER QUALITY....
DATA GAPS.............I
I
I
9
CONCLUSION
LIMITATIONS
REFERENCES.....
Figures
Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 4.
Figure 5,
Vicinity Map
AerialPhoto
Land Use and Shoreline Designation
ShoreZone lnventory
Marine Species Map
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A _ SITE PHOTOGRAPHS ...........
APPENDIX B - AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS..................
A-1...A-4
B-1...8-4
File No. 12677-001-03
August 3, 2006
Page i GeoExcrneens/
T
T
I
I
I
I
T
I
t
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
T
I
I
I
Sxoneuxe CxlRacreREATroN RepoRr
Pueasanr HlRson Mennleruo Gour Resonr
Jerpensor Counw, WesnworoN
Fon
Sreresuax Conponanoru
INTRODUCTION
GeoEngineers, Inc (GeoEngineers) was contracted by Statesman Corporation to perform a shoreline
characterization for the proposed Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort located on Black Point in
Jefferson County south of Brinnon, Washington. GeoEngineers evaluated the potential presence of
shorelines of statewide significance on the site in general accordance with Title 18 of the Jefferson
County Code Chapter 18.25.230.
Pno.lecr Locnnoru
The proposed development is located on the Olympic Peninsula adjacent to Hood Canal in Sections 15
and 22 of Township 25 North, Range 2 West of the Willamette Meridian in Jefferson County (Figure 1).
The subject property, herein referred to as the site, consists of approximately 250 acres and is partially
developed. It is located in the Skokomish-Dosewallips Water Resource lnventory Area (WR[A 16) and is
part of the East Olympic and Hood Canal Basins.
The proposed project site is located on Black Point, which extends east approximately I mile into Hood
Canal, and the southwestern shoreline of Pleasant Harbor, a shallow cove located north of Black Point.
The peninsula consists ofhills, ravines and deep kettles shaped by glacial processes. The surface geology
consists of Vashon-age till, outwash and ice-contact sediments underlain by pre-Vashon non-glacial
stratified deposits (Subsurface Group, Inc. draft Site Geology map 2006). A portion of the project area is
currently being used as an RV Resort (Pleasant Harbor RV Resort) with developed roads, RV pads with
water and electricity and restrooms located through out the developed area of the site. A commercial
marina and store are located along the Pleasant Harbor shoreline. State Route (SR) l0l transects the site.
Pno.lecr DescRrpttott
The Statesman Corporation intends to develop a mixed-use resort development on the subject property.
However, the exact location and details of the development have not been defined at the time of this
work. Therefore, we have not evaluated potential impacts of the proposed multi-use development.
Pnorecr Scope
GeoEngineers was requested to conduct a review of the existing shoreline permitting requirements and
develop a list of the different types of permits and processes required by Jefferson County's Shoreline
Master Program regulations, Resources Lands/Critical Areas Ordinance, and Development Regulations.
A shoreline inventory and assessment of the site was requested and includes collection and review of
elements of the natural and built environment along the Hood Canal shoreline including shoreline
modifications such as bulkheads, piers and docks. This report also includes Global Positioning System
(GPS) locations of groundwater seeps on the beach slope below the bluff face and any observed
signifi cant shellfi sh resources.
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I FileNo.12677-001-03
August j, 2006
Page I GeoExeweeaslQ
Our inventory and assessment is presented in this shoreline charucteization report that includes
discussion and analysis of the data collected in the shoreline inventory. Data was collected by file review,
literature investigations and field reconnaissances. This report also includes a map portfolio that
documents the shoreline conditions of the resort property. Additional elements of this report include
regulatory conditions that affect areas within shoreline jurisdictions, cumulative impacts such as
development and gaps in existing information. Data sources that were used to address these elements
include published reports and mapped data.
Srre DescRrPTroN
The site is bordered to the south by the Hood Canal of the Puget Sound. The eastern edge of the site is
bordered by forested land and several single-family residences. The northern portion of the site is
bordered by light residential housing and most of the western edge is bordered by SR 1 0 1 . The proj ect
area is composed of four sections (Figure 2). Section l, the largest of the sections, is220.1 (*) acres,
located on the southwest portion of Black Point, east of SR 101 and south of Black Point Road. Section 2
is a narrow strip of land (7.8 * acres) that runs along the east to southeastem side of SR 101 and
immediately north of Black Point Road. Section 3 encompasses the commercial marina and associated
parking area (9.8 + acres) on the southern side of SR 101 and Section 4 is the triangular shaped 11.9 (+)
acres located to the north of Section 3 on the northern side of SR 101.
METHODS
Pepen lnverronv
GeoEngineers conducted a search for pertinent and applicable data including maps, plans, surveys, studies
and shoreline inventories. Information was obtained from the Jefferson County Shoreline Management
Master Program (SMMP) (SMMPl998), the Brinnon Comprehensive Plan (Jefferson County Department
of Community Development [JCDCD] 2005a), the Jefferson County Shoreline lnventory and Analysis
(JCDCD 2005b), Jefferson County Critical Areas Ordinances Chapter 18, the Washington Department of
Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Priority Habitat and Species maps (WDFW 2006), Washington Department
of Natural Resources (DNR) ShoreZone Inventory data (DNR 2001) and the WDFW technical reports on
shellfish resources in Puget Sound (WDFW 2005). We reviewed the l98l United States Geological
Survey (USGS) map and topographic maps. We also reviewed recent aerial photographs of the site and
shoreline to determine changes in cover and land use practices that have occurred in and around the
project area (USGS 1981, USGS 1990 and Washington Department of Ecology [Ecology] 1994).
Frelo ReconruarssANcE
GeoEngineers biologists performed a field reconnaissance to inventory land use and shoreline
modifications on April 26 and27 and June 19,2006 as part of the inventory process to spot-check and
supplement existing information. The field reconnaissance started at 10:00 AM and ended at 5:00 PM on
all days. The weather was partly cloudy to sunny all days and the temperature ranged from 60oF to 70oF.
Observations of shellfish resources, seeps and steep slopes were recorded as part of the reconnaissance
efforts. We walked the entire length of the study area recording current land use patterns and conditions
within the shoreline and riparian zone on the site. A photographic record was taken to document existing
site conditions and to supplement the narrative discussion presented in this report. Photographs
documenting onsite conditions and are located in Appendix A.
File No. 12677-001-03 Page 2 GeoExernerns/
August 3, 2006
CURRENT REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
The discussion of regulatory requirements included herein is not intended to be a complete list of all
permits or approvals necessary for work within Jefferson County's shoreline jurisdiction or other areas
within the County limits. Portions of local code and state and federal regulations, as discussed in the
Jefferson County SMMP (1998), must also be consistent with the regulations developed by the County to
implement its plans. These may include, but are not limited to, the various zoning code and regulations
relating to building construction and safety. Permits and approvals necessary for building construction
may vary from parcel to parcel regardless of shoreline jurisdiction and may also vary depending on the
type and intensity of the work proposed.
SuoReune JuRrsorcrroN AND JerreRsor,r Goururv Recuulrrous
Under the Shoreline Management Act (SMA) (Revised Code of Washington [RCW] 2006b), the
shoreline jurisdiction currently includes areas in Jefferson County that are 200 feet landward of the
Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) of waters that have been designated as "shorelines of statewide
significance" or "shorelines of the state." These designations were established in 1972 as described in
Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173-23 (WAC 2000). "Shorelines of statewide significance,"
specifically pertains to the Pacific Coast, Hood Canal and certain areas of Puget Sound. "Shorelines of
the state" are generally described as all marine waters and upland areas called "shorelands" that extend
200 feet landward from the edge of these waters.
Enacted in 1971, the SMA found in RCW 90.58 (RCW 2006b) is designed to manage and protect
shorelines of the state by regulating development in the shoreline area. The primary goals of the SMA are
to: l) balance and integrate the objectives and interests of local citizens; 2) address the full variety of
conditions of the shoreline; 3) guide planning and regulatory measures for adjacent land use; and 4)
address conditions and opportunities of specific shoreline segments by classiffing the shorelines into
"environment desi gnations."
Shoreline Management Master Program
Any project proposed to be located within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a regulated
shoreline is within the jurisdiction of the SMMP (1998). Under the SMMP, shorelines of Jefferson
County have been divided into five environment designations. Upland shoreline designations (urban,
suburban, conservancy and natural) including wetlands extends to the extreme low tide level. All bodies
of water, including shorelines of the state, are designated "aquatic." Upland and aquatic designations
intentionally overlap in the intertidal zone. Projects taking place within the intertidal zone will be
reviewed for consistency with both designations.
There are two environmental designations for shoreline along the site as shown in Figure 3. The southem
shoreline of the site is designated as "conseryancy." The remainder of the peninsula shoreline, including
Black Point and Pleasant Harbor, is designated "suburban" (Jefferson County Code [JCC] 2005b).
Conservancy shorelines are those with valuable natural, cultural or historical resources or environmental
conditions that need to be protected to ensure their continual supply is not degraded. Specific areas
included in this designation are steep slopes and eroding bluffs such as those found on out site. Low
density residential development and aquaculture activities are permitted on conservancy shorelines
provided these resources are not degraded.
File No. 1 2677-001 -03
August 3, 2006
Page 3 GeoEncrneuns/
Suburban shorelines are those where residential development permits space for livestock or woodlots
without reaching urban density. These areas are generally not linked to utilities from an urban center.
Some commercial activity, serving the immediate area, is considered an integral part of this designation.
Marinas and some commercial activities are permitted on suburban shoreline provided that sewage, water
supply and open space are adequate.
There are two common Shorelines Permits issued under the Shoreline Master Program in Jefferson
County. These are:
Shoreline Substantial Development: Under the SMA any development exceeding $5,000, or for
private docks in salt water $2,500, is considered substantial. Substantial development permits can
not be approved unless they are consistent with the SMA, SMMP and rules established by
Ecology.
Shoreline Conditional Use: Under the Shoreline Management Master Program for Jefferson
County certain shoreline uses are allowed if they are compatible with the shoreline designation.
If the proposal contains uses that are not preferred by may be permitted when specific conditions
are met a Shoreline Conditions Use Permit may be approved.
Comprehensive Plan, Zoning And Other County Regulations
The Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations map identifies Section I on site as
rural residential, I house per l0 acres as shown in Figure 3. Sections 2,3 and 4 are identified as rural
residential I house per 5 acres as shown in Figure 3. Standard setbacks for residential structures above
steep slopes such as those existing along portions ofthe shoreline are 30 feet or one foot for each foot of
bank height, whichever is greater but not to exceed 100 feet (JCC 2005a). As required by the Growth
Management Act (RCW 2006a), the Comprehensive Plan also includes the goals and policies of the
County's existing SMMP.
Orxen Srlre Aro FeoeuL REGULATToNS
A number of state and federal agencies also have jurisdiction over land or natural elements and activities
within the County's shorelines. Local development proposals most commonly higger requirements for
state or federal permits when they impact wetlands or streams; potentially affect fish and wildlife listed
under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA); result in over 5 acres of clearing and grading; or affect
the floodplain or floodway. As with local requirements, state and federal regulations may apply
throughout the County, but regulated resources are common within the County's shoreline jurisdiction.
The state and federal regulations affecting shoreline-related resources include, but are not limited to:
Endangered Species Act: The federal ESA covers the protection and recovery of federally listed
species. The ESA is jointly administered by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration Fisheries (formerly referred to as the National Marine Fisheries Service), and the
United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
Clean Water Act: The federal Clean Water Act requires states to set standards for the protection
of water quality for various parameters, and it regulates excavation and dredging in waters of the
U.S.
Hydraulic Project Approval: WDFW regulates activities that use, divert, obstruct, or change the
natural flow of the beds or banks of waters of the state and may affect fish habitat. Projects in the
shoreline jurisdiction requiring construction below the OHWM of Pleasant Harbor or Puget
a
a
a
a
File No. 12677-001-03
August 3, 2006
Page 4 GeoExenee*s1Q
a
a
a
a
a
Sound will require a Hydraulic Project Approval from WDFW. Projects creating new impervious
surface that could substantially increase stormwater runoff to waters of the state may also require
approval.
National Pollution Discharge and Elimination System (NPDES): Ecology regulates activities
that result in wastewater discharges to surface water from industrial facilities or municipal
wastewater treatment plants. NPDES permits are also required for stormwater discharges from
industrial facilities, construction sites of five or more acres, and municipal stormwater systems
that serve populations of 100,000 or more.
Sectionl0,WorkinNavigableWaters: Section l0of thefuversandHarborsActof 1899is
designed to regulate obstruction or alteration of navigable waters of the United States. Under this
authority the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers must authorize any work in, over or under navigable
waters of the state.
Coastal Zone Management Certification: Any project requiring federal licenses or permits
must be certified by Ecology as consistent with Washington's Coastal Zone Marngement
Program.
Shellfish Operation License: Many of the shellfish species harvested commercially in Puget
Sound are filter feeders, specifically oysters, mussels, geoduck and scallops. These species are
capable of concentrating harmful chemicals, bacteria, viruses or marine biotoxins. Because of
this possibility the Commercial Shellfish Licensing and Certification Program must approve
harvest sites and commercial shellfish operations.
Aquatic Farm Registration: If cultured shellfish opportunities are pursued WDFW requires the
regishation of any aquaculture operation. Quarterly production reports will be required. An
additional permit to transport live fish products within the state may also be required.
RESULTS
As part of the planning process, Ecology has recommended the evaluation of land use patterns including
the built and natural environment. Included in this report are discussions of the built environment
including shoreline modifications, public access and natural shoreline features. In addition to these
elements, Ecology recommends that the inventory element include discussions covering regulatory
conditions that affect areas within shoreline jurisdictions (in Section 2), cumulative impacts such as
channel modifications and development, and gaps in existing information.
LlNo Use ParrenNs
This element of the shoreline inventory was referenced from the Brinnon Comprehensive Plan Land Use
Designations provided by Jefferson County (JCDCD 2005a) and by the Washington State ShoreZone
Inventory (DNR 2001). Figure 4 illushates the Shorezone Inventory designations located on site. Land
use was also documented during field reconnaissance by GeoEngineers biologists performing the
shoreline inventory and characterization.
Built Environment
The Pleasant Harbor Marina is located on the north shore of Pleasant Harbor in Section 3 on site
(Appendix A - Photographs 1 and2). Pleasant Harbor marina is designated as a commercial marina and
is located in an all-weather, deep-water harbor. The marina offers a network of docks and piers and 3l I
boat slips including 12 slips that can accommodate vessels up to 150 feet in length. Another marina
FileNo.12677-001-03
August 3, 2006
Page 5 GzoEnew*as1Q
a
designated as a private marina is also located on the north shore of Pleasant Harbor to the east of Section
3. Several private docks and piers line the remaining shoreline of the harbor. A detailed discussion of
conditions existing in Pleasant Harbor is found in the report titled Pleasant Harbor Marina Impact
Analy s is (GeoEngineers 2006a).
Section I shoreline contains no structures or buildings. The shoreline is comprised of natural vegetation
with numerous mature trees, steep slopes and overhanging vegetation. An aerial photographic record of
Section I shoreline is located in Appendix B. The shoreline along Section 2 contains no buildings or
structures. However, a boat ramp borders the site to the south (Photograph 3) and a private dock borders
the site to the northeast.
Public Access
One functioning public boat launch is located to the south of Section 2 in Pleasant Harbor off site. One
other boat launch is currently being reconstructed by WDFW several hundred feet south of the
functioning boat launch. People mooring their boats at the Pleasant harbor Marina have access to the
shoreline along Section 3. During low tide events, the general public can walk along the shoreline
throughout the entire length of the shoreline of the site.
The shoreline along the southern edge of Section I can be accessed by foot or vehicle from adjacent
properties. A survey vehicle was observed driving on the beach in Section I during the field
reconnaissance on April 26, 2006. The shoreline to the east of the site is accessible from private and
public roads to the residences on the southeastern tip of Black Point called Quatsap Point. The shoreline
along Section I is undeveloped and lacks docks or piers for boat access. Boat landing on this shoreline is
inhibited by the high quantity of large rocks and shallow depths. A foot trail on site provides access from
Section I to the southem shoreline. Due to the steep slopes along this section of shoreline in Section 1,
this foot trail is the only shoreline access from the site.
Natural Shoreline Features
The southern shoreline in Section I is currently undeveloped and contains natural vegetation. Steep
bluffs roughly 150 feet tall separate the upland property from the shoreline along the eastem half of the
shoreline (Photographs 4 and 5). Nesting birds had carved several small pockets in the cliff face in
various locations (Photograph 6). Wave action at the base of the cliffs had also carved out several
shallow caves (Photograph 7). The western half of this shoreline does not contain bluffs but contains
medium slopes and natural vegetation up the OHWM of the Hood Canal. A detailed description of
vegetation found along this shoreline can be found in the report titled Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf
Resort Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment (GeoEngineers 2006b).
Shoreline in Sections 2 and 3 are located in Pleasant Harbor and are moderately developed. Section 2
contains natural vegetation; however, the width of the section that includes the shoreline is small. The
shoreline for Section 2 is bordered by a boat launch to the south and a private residence to the north.
Section 3 shoreline encompasses the Pleasant Harbor marina and associated piers and docks. The
majority of the shoreline contains natural vegetation; however, a road system associated with the marina
is located roughly 20 to 50 feet behind it. A detailed discussion of the shoreline in Pleasant Harbor is
presented in the Marina Impact Analysis report (GeoEngineers 2006a).
The beach along the southern shoreline in Section I is primarily composed of gravels and cobbles with
underlying sand. Several logs and woody debris have been washed up by the tide in the upper portions of
the beach (Photograph 8). Mature madrona (,4rbutus menziesii), westem hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla)
File No. 12677-001-03
August 3, 2006
Page 6 GeoExeneeeslQ
and Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesll) trees extend from the shore overlying the beach. The beach
along Sections 2 and 3 are primarily composed of medium-sized rocks and cobbles with underlying sand
and sediment. The banks contain steep slopes with natural vegetation overhanging the OHWM in
Pleasant Harbor.
Forage Fish
Forage fish presence has been documented along the shoreline of Black Point (WDFW 2006). The forage
fish with spawning areas located along the shoreline of the site is Pacific herring (Clupea harengus
pallasi) in Section 1 (Figure 5). Eelgrass (Zostera marina) beds, a priority habitat (WDFW 2004), are the
preferred habitat for herring spawning. Eelgrass is documented to occur continuously along the entire
shoreline of Section I according the WDFW ShoreZone Inventory (2001).
Sand lance (Ammodytes hexapterus) has documented spawning areas along the mouth of Pleasant Harbor
and surf smelt (Hypomesus pretiosus) has documented spawning areas along the shoreline at Quatsap
Point (WDFW 2005) as shown on Figure 5. Forage fish use these areas for spawning due to the substrate
size and composition. Forage fish eggs are concenhated near the high-tide line as deposited by the fish
themselves or by wave activity bringing them to the shore. Overhanging vegetation along the shoreline
(Photograph 9) provides protection for forage fish eggs from harsh temperatues caused by sunlight on
beach sand (Pentilla 2006).
Shellfish
Several species of shellfish are documented to occur in the intertidal and subtidal waters on the southern
shoreline of Section I (WDFW 2005 and 2006) as shown on Figure 5. These species include: geoduck
(Panope abrupta), Pacific oyster (Crassostrea gigas), sea cucumber (Parastichopus califurnicus),
Dungeness crab (Canger magister), spot prawn (Pandialid platyceros), pink shrimp (Pandalus jordani),
northern shrimp (Pandalis borealis), coonstripe shrimp (Pandalis danae), native littleneck clam
(Protothaca staminea), Manila littleneck clam (Tapes philippinarun), butter clam (Saxidomus giganeus),
cockle (Clinocardium nuttallii), native horse clam (Tresus rurtallii), native Pacific littleneck (Tresus
capax), and piddock (Zirfaea pilsbryi). The Olympia oyster (Ostrea lurida), a State Candidate for listing
under the ESA, is not documented to occur within the vicinity of the site. The Pacific oyster was
observed in moderate abundance along Sections 1, 2 and 3 shorelines (Photographs 10 and 11).
Groundwater Seeps
A single groundwater seep was observed along the eastern portion of Section I shoreline. During the
April site visit, water was observed actively dripping from the cliff face (Photograph l2). However, no
dripping water and a healthy presence of moss was observed during the June site visit (Photograph l3).
The GPS location of this spring is shown on Figure 5.
Several groundwater seeps were observed along the boat launch shoreline south of Section 2. This
groundwater is believed to originate from Streams A and B identified in the report titled Pleasant Harbor
Marina and Golf Resort Wetland Delineation (GeoEngineers 2006c). Streams A and B flow through
Section 2 on site and disperse into the ground off site. The seeps observed flowing from the shoreline
during the April site visits is believed to be the outlet of this subsurface flow.
File No. 12677-001-03
August j, 2006
Page 7 GaoEaenu+rslQ
Wlren Quauw
Water quality issues have historically been a problem in the Hood Canal. These issues have prompted an
in-depth examination by state and federal agencies to determine the causes of pollution and poor
dissolved oxygen levels. Water quality is an important issue in the Hood Canal due to the high presence
of listed aquatic species.
Dissolved oxygen in the Hood Canal has historically been a problem for aquatic species, causing periodic
fish kills. Hood Canal is naturally prone to developing low levels of dissolved oxygen. This is partly due
to the narrow and long configuration of the canal. This configuration inhibits water circulation through
the mouth of the canal. Another contributing factor is the high productivity of algae. Algae production is
affected by sunlight, available nutrients and stratification of seawater according to density. Stratification
inhibits mixing of deep and shallow water, thus reducing the mixing of low-oxygen waters with the air.
Nitrogen enters the canal from the ocean, rivers and atmosphere and acts as fertilizer for algae and aquatic
plants. Hood Canal algae growth is normally limited by nitrogen in summer because strong stratification
prevents upward mixing of the nutrient-rich deep waters and the naturally low nutrient level. The higher
concenhation of nitrogen in the canal means the more the algae will grow. When too much algae is
present, it causes aesthetic problems and the algae die. The decay of dead algae and other organic matter
reduces the oxygen levels in the canal (Puget Sound Action Team 2000).
Ecology maintains long-term marine water quality monitoring stations in various locations within the
Hood Canal. A core station is located approximately 8 miles to the northeast of the site 0.25 miles from
the shoreline of Kitsap County. This monitoring station records levels of dissolved nitrate and dissolved
oxygen, along with other water quality data, in the water during certain times of the year (Ecology 2003).
Data recorded in February of 2003 was compared to data recorded in August of 2003. Dissolved nitrate
levels dropped by half of their concentration from winter to summer. The top stratosphere in the water
during August contained no detectable nitrate levels. Dissolved oxygen levels dropped consistently 2
mg/l throughout all stratospheres of the water from winter to summer.
Poor water quality from pollution can cause drastic negative effects on fish and shellfish species.
Concentrated levels of pollution increase in aquatic species as they progress through the food chain. A
review of Ecology's Water Quality Assessment for Washington interactive viewer revealed no presence
of water on Washington's 200212004 Section 303(d) List for Category 5 waters of Washington State
(Ecology 2004). A Category 5 water body means that the water quality standards have been violated and
there is no pollution control plan set in place (Ecology 2005). The interactive viewer showed the
presence of two Category 1 water bodies located to the south of Black Point. A Category I water body
means that it has met test standards to be classified as clean water (Ecology 2005).
The Washington State Department of Health (DOH) places a temporary shellfish closure on the
southwestern shoreline along Section I due to marine biotoxin or pollution during the months of May
through October (DOH 2006). This closure is due to high temperatures in the water creating a condition
called vibroisis in shellfish. Vibroisis can cause illness in humans if eaten raw. Other shellfish closures
located along the southwestern edge of Section I is prompted by contamination from seals near the mouth
of the Duckabush River (Jefferson County Department of Public Works 2005). A detailed analysis of
Pleasant Harbor water quality can be found in the Marina Impact Analysis report (GeoEngineers 2006a).
FileNo.12677-001-03
August 3, 2006
Page I GeoExeweeeslQ
DATA GAPS
'l'he lesearch and lleld invesli_sation contlucted in support of this project revealed several areas that could
be considered data gaps. Data gaps are areas of anal.v-sis related to this report that such infonnation has
not becn recorded or published. Such areas include:
r\4apped shoreline rnoditications. such as docks. bulkheads or sear,',alls:
Recent high quality aerial photos; and
Rccent s'ater quality data lbr Pleasant Harbor and Hood Canal.
'l-hese data gaps. rvill require project level analysis at the time of the proposed project if they appear to
elTect developrnc-nt activitics.
CONCLUSION
The shoreline associatecl rr,ith the proposed developmenl site contains three environmental designations
alloi,r,ing varying Ietels ol developrnent. Residential development regulations require a bull'er betrveen a
30-lbot rnr'nirnurr or 1O0-lbot maxirnum setback fi-om steep slopes such as tllose along the Section I
shoreline. A varietl, ol' slate and federal pennits may be required for differenl aspects of the proposed
developnrent
The rnajority of the sile shoreline contains natural vegetation u,ith the exception of the Pleasant Harbor
Marina. Irorage lish species are documented lo be present rvithin the vicinity of the site and may utilize
the shoreline for sparvning. Oysters and other invertebrate species are also docurnented to be present in
the vicinity of the site along the shoreline of Section l.
Data gaps t.lrat s'ould bc valuable to fill for plarrning future development of the area include: mapped
:;horeline rnodilications. high quality aerial photos and u,ater quality informalion for Pleasarrt Harbor and
Hood Canal.
LIMITATIONS
CeoEngineer-s has perlbrmed this Shoreline Characterization of the proposed developrnent al Pleasant
I-larbor. Washington irr general accordance with the scope and limitations of our proposal. Within the
limitations of scope. schedule and budget, our services have been executed in accordance rvith the
gelrerall.v accepted plactices Ibr Shoreline Characterizalion in this area at the tirne this report rvas
prepared- No u'arrantv ol otherconditions. express or implied, should be understood,
I'his report has becrr prcpared tbr the exclusive use of Statesrnan Corporation, their authorized agents and
regulatory asencie.s lbllorving the described methods and infonnation available at the time of the work.
l\o other part-v nray rely on the product of our services unless rve agree in advance to such reliance in
-writing. The inlbnnation c<lntair:ed herein should not be applied tbr any purpose or ploject excepl tlre one
ori-tina lly contenrpl aled.
REFERENCES
(Jeol-.nginecr-s. Irrc. 2006a 1'leasant Ilarbor lvlarina hnpact Analysis.
a
a
a
l:il( .\o I :lra;-tlttl-tl.:
lil!t.\t j. :tl(t('
Prye 9 GtoEnew**s1!
GeoEngineers, Inc. 2006b. Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort Fish and Wildlil-e Habitat
Assessnrent.
GeoEn-qineers. Inc. 2006c. Pleasant Harbor Marina arrd Golf Resort Wetland Delineation.
Jefferson County Code. 2005a. Chapter 18.25.410. Residential Developrnenl.
Jefferson County Code 2005b- Clrapter 18.25.700, Common description of environment designations
Jefferson County Department of Community Development. 2005a. Brinnon Comprehensive Plan-
Jefl'erson Counry Departrnent of Cornmunity Development. 2005b. Shoteline lVlaster Pro-p.ram Update:
Shorelilre lnventorry and Analvsis.
Jellerson County Departrnent of Publis Works. 2005: Surface Water Management Plan.
http://www.cojefferson.wa.us/publicrvorks/Surfaceo/o20Water/Chapter%202%2OExistineo/o2OCo
11drtrpni.pdf
(Accessed August 2, 2006)
.lell'erson County Shoreline Management ivlaster Progranr. 1998. Shoreljne Management Nlaster
Program fbr Jefferson County and Port Tou,nsend. Washington.
Pentilla, D. E. 2006. Personal comnrunication: Course on identificalion of forage fish sparvn in intertidal
shore regions.
Puget Sound Action Team- 2000. Frequently asked questions about Hood Canal dissolved oxygen
problerns.
http:i /w\\'w. psat -wa. sov/Programsihood canal/hc faq.hlID
(Accessed July I8, 2006)
I{evised Code of Wa.shington. 2006a. Chapter 36.70A- Grol,r,th Management Act.
Revised Code of Washington. 2006b. Chapter 90.58, Water Rights - Envirorurent: Shoreline
Management Act of 197 I .
United States Geological Sun ey. 198 I . Brinnon, Washington; l:24000. 7.5-minute quadrangle.
United States Geological Sun'ey. 1990. Aerial photograph. Available online at: <
h{tp:l/rvu,u,.terraservemsa.corn/image.aspx?T= l &S:1 I &Z:10&X:1265&Y:13 I 92&W:3
(Accessed August I, 2006)
Washington Adrninistrative Code. 2000. Title 173 Chapter 26, State Ivlaster Program
ApprovallArnendment Procedures and Shoreline Master Program Guidelines
Washington Departrnenl of Fish and Wildlife. 2004. Priority habitats and species list. Aquatic Flabitat
Pro-qram.
h t tp.ritydlU.wilgov/habi ah g/
(Accessed August l. 2006)
Wa.shinston Departrnerrt of Fish and Wildlife. 2005. Salnton, Marine Fish. and Shellfish Iiesour-ces and
Associated Fisheries in Washins.ton's Coastal and Inland lvlatine Waters.
l'ilt .\'o. I lhj7.l)ttl-tt-l
..lrrgrtst -i. )()tl/'
Puge l0 GroEnewztnsiQ
Washington Deparhnent of Fish and \Vildlife.2006. Washington Departmenl of Fish and Wildlife
Priority habitat and Species Map-Habrtats and Specics Ivtap in tlre Vicinity of T25R02W Seclions
l5 and 22.May 19,2006.
Washington Department of Natural Resources Nearshore llabitat Program. 2001 . Washington State
Sl.roreZone Inventory.
Washington State Deparlment of Ecology. 1994. Shoreline Aerial Photos.
huplapps-es$va.go{ch-orephotqils-cilltpbslsssar-ch-asp-?-r{-JEfq0-21
(Accessed August l, 2006).
Washington State Department of Ecology. 2003. Long-term marine .,r/ater qualiLv data.
bttpJ&ryssy-.rry4cqV-appslg-ap/-tramle]-vg&n\rdalqsE-?sp}!qlD--72
(Accessed August 2, 2006)
Washington State Departrnenl of Ecology.20O4. Water Quality Assessment for Washington viewer,
303(d) and 305(b) Reporl.
Irttp ://apps.ecy.rva. sov/u'qaq'a/vieu'er.htm
(Accessed August 1, 2006)
Washington State Departrrent of Ecology. 2005. Washington State Water Quality Assessment. 303(d)
and 305(b) Report.
htlp://u,rvw.ecy.wa - gory'programs/rvgi 3 03 d/2002/2002- index -htm I
(Accessed August l, 2006)
Washington State Department of Health.2006. Recreational Shellfish Beach Closures Due to Biotoxins
or Pollution.
lflpllww4. do!],rv_q"ggyls_g1ip!g!sli m ap. d l l ?namrbi ov i ew &Bid D=- 27-0287
(Accessed June 30, 2006).
I i lr .\'o. I )67 7 -t)l) I. t)l
.lugust 3. 2l)l)6
Pay ll GzoExetnernslQ
T
T
!
t
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
T
T
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
t
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
Section 4
Section 3
Section 2
01
Section 1
I
I
I
I
\
)
\
+i.-,..|
o
Quttrrp Folnt<-L--
Notes:
1. The locations of all features shown are approximate.
2. This drawing is for information purposes. lt is intended to assist in
showing features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, lnc.
can not guarantee the accuracy and content of electronic liles. The master
lile is stored by GeoEngineers, lnc. and will serve as the ofiicial record of
this communication.
3. lt is unlawful to copy or reproduce all or any part thereof, whether for
personal use or resale, without permission.
Vicinity Map
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Brinnon, Washington
GroEruarNEERO Figure 1
SITE
2,000
@
2,0000
-@"
Feet
Data Sources: lnterstates, state routes, and roads from TIGER 2000.
County boundaries, cities, and waterbodies from Department of Ecology.
Lamberl Confqmal Conic. Washington State Plane North, North Ameri€n Oatum 1983
@
oN
)
5
I
I
I
I
_4r
-lg/
/
Clallam
<t)
o
(f)o
ooFF(l)N
N
0-
i
o0-
Iotro
ido
o
Grays Hebor
Notes:
1. The locations of all features shown are approximate.
2. This drawing is for information purposes. lt is intended to assist in
showing features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, lnc.
can not guarantee the acorracy and content of electronic files. The master
file is stored by GeoEngineers, lnc. and will serve as the ofiicial record of
this communication.
3. lt is unlawful to copy or reproduce all or any part thereof, whether for
personal use or resale, without permission.
Data Sources: lnterstiates, state routes, and roads from TIGER 2000.
County boundaries, cities, and waterbodies from Department of Ecology.
Lambert Conformal Conic, Washington Stale Plane North, North Ameri€n Oatum 1983
Aerial Photo
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Brinnon, Washington
GroEruoNEERe Figure 2
-I
SITE
1,000 1,000
",{b'
0
Feet
{*I
.oh,a I a
-l Ekr.-?
I
I
f
,t I \,I
l
h,I
l!
*t'-'"trt*'
!o
--
I
,_f
tt
a
!
a .J
ItJ,IltI a
{
I t
III
I
!
I
d ,i
\I I
-I T\t
a a
)ffi TI
a Itaa
a
h
t
T
t
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
t
T
I
T
T
t
I
I
t
I
1
\
I,fi
t
IIII'\-j/
D
-'a t \
)
(
/
5 I
l,
lr'
Clallam
Jefle6on
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(oooN
c{o
E
o)
.9,
o)t
.E,
x
Eooloc
ooF.F-@N
oc
o)
(E
oo
@
o
(.)o
ooF.F-(o
N
N
(L
i
(I,&
=oto
ino
o
Puget Sound/Paclflc Ocean
Not€s:
1 . The locations of all fsatures shown ar6 approximate.
2. This drawing is for information purposos. lt is intendod to assist in
showing features disilssed in an attached document. G€oEnginoors, lnc.
can not guarantee the accuracy and contant of slecbonic files. The master
file is stored by GeoEnginoers, lnc. and will serve as the official remrd of
this communication.
3. lt is unlawful to copy or reproduce all or any part thereof, wh6ther for
personal uss or resale, without pemission.
Oata Sourc6s: lnterstates, stat6 routos, and roads from TIGER 2000.
County boundaries, cities and waterbodies from
Department of Ecology.
Shorezone inventory from Departmsnt of Nahrral Resources (updated 2001).
Land use dosignations digitized from Jefferson County Compr6hensive Plan
Land Use Designation map dated Dscsmber 1 3, 2003.
Lambed ConfomalCmic, Washingtff State Plan6 Ntrth, Norlh Amerien Datum tg€lii
Land Use and Shoreline Designation
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Brinnon, Washington
GroEr.rc NEERO Figure 3
Shoreline Designation
1,200 1.200
!sit"
r/
Feet
Legend
Land Use Designation
Rural Residential RR 1:5
-
Natural
Rural Residential RR 1:10
-
Conservancy
Rural Residential RR 1:20
-
Suburban
Section 4
Section 2 Section 3
Section 1
I
l-l Not zoneo
oot-F-(o
N
(!
o)
(o
o(-)
Looo
oof.-F.@N
N
(L
E
(!(L
-oto
ido
o
)
!o t
a Section 3
II
t t \
Puget Sound/Pacttlc Ocean
Notes:
1. The locations of all foaturss shown arB approximate.
2. This drawing is for information purposes. lt is intended lo assist in
shtring features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, lnc.
can not guarantee ths accuracy and content of electronic liles. The master
fila is stor€d by GooEnginsers, lnc. and will ssrvs as lhe official record of
lhis communication.
3. lt is unlawful to copy or reproduce all or any part thereol whether for
personal us6 or rosalo, without psrmission.
Data Sourcos: lnterstiatos, stale routBs, and roads from TIGER 2000.
County boundaries, cities and waterbodies
from Deparlment of Ecology.
Shorozons inventory from Departmont of Natural Resourc€s (updated 2001 ).
Lambert Confomal Cmic, Washingtm State Plane Ntrlh, North Ameri€n Datum 198i)
ShoreZone lnventory
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Brinnon, Washington
GeoENGTN EERQ Figure 4
1,200MOr. VENESOWRTYNG LOW TNCUNEO CUFF 1VENEA OF $ND. PEABE. COSLE OVERLYTNG BEDR@K)
12rwncuuo erFr. R&P(BEm@x)
STEEP CIIFF OF rcO€RATE HAdT (BEOROCK)
H 1,200
Feet
ftsnu
-
Sh@Zon6 Ortside Study AGa
trgond
Shorczoro lnwntdy
fue rrce 6ms dnLyrevilEa oF pEaSE ow&ync $E)
?*nrnalrrreRoF P@E ryE&YrNG wo)
lpue rrcegercRoF 'BEE.coaou ffiRlyrNo so)
2g* r*a (*"ER oF psE. c6au ffiroyrNG ilo! wur (wooo. Rrpw)
I
I
I
I
t
I
t
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
t
T
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(oooN
l-
-^?a
"v{)1
,t4
-.qt.r$
q+
ft{ Iradtcr
Lot*d
*l
&-,-!,rupllgt no
0
'tn
Sectron 3 w Ln
2
e",.[e9\6{
Jefferson County
I
Kitsap County
Noles:
1- The locations of all features shown are apprcximate.
2. This drawing is for informalion purposes. lt is intended to assist in
showing features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers. lnc.
can not guarantee the accuracy and content of eleclronic files. The master
lile is stored by GeoEngineec. lnc. and will sene as the offcial record o,
this communi:ation.
3. lt is unlawful to copy or reproduce all or any part thereof. whether for
personal use or resale. without permission.
Dala Sources: Praority Habatat Species dala digitized from maps
provided by l hshington Deparlment of Fish and wlldlifs. U.S.
topographic map from National Geographic Society (obtained June 2006).
Lambert Confqmal Conrc, Vvsshinglon State Plane North. Norlh tunen€n Dstum l9E3
Marine Species Map
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Brinnon, Washington
GroEruc NEERO Figure 5
KXI Harosnell lntertidal Ctan VA Northem Abolone
2,0000 *t#,
Feet
Pandalid Shrimp
Dungeness Crab
2,000
Pacific Oyster
Hardshell Subtidal Clam
Herring Spawning Area
O seep
, ., ',., Sand Lance SpawningArea
-
Surf Smelt SpawningArea
-
Steep Slope
@sne
F.N
N
(L
Io
E.o
irio
o
\JL
tlloit,,_-_:_:oqD_
)
\
T a
I,
-r
t
t
I
Ilitttt
Ll
I
Ll
IE{
L
I
, !i:tr' -
(a
/
i'
.,a
t-J,
T
T
I
!
I
I
T
I
I
I
T
I
I
t
I
I
T
I
T
GroEr,rc wrr*:t1fi
AppettDtx A
Srre PuotoaRAPHs
T
I
t
I
I
t
T
I
I
T
T
I
I
I
I
t
T
T
t
APPENDIX A
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
Photograph I
Pleasant Harbor and Pleasant Harbor Marina looking northeast from public boat launch
\
\'r
'.tJ
i
File No. 12677-001-03
August 3, 2006
Page A-l GeoEnsneenslQ
d fl v\
E,T.lbl hr I &tlr ^tY^-{d
+
I
ilt
.tsr&t
4
Photograph 2
Pleasant Harbor Marina with private dock in foreground.
Photograph 3
Subject Property Section 2 shoreline
Photograph 5
Bluffs on Subject Property Section I shoreline.
-
Photograph 4
Bluffs on Subject Property Section I shoreline.
File No. 12677-001-03
August 3, 2006
Page A-2 GeoEneixeeeslQ
it
T,
lr-;7
I
I
,'
v
:rl. 1- ,
\r
Photograph 6
Nesting bird cavities in bluffs on Section I shoreline.
Photograph 7
Wave-carved caves in Section I shoreline.
Photograph 9
Ovcrlying vegetation on Section I shorelinc.
*' 3e
Photograph 8
Woody debris on beach of Section I shoreline.
File No. 12677-001-03
August 3, 2006
Page A-3 GeoEnewezaslQ
t ii,-, ,
!E nt
'=-E
{
i':r-
..aatfF
I
--
Photograph 10
Section I shoreline at low tide.
Photograph 12
Groundwater seep on cliff face in April 2006.
Photograph ll
Oyster beds on Section I shoreline.
Photograph 13
Same seep photographed in June 2006.
File No. 12677-001-03
August 3, 2006
Page A-4 GeoExeweeaslQ
.-a --
-----d
EE
i T
a
't
GEoEnra wrery-1fi
AppettDtx B
Aennt PuoroaRAPHs
D
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
t
I
T
I
I
I
t
1
t
t
I
t
APPENDIX B
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA ANALYSIS IMPACT REPORT
United States Geological Survey. 1994. Aerial Photo.
(Accessed August 1, 2006)
File No. 12677-001-03
August j, 2006
Poge B-I GeoEnstxezeslQ
t
n
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1994. Shoreline Aerial Photo
http://a pos. ecv.wa.qov/shorephotos/scriots/bio ohoto. aso?id=J E F0022
(Accessed August 1, 2006)
File No. I 2677-001-03
August 3. 2006
Page B-2 GeoEneweeeliQ
Q{
r+*
7'1,
I
\.
fl't-..
-rr't,
f
t - a'al' e -'aaqr
i.-ftT -GE
{r
a I
I
7.
IJ
--
t
\
r
I
t
File No. 12677-001-03
August 3, 2006
Page B-3 GeoEnsn.eeaslQ
U
{1nt*,#r
{tl\u
I
'a \-?
t
:ft
lh.,^
,t',t,I
4'
t'',fr
'' I iL"
r'|
r-f
c . ,__rlra,.!;
I
||tf .rl
t
I
,
t L. -
ETffi ail,
r{
-F
E
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1994. Shoreline Aerial Photo.
http://a pos. ecv. wa.qov/shorephotos/scri pts/biq photo. asp?id=J E F0023
(Accessed August 1, 2006)
I
I
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1994. Shoreline Aerial Photo
http://a pos. ecv.wa.q ov/shoreohotos/scri pts/biq photo. asp? id=J E F0024
(Accessed August 1, 2006)
File No. 1 2677-00 1 -03
August 3, 2006
Poge B-4 GeoExeneeeslQ
r tlr r i I
t'
ra
r
:af i .,
itEffi
n
I
SUBSURFACE GROUP LLC
630 6h Street Soulh
Kirkland, WA 98033
r et @25\ B2g7 545 F ax (425) B2B-7 548
August 10,2007
Subject: Soils and Geology
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort EIS
Jefferson County, Washington
Subsurface Group, LLC Project *(SG0601
Dear Dr. Mann:
This letter presents the results of our evaluation of soils and geology for the Pleasanl Harbor Marina and
Golf Resort in Jefferson County, Washington, This report supersedes our previous report dated July 21,
2006 and incorporates the 2 additional alternatives: The Brinnon Sub-Area Plan; and the Hybrid Plan
which includes the Tudor and Jupiter properties.
This report addresses soils and geology as it pertains to the project and includes a description of the
geologic and soil baseline conditions at the site and the potential environmental impacts of these
conditions during construction of the project.
We trust that this information suits your current needs. lf you have any questions or need additional
information, please contact us,
Sincerely,
Subsurface Group, LLCil**
Vincent J. Perrone, Ph.D., P.E.
Geotechnical Engineering Consultant
frut A..^HJ A.
David A. Yonemitsu, L.E.G.
Consulting Engineering Geologist
ElSSoils Geologl0Sl 007(Final).doc
APPENDIX 4
Project No.SG0607
Dr. Garth Mann
The Statesman Corporation
7370 Sierra Morena Blvd. S.W.
Calgary, Alberta T3H 4Hg
Canada
I
t /r"r*fu-
I
t
T
I
I
I
I
t
I
T
I
t
I
t
I
t
t
I
I
Ihe Slatesman Corporation
August 10,2007
Page 2 of 17
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA A,ND GOLF RESORT
ENWRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT- SO'LSA ND GEOLOGY
1 SOILS AND GEOLOGY
This chapter addresses the existing soils and geology and evaluates potential impacts associated with
conslruction of the proposed project.
1.1 Methodology
Existing site geology and soil information was obtained from published data, performing site
reconnaissance and geologic mapping, excavating 66 exploratory test pits and drilling 3 deep
geotechnical borings to depths of 160 ft to 175 feet.
Publications are listed in the "References" section and generally include the following information:
. State of Washington Department of Ecology (1979, 1981) reports on geology and water
resources and coastal conditions;
. U.S. Department of Agriculture (NlcCreary, 1975) soil survey and;
. Jefferson County Master Plan (1978) description of geologic conditions in eastern Jefferson
County.
As part of this investigation two University of Washington research professors D.B. Booth and K. Goetz-
Troost, experts in Pleistocene glacial geology and morphology, were invited to the project site for a field
visit and to obtain their opinions on glacial units and depositional environments of the project area.
1.2 ExistingConditions
1.2.1 Topography
1 .2.1.1 Golf Course and Resort Area
The Golf Course and Resort Area is approximately 22A acres and is currently operating as a
campground. The south property line borders Hood Canal for approximalely lz mile. The site
topography rises up from Hood Canal to the upland area at about elevation 200 to 300 ft. (elevation
datum is NAVD88). The upland area consists of hummocky terrain which was sculpted by glacial
processes, and includes a series of kettle depressions that are about'120 feet deep. The slopes along
Hood Canal consist of near vertical 100 ft high bluffs along the easterly /, of lhe property line. The
westerly shoreline slopes are inclined at about 1H:1V to 1 .5H:1V
Some minor site grading has occurred to create level campsites and roadways. A gravel borrow pit was
located east of the large kettle and in the fenced storage area near the campground entrance. Portions
of the site were previously logged including the large kettle. The site is vegetated with Douglas fir,
spruce, alder and cedar, madrona, alder and maple trees with an under story of salal, ferns and
blackberries. There are no streams in the Golf Course and Resort Area.
1.2.1.2 Marina and Maritime Villaqe Area
The Marina and Maritime Village area consists of about 16 acres located between SR-101 and Pleasant
Harbor Bay. The Maritime Village comprises the southerly 7 acres which is undeveloped excepl for a
real estate office building. The site generally slopes down to the east at about 2H:1Y to 3H:1V.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
il
i
T
I
I
I
Ihe Sfatesm an Corporation
August 10, 2007
Page 3 of 17
The northerly 9 acres comprises the Marina which includes an existing marina with a small retail shop,
maintenance and storage buildings, and parking areas. The existing topography generally slopes down
from SR-101 at about 3H:1V. There are mid-slope benches that were cut into the existing hillside above
the marina for access roads and parking.
Most of the site is vegetated by Douglas fir trees with a thick under story of salal and ferns. Five
intermittent streams flow through the site and discharge into Pleasant Harbor.
1.2.1.3 Tudor and Jupiter Propertv Area
The Tudor and Jupiter properties comprise about 25 acres located west of SR 101 at the intersection of
Black Point Rd. The Tudor property is cunently undeveloped whereas the Jupiter property has an
existing automotive center building.
The Tudor property generally slopes down to the east at about 3H:1V to 4H:1V. An east-west ravine with
an intermittenl stream occupies the northern portion of the property. The site is forested with Douglas fir
lrees and a thick under story of salal and ferns.
The Jupiter site is relatively flat-lying to gently sloping down to the east. The auto center occupies the
south % of the property, which has been cleared of vegetation. The remaining undeveloped portions of
the property is vegetated with Douglas fir trees and an under story of salal and ferns.
1.2.2 Regional Geologic Setlrng
The project site lies on the boundary of the Physiographic province of the Olympic Mountains and the
Puget Sound Lowland which has a complex history of orogeny (mountain building), volcanism, faulting,
erosion, deposition of sedimentary rocks, and several periods of glaciations. Bedrock was mapped by
others (Tabor and Cady, '1978) and during our field reconnaissance of the shoreline from the southern
shore of Pleasant Harbor Marina to about 750 feet south of Black Point. Bedrock consisted of Crescenl
formation basalt: slightly weathered fine grained, hard, slightly weathered. Generally the basalt is not
friable (sound bedrock) with widely to very widely-spaced fractures.
During the Pleistocene (10,000 to 200,000 years ago), continental glaciation advanced in the Puget
Sound Lowland and the Olympic Mountains at least four times. The Fraser Glaciation, especially the
Vashon Stade (last glacial advance about 13,000 to 19,000 years ago) has modifled the project area to
its present topography. As the glacial ice known as the Puget Lobe advanced in to the project area
meltwater streams began depositing advance outwash deposits of silt, sand, gravel and cobbles over
ancestral topography.
Portions of the Puget lobe blocked the drainages of the outwash meltwater streams producing ice
dammed impoundments such as glacial Lake Leland. ln the relatively quiet waters of the glacial lake,
glacio-lacustrine deposits of sandy silts, silts, and clays were deposited at the bottom the glacial Lake
Leland. As the Puget Lobe advanced into project area glacio-lacustrine and outwash deposits were
overrun by the advancing ice and a homogeneous mixture of silts, sands, gravel, cobbles and boulders
known as Vashon glacial till was deposited in and under the advancing glacial ice.
As the glacial ice retreated the project site experienced active ice margin deposition and later area ice
stagnation. Deposits of ice contact stratified drift were deposited along the margins of the Vashon Stade
glacial ice. As the glacipl ice retreated large blocks of glacial ice were left in place (stagnant ice) and
Glacial Lake Leland began draining and releasing large volumes of water that flowed through the area
and eroded the Vashon Stade glacial deposits creating kame terraces and eskers consisting of coarsely
bedded sands, gravelly sand, sandy gravel recessional outwash. The large stagnant blocks of ice
eventually melted and produced deep localized depressions known as kettles.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
i
I
il
l
Ihe Statesm an Corporation
August 10, 2007
Page 4 of 17
1.2.3 Faulting
Recent studies completed in the Puget Sound Lowland have identified several faults that have been
active during the Holocene Period (present day) and lithological and/or tectonic lineaments. Most notably
are the Seattle Fault Zone, Hood Canal FaulVlineament, and Coastal Boundary FaulUlineament. These
structural features lie within 15 miles of the project site. The locations of these structures are presented
on Figure 1.
The western terminus of the Seattle Fault lies about 9 to 12 miles east of the project site. Recent studies
have concluded that movement along this fault has occurred 1,100 years before present and that a
seismic event along this fault may be as high as a Magnitude 7 event (Hamilton, 2006).
The closest faulUlineament is the Hoods Canal Fault, this lies within a few kilometers west of the site.
Recent studies completed at the Lake Cushman Project have termed the Hoods Canal Fault as a non
existent source of seismic activity (Hamilton, 2006).
The Coastal Boundary FaulU lineament lies to west of the site and is considered to be suture zone thrust
fault that was active during the middle Miocene and is a lithologic boundary of the older Crescent
Formation basalts and the younger sedimentary rocks that form the Peripheral Rocks of the Olympic
Mountains. At the present time no seismicity studies indicate the generation of an earthquake along this
structure.
1.2.4 Site Geology
The project sites are comprised of predominantly Vashon Age glacial soils that are predominantly dense
to very dense sand and gravel with varying amounts of silt and some cobbles. Older Pre-Vashon non-
glacial deposits consisting of dense to very dense fluvial sands and hard lacustrine silts and clays were
observed in test boring B-2 and exposed in the bluffs along Hood Canal. Bedrock outcrops were not
present on the 3 project site areas or within the depth of the exploratory test pits and borings performed
for this project.
Human activity has altered the landscape for construction of roads and other improvements. Landslide
slumps have been identified along the coastal bluffs along southwestern portion of the property and in
the extreme southeastern corner of the property. Small debris flows have occurred along the shoreline
bluff in the southwest and southeast portion of the property. At the time of our site investigation landslide
features and debris flows were not observed on the kettle slopes or on the steeper slopes of property.
Figures 2 and 3 illustrate the surflcial geologic conditions at the site along with the locations of borings,
test pits, and outcrop exposures. A detailed site reconnaissance was not performed on the Tudor and
Jupiter properties. Therefore, the interpreted geology shown on Figure 3 should be considered
approximate. Descriptions of the geologic deposits are presented in the following sections from youngest
to oldest.
1.2.4.1 Holocene Deposits
Fiil
Fill soil was generally found under existing roads, graded campsites and along the margins of existing
buildings. Fill was comprised of re-worked native soils consisting of loose to medium dense, silty gravelly
sand with trace organics to ten percent organics. Fill in the project area may range in thickness from a
few feet to 10 feet along the edges of roadways and campsites. Fill was not shown on the geologic map
because of the limited extent and variable thickness.
Colluvium (Qmw)
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
The State sman Corporation
August 10,2007
Page 5 of 17
Colluvium is soil that was transported downslope by gravity and erosion and were found near the base of
the steeper slopes along Hood Canal. These soils consisted of loose to medium dense mixtures of silt,
sand, gravel, cobbles and boulders. The thickness of this deposit could vary from a foot to ten feet in
thickness. Colluvium was not shown on published geologic maps because of their wide distribution and
their limited extent along the shoreline.
Beach Deposlts (Qb)
Beach deposits were locally found along the inter-tidal zone between the coastal bluffs and Hood Canal.
These soils consisted of loose to medium dense, silt, sand fine to coarse gravel, cobbles and boulders to
severalfeet in diameter with trace amounts of wood debris, shells and organics.
Land slide Deposrts (Q/s)
Landslide deposits have accumulated near the base to the crest of the coastal bluffs bordering Hood
Canal. The deposits consisted of loose to stiff glacial diamict composed of broken to internally coherent
surficial deposits derived from fine and coarse grained glacial outwash, glacial till, and, colluvium that
were transported down slope.
1.2.4.2 Vashon Glacial Deoosits
Recesslona/ Outwash (Qvro)
This deposit consists of a loose to medium dense stratified sand, gravelly sand, and sand and gravel with
scattered boulders.
lce Contact Depostts (Qvl
lce contact deposits have been subdivided based on soil gradation characteristics into three separate
sub-units: glacial till, glacial outwash, and glacio-lacustrine,
Glacial Till (Qvit)
The ice contact glacial till consists of a dense to very dense homogenous mixture of silt sand,
gravel, and cobbles. The glacial till in the kettle features can grade to sandy gravel and gravelly
sand with trace amounts of silt. The thickness of this unit can vary from a few feet to tens of feet.
GlacialOutwash (Qvio)
The ice contact outwash deposit consists of dense well bedded sand, gravelly sand, and sandy
gravel, The deposit is usually interbedded with thin diamict layers and irregular lenses of fine-
grained lacustrine deposits.
Glacio-Lacustrine (Qvil)
The ice contact glacio--lacustrine deposit consists of a medium dense to stiff silt to sandy silt
slightly laminated to massive. This deposit is occurs in the more granular sub-units as thin
discontinuous lenses and laminations.
Vashon Till (Qvt, Qvtl)
Two distinct glacial till sub-units were observed in the project areas: a subglacial till or basal till
(Qvt) and a sub-unit subglacial lodgment till (Qvtl). The basal till consists of a very dense,
homogenous mixture of silt, sand, subrounded gravel, and cobbles. The thickness observed
was estimated to be about15 to 25 feet. The lodgment till consists of a very dense,
homogenous, matrix supported gravelly, sandy silt with subrounded cobbles to boulders to 3-
foot diameter. The deposit is stratified with sand, gravelly sand, and gravel lenses and/or layers.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
The Statesman Corporation
August 10,2007
Page 6 of 17
Vashon Advance Outwash (Qva)
The advance outwash deposit consists of a dense to very dense well bedded sands, with thin layers of
gravelly sands, and sandy gravel.
1.2.4.3 Pre Vashon Deposits (Qu)
Pre-Vashon non-glacial deposits underlie the Vashon age glacial deposits along the south-central and
southeastern portion of the beach bluff. The nonglacial deposits are composed of a very dense stratified
deposit fine to coarse sand interbedded with gravelly sand. lt contains occasional 6-inch clayey silt beds.
1.2.5 Surficial Sol/s
The Natural Resources Conservation Service (McCreary and Raver, 1975) has mapped Grove Series,
Hoodsport Series, Coastal Beach and Rough Terrain soils on the project site. A description of these
soils is summarized in Table 1.
Table 1 - Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Descriptions
Soil Series Textural Glassifi cationNRCS
Symbol
Terrain
Slopes
USCS
Symbols
Coastal Beaches Co Sands and gravels
Grove
None SP, GP Beach deposits,
Qb
Vashon glacial
recessional
outwash, Qvr
Vashon glacial till
(Avt)
Hoodsport
GoC
GoE
HoC
HoD
HrD
Very gravelly loamy sand
Very gravelly loamy sand
Very gravelly sandy loam
Very gravelly sandy loam
Very gravelly sandy loam
0 to 15%
30 to 50%
0 to 15%
15 to 30%
0 to 30%
SP-SM, SM
SP-SM, SM
GP-GM,
GM, SP-SM,
SM
Rough Broken
Land
Ro None
Vashon glacial till
(Qvt) and Vashon
glacial advance
outwash (Qva)
Pre-Vashon (Qu)
The site soils include the Grove Series, Hoodsport Series, Coastal Beaches (Co), and Rough Broken
Land (Ro):
Grove Series. Somewhat excessively drained and well-drained very gravelly soils. The parent
soils are glacial outwash deposits.
Hoodsport Series. Moderately to well drained soils that have a very low permeability cemented
layer at a depth of 20 to 36 inches. These soils formed from glacial till deposits.
Coastal Beaches. Sandy gravelly sloping beaches in long narrow strips.
Rouqh Broken Land. Marine bluffs that have slopes greater than 50%.
The distribution of these soils is shown on Figures 4 and 5.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Pro,ject No. SG0607
Parent Geologic
Formation
Ihe Sfalesman Corporation
August 10, 2007
Page 7 of 17
1.2.6 Groundwater
Groundwater in the Golf Course and Resort Area and for most of the Black Point area resides in the sea-
level aquifer. Aquifer recharge is primarily from the direct infiltration of precipitation. As water percolates
downward, it may perch on low-permeability till or till-like soils; however, since there were no streams and
only minor seeps observed on the bluffs at the Golf Course and Resort Area, it is assumed that perching
layers are discontinuous, and the majority of groundwaler percolates to the sealevel aquifer.
Groundwater in the vicinity of the Maritime Village also resides in the sea level aquifer. ln this location,
the aquifer material may be sand, till, or more likely basalt bedrock. The unit contacts appear to vary
dramatically in the area. The aquifer is recharged by the direct infiltration of precipitation, and from
groundwater seepage from the upslope areas to the west.
Groundwater was not encountered in the test pit explorations and there was only minor evidence of
surface water present on the Golf Course and Resort Area and the Maritime Village Area. Direct
measurement of groundwater elevation was not performed at the Marina or on the Jupiter and Tudor
Properties.
The regional groundwater levels measured in borings B-1, B-2 and B-3 ranged between 7 feet elevation
(170 ft deep) at boring B-3, 17 feet elevation (137 ft deep) at boring B-1, and 27 feet elevation (158 ft
deep) at boring B-2. The existing domestic wells in the area, American Campground and Pleasant Tides
Water Co-Op, indicate the same regional trend with static water levels ranging from 20 to 25 feet
elevation. These groundwaler elevations should be considered preliminary since they are based on
approximate ground surface elevations, and with respect to groundwater measurements made in boring
B-2 prior to development of the B-2 well.
Since the Vashon glacial deposits are discontinuous, particularly the Vashon lce Contact (Qvi) deposits,
perched groundwater could be encounlered where impervious layers underlie granular soils. The
locations of perched groundwater conditions in the near surface glacialdeposits are limited and could be
encountered anyruhere on the site, especially during the winter and early sprlng months.
1.2.7 Geologically Hazardous Areas
Geologically hazardous areas are lands susceptible to landslides, erosion, or seismic movement due to
the underlying soils and geology. Some of the areas surrounding the project site are considered
geologically hazardous because of steep slopes where erosion and landslides have occurred in the past.
Steep slopes are defined in Jefferson County's Sensitive Areas Ordinance as any slope greater than
40%, which represents a geologic hazard with respect to landslides. Steep slopes bound the east
portion of the site along the bluffs of Hood Canal and on the sides of the kettle holes in the upland area
and landslides were observed on the slopes along Hood Canal. The locations of landslide and erosion
hazard areas are shown on Figures 6 and 7.
Criteria used for estimating landslide potential and erosion potential included depth to competent soil,
underlying soil types and density, slope gradient, vegetation, and the presence or absence of
groundwater. These data were obtained from test pit explorations, site reconnaissance, geologic
mapping, and LIDAR imagery. Due to vegetative cover and limited exploration, areas mapped as
"moderate erosion potential" on Figures 6 and 7 should be considered approximate and subject to
modification at permit level detailed engineering and review.
The majority of the project site is considered to have a low potential for slope instability related to
construction of the proposed development. Areas interpreted to have low to moderate potential for slope
stability problems are typically underlain by ice contact deposits consisting of till, outwash, and lacustrine
sediments with slope inclination ranging between 15 to 30 percent. However lacustrine deposits located
in the Maritime Village Area in the northwestern portion of the site adjacent to SR 101, which have slope
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
The Statesman Corporation
August 10, 2007
Page B of 17
inclinations ranging between 0 to15 percent, may have a higher potential of slope instability due to
construction practices such as deep road cuts or placing fill at the crest of slopes underlain by this
deposit.
The south-central and southeastern of coastal bluff in the Golf Course Resort and Housing Area is
underlain by the granular bedded Pre-Vashon non-glacial deposits. At the present time only minor
slumping and raveling of the slopes were observed. Bedding of this deposit is favorable for slope stability
(bedding normal to the face of the bluff), however geologic reconnaissance observed widely spaced low
angle fractures that may daylight along the bluff face with dip direction to the east. These widely spaced
fractures could potentially produce rock like block failures at the bluff.
The steep slope in the upland areas including the kettle slopes did not show evidence of slumping or
debris flow scars. Accordingly these areas were designated as low to moderate potential of slope
instability. The remainder of the site is considered to have a low to moderate potential of slope instability
based on the underlying glacial soils slope gradient and the lack of groundwater.
High landsliding potential areas included existing landslides, debris flows, slope raveling and slumping
along the southwest to southeastern portion of the coastal bluff. Slopes in these areas were generally
greater than 40 percent along the southern portion of the coastal bluff and becoming near vertical in the
south-central to extreme southeastern portion of the property. The southwestern coastal bluff is
underlain by Vashon Age Glacial soils consisting of glacial till, advance outwash and possibly glacio-
lacustrine deposits that may be covered by active slide areas. The mechanism for these slides and
slumps have not been fully studied at this time, but one mechanism for these slides is the undercutting of
the coastal bluffs by wave action during large storms and daily tidal action.
Environmental impacts related to landslides, debris flows, and slope instability include encroachment of
slides into presently stable ground and increased sedimentation due to exposure of erosion-susceptible
scarps.
Land use planning strategies and engineering measures can be used to reduce the health and safety
risk due to steep slope hazards. Jefferson County's Critical Areas Ordinance provides the following
minimum steep slope setbacks: 1) At least 30 ft from a mapped landslide; 2) Thirty feet plus 1 ft per ft of
slope height but not exceeding 100 ft.
1.2.8 Seismic Hazards
The project area lies within a seismically active area that has experienced small to large magnitude
earthquakes. The three largest historic earthquakes in the Puget Sound area were: 1) Magnitude 7.2
Olympia Earthquake in 1949; 2) Magnitude 6.7 Puget Sound Earthquake near Seatac in 1965 and 3)
Magnitude 6.8 Nisqually Earthquake in 2001. These large seismic events were the result of the
subduction of Juan De Fuca plate and are referred to as intraplate earthquakes with epicenters deeper
than 30 km.
Shallow crustal earthquakes occur at depths ranging from the surface to 25 km. These shallow
earthquakes originate in a saucer shaped zone about 10 km thick that underlies the Puget Sound
lowlands at depths below 15 km. The largest of these shallow events less than Magnitude 5 have
occurred in this zone, (Hamilton, 2006).
National seismic hazard maps provide information necessary to design buildings, bridges, highways and
utilities to withstand earthquake events. These maps are updated frequently based on new scientific
information about geologic conditions. Structures that are designed and built in accordance with IBC and
current engineering standards will perform well and should sustain minimal damage from ground
shaking.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
Ihe Slatesm an Corporation
August 10,2007
Page 9 of 17
The soils within the project site generally have a low susceptibility to liquefaction although localized
liquefaction of loose beach deposits could occur on the shores of Hood Canal. Liquefaction occurs when
loose granular soils below the groundwater table lose strength in response to strong ground shaking.
Land use planning strategies and engineering measures can be used to reduce the health and safety
risk due to seismic hazards in hillside areas where landslides are possible, and bluff setbacks addressing
the issue are recommended.
1.3 Environmentallmpacts
All of the alternatives A, B, C, and D will involve construction of residential roads, buildings, stormwater
retention facilities and buried utilities. Earth activities will occur that will have construction related impacts
to the soils and geology in the study area. The indirect impacts could include localized areas of soil
erosion and sediment transport near intermittent streams found in the Marina and Maritime Village Area
due to increases in groundwater runoff.
No long term development impacts are expected to the existing slopes and bluffs in the Golf Course and
Resort Area along Hood Canal since groundwater levels will remain unchanged in the vicinity of the
Hood Canal bluffs and slopes. Localized areas of soil erosion could occur on the slopes along Hood
Canal during slte grading due to temporary increases in groundwater runoff and infiltration. Project
specific stormwater protection plans must address the issue to assure no contamination of the canal
would occur.
1.3.1 Alternative A - No Action Plan
The No Action Plan would operate under the existing Jefferson County Master Resort Plan. lt consists of
adding approximately 24 single family homes in the Golf Course Resort and Housing Area, 6 new homes
in the Maritime Village sub-area, two, 2,500 square ft commercial buildings on the Tudor property, a gas
station/RV repair shop for the Jupiter property and associated roadways, utilities and stormwater
drainage systems. lt is anticipated that the houses will be constructed without full basements. The
construction would involve minor regrading for roadways and house construction and installation of
underground utilities.
Site grading would involve moving limited amounls of soilfor building and roadway construction. Most of
the on-site soils will be suitable for use as structural fill and would therefore result in minor amounts of
imported fill. Site grading would include stripping organic topsoil, excavating, placing and compacting
structural flll to create level house sites and more uniform roadway profiles.
The standard Jefferson County residential roadway width is about 25 ft. During construction the soils in
these areas will be exposed to increased runoff and soil erosion into adjacent intermittent streams in the
Marina and Maritime Village Area.
Site utility construction would consist of excavating trenches to less than about 3 feet deep for water
mains and residential service lines, storm drains and, electric cables. Some pipe bedding sand may be
required from offsite sources. Trenching will result in temporary soil stockpiles that would be exposed to
increased runoff and soil erosion into adjacent intermittent streams on in the Marina and Maritime Village
Area.
The increased stormwater runoff from roofs and paved surfaces could result in local slope instability on
steep slopes if the facilities are improperly designed. ln particular the existing landslide and colluvium
deposits along Hood Canal could result in offsite impacts if groundwater flow and stormwater runoff is
increased in these areas.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
Ihe Stalesm an Corporation
August 10,2007
Page 10 of 17
1.3.2 Alternative B - Pleasant Harbor Golf Course and Marina Resorl
Construct an 1B-hole golf course south of Black Point Rd with 128 residences,462 townhouse units, 97
villas and 52 apartments for a total of 739 units. A 200 seat conference center, 3000 sq ft restaurant and
5,000 sq ft office would be constructed at the north end of the Golf Course area. The Marina and
Maritime Village area development would include 16,000 sq ft of commercial buildings, BB residences,
and 63 waterside townhouses for a total of 151 units. The waterside townhouses will be constructed into
the existing hillside. Residential roadways, utilities and stormwater retention systems, and a water
treatment system including buried piping and a treatment building would be constructed under this
Alternative. The construction would involve regrading for roadways and house construction and
installation of underground utilities.
Site grading will be accomplished to balance the amount of excavation with the amount of fill needed to
fill the kettles for the stormwater retention ponds. ln order to minimize the area of site disturbance while
obtaining sufficient fill material, full basements will be excavated beneath the residences and the hotel
structure will have 2 stories underground. Site grading would occur in the residential dwelling areas,
roadways, retention pond areas and in the treatment plant area- These site areas will be stripped of
vegetation and topsoil to expose the underlying soils which will be excavated or compacted. During
construction, these areas will be exposed to increased stormwater runoff and erosion into adjacent
intermittent streams in the Maritime Village and Marina Area and in the south side of the Golf Course
Resort area near Hood Canal. Localized areas of soil erosion could occur on the slopes along Hood
Canal during site grading due to temporary increases in groundwater runoff.
There should not be any long term project impacts to the stability of the steep slopes along Hood Canal
since the facilities will be designed to capture surface water runoff and to avoid any increase in
groundwater levels on the slope.
1.3.2.1 Construction of Roadwavs
The standard Jefferson County residential roadway width is about 25 ft. The paved roads will be
constructed on competent glacial soils or on compacted structuralfill derived from general site grading.
Paved roadways could increase the potential for increased streambed erosion, surficial landsliding on
steep slopes and increased sediment delivery. These impacts would be due primarily to improperly
designed roads and slopes which could concentrate runoff flows or change natural drainage patterns.
Landsliding and debris flows adjacent to the steep slopes along Hood Canal could result in the eventual
encroachment of landsliding into currently stable ground conditions.
1.3.2.2 Construction of Retention Ponds
The retention ponds will be constructed within the existing kettle features. Approximately 1.5 million
cubic yards of excavation and new structural fill will be placed in the kettles to reduce the overall volume
of the pond. The kettles will be partially backfilled to reduce the storage volume and the existing 1.5H:1V
kettle slopes will be flattened to 3H:1V. Temporary access roads will be constructed on the existing side
slopes to provide equipment access into the bottom of the kettle. The access roads will be constructed
by cutting and filling to create about a 12 fool wide level bench in the side slope. Approximately 300,000
CY of material will be excavated to flatten the slopes and about 1.2 million CY of backfill will be placed
inside the kettles.
Native on site common borrow consisting of sand and gravel from general site grading activities will be
used for structural fill. The fill will be placed in loose lifts and compacted with heavy vibratory drum
compactors. The structuralfill will be keyed into the undisturbed native slopes.
A pond liner system will be required to provide a low permeability barrier. The liner system will generally
consist of a 12- inch thick sand cushion placed below the liner and a 12- inch thick protective soil cover
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
Ihe Statesm a n Cor por atio n
August 10,2007
Page 11 of 17
layer. Both the sand cushion and the cover layer can be manufactured from on-site soils by sieving.
Alternatively these soils could be imported from offsite sources to eliminate the need for on-site
processing.
The temporary access road construction and site clearing could increase the potential for localized slope
instability during extended periods of wet weather. However, we do not anticipate any significant impacts
form landsliding, erosion or sediment transport by stormwater since the kettles form a topographically
enclosed and confined system.
1.3.2.3 Construction of Houses, Hotels and Water Treatment Buildinqs
Building areas will be stripped of vegetation and topsoil. The topsoil will be stockpiled for future
landscaping purposes. Basement excavation spoils will be transported, placed and compacted in the
kettles. During construction, the stockpiled topsoil and the native subgrade soils will be exposed to
increased stormwater runoff and erosion into surrounding surface waters.
1 .3.2.4 Construction of Underoround Utilities
Buried utilities will be installed in the roadway for sanitary sewer, water, electricity lines. The trench
excavations will be less than about 3 feet wide and 4 ft deep and above the groundwater table. Granular
soils may be imported for pipe bedding; the trench excavation spoils will be re-used as trench backfill.
Temporary soil stockpiles would be subject to erosion and sediment delivery to nearby drainages.
1.3.3 Alternative C - The Brinnon Sub-Area Plan
Construcl an 18-hole golf course with a 246 unit hotel and conference center and 45 single family homes
in the Golf Course and Resort Area. The Marina and Maritime Village Area will include a 7,000 sq ft
commercial building, 20 residential units, 20 units along the water and a 5,000 sq ft gift shop. The Tudor
property will be developed with a 30,000 sq ft restaurant and small grocery store, 2O-unit lnn and 20
townhouses. A village gas station and convenience store and an RV storage/repair building will be
constructed on the Jupiter site.
Site grading will be accomplished to balance the amount of excavation with the amount of fill needed to
fill the kettles for the stormwater retention ponds. ln order to minimize the area of site disturbance while
obtaining sufficient fill material, full basements will be excavated beneath the residences and the hotel
structure will have 2 stories underground. Site grading would occur in the residential dwelling areas,
roadways, retention pond areas and in the treatment plant area. These site areas will be stripped of
vegetation and topsoil to expose the underlying soils which will be excavated or compacted. During
construction, these areas will be exposed to increased stormwater runoff and erosion into adjacent
intermittent streams in the Marina and Maritime Village Area and in the south side of the Golf Course
Resort area near Hood Canal. Localized areas of soil erosion could occur on lhe slopes along Hood
Canal during site grading due to temporary increases in groundwater runoff.
There should not be any long term project impacts to the stability of the steep slopes along Hood Canal
since the facilities will be designed to capture surface water runoff and to avoid any increase in
groundwaler levels on the slope.
1.3.3.1 Construction of Roadwavs
The standard Jefferson County residential roadway width is about 25 ft. The paved roads will be
constructed on competent glacial soils or on compacted structuralfill derived from general site grading.
Paved roadways could increase the potential for increased streambed erosion, surflcial landsliding on
steep slopes and increased sediment delivery. These impacts would be due primarily to improperly
designed roads and slopes which could concentrate runoff flows or change natural drainage patterns.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
Ihe Statesman Corporation
August 10, 2007
Page 12 of 17
Landsliding and debris flows adjacent to the steep slopes along Hood Canal could result in the eventual
encroachment of landsliding into currently stable ground conditions.
1.3.3.2 Construction of Retention Ponds
The retention ponds will be constructed within the existing kettle features. Approximately 1.5 million
cubic yards of excavation and new structural fill will be placed in the kettles to reduce the overall volume
of the pond. The kettles will be partially backfilled to reduce the storage volume and the existing 1.5H:1V
kettle slopes will be flattened to 3H:1V. Temporary access roads will be constructed on the existing side
slopes to provide equipment access into the bottom of the kettle. The access roads will be constructed
by cutting and filling to create about a 12 fool wide level bench in the side slope. Approximately 300,000
CY of material will be excavated to flatten the slopes and about 1.2 million CY of backfill will be placed
inside the kettles.
Native on site common borrow consisting of sand and gravel from general site grading activities will be
used for structural fill. The fill will be placed in loose lifts and compacted with heavy vibratory drum
compactors. The structuralfillwill be keyed into the undisturbed native slopes.
A pond liner system will be required to provide a low permeability barrier. The liner system will generally
consist of a 12- inch thick sand cushion placed below the liner and a 12- inch thick protective soil cover
layer. Both the sand cushion and the cover layer can be manufactured from on-site soils by sieving.
Alternatively these soils could be imported from offsite sources to eliminate the need for on-site
processing.
The temporary access road construction and site clearing could increase the potential for localized slope
instability during extended periods of wet weather. However, we do not anticipate any significant impacts
form landsliding, erosion or sediment transport by stormwater since the kettles form a topographically
enclosed and confined system.
1.3.3.3 Construction of Houses. Hotels and Water Treatment Buildinqs
Building areas will be stripped of vegetation and topsoil. The topsoil will be stockpiled for future
landscaping purposes. Basement excavation spoils will be transported, placed and compacted in the
kettles. During construction, the stockpiled topsoil and the native subgrade soils will be exposed to
increased stormwater runoff and erosion into surrounding surface waters.
'1.3.3.4 Construction of Underoround Utilities
Buried utilities will be installed in the roadway for sanitary sewer, water, electricity lines. The trench
excavations will be less than about 3 feet wide and 4 ft deep and above the groundwater table. Granular
soils may be imported for pipe bedding; the trench excavation spoils will be re-used as trench backfill.
Temporary soil stockpiles would be subject to erosion and sediment delivery to nearby drainages.
1.3.4 Alternative D -Hybrid of Alternative B
Alternative D consists of Alternative B for the area East of SR 101. West of SR 101: the Tudor property
will be developed to include a 50 unit RV park, 4 rental cabins, two -5,000 sq ft commercial buildings; the
Jupiter site will include a rural gas station and an RV storage/repair building.
Site grading will be accomplished to balance the amount of excavation with the amount of fill needed to
fill the kettles for the stormwater retention ponds. ln order to minimize the area of site disturbance while
obtaining sufficient fill material, full basements will be excavated beneath the residences and the hotel
structure will have 2 stories underground. Site grading would occur in the residential dwelling areas,
roadways, retention pond areas and in the treatment plant area. These site areas will be stripped of
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
!
The Statesman Corporation
August 10,2007
Page 13 of 17
vegetation and topsoil to expose the underlying soils which will be excavated or compacted. During
construction, these areas will be exposed to increased stormwater runoff and erosion into adjacent
intermittent streams in the Marina and Maritime Village Area and in the south side of the Golf Course
Resort area near Hood Canal. Localized areas of soil erosion could occur on the slopes along Hood
Canal during site grading due to temporary increases in groundwater runoff.
There should not be any long term project impacts to the stability of the steep slopes along Hood Canal
since the facilities will be designed to capture surface water runoff and to avoid any increase in
groundwater levels on the slope.
1.3.4.1 Construction of Roadwavs
The standard Jefferson County residential roadway width is about 25 ft. The paved roads will be
constructed on competent glacial soils or on compacted structural fill derived from general site grading.
Paved roadways could increase the potential for increased streambed erosion, surficial landsliding on
steep slopes and increased sediment delivery. These impacts would be due primarily to improperly
designed roads and slopes which could concentrate runoff flows or change natural drainage patterns.
Landsliding and debris flows adjacent to the steep slopes along Hood Canal could result in the eventual
encroachment of landsliding into currently stable ground conditions.
1.3.4.2 Construction of Retention Ponds
The retention ponds will be constructed within the existing kettle features. Approximately 1.5 million
cubic yards of excavation and new structural fill will be placed in the kettles to reduce the overall volume
of the pond. The kettles will be partially backfilled to reduce the storage volume and the existing 1.5H:1V
kettle slopes will be flattened to 3H:1V. Temporary access roads will be constructed on the existing side
slopes to provide equipment access into the bottom of the kettle. The access roads will be constructed
by cufting and filling to create about a 12fool wide level bench in the side slope. Approximately 300,000
CY of material will be excavated to flatten the slopes and about 1.2 million CY of backfill will be placed
inside the kettles.
Native on site common borrow consisting of sand and gravel from general site grading activities will be
used for structural fill. The fill will be placed in loose lifts and compacted with heavy vibratory drum
compactors. The structuralfillwill be keyed into the undisturbed native slopes.
A pond liner system will be required to provide a low permeability barrier. The liner system will generally
consist of a 12- inch thick sand cushion placed below the liner and a 12- inch thick protective soil cover
layer. Both the sand cushion and the cover layer can be manufactured from on-site soils by sieving.
Alternatively these soils could be imported from offsite sources to eliminate the need for on-site
processing.
The temporary access road construction and site clearing could increase the potential for localized slope
instability during extended periods of wet weather. However, we do not anlicipate any significant impacts
form landsliding, erosion or sediment transport by stormwater since the kettles form a topographically
enclosed and confined system.
1.3.4.3 Construction of Houses, Hotels and Water Treatment Buildinos
Building areas will be stripped of vegetation and topsoil. The topsoil will be stockpiled for future
landscaping purposes. Basement excavation spoils will be transported, placed and compacted in the
kettles. During construclion, the stockpiled topsoil and the native subgrade soils will be exposed to
increased stormwater runoff and erosion into surrounding surface waters.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
The Statesman Corporation
August 10,2007
Page 14 of 17
1.3.4.4 Construction of Underqround Utilities
Buried utilities will be installed in the roadway for sanitary sewer, water, electricity lines. The trench
excavations will be less than about 3 feet wide and 4 fl deep and above the groundwater table. Granular
soils may be imported for pipe bedding; the trench excavation spoils will be re-used as trench bacKill.
Temporary soil stockpiles would be subject to erosion and sediment delivery to nearby drainages.
1,4 MITIGATIONMEASURES
1.4.1 Alternative A - No Action Plan
lmpacts of Alternative A would be mitigated by complying with applicable regulations and applying
standard design and construction practices common to the industry. County regulations would require
use of best management practices (BMP's) for new construction.
1 .4.2 Alternative B - Pleasant Harbor Golf Course and Marina Resort
lmpacts of Alternative B would be rnitigated by complying with applicable regulations and applying
standard design and construction practices common to the industry. County regulations require the use
of construction best management practices (BMPs) which include the use of silt fencing, barrier berms,
plastic covering for exposed ground, sediment traps (hay bales), temporary sediment detention basins,
and restricting construction activities to dry-weather periods to contain sediment on site. Straw mulch
and erosion control matting should be used to stabilize graded areas and reduce erosion and runoff
impacts on slopes.
ln addition, the following specific mitigation measures are proposed:
. Limit the extent and duration of site clearing, grading and disturbance of existing ground surface
and natural vegetation. This will be accomplished by staging the construction work to
accomplish full build out in separate construction phases over a number of years.
. Establish development setbacks from the crest of steep slopes, especially the coastal bluff area.
. Flatten the existing kettle slopes to reduce long term erosion and landslide hazard.
. Avoid introducing any additional uncontrolled surface water into documented landslide areas
and other steep slopes in the project area. Stormwater and groundwater infiltration systems
would be designed to reduce groundwater flows toward the shoreline bluffs to reduce landslide
hazards.
. Limit development on long, steep slopes especially slopes underlain by soils prone to erosion.
. Erect silt fences around disturbed areas to minimize migration of displaced soils into undisturbed
vegetation and structures.
. Avoid wet weather grubbing, stripping, and grading where possible.
. Hydro-seed cut slopes and fill berms as soon as practical; on steeper slopes use mulch, jute
matting or synthetic fabric to aid re-establishment of vegetation.
. Cover any stockpiled soils with visqueen especially during wet weather.
. Employ water trucks and/or sprinkler systems to minimize dust and wind erosion during dry
weather.
. Construct haul roads with quarry spalls, asphalt, or recycled concrete and/or suitable road
bedding.
. Control surface water runoff with ditches, detention ponds and check dams.
r Line drainage ditches grass and/or quarry spalls to limit water erosion
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLG Project No. 5G0601
Ihe Stafesm a n Corporation
August 10,2007
Page 15of17
a Protect permanent cut slopes with rockery walls, ecology blocks, and engineered retaining wall
structures
1.4.3 Alternative C - Brinnon Sub-Area Plan
lmpacts of Alternative C would be mitigated by complying with applicable regulations and applying
standard design and construction practices common to the industry. County regulations require the use
of construction best management practices (BMPs)which include the use of silt fencing, banier berms,
plastic covering for exposed ground, sediment traps (hay bales), temporary sediment detention basins,
and restricting construction activities to dry-weather periods to contain sediment on site. Straw mulch
and erosion control matting should be used to stabilize graded areas and reduce erosion and runoff
impacts on slopes.
ln addition, the following specific mitigation measures are proposed:
. Limit the extent and duration of site clearing, grading and dlsturbance of existing ground surface
and natural vegetation. This will be accomplished by staging the construction work to
accomplish full build out in separate construction phases over a number of years.
. Establish development setbacks from the crest of steep slopes, especially the coastal bluff area.
o Flatten the existing kettle slopes to reduce long term erosion and landslide hazard.
. Avoid introducing any additional uncontrolled surface water into documented landslide areas
and olher steep slopes in the project area. Stormwater and groundwater infiltration systems
would be designed to reduce groundwaler flows toward the shoreline bluffs to reduce landslide
hazards.
o Limit development on long, steep slopes especially slopes underlain by soils prone to erosion.
o Erect silt fences around disturbed areas to minimize migration of displaced soils into undisturbed
vegetation and structures.
. Avoid wet weather grubbing, stripping, and grading where possibte.
. Hydro-seed cut slopes and fill berms as soon as practical; on steeper slopes use mulch, jute
matting or synthetic fabric to aid re-establishment of vegetation.
. Cover any stockpiled soils with visqueen especially during wet weather.
. Employ water trucks and/or sprinkler systems to minimize dust and wind erosion during dry
weather.
. Construct haul roads with quarry spalls, asphalt, or recycled concrete and/or suitable road
bedding.
. Control surface water runoff with ditches, detention ponds and check dams.
. Line drainage ditches grass and/or quarry spalls to limit water erosion
. Protect permanent cul slopes with rockery walls, ecology blocks, and engineered retaining wall
structures
1.4.4 Alternative D - Hybrid of Alternative B
lmpacts of Alternative C would be mitigated by complying with applicable regulations and applying
standard design and construction practices common to the industry. County regulations require the use
of construction best management practices (BMPs) which include the use of silt fencing, barrier berms,
plastic covering for exposed ground, sediment traps (hay bales), temporary sediment detention basins,
and restricting construction activities to dry-weather periods to contain sediment on site. Straw mulch
and erosion control matting should be used to stabilize graded areas and reduce erosion and runoff
impacts on slopes.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0601
Ihe Sfafesman Corporation
August 10,2007
Page 16 of 17
ln addition, the following specific mitigation measures are proposed:
. Lrmit the extent and duralion of site clearing, grading and disturbance of existing ground surface
and natural vegetation. This will be accomplished by staging the const/uction work to
accomplish full build out in separate construction phases over a number of years.
. Establish development setbacks from the crest of steep slopes, especially the coastal bluff area.
. Flatten the existing kettle slopes to reduce long term erosion and landslide hazard.
. Avoid introducing any additional uncontrolled surface water into documented landslide areas
and other steep slopes in the projecl area, Stormwater and groundwater infiltration systems
would be designed to reduce groundwater flows toward the shoreline bluffs to reduce landslide
hazards.
. Limit development on long, steep slopes especially slopes underlain by soils prone to erosion.
r Erect silt fences around disturbed areas to minimize migration of displaced soils into undisturbed
vegetation and structures.
. Avoid wet weather grubbing, stripping, and grading where possible.
. Hydro-seed cut slopes and fill berms as soon as practical; on steeper slopes use mulch, jute
matting or synthetic fabric to aid re-establishment of vegetation.
. Cover any stockpiled soils with visqueen especially during wet weather.
. Employ water trucks and/or sprinkler systems to minimize dust and wind erosion during dry
weather.
. Construct haul roads with quarry spalls, asphalt, or recycled concrete and/or suitable road
bedding.
. Control surface water runoff with ditches, detention ponds and check dams.
o Line drainage ditches grass and/or quarry spalls to limit water erosion
o Protect permanent cut slopes with rockery walls, ecology blocks, and engineered retaining wall
structures
1.5 Significant Unavoidable Adverse lmpacts
Alternatives A, B, C and D would permanently alter the natural topography. Alternative A would result in
minimal topographic alteration al residential sites and roadways. Alternatives B, C, and D would more
significantly alter the terrain by partially filling the large kettles and regrading building sites and roadways.
Localized slope instability and soil erosion could occur during construction. However, these impacts
would be minimal since there are no streams on the Golf Course area, and only a few intermittent
streams on the Marina and Maritime Village area. These effects would be significantly reduced or
eliminated through proper mitigation design and by scheduling earthwork activities near these intermittent
streams during drier summer months. There are no indications to suggest that the proposed project
would have any significant impact to adjacent properties or Hood Canal.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
Ihe Statesm an Corporation
August 10,2007
Page 17 of 17
2 REFERENCES
Hamilton, 1998. "Neotectonic and Glaciotectonic Aspects of the Seismic Harad to the Cushman Project
FERC No. 462, Mason County, Washington." Prepared for Tacoma Public Utilities, Light Division,
December 1998.
Hamilton, 2006. "Review and update of seismicity and geology information regarding Cushman Dam
No. 2, for PFMA session," memorandum,May 12,2006, to Steve Fischer.
Jefferson County Master Plan, 1978. Description of geologic conditions in eastern Jefferson County.
McCreary, F.R., 1975. "Soil Survey of Jefferson County Area, Washington." U.S. Department of
Agriculture.
State of Washington Department of Ecology, Coastal Zone Atlas, June 1979.
State of Washington Department of Ecology, 1981. Geology and Ground-Water Resources of Eastern
Jefferson County, Washington," Water Supply Bulletin 54, April 1981.
Tabor, R.W, and Cady, W.M., 1978. "Geologic Map of the Olympic Peninsula, Washington: U.S.
Geological Survey Miscellaneous lnvestigations Series Map l-994," 2 sheets, scale 1:125,000.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC
630 6th Srree, South
Krkland, WA 98033
ph: (425) 828-7545
,,a.,q
DDMF
SWIF
HCtr
sr
SMF
DMF
CRF
DF
sHz
Drrrington Dcvib MarrItin frulu
Sosth Whidbcy Ishnd fiult
Hood Caml hult
scrttlc fatlr
Srddlc Moururin fiutrs
Dow f,{6uil6in flult
Cmyoa Rivcr feulr
Doty feult
Mr $, Hclensscirmicmnc
DDMF,*__ol.\Ju.,,efirc. \
Gcodctic
cnrr.l
ftottlainB
(Srvrgcaal, l99l)
sMr
DMF
tr
A Uptifl
sllz
\
_..12, ,ttl.
\1
qlo*
\ixr.tt rsgc
Zil.aof
Er*Wcsr
Cocguriur
v
o
Subridcocc
Strurg ground rnoioo (rocUlu&tido)
++
,t
cRF -fl--{
\
co.,lrl
/
ncotcctoiltic
GerurtrFom
McCrcry, 1996
Pluc
Corvcrgrncc
lt
Cmrprcrsion
exir &orn botehole brcrkout
&tr
(Mrgocrrd
Zob.ct! 1992)
\
HCF
+
RlSiooi
Nortlusolr6
Cotrycd,mud
Crurrl Slrcrtczring
I
\\
\\
\
\
Ro,birrlon
r995
I
Point4 \
\j
a\
+
l\\
!\
A
.$
..f*
/
I
RenierMl.
\
\1,
\1
a
I
-^--'i-;..'
t\
\
\l
\
\I
BB
{-\
. 'ltudwia cc
Wdbar[-GIR = Olrcioisooatic
Rcbomd
MT ST. HGIG,B
\
d.. 1992
I
\
500 100 ktn
w E
S
THE STATESMAN CORPOBATION
PLEASANT HARBOR
MARINA & GOLF RESOBT
GEOLOGIC STRUCTURES
Job No.
06101
Figure 1
\a\'(v
6
_9
!p.
t
A
+ti'i.r
+
I!
}I o
o
o
t
tr
\
,+I:a
,i'$+
"t!'QS
tr
+
o
.. \'
t+l:+t\ iPl.\.Nl
ry
+g
T@*
::,o
=6p+
s
ff+!,nl/j
*;$,-i
:
tt,
p
+
ll)
+t,t J
\
\=i\\o
$-
-+,i
g\)
\
{m--
,1
@m \
N
\,\
=*\m
€'.,\
aoOno
E6OOJC>ado''\ o)
\tr
J\l
t,
\:.-
-\^-\
*
N
a
N
\
d
o)
\\
o.
R#q-(o f.o3
o
\\
N
\\\,
\
o
oso:
SEE
66s.
+IT
-+
--d!v
+I
=!?ir
{tt
T
\i
'9 a: tl6 ' 'Tl- o,\ 1(bto-
o
o
t.I\. '
> \\
\\\+
, .i-llo
-o(PL o
\
\)
3HqT
HE
BBilea08-
/i
/tu
\I
+({t!r
@
+
6
o
I
o
I
3
o
tq
a
e
N
I
0g
q
E
2
?
I
o
J
3g
+{!
o
6.<.{}
"ai
\
t
o
6
E
I
+
It
!
+
ir!
:l
!
8
6
!
E
T
$
@
I
h
+
6
P
I
5f
f;
a,o
o
s
3
I
i
t
E
8
z
#
9eoi
B9
!i
ir
3z
2A
d
o
=
+ihN
o
a
a
T
z
I
z
oq
€m--
!
.N
iTA \
\\
d
THE STATESMAN CORPORATION
PLEASANT HARBOR MABINA & GOLF RESORT
SUBFICIAL GEOLOGY
Marina and Maritime Village Areas
Golf Course and Reson Area
SG(FoI
FiguE 2
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC
630 6ln st@t s@tt
K*l.nd, WA 98033
ph: (425) 828-795
a/1o/07
=200'
tt
b,
cAH
TTIIITIIIIITIIITIII
os.
t,t
(
\-..
\-./
-r.(
(/
i
(
\\{\,/
-,,{.t
I
-dd^-
I
tlr
)
8.
E:
27i<
i-r
r
.)
,{q\
+I!t
\,ri-
i+
-1
\
)-a\-
4
r
J
t \
(
/,
\
\/(tt\
)
bq)
b\
\\.tr
)
J
(a\
\
v
ot
f
\
(l
,1
i
/
l
\\($
l.))q )
!-r' ),l '.','/t {I
LI l\
I
I
T
I
T
I
t
I
T
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
N
TUtfItL
tu
r.ua
/1
,0 Rc- o?,/
&
Marina
Area
Maritime
Village
Area
(avil)
-J-
24
, v}\_
'./ -
(
F''.D /)
\'.. f-r*.:+(
I
*
/-:
,
((
/<l
/
Golf Cou rse
Area
i)
',.''"& Resort\,/.'
a
TP.
q
t6;r 1)
7+
\',@s 1
1 +):
/
+rP 10
SEE FIGURE 2 FOR
LEGEND & NOTES
I
I
t
(Qvit)
'h
/
iri,
.i.6\
+DNJ
^Pa
+
+TP-4
Iq',1"
/C
rP-3
+
+TP-2
\e/t I
-J/
-J:
.:'
2
A
)Z)-//t'
).')/----/ v
I /.
,/Daium: NAVD88'\\..-l-)
?
.'?
-/-I
'l'N ,/
-) 717'N
\\N,,-
, .' Tudor Property
\.-r
//
Jupiter Property
\*\
)
/ 2r:-/ ,.\J7:
/_.)--
v
/
./'-?<
-'--4
a,
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC
630 6lh Srreel Soulh
Ktuland, WA 98033
ph: (425) 828-7545
dore 8/1o/O7 THE STATESMAN CORPORATION
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA & GOLF RESORT
Job No.
SURFICIAL GEOLOGY sG0601
Tudor and Jupitor
Figure 3
!@ 2m
FEET
9
)-+29-
//>
:HHv
) '-. <-J--/'\--j .'l
r r\ /'-?
\
+)
\\
/
I
I
\J \_
\
J
\
v,ra
\')
,--t/tr
l\\/
+/\
', .l
lt
L
-;,'":)('d^(v:-)*8.,
i(
il \
++/(
__\=
^.\
\\----
/_.-
I
I /,I
t
t,)
)$
/,
:\
\
\
\\
\i
\
\
\\
\
(
t
ZABh
P8
1i
!6
t$
=g
Ii
=
=
d
!6e9
ets!o
o2
Z6f,;
5X!i
E3
Q9
6
EI
;sgE
fi
I
F
i
f,.
E
2
B
I
!EYOhm
IE,
H
3
E s r*
Ff,5
Qooste4f,5EFF22t
EpelFt
EO:IH$
Hfrs
o
\
ot--l'
I
c
o
---l
tt-.
\\.
a
,
o
o
I
f,
a
,
o
a
9
c
R)\
I
r$,w
r''
)
YI
n
\
'-'({N "
t-v$i.,$r.\l c-I
(
!I\j\i
tj
fr
1r
l'. t
l\N
\t
l
\
^1.I
\\'YT'" 1- -/\\, \\)t rl\l
\(
-. t.
)
\
\
v-.ooo,f
o
o)
,\
Eq
i3ir
35
I
d
o)
\
(
\
\..-\
--1
\
(
)\
\
I
I
\\\
)\
\
\\\\
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC
a/1o/o7
OAY
drorn by CAH
1'= 200'
630 61,, St@t Soulh
Kirkland. WA 98033
ph: (25) E2&7515
THE STATESMAN CORPORATION
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA & GOLF RESOFT
SURFICIAL SOILS
Marina and Maritime Village Areas
Golt Course and Resort Ar6a
sG060r
T.I|IITITIIITIIITTIT
t-
"i
")
l
\
.h.
:-
(
-i '' \..-( -.-\..
.. \z/:-
t
4h\
)
.-/,-J-
ltJ
rrJ
\-;
)\
tr{
$a=5a;
r
1
+
t
I
tt
)r\
\\
(
\
\=lr
v,
<t
+
i
\
?
r
Figure 4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
t
T
I
T
I
SEE FIGURE 4 FOR
LEGEND & NOTES
Daium: NAVD88
Tudor Property
)/
\
,/-,
d
/
*:t6.--;,#
><
-,<-,/z lt
X'-2i4
f' ,/ -,/
-/l
ry/7//Marina
Area7Maritime
Village
Area
1
../
Golf Coursb
$ Resort Area
/f./
'J.
/ 1./
/-)
! .(-.
)
)
%
\\- )
Y\
\
a\
/i
\d(:
2<
No!
E
),l
I
I'b
il i'.
,rf
ultf,o
IL
ulula\
rI
l,#tu\V
\
(! /(
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC
630 6lh Slreel South
Krkland, WA 98033
ph: (425) 828-7515
dote 8/1O/O7
THE STATESMAN CORPORATION
PLEASANT HARBOH MARINA & GOLF RESORT
SURFICIAL SOILS
Tudor and Jupiter Properties
Job No.
ffiolm2m
FEET
Figure 5
-X
/
/
\
) \\
z$
(
^ )J,o
A
a,
/ t),
!
Jupiter Property
,.1:
$,r
.\C
o
i)
lr
4
/.
/,
/-
/ ,,r) r
)r'
iiN)i
)
V.
l//t
///-_
s\
N\t,
\
\
srtW
l/r'
-+19
v
----Qt--\-\\
sN-'\\'r\i--
t/ t
t
t-
2-
' 4
'
, "^,
J:./
/-z--tr
--...-t-f \-7
. f},
^ ^r)'J^ /\2
fz
J
'd)I
/i'
(
\-_-
t-
1
\
l1
061 01
FIGURE
r.-\V
./ -2 )fl
=-\---_
-\-
trrr/'
..(i
EqIeE,
EIfrEEe
ietE?3
=fi;BH;
89*8ts
;EZBe
?;I=F
i6d3i
ai:q
Nfl[E
E EqE;aE
TP
dEg
rsE
H EEg"'t i3d;H
E3
q
g
\
)/-/
EAi Eilg E:ai x
T.91 VilFg d
sEE
gEI
1rzaO;tfrznAg
Ee=
E9
5E
a
H
9;
;=
It
;o
fts
$e=1
'a
'\-.
(c,
f'
a/('
I!'')ri
-__--J
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC
8/10/O1
DAY
CAH
1"=200'
630 6th Sl@, S@lh
Kit*l€nd, WA 98033
eh: (125) 8257t15
THE STATESMAN COBPORATION
PLEASANT HABBOR MARINA & GOLF RESOBT
EROSION & LANOSUDE HAZARD POTENTIAL
MARINA & MARITIME VILLAGE AREAS
GOLF COURSE & RESORT ABEA
sco601
Figure 6
rTI)-III-IITIITTTII
\,./
t\\
\
)
7\*
/fr
f:,{,
5
i-)
/,/'
)
(
-rf
j
#
"(
t
(
t
,/
(
(D
)
fIt
\
r
N
\
,'L
l
,
\
(
()at
.\
)
,1'
I
T
t
I
I
I
t
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
T
.-'/-'/// t, -zi
-/ --a
,:;r?/r'-77rr7 ,d
n-,_--V Z-/-//
'////,,)/-t 2c\. _.--41r--,//'I.,/
Datum: NAVD88 /,_l /a Marina
Area\\-G'*,/\Maritime
Village
Area\\
l.uOor Property ,--,/'-'\---" a(,---// /'
---,J; / /'
'_r,'/_,/ r/
/7,
.\1
IP
, r\t'\r\-t\
,"4.
'a^
," -t'It-t'Crolf Cours€
{,4 & Resort Area
q-
Jupiter Property
N
\
',H
\-( .
//
--.7 'fr€-
\
/4/ /-^ri\
z4
71-4 t ./
+gs,_-,
\\--,/
a
(o
trJtrl(,
lL
rurfla
+a
L'a<
/i
i
i-\,
lr
/,
/,/
/!
,/
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC
630 6rh Streel South
Khkland, WA 98033
ph: (425) 828-7545
dote 8/10/07 THE STATESMAN CORPORATION
PLEASANT HARBOR MAFINA & GOLF RESORT
EROSION & LANDSLIDE
HAZARD POTENTIAL
Tudor & Jupiter Properties
Job No.
sG0601r00 200
FEEI
Figure 7
7-
)i(
I(
)
--b?41
/<
/,9
L /t
(
t/9J
///,';
$,'
'- i-7^----1 t t /*7:1-
1
,.}. /'>
hr/
/\
-<^(
E2-
/(ii\ltr--
\ tt
(
.'-*E#
'./
\-
)
),
(*I
-[
)
l
L
I ))/
/ir\,UI\)
\,{
(
\',
)j.
tr\d!
E
\
ilt
I
\.
---\-=i-7
\i
\o
lO'/6\
I
i\.
\.
T
t
t
I
t
t
I
I
T
I
I
T
t
t
I
T
I
I
t
SUBSURFACE GROUP LLC
630 6rh Street South
Kirkland, WA 98033
Iet. (425) B2B-7545 Fax (425) 828-7548
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINAAND GOLF RESORT_WATER SUPPLYAND
G R O T]NDWATE R IMPA CT ANAYS IS
I.O INTRODUCTION
This report presents the appr-oach for water supply at the proposed Pleasant Harbor Marina and
Golf Resort, and presents of an analysis of the impacts and benefits of the water supply strategy
on the groundwater regirne beneath Black Point and the proposed resort. This reporl also
provides an analysis of altemate land use water supply-related impacts as presented in the
Envirorunental lmpact Statement. The report is based on our current understanding of the
proposed development, climatic, and subsurface and groundwater conditions; this evaluation
may amended after additional site work is performed.
The proposed rnarina and golf resort is primarily located on Black Point, bordering Hood Canal
in Jefferson County, Washington. The site is located within Water Resource lnventory Area
(WRIA) 16, in Sections 15 and 22 of T25N, R2W. As further discussed below, an existing
marina, campground, and other smaller commercial entities occupy the site; however, the site is
largely undeveloped. Figure 1 presents the proposed site plan. Figure 2 shows the existing
conditions.
The water supply approach for the development is an innovative mixture of use of existing
gloundwater rights, rainfall water harvesting, and treatment and reuse of wastewater.
Groundwater wells will be the potable water supply source for the resort. Water for other uses,
such as irrigation, will come from wastewater and water collected on the site- Because the
source of the irrigation supply is solely from on-site, the supply is dependant on climatic
conditions. Irrigation requirements are highest during the drier periods of the year; as such,
water will be collected during the wetter periods and stored in existing topogaphic depressions
for use during the remainder of the year. Excess water harvested will be then recharged to the
underlying aquifer to maintain and enhance the aquifer system beneath Black Point.
Figure 3 shows the site phasing map within the MPR boundaries. The proposed development
will consist of constructiorr of the golf course, lining of existing topog'aphic depressions, and
construction of residences on the Black Point property; and remodeling and construction of the
marina facilities and additional housing.
This report first presents the physical conditions that the site lies within; we then provide
analysis on the irnpacts and benefits the site may have for the various EIS altematives.
2.0 TOPOGRAPITYAND GEOGRAPHIC FEATT'RES
The site layout and topographic features are shown in Figure l. The rnajority of the
development encompasses a 220 acre part, or one-third, of Black Point. This area lies to the
EIS Groundwater (Ver1 6).doc
APPENDIX 5 Project No.SG0601-02
Hydrogeologic Evalu ation
June 26,2006
Page 2 of 19
southeast of the intersection of Highway l0l and Black Point Road. The ground surface
throughout the area is hummocky and typical of a site modified by glacial processes; the site
includes a number of kettles, which are large glacial depressions. Ground surface elevations
range from about 60 feet in the bottom of the deepest kettle, to elevation 320 feet on a hill in the
southeast portion of the site. Though ground surface elevation varies considerably across the
site, the average site elevation is about 180 to 200 feet.
Tllee of the larger kettles are located along about the central north-south axis of the site. The
northern kettle (A) is about 45 feet deep and roughly 1.4 acres in size at ground surface. The
central and largest kettle (B) is over 100 feet deep and about 13 acres in size. The southem
kettle (C) is also about 100 feet deep and about 4.5 acres in size. Most of the kettles on site are
roughly conical.
Three elongate ridges, or pronounced topographic highs, are found on the Black Point part of
the project area (Figure l). These are roughly oriented in a northeast-southwest direction and
range from 1,000 to 1,400 feet long. The upper surfaces of these ridges are fairly flat, and range
between 270 and 320 feet elevation.
3.0 CLIMATICCONDITIONS
Climatic conditions govem aquifer recharge and the amount of water that can be directly
collected for water supply. As such, an understanding of local climatic conditions is ttecessary
to provide an understanding of water availability at the site.
The site lies in southeastern Jefferson County adjacent to Hood Canal. The prevailing winds in
the region are from the west, as such, the site lies on the lee side of the Olympic Mountains, and
the area is buffered from large oflshore storms. [.ow pressure off-shore weather systems
encounter the Olympic Mountains and are forced upward and over the mountains, releasing a
large percentage of the moisture on the west side of the mountains due to orographic effects. As
the systems move east over the crest of the mountains, temperatures inqease and there is less
precipitation. This is locally referred to as the rain shadow effect of the Olympic Mountains.
The rain shadow effects in Jefferson County are strongest in the Port Townsend area; where less
than 2O-inches of rainfall occur on average, and lessen toward the southem porlion of the
County. Just over 55 inches of precipitation fall in Quilcene, about 1 1 miles norlh of the site.
Most of the precipitation events in the site area are generated frorn southerly storms that move
north up the canal. The climate is marine; winter months are typically moderate and wet, while
summer months are typically mild and dry. The measured diff-erences in precipitation at
stations along the east side of the County occur primarily in the winter months and are related to
rain shadow effects; most stations have similar summer month rainfall characteristics.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
Hydrogeologic Ev al uation
June 26,2006
Page 3 of 19
3.1 Climatic Data
The climatic data used for the site analyses were from the Quilcene 2 SW weather station (No.
456846). The period of record for this station provides over 58 years of data between June 4,
1948 to present. The average precipitation at Quilcene over the period of record was 55.43
inches. The total average daily precipitation for one year is 56.7 inches. Quilcene lies about 11
rniles north of Brinnon and Black Point. Only two other long-term weather stations are in the
region: Port Townsend and Bremerton. Table 1 compares climatic conditions at these stations.
As mentioned above, Pofi Townsend experiences less than half of the precipitation at Quilcene,
this and other topographic and marine conditions make this site unsuitable. Bremerton lies
about 1 5 miles east of the site. Though this site experiences a precipitation rate of 5 I .57 inches
per year, which is more typical to the site than Port Townsend, the precipitation and temperature
monthly pattems are different from that of Quilcene. The Quilcene station was selected because
it is closer to the site and lies in a similar geographic and climatic environment. The data frorl
weather stations from Port Townsend to Shelton suggest that rainfall on the west side of Puget
Sound increases from north to south; as such, since Black Point lies to the south of Quilcene. the
Quilcene data rnay provide a conservative estimate of rainfall at Black Point. If actual rainfall
conditions are higher at Black Point, then the water supply and groundwater recharge estimates
provided herein may actually under predict site conditions, which is conservative from a water
supply prediction standpoint.
Average daily weather parameters were downloaded from the Westem Regional Climate
Center for the Quilcene gage. The available data of interest to this evaluation are average daily
precipitation and average daily maximum and minirnum tanperatures.
3.2 Evapotranspiration
Evapotranspiration is a calculated value that describes the combined loss of water through
evaporation from site soils, plant hanspiration, and evaporation of intercepted water fiom
foliage. Potential evapotranspiration describes the amount of water that can evaporate from an
area under given climatic conditions; actual evapotranspiration describes the amount of water
that can actually evaporate given the amount of water in storage in the soils and plants. Actual
evapotranspiration is always less than potential evapomtion in the Pacific Northwest because of
a moisture deficit in the surruner months. The deficit is due to low precipitation and soil
moisture that has been consumed due to transpiration and evaporation processes. This is an
important variable when describing groundwater recharge conditions.
Potential evapotranspiration was calculated using the FAO Penman-Monteith (1998) rnethod on
a daily basis from the Qulicene data set. ffis method is considered the intemational standard
for calculation evapotranspiration. For compadson, evapotranspiration values were obtained
from Geology and Ground-Water Resources of Eastern Jefferson County, Water Supply
Bulletin No. 54 (1981). Figure 4 slrows a comparison of precipitation and potential
evapotranspiration on an average daily basis for the year. The calculated annual potential
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
Hydrogeologic Evaluation
June 26,2006
Page 4 of 19
evaporation was 24.1 inches per year using the Penman-Monteith method, and 24.2 inches per
year using tlie Thomthwaite method in WSB No. 54.
4.0 GEOLOGY
The geologic conditions at the site are important to describe the origin, location, and
characteristics of aquifers and aquitards at the site; they provide information used to evaluate the
water supply and recharge conditions at the site.
The site geologic conditions were obtained from existing published data, perfonning site
rcconnaissance and geologic mapping, excavating 66 exploratory test pits, and drilling 3 deep
geotechnical borings to depths of 160 to 175 feet.
Because the site geology is complex, we also invited Drs. Derek Booth and Kathy Goetz-Troost
from the University of Washington to visit the site and to obtain their opinions on glacial units
and depositional environments of the project area. They are recognized expefts in Pleistocene
glacial geology and morphology, and have published a number of geologic maps in westem
Washington.
The following provides a description of the geologic setting and soil types found at the
development site. A more detailed description of the site geology and soils is presented by
Perrone Consulting (July 2007). That report also provides boring and test pit logs collected for
these evaluations.
4.1 Regional Geologic Setting
The project site lies on the boundary of the Physiographic province of the Olympic Mountains
and the Puget Sound Lowland which has a complex history of orogeny (rnountain building),
volcanism, faulting, erosion, deposition of sedimentary rocks, and several periods of glaciations.
Bedrock was mapped by others (Tabor and Cady, 1978) and during our field reconnaissance of
the shoreline from the southem shore of Pleasant Harbor Marina to about 750 feet south of
Black Point. Bedrock consists of Crescent formation basalt: slightly weathered fine grained,
hard, slightly weathered. Generally the basalt is not friable (sound bedrock) and has widely to
very widely-spaced fractures.
During the Pleistocene (10,000 to 200,000 years ago), continental glaciation advanced in the
Puget Sound Lowland and the Olympic Mountains at least four times. The Fraser Glaciation,
particularly the Vashon Stade (last glacial advance about 13,000 to 19,000 years ago) has
modified the project area to its present topography. As the glacial ice known as the Puget Lobe
advanced into the project area meltwater streams began depositing advance outwash deposits of
silt, sand, gravel and cobbles over ancestral topography.
Portions of the Puget lobe blocked the drainages of the outwash meltwater streams producing
ice dammed impoundments such as glacial Lake Leland. In the relatively quiet waters of the
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
Hydrogeologic Evalu ation
June 26,2006
Page 5 of 19
glacial lake, glacio-lacustrine deposits of sandy silts, silts, and clays were deposited at the
bottom the glacial Lake Leland. As the Puget [.obe advanced into project area glacio-lacustrine
and outwash deposits were overun by the advancing ice and a homogeneous mixture of silts,
sands, gravel, cobbles and boulders known as Vashon glacial till was deposited in and under the
advancing glacial ice.
As the glacial ice retreated, the project site experienced active ice margin deposition and later
area ice stagnation. Deposits of ice contact stratified drift were deposited along the margins of
the Vashon Stade glacial ice. As the glacial ice retreated, large blocks of glacial ice were left in
place (stagnant ice) and Glacial Lake Leland began draining and releasing large volumes of
water that flowed through the area and eroded the Vashon Stade glacial deposits creating kame
terraces and eskers consisting of coarsely bedded sands, gravelly sand, sandy gravel rccessional
outwash. The large stagnant blocks of ice eventually melted and produced deep localized
depressions known as kettles.
4.2 Site Geology
The project sites are comprised of predominantly Vashon Age glacial soils that are
predominantly dense to very dense sand and gravel with varying amounts of silt and some
cobbles. Older Pre-Vashon non-glacial deposits consisting of dense to very dense fluvial sands
and hard lacustrine silts and clays were observed in test boring B-2 and exposed in the bluffs
along Hood Canal. Bedrock outcrops were not present on the site areas or within the depth of
the exploratory test pits and borings performed for this project.
The glacial process that formed the current project landscape left a complex assemblage of irr-
place and reworked soils overlying an eroded or faulted bedrock surface. Figure 5 presents a
geologic map of the site formulated from exploration data, reconnaissance, professional
publications, and inter,riews. The surficial deposits consisted predominantly of ice contact till
and advance outwash deposits. Recessional outwash was observed on most of the higher
elevation elongate ridge features observed at the site. The bluffs along the southem edge of the
property indicate advance outwash overlying older non-glacial fluvial deposits. The
assemblage of these and other soils forms a complex stratigraphy that directly relates to the
aquifo'conditions at the site. A summary of the significant soil types encountered is presented
below so the reader can gain an understanding of the differences between the soil types; Perrone
Consulting (July, 2007) provides a more thorough description of the soils on site. Descriptiorrs
of the geologic deposits are presented in the following sections from youngest to oldest.
4.2.1 Vashon Glacial Deposits
Recessional Outuvash (Qrro)
This deposit consists of a loose to medium dense stratified sand, gravelly sand, and sand and
gravel with scattered boulders. This unit is typically pervious.
Ice Contact Deposits (Qvi1
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SGO607
Hydrogeologic Eval u ation
June 26,2006
Page 6 of 19
Ice contact deposits have been subdivided based on soil gradation characteristics into three
separate sub-units: glacial till, glacial outwash, and glacio-lacustrine.
Glacial Till (Ovit)
The ice contact glacial till consists of a dense to very dense homogenous mixture of silt
sand, gravel, and cobbles. The glacial till in the kettle features can grade to sandy gravel
and gravelly sand with trace amounts of silt. The thickness of this unit can vary from a
few feet to tens of feet. Till typically acts as an aquitard due to its low penneability.
Glacial Outwash (Qvio)
The ice contact outwash deposit consists of dense well bedded sand, gravelly sand, and
sandy gravel. The deposit is usually interbedded with thin diamict layers and irregular
lenses of fine-grained lacustrine deposits. This unit typically exhibits low permeability
but has lenses or layers of high permeability soils.
Glacio-Lacustrine (Ovil)
The ice contact glacio-lacustrine deposit consists of a rnedium dense to stiff silt to
sandy silt slightly laminated to massive. This deposit is occurs in the more granular
sub-units as thin discontinuous lenses and laminations. Lacustrine soils for aquitards
due to their low permeability.
Vaslton fill (Qvt, Qltl)
Two distinct glacial till sub-units were observed in the project areas: a subglacial till or basal till
(Qra) and a sub-unit subglacial lodgment till (Q\rtl). The basal till consists of a very dense,
homogenous mixture of silt, sand, subrounded gravel, and cobbles. The thickness observed was
estimated to be about 15 to 25 feet. The lodgment till consists of a very dense, homogenous,
matrix supported gravelly, sandy silt with subrounded cobbles to boulders to 3-foot diameter.
The deposit is stratified with sand, gravelly sand, and gravel lenses and/or layers. These units
exhibit very low penneability.
Vashon Adtance Out**ash (Qva)
The advance outwash deposit consists of a dense to very dense well bedded sands, with thin
layers of gravelly sands, and sandy gravel. Advance outwash forms the most prolific aquifer in
the Puget Sound region.
4.2.2 Pre Vashon Deposits (Qu)
Pre-Vashon non-glacial deposits underlie the Vashon age glacial deposits along the south-
central and southeastern portion of the beach bluff. The non-glacial deposits are composed of a
very dense stratified deposit fine to coarse sand interbedded with gravelly sand. It contains
occasional 6-incli clayey silt beds. This units exhibits high permeability and forms an aquifer
on site-
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0601
Hydrogeologic Evaluation
June 26,2006
Page 7 of 19
4.3 Site Groundwater Conditions
Groundwater monitoring instrumentation was installed in borings B-1 through B-3 to gain an
understanding of aquifer corrditions at the Cell A site. Two vibrating wire piezometers were
installed in boring B-l; these were installed to provide groundwater level elevation data at both
the regional aquifer (sea level) and what may have been a perching unit at about elevation 65
feet. The data collected since installation indicates that perched groundwater is not present at
tlris location, and that the regional aquifer groundwater elevation atB-2 was about 11.1 feet on
June 2l ,2006.
A monitoring well was installed at location B-2. The monitoring well was installed for
measuring groundwater levels and for water quality sampling purposes in the future. The
groundwater level elevation at B-2 on June 21,70A6 was 34.0 feet.
One vibrating wire was installed in B-3. The regional aquifer groundwater elevation at B-3 was
about 10.3 feet on June 21 ,2006.
Dataloggers were connected to the vibrating wire transducers in B-l (deep) and B-3. These
collected water level data on 20 rninute intervals between June 12, 2006 and July 17,2006. The
data shown in Figure 6 indicates a direct hydraulic connection with tidal cycles. B-1 and B-3
are each about 1,200 feet from Pleasant Harbor and Hood Canal. The delay between a tidal
high or low and the corresponding groundwater level high or low varies, but is about 6.5 hours
for each instrument location. The tidal efficiency, or the groundwater level fluctuation as a
percentage of tidal fluctuation, was 0.008 feet per feet for B-1, and 0.01 feet per feet for B-2.
The water level data were compared to precipitation data collected at a private weather station
in Qulicene. The data comparison is shown on Figure 7. These data show a significant rise in
groundwater level elevations due to precipitation events. For instance, the data suggests that
0.12-inch precipitation event was related to an increase in water levels at both instruments on
the order of 0.2 feet. The delay between the two appears to be about I to 2 days. Assuming that
the groundwater response is related to the precipitation events immediately preceding, the
response is too fast for infiltration of precipitation over 100 vertical feet, or though the base of
the kettles. The response would suggest an off-site source for the head increase, such as the
Duckabush fuver or drainage from the mainland. This suggests an altemative method for the
erosion of the bedrock service near the Tudor and Pleasant Tides wells on the west side of the
site, which may have been due to the ancestral Duckabush River discharging into Hood Canal
at this location.
5.0 SITE TI\'DROGEOLOGIC PERSPECTN'E
This section provides a surrunaly of the hydrogeologic regirne on the Black Point peninsula.
This larger scale perspective is necessary for an understanding of how the dynamics of the
peninsula geology affect local hydrogeologic conditions.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
Hydrogeologic Eval uation
June 26,2006
Page B of 19
Black Point is formed of a mixture of bedr-ock, pre-Vashon-aged fluvial deposits, and Vashon-
aged glacial deposits. The distribution of soils within the peninsula is complex, and fairly
unique within the Puget Sound area. The formation of the present day soils and topography
likely began with fluvial and then glacial scouring and erosion of the basalt bedrock of the
Crescent Formation. Ice-marginal streams are erosive meltwater streams that flowed along the
margins of the glaciers and scoured channels in the bedrock during both advance and retreat.
The remnant of a minimum of three ice marginal stream cuts is currently seen on the bedrock
hills at higher elevations above the site. An ice marginal stream may have cut a trough ttuough
the Pleasant Harbor area- This left a bedrock high at the northeast and eastern rnargins of the
point; and a deeper scour or trough through most of the point. Figure 8 shows a geologic cross
section across the northern portion of the peninsula; this shows that bedrock relief may change
as much as 200 feet in a 200 foot-horizontal distance. The location of the section is shown is
Figure 5. An alternative explanation is that the scouring of the bedrock surface was due to the
mouth of the ancient Duckabush River being at the Black Point site, rather than just south of the
point where it lies today.
Prior to Vashon-aged glaciation there was high-energy erosion and deposition from the
ancestral Duckabush and Dosewallips Rivers. These formed the coarse-grained deltaic deposits
seen just north of Brinnon, and those on the southeast part of the development property shown
as Qu on Figure 5. Where below the water table, Qu deposits may form a prolific aquifer. The
geologic mapping and boring logs suggest that remnant Qu deposits are found above and below
sea level on the central and southem portions of the peninsula. It appears that the bedrock high
on the northeast end of the peninsula shielded the Qu on the lee side of the bedrock from glacial
erosion in this location. The Qu is either absent or below sea level in the remainder of the
peninsula. Figures 8,9, and 10 provide geologic cross sections of the area. These show how
the Qu has been scoured out from the interior of the peninsula.
The Vashon-aged glacial processes were responsible for erosion of existing soils and deposition
of a complex mixture of soils. Advance outwash (Qva) was deposited in front of the advancing
glacier. These deposits are found along the southem bluff of the site and on the eastem bluffof
the peninsula. Qva sands are generally found below about 50 to 100 feet elevation. Though
typically coarse-grained and pervious in nature, they may have lenses or layers of lower-
permeability silt and silty sand. The Qva and Qu fonn the principle aquifer of the peninsula.
Till (Q\4) was deposited as the glacier overrode existing soils. These soils are dense silty sand
and gravels that typically form a barrier to groundwater flow. Though groundwater can
infiltrate through the unit with time, the ur-rit is not an aquifer. Basal till was observed along the
bedrock margins on the west side of the site and along the west and norlh sides of Pleasant
Harbor. Till was also encountered in B-3, and may have been encountered in the American
Campground well. Qvt was not found in the interior of proposed development site. Till was
typically 25 feet or less thick.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
U
Hydrogeologic Evalu ation
June 26,2006
Page 9 of 19
The continental glacier that occupied Hood Canal and the greater Puget Sound region retreated,
or wasted, in a south to north direction. As the glacier retreated, there were pulses where the
glacier may have re-advanced for a small time period. The Black Point peninsula appears to
reflect an area where remnants of the wasting and re-advance of the glacier occurred. The ice-
contact deposits at the site rcflect a mixing of previously laid till, glaciolacustrine, outwash, and
other units. The deposits were eroded in a glaciofluvial environment, and were then densified
as the glacier re-advanced over the site. The Qvi units are highly variable and complex in
composition and permeability characteristics. Qvi soil penneabilities can change dramatically
frorn soils with till-like characteristics to outwash characteristics, often within tens of feet.
As the glacier wasted and pulsed, part of it was likely floating. During that period, large blocks
of ice became remnant features of the ice sheet, were likely covered with soils, and wasted in
place over a period of time after much of the other ice had retreated. These blocks of ice
formed the kettles that are currently observed as deep depressions at a number of locations at
the site. As the ice blocks slowly melted, Qvi soils were being deposited around them; there
was likely a glacial advance over these deposits. As the stagnated ice blocks melted in-place;
sand, gravel, and silt soils entrained in the ice were deposited, forming a lower permeability skin
on the side walls and base of the kettles. The presence of this lower permeability skin is likely
reflected by the seasonal formation of wetlands at the base of some of tlie kettles. The fact that
the kettles do not hold appreciable amounts of water suggests that the Qvi soils surrounding the
kettles are pervious, and that the kettles are not underlain by till (Qvt) soils. Qvt was
encountered in boring B-3, located between kettles B and C, the bottom elevation of these
kettles is below the elevation of the till (till elevation about 90 to 100 feet).
Deposits of recessional outwash and ice contact glacial outwash mantle the peninsula. These
deposits are typically pervious, but can have a wide range of permeabilities on a local scale.
These deposits play a critical role in minimizing or eliminating runoff frorn the peninsula site.
Precipitation readily infiltrates into these soils. In areas where these deposits are underlain by
Qvi soils of low permeability, they may store infiltrated water until the mass of Qvi soils can
infiltrate water to the Qva and Qu aquifers.
The lack of runoff on the peninsula is contrasted with the seasonal runoff observed by
GeoEngineers (June 2006) on the site areas bordering Higlrway 101 and at the Maritime
Village. Glaciolacustrine silt and till underlies Cell B. These soils are low penneability and
typically do not allow direct infiltration, as such, runoffis generated by precipitation. Since the
streams on these areas are rather small, it suggests that the catchment areas for the streams are
also small, and/or that some of the water may be infiltrated downslope. Some of the streams
may also be supported by groundwater discharge.
The peninsula is surrounded on three sides by sea water. Due to density differences, fresh water
essentially floats on sea water. The principle is theoretically govemed by the Ghyben-Herzberg
relationship which establishes a relationship between fresh water head and the location of the
salt water-fresh water interface. The relationship states that for every foot of fresh water head
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. 5G0601
Hydrogeologic Evaluation
June 26,2006
Page 10 of 19
above sea level, the depth to the salt water interface is vertically a factor of 40. As noted in the
previous section, the head beneath the peninsula ranges between 1 1 and 34 feet, as such there is
a significant fresh water lens beneath the peninsula. The depth of the interface would also be
governed by the depth to bedrock; that depth is not known with current data, though bedrock
probably lies at depths greater than 1 00 feet below sea level.
Though there may be a significant fresh water body beneath the peninsula, it is important to
maintain a positive fresh water head above sea level in the aquifer. The change in fresh water
head has a large impact on the location of the salt water interface. A reduction of head below
sea level could cause sea water intrusion, which is a poor practice for maintaining an aquifer (as
it takes rnany years to recover from the effects of sea water intrusion), and would also violate
State and County policies.
The Qva and Qu form the principle aquifers on Black Point peninsula. The profiles in Figures 8
through l0 provide an underctanding of how the recharge processes and soil conditions affect
the water supply capacities of the aquifer. Figure 8 shows that there are goundwater gradients
toward the center of the peninsula fiom the north, east, and west sides. These indicate that
groundwater is flowing toward the center and westem portions of the peninsula, which is likely
composed of higher permeability soils. Groundwater flow from the west is anticipated as
discharge from the upland areas flows toward the canal. The flow on the east side of the
peninsula to the west indicates that recharge is greater on the west side of the point than at the
site. This may be in part due to the pervious Qvio sediments that lie at ground surface on the
east side of tlre site. ln our opinion, recharge is greater on the eastem part of the site and
peninsula because there is a thinner mantle of Qvi soils and a thicker sequence of Qva and Qu
soils. The higher recharge may also be due to local weather pattems and orographic effects as
southerly storms reach the peninsula.
The presence of bedrock also affects groundwater flow directions. Geologic mapping indicates
bedrock highs on the northem and eastem parts of the peninsula. Qva soils directly overlie
bedrock in these areas. As such, bedrock will perch water in the Qva, and groundwater may
move along bedrock topography where above sea level. If the peninsula was merely an
accunulation of soil, groundwater flow gradients would typically be radially out from the
center. These data show that the bedrock plays an imporlant part in the groundwater flow
directions and recharge characteristic of the peninsula.
The Qva/Qu aquifer is prolific. The soil types which form the aquifer consist of permeable
sands and gravels. Though aquifer tests have not been perlonned in the aquifer, the well log
fiom the American Carnpground well suggests that the aquifer has a moderate transmissivity.
Transmissivity is an aquifer parameter that describes groundwater flow rates in an aquifer. That
well was tested at 307 gallons per minute with 43 feet of drawdown; using an empirical formula
that utilizes well specific capacity, this leads to an aquifer transmissivity of L3 square feet per
day. This is a rather typical value of transrnissivity for Qva aquifers in the Puget Sound region.
I
I
t
I
t
t
I
I
I
I
t
I
t
I
I
lrl
ll
1l
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607 t
Hydrogeologic Evaluation
June 26,2006
Page 11 of 19
The groundwater heads and flow directions suggest that the aquifer beneath the westem parl of
the site exhibits higher permeabilities than in the vicinity of the campground well.
6.0 CRJTICALAQT]IFER RECHARGEAREA
Jeffbrsorr County has designated Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas on the site. Two types of
critical aquifer recharge areas are identified: l) Seawater Intrusion Protection Zones (SIPZ); and
2) Aquifer Recharge Areas.
The SIPZ classification is due to the site being proximate to a marine shoreline. Jefferson
County has an existing Seawater Intrusion Protection Zones Policy (UDC Section 3.6.5). The
site is a coastal Seawater Intrusion Protection Zone (SIPZ); all land within one-quarter mile of a
shoreline in Jefferson County fall within this classification. Based on the County's web site, no
At fusk or High fusk SIPZ areas have been identified on the peninsula. All of the wells
sampled in the vicinity of the site in the County's study had chloride concentrations less than
100 milligram per liter.
The Aquifer Recharge Area designation was based on mapping performed by Grimstad and
Carson (1981) for preparation of Water Supply Bulletin No. 54 for the Department of Ecology.
The geologic field mapping, test pit explorations, and borings performed for this and other
evaluations has reinterpreted the work perlormed by Grimstad and Carson. This
reinterpretation was based on actual sampling of the soils on site as opposed to field mapping,
which typically does not utilize exploration methods. These efforts have used Best Available
Science in characterizing the geologic and groundwater regime through field mapping and
borings on site. Based on our work, the critical aquifer recharge areas would best be located on
the eastem part of the point, and possibly areas north of the site. This is demonstrated by
groundwater heads in the center of the site being lower than those on the margins.
Additional work will be perfonned to develop susceptibility ratings for the site. An Aquifer
Recharge Area Report will be prepared to quantifu aquifer recharge and susceptibility. Based
on the results of these studies, Adaptive Management procedures will be developed for
rnaintaining groundwater quality and quantity.
The proposed land uses at the site do not fall within the high irnpact land classification as
defined by the County. As such, the County policy requires protection standards using of Best
Management Practices for storm water and sewage disposal, and for land use such as golf
courses. As describedby 2020 Engineering, storm water and sewage effluent from the project
will be contained in closed systems. Golf course management will conform to Jefferson
County's BuiltGreen Program (2020 Engineering, July 2007). Irr addition, less than l5 percent
of the project area will be covered by impervious surfaces; the water frorn these surfaces will be
collected and eventually reintroduced to the aquifer. The only losses to the system will be
tllough evaporative and evapotranspiration processes. These losses have been estimated to be
less than 1 percent of the annual pre-development water budget. As such, recharge will be
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
Hydrogeologic Evaluation
June 26,2006
Page 12 of 19
rnaintained over the year; where the recharge rate over time will be more gradual with fewer
peaks and valleys.
7.0 ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTS
The following provides a description of the impacts from the proposed alten,atives for the
project area. As requested by the County, we have specifically addressed the following issues
related to watsr': a) rainwater harvesting; b) groundwater, including saltwater intrusion. We
understand that sewer service, water quality, and surface water will be addressed by 2020
Engineers; though we refer to water rights, these have been addressed by Perkins Coie (2007).
Predevelopment recharge to the aquifer from precipitation was estimated using a water balance
method. This method consists of subtracting runoff, evapotranspiration, and change in storage
from precipitation that falls on the site. The climatic data used in the analyses was collected
from the Qulicene weather station as discussed in Section 3.0. Evapotranspiration was
calculated using the Penman-Monteith method. Runoff was assumed to be zero. The soil
moisture capacity was assumed to equal 4-inches, as presented in Water Supply Bulletin 54, and
as by our understanding of the site soil conditions.
7.1 Alternative A - No Action Plan
Under the No Action Plan Black Point would continue to develop as a single-family residential
area with the addition of some commercial activity in the Jupiter arrd Tudor properties. The No
Action Plan assumes the addition of a t hole golf course and discontinuing the operation of the
campground area. There are no other proposed changes to the existing land uses.
The current building requirements for residential homes by Jefferson County are 200 gallons
per day per bedroom in the residences. We assulne that the homes will have 2.5 bedrooms, and
permitting will require a minimum supply of 500 gallons per day per residence. We assume
there would be irrigation of an about 0.2 acre of residential landscape. Assuming about 15
inches of irrigation will be used between about May and October for inigation of each parcel;
about 81,000 gallons per unit would be used for irrigation. These numbers suggest a total
armual water use under the No Action Plan of about 23 million gallons. Table 2 provides a
summary of the water use requirements for the MPR.
It is our understanding that precipitation that falls on all pervious surfaces for residential
development in Jefferson County must be infiltrated. Local clearing and residential irrigation
practices will not significantly affect recharge because irrigation will maintain soil moisture. As
such, there willbe no significant change in recharge due to the development.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Prqect No. SG0607
I
Hyd rogeologic Eval u ation
June 26,2006
Page 13 of 19
The aquifer underlying the site is pervious, and with proper placement and operation of wells it
will supply the water requirements described above. However, the increase in groundwater use,
primarily related to golf course and residential irrigation, will create a demand on the aquifer
greater than that presently experienced. The increase in unregulated wells could lead to over-
use of individual wells and salt water intrusion through upwelling or the combined eflect of
multiple wells spread throughout tlre aquifer area.
7 .2 Alternative B - Pleasant Harbor Marirra and Golf Course Resort
This section presents the water demand and supply requirements for the proposed development.
The proposed development will consist of construction of an 18 hole golf course, 890
residential units, and about 79,000 square feet of commercial facilities. Water harvesting will
be used in concert for water supply. Irrigation for the golf course and Fire Smart program will
be from treated water stored in the ponds. In essence, the only consumptive losses from the
project will be from evaporation and evapotranspiration losses.
7.2.1 Water Demand - Potable
The residential water demand is based on a supply requirement of 175 gallons per day per
residential unit. This is based on using water savirrg fixtures tluoughout the units and a
reduction in potable water use by using reclaimed water for the toilets. A more detailed
description of the water use requirements per urrit is provided by 2020 Engineers (July 2007).
The resort will have seasonal occupancy as described by Statesman (2007). Given the above
number of units and demand rates; the annual demand for the residential units will be about 93
acre-feet of water.
Statesman has provided an estimate of 25,000 gallons per day for commercial uses at the resofi,
this equates to 28 ac-ft per year.
Given these estimates, the potable water demand at the desigll occupancy is about 121 ac-ft per
year (Table 2).
7.2.1 Water Demand - Non-potable
Non-potable water and harvested rainwater will be used for inigation. The irrigation demand
will be for golf course irrigation and the Fire Smart program, which will used to promote native
vegetation health and to reduce fire hazards; excess non-potable water will also be used for
aquifer recharge.
The total golf course area to be irrigated will be about 6l acres. Two methods were used to
estimate the irrigation requirement for the golf course: the first was to calculate required
irrigation based on an evapotranspiration deficit; this estirnate evaluated a demand of about l7
inches per year of irrigation. The second rnethod utilized the rnethods presented in publication
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
Hydrogeologic Evaluation
June 26,2006
Page 14 of 19
EBl513 by the Washington State Cooperative Extension. This method estimated an irrigation
requirement of about 15.7 inches per year. To be conservative, we used the higher rate, which
equates to about 90 acre feet per year.
The Fire Smart Program has been designed to promote native vegetation growth and reduce fire
hazards. Native vegetation is primarily dormant in the surrmer months and we applied 20
percent of the evapotranspiration demand for the plants to wet them. We applied this rate to
120 acres of property that will not be developed by the proposal. The total Fire Smart program
demand was about 18 acre-feet per year.
Given these calculations, the total non-potable dernand is about 107 acre-feet per year. Table 2
provides a surunary of the water use requirements.
7.2.3 Water Supply Approach
The approach to water supply at the proposed development is an innovative means of
collection, distribution, treatrnent, and reuse intended to reduce the irnpact on nafural resources
and the underlying aquifer. The concept consists of use of groundwater and roof top rainwater
harvest for potable supply and collection of roadway rainwater and reuse of water for irrigation.
This concept is supported by the state's 1992 Water reclamation Act. Potable supply will be
from the existing well and a new backup well. Harvested water from the building rooftops will
be routed to a 50 million gallon storage reseloir. The existing water right owned by Statesman
will support the water demand up to Phase 2 building of the resort. The use of wells to provide
potable water will decrease significantly, or be eliminated once water rights are acquired for
rainwater harvesting.
Wastewater from the residential and commercial uses will then be routed to a treatment plant,
which will treat the water to Class A standards and discharge the storage ponds. The proposed
driving range pond will be partially filled and lined to hold about 60 million gallons. The water
stored in this pond will then be used to irrigate the golf course, provide water for the Fire Smart
Program, and provide water for aquifer recharge.
The design of the development reduces the amount of construction of impervious surfaces that
would lirnit natural aquifer recharge, maintains or minimizes a soil moisture deficit in areas
(such as the golf course and Fire Smart program area) that would typically dry in an
undeveloped site, reuses water, requires a minimum of groundwater pumping, and provides
recharge to the aquifer. Recharge will be directly injected to the aquifer through the use of
wells.
7.2.4 Water Balance Calculations
Water balance calculations were performed to evaluate the water supply potential of the
approach, and to evaluate the amount of water that can be used for artificial recharge. Table 2
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. 5G0601
I
I
H yd roge ol og ic Ev a I u at i o n
June 26,2006
Page 15of 19
provides a summary of the water balance calculations. Tlre demand requirements are as
discussed above. The basis for the available supply is also presented in the table. Note that all
of the calculations utilize the daily weather data and evapotranspiration estimates discussed in
Section 3.0. As such, the calculations take into consideration the effects of evaporation on an
exposed water body, such as the ponds. Precipitation events less than or equal to 0.01 inch were
not allowed to contribute to the budget. Evapotranspiration was allowed to reduce the amount
of precipitation before the water was routed into a reservoir. From these standpoints, the
calculations are conservative.
Because the water supply systems require storage, an analysis of the build out of the resort was
performed to evaluate whether the resort could be initiated based on groundwater rights, limited
rain water harvesting until full build out, and storage. This analysis is also important to evaluate
whether aquifer recharge can be perfonned in a timely marlrler to reduce aquifer impacts.
Figure 11 shows the results of the build-out scenario. In this, it takes about two years for
storage to accumulate in the ponds to provide a steady reserye. Overflow storage will be routed
to the recharge system. This system will place water into the ponds and then to shallow wells
that will inject the water into the aquifer, but above the water table. Recharge rates will reach a
relatively constant 62 million gallons per year. There will be sufficient storage in the ponds to
account for natural climate fluctuations. Figure l1 presents the water cycle, by component, on
an amual basis.
7.2.5 Aquifer lmpact Analysis
Table 3 provides a summary of the predevelopment recharge versus irnpact. As shown, there is
a small increase in water use from the existing aquifer from the water use scheme. Reduction of
the amount of water used by water saving fixtures and through use of harvested water for
residential purposes rvill ultimately result in recharging more water to the aquifer than is
presently occurring. This benefit is due primarily to the decrease in evapotranspiration at the
site, that there will be relatively few impervious surlaces on the site compared to the overall
property; that the majority of recharge occurs during the fall, winter, and spring, that about one-
half of the site receives irrigation, and that the underlying aquifer is not a major source of water
supply. This analysis ignores the potential for off-site recharge. The potential impact dudng
build out and operation of the resort prior to acquiring water rights is small, and is not predicted
to provide an adverse aquifer impact. The estimated positive impact to the aquifer system with
time is due to an innovative system of capfuring, use, and reintroduction of water to the aquifer.
7.3 Brinnon Subarea Plan Alternative
The BSAP will be very similar to the proposal in that the golf course housing and comrnercial
facilities will be constructed similar to the proposal, but the residential use will be less and there
will not be a fire smarl prograrn. Table 2 provides a summary of the water use requirements for
the altemative.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
I
l
I
Hydrogeologic Evaluation
June 26,2006
Page 16 of 19
The water demand requirements for the BSAP Altemative are similar but less than the proposal.
The differences are largely in the residential and inigation uses. Since the proposal plans to
irrigate more land area, the actual water demand appears higher. The key to an impact analysis
for the BSAP Alternative is to predict what the water supply source will be for development. If
the developer chooses to use water conservation, reuse, and storage measures such as
Statesman, then the impact will be relatively similar to that for the proposal, though more
infrastructure may be required for water distribution. If the developer chooses to not collect
rainfall for the water demand, then in lieu of an off-site water system supply (which is unlikely)
groundwater wells would need to be installed. Groundwater withdrawals would need to be over
100 acre feet to support irrigation uses with reuse of water.
The loss in recharge to the aquifer is on the same order as the no action altemative and the
Statesman altematives using well supply only.
7.4 Hybrid Alternative
The Hybrid Altemative is identical to the Statesman Altemative but for addition of some
residential and commercial use. The amount of water required for these uses is estimated to be
an additional 28 ac-ft of water per year.
The amount of water required for this proposal is greater than the Statesman proposal; however,
the amount of water collected by rainwater hatvesting and reinjection of the water is also greater
than the Statesman proposal. Since stormwater will be required to collected and treated, more
water is available for aquifer recharge. The projected aquifer impact using wells as the sole
supply source is slightly less than the other alternatives, and will decrease to a slight aquifer
enhancement once rainwater harvesting rights are acquired.
8.0 MITIGATIONMEASURES
8.1 No Action Alternative
The no action altemative will lrave aquifer impacts similar to the other proposals. Because of
the potential for sea water intrusion, groundwater users under Alternative A should have water
use limitations and be required to utilize water conservation measures to reduce irnpact to the
aquifer.
8.2 Proposal
The existing proposal has a slight impact on tlre aquifer conditions beneath the site. This is
because the proposal has incorporated mitigation measures to reduce aquifer impact. Further
rnitigation may be performed by routing less water to the Fire Srnart progam and using that
water for groundwater recharge. The project will develop susceptibility ratings for the site and
develop adaptive management procedures to maintain groundwater quality and quantity.
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Prqect No. 5G0601
i
Hydrogeologic Evaluation
June 26,2006
Page 17 of 19
Groundwater and water quality monitoring will be performed at monitoring wells installed
along the bluff and interior of the project site. No other rnitigation measures are considered at
this tirne.
8.3 Brimon Subarea Plan Alternative
The Comprelrensive Plan altemative rnay have a similar small impact to the aquifer if the water
conservation, reuse, and storage rneasures planned for the proposal altemative are used. If those
measures are not used, and groundwater pumpage is the sole source of water for the
development, then a higher potential for salt water intrusion in the sea level aquifer exists.
9.4 AltemativeD-Hybrid
The Hybrid Alternative has a slight decrease in aquifer impact than the proposal. We anticipate
that wells for the additional development could be located west of the highway and would have
a minirnal impact on the aquifer. This alternative, as with the Statesman and BSAP alternatives,
will have the potential to provide a net positive aquifer irnpact if rainwater harvesting is used in
concert with the other reuse and water conservation measures.
9.0 SIGMFICANT T]NAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS
It is our opinion that unregulated water use under the No Action Altemative has the potential to
promote sea water intrusion which would contaminate the aquifer and violate State and County
policies. If domestic wells are installed properly and operated within the limits of domestic
water rights, than the potential for aquifer impact is low. The remaining altematives have small
potential impact or a potential aquifer benefit, if properly managed, and would not produce any
avoidable adverse impacts.
Thank you for the opportunity to be of service.
Sincerely,
Scott F. Bender L.H.G., C.G.W.P
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
n
n
Hydrogeologic Evalu ation
June 26,2006
Page 18 of 19
ENCLOSURES
List ofTables:
l. Regional Weather Station Monthly Climatic Summaries
2. Water Balance Inputs and Summary
3. Summary of Water Demand for MPR Altematives
4. Estimated Aquifer Recharge Loss per MPR Altemative
List of Figures
l. Site Plan
2. Exiting Conditions
3. Site Phasing Plan
4. Comparison of Precipitation and PET for Proposal Property
5. Surficial Geology
6. Measured Groundwater Level Fluctuations Compared to Tidal Fluctuations
7. Measured Groundwater Level Fluctuations Compared to Precipitation
8. Geologic Profile A-A'
9. Geologic Profile B-B'
10. Geologic Profile C-C'
I 1. Water Balance for Initial Development to Full Build-Out
References:
o 2020 Engineering, verbal communication, July 2007
. Crop Evaluation - Guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirements - FAO
Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations. Rome, 1998.
o EBl5l3 Irrigation requirements for Washington. 2001. Washingon State Cooperative
Extension.
o Geology and Ground-Water Resources of Eastem Jefferson County, Water Supply
Bulletin No. 54, Washington Department of Natural Resources and Jefferson County
Public utility District No. I (1981).
o GeoEnglneers, Inc. Draft Wetland Delineation, Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf resorl,
Jefferson County, Washington. June 2006.
o Perrone Consulting, lnc. Geotechnical Report, Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf
Resort, Jefferson County, Washington. July 2007.
. Jefferson County Master Plan (1978) description of geologic conditions in eastem
Jefferson County.
o Westem Regional Climate Center
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
I
n
Hydrogeologic Evaluation
June 26,2006
Page 19 of 19
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC Project No. SG0607
I
tl
I
I
I
QUILCENE 2 SW, WASHINGTON (4s6846)
Period of Record z 61 411948 to 1213112005
Jan Feb Mar
Average Max. Temperature (F) 44.2 49.4 54.2
Average Min. Temperature (F) 30.4 32.1 34.1
Average Total Precipitation (in.) 8.23 6.84 6.03
Average Total SnowFall (in.) 2.9 1.3 0.5
Average Snow Depth (in.) I 0 0
Apr
60.5
37.7
3.56
0
0
May
66.7
42.6
2.58
0
0
Jun
7l .5
47.6
2.17
0
0
Jul
77.2
503
t. t9
0
0
Aug
77,1
49.9
t.23
0
0
Oct
6t.2
39.6
Dec
44.1
3 r.6
9.8 r
2.4
0
Annual
60.7
39.7
55.43
7.6
0
Sep
72.3
45.6
1.52
0
0
4.t9
0
0
Nov
50.3
34.8
8.07
0.4
0
poRT TOWNSEND, WASHINGTON (456678)
Period of Record z 61211948 to 1213112005
Jan Feb Mar
Averagc Max. Temperature (F) 45.3 48.6 52
Average Min. Temperature (F) 36.3 37.5 38.8
Average Total Precrpitation (in.) 2.19 1.62 1.73
Average Total SnowFall (in.) 1.5 0.7 0.6
Average Snow Depth (in.) 0 0 0
Apr
57
41.9
1.43
0
0
Jul
7 t.9
51 9
0.87
0
0
I)ec
45.9
37.3
2.5'7
0.7
0
Annual
58.3
43.9
19.12
4
0
Oct
58.6
45.t
1.52
0
0
Aug
72.2
52.2
0.9
0
0
May
62.8
46
1.48
0
0
Jun
67.4
49.6
t.26
0
0
Sep
67.8
49.6
r.06
0
0
Nov
50.4
40.2
2.49
0.5
0
BREMERTON, WASHINGTON (450872)
Period of Record : 6l lll948 to 1213112005
Jul
75.2
53.4
0.86
0
0
Dec
4s.4
34.9
8.84
1.8
0
Annual
59.9
43.1
51.6t
7.7
0
sep
70.5
50
t.79
0
0
Aug
75.4
53.8
t.04
0
0
May
65.2
45.6
2
0
0
Apr
58.6
40.5
3.il
0
0
Average Max. Temperature (F)
Average Min. Temperature (F)
Average Total Precipitation (in.)
Average Total SnowFall (in.)
Average Snow Depth ( in.)
Jan
45
34.t
8. r4
3.5
0
Feb
49.2
35
6. t9
1.3
0
Mar
53.3
17
5.5
0.4
0
Oct
60.6
44.1
4.49
0
0
Nov
50.s
38.3
8.1 I
0.7
0
Jun
69.9
50.2
L55
0
0
Table l. Regional Weather Station Monthly Climatic Summaries
Source: Western Regional Climate
Center
SUBSURFACE GROUP. LLC sc 060 l-02
I'fIIITXIIII, IItr\-J D- I-
-rrtrf,r--rnrrr-rD(rr I
Table 2. Summary of Water Demand for Altematives
[:nd Use Alternative Rcsidential Units
Nmbcr
of units
Arnul Walcr
Urc pcr Unit
(cal)
Annul
Dcmand (gal)
Commercial Use
Sq@c Feet Annul
Demand (gal)
Inigarion
AmulDmod
(sal)Tobls
Notes
500 gpd pcr resid.ntial homc pl6 rcsiddti.l iEigation
I75 gpd/unrt for all 16idcntal unir.
Est 70 gpd prr room, 65% rccupicd
Assmc 2.5 rmm pcr B&B, 200 gpd/unil 65'l. o@upicd
500 gpd p., .6idctrtial homc pl6 rcsidotial irigation
Commcrcial uc ro a pcrcqtagc ofProposel
Esr ?0 gpd pcr .oorr' 6 S'y'o oaugicd
Ass@c 2.5 r@m pcr tomhomc, 200 gpd/mit, 65% ocopicd
Esl 70 gpd p6 roqm, 65% ocupicd
Increc in rcsidotial od commcrcial uc
Est 70 gpd pcr stall, 65% ompicd
Assmc 2.5 .@m pcr @bia 200 gpd/wit, 65% occupied
No Action
Hom6
N{arim
Commcrciel
Tudor Site
Commercial
Jupiter Silc
Gas Sbtion ed RV
Totrl (gallons)
Toal (ac-ft)
30 116,904 9,507,131
9,507,131
3,000
5,000
1,000
346,497
577,495
I 15.499
1,039,492
3
31 14.585,696
t4,585,696
45
24,092,E28
346,497
577,495
t 15.499
25,t32,3t9
77
Proposl
Tobl (ac-ft)
890 34,t25 10,371.250
91
79,000 9,t24,426
2E
34,958,224
t07
74,453.900
228
CDlf 60.0,00 6.929.944 6l 29,t7t.192 36.10t.336
200 16,60t 3,321,500
7 47,450 312, I 50
25
zo
20
20
316,904 1,922,5tO
16,50r lt2,l50
4'1,450
16,608
949,000
332,150
13,1E9,560
40
E90 42,321 t7,67t.250
20
4
16,60E
47,450
332,150
169,E00
38,193,200
ll7
15,000
2,500
1,847,985
2tt,748
20,000
1,000
2,309,981
I 15,499
I 1,492,157 29.t71.392
79.000 9.124,426 l8l 34,95E.224
5,000 577,495
577,4955,000
tt5,499
10,394,916 34,958,224
3,32r.500
332,150
7,922,6t0
1,847,985
332r50
288.748
949,000
132,150
2,309,9E1
l 15.499
53,853,109
165
8t,753.900
332,150
189,800
577.49s
577.495
I I5,499
E3,546,340
256
SUBST'RFACE GROUP, LLC SC,060l-02
t8l
Tudor Sitc
,upitcr Sitc
Cas SEtion ed RV
1,000
Table. 3. Estimated Aquifer Recharge Loss Due to Proposed Alternatives
3l
to
BSAP
Ac-ft
739
2
Loss 46
133
60
109
-30
-240
0
0
49
-6
0
43
133
60
8l
-30
- 195
48.1
predevelopment rechilge
Calculation
precip - ET - moff-Storagc Chmgc
lnches
28.5s
No Action Proporl
Ac-ft Ac-ft
739 739
Hybrid
Aefl
't39
83
60
35
-10
-122
due to grundwater pmping Zero loss for existing wtcr rights
duc to chmgr in stomgc say 2" of4" retained due to irigstion
due to artificial rahrgc
loss due to water hwest
loss to I ined pond intreption md evapoEtion
0
0
49
-6
0
43
1%
133
@
EI
-30
.195
48
3Vo
133
60
109
.30
-240
JI
2%
2
46Loss
Calculation
praip - ET - uoff-Storagc Chmgc for 615 rcrcs
lnchcs
28.55
No Action
Ac-ft
1,689
Proposal
Ac-ft
t,689
Hvbrid
Ac-ft
1,689predcvclopmeot rrchuge
loss duc to water hecst
los to lined pond interccption
Zero loss for existing watcr rights
say 2' of4' rctained due to irigation (120 ac - B; 53 ac - C)
BSAP
Ac-ft
1,689
83
60
35
-lo
-t22
duc to goudwater pmping
due to chmgc in stongc
due to artificial rmhugc
Subsurface Group, LLC sG060l-02
n
I
t
Table. 4. Black Point Aquifer Recharge Loss Due to Proposed Alternatives
duc to groudwater pmpinB Zero loss for existing water rights
due to chmge in storage say 2" of4" retaincd du€ to irigation (120 ac - B;53 ac - C)
due to artificial rechrge
0
0
267
-9
0
258
49o/o
104
60
30
- 139
33
60/o
2
Loss
0
0
l8
0
0
l8
104
60
0
-))
.139
3.5
Calculation
predevelopment rechuge prccip - ET - runoff-Storage Chmge
Inches
28.55
AItA
Ac-ff
523
AIt B
Ac-ft
521
Altc
Ac-ft
521
AIT D
Ac-ft
523
loss due to water hmest (Black Point only)
loss to lined pond interception
Bhck Poinl Aquifer Rechargc lns Duc to Proposed Altematives
Itcm Calculation
Peninsula predevelopment recharge precip - ET - runoff-Storage Chmge for 615 acres
Rechdge loss due to wator hrycst
Rechugc los to lined pond itrtcrception
Loss due to groutrdwater pmping Zero loss for existing water rights
Cain duc to chmge in storage say 2" of4" retaincd duc to irigation (120 ac. B; 53 ac - C)
Gain duc to anificial rechuge
Total Loss
Perccnt Loss
Inches
28.55
2
AIt A
Ac-ft
1,463
AIt B
Ac-ft
1,463
104
60
0
-22
- 139
0.20/o
AIt C
Ac-ft
t,463
AIt C
Ac-ft
t,463
0
0
0
0
0
t04
60
30
-22
-139
33
2n/o
0
0
267
-9
0
258
tSvo
0
00/o
3
Subsurface Group, LLC sG060l-02
t
I
T
t
I
T
I
I
I
t
I
T
I
I
T
I
t
I
I
v)t /\
1
l-
I
/I L
I
I
/+Jt
I T /a
I
I
SUBSURFACE GROUP,
LLC
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf
Groundwater Impact Evaluation
Statesman Corporation
Site Plan (Cell A)
Project Numbcr
sG060 I -02
Figure I
I
-7 __
I
---/7
ffi R!
)"1Y3
1
L-I 'TlI
,{
1
ttl 1
l
)1JI\
llli
1 V
I
I \t
I nzNq/ttr \
)_./ H*.//t
il)
/)i/77.,
a"t(
_)
I
I
!
,$rr
SUBSURFACE GROUP,
LLC
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf
Groundwater Impact Evaluation
Statesman Corporation
Existing Conditions
Project Number
sG060l-02
Figure 2
I
I
T
t
I
I
I
T
T
t
T
I
I
t
I
t
t
I
I
I
1I
//l X
ts l
t
7
I
/
U
From Comp l'lun
Proposal
I l, 2,3, {
A,B,C,D
SUBSURFACE GROUP,
LLC
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Comprehensive Plan
ZoningCroundwater Impact Evaluation
Statesman Corporation
Project Number
sG060 I -02
Figure 3
t
I
I
t
T
T
t
I
T
T
t
I
I
I
I
I
T
T
I
r
C
\
.\
Y
I
II'IIIII'IIIIII'III
0.60
0.50
0.40
€)
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
l-Jan 3l-Jan 2-Mar l-Apr l-May 3l-May 3GJun 3GJul 29-Aug 28-Sep 28-Oct 27-Nov 27-Dec
*Averagc Daily Prccipitation (in)
-po,cntialEvaportranspiration
(12-day moving average)
-Daily
Prccipiation (l24ay moving avcragc)
??
il[
May 9
Oct 6
SUBSURFACE GROUP,
, LLC
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Groundwater Impact Evaluation
Statesman Corporation
Comparison of Precipitation and
Potential Evapotranspiration
Project Number
sG060l-02
Figure 4
\l
\[
( I'l
I
\\:
\
\\
i\
\
\
i
fi'
$r
\
\\
€r'-m{
r:o,{,
T,
W
lnE
l!ts
H6
lHr
li ,
t
(4
\)
E
c
3
;EqEEEfigitdddE
I''EEi?g n: Fogict
do^I I9- r
tt
i)
F
n
e
69
o
d++ t'l +
n E ll {Q T'TI T' {j -
sEE{etto I t
EH EHi ;
ad aiE6l
E
eI
o
>o
9i
to
?3
Zg
4!
oE
Hhod
2A
rd B
>o 9
E$:l9
q5
96
I
II
oq
ia
;F
;o
!
+
,.5l
o
+f
T
+It
+-tt!
(+
+!
'o
o
o
o
!\.
''+i,i
+
+tr.
)
\r4
!o',
<.1-'
\
-/
a*.'{ ,'i1
t^
&
\
\et I!,,
r)
9?to{!
it o
++
/(
$
+
+IT
o
iltt
n)o
6'
+t!
\
.h
)
+.l tI
/-.
"ts6
\
o
\t\
\
€mr
{noo
\E.m-
\r
tl
+
\:1..
d
m'\
\l\
\
Il X +-u
I
oo
oo'
go
7-.ooof
o.0)
\b
-ao
o
ailg-(o =.
\
o
o)
\
N\
o3
o
-i
N \
\\
\\\
-a\-'N=
\:.. \
N,i
r\
ta\
\
,/
\
\
\\\
:m--NC
THE STATESMAN CORPORATION
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA & GOLF BESORT Golf Course and Resort Area
SURFICIAL GEOLOGY 061 01
Figur€ 5
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC
630 6ai streol Sortl,
K*land, WA 98033
eh: (125) 82&7il5
B/1O/O7
3d
1"=2OO'
DAY
c a
IITIIIIITIIIIIITI-I
o
L_\^
\
\\
-+-i
\
{
r
/ \^\-\
C-
l -/-_
't'
-/
I
ll
(
c )
o
J,.t\)
,/.
/\g
\
(
tt:'
).
\
-\I
1
)_\(
\
\
)
)
l
-N\+-.( i) I:! \'-[^-
)\,
./ \?
/-1
\l
\
\J."l\
'l l-.)(
I
I
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
I 1.30 20
I l.l0
l5
t0.90
-c)
o
qt
6)
1.1
ID
(l)J
ID
qt
'
o
0.70 t0
0.50
0.30
5
o
-()
BO
q)
€,
F
I 0.0 0
9.90
-)
9.70
9.50 -t0
6n2t2006 6il4t2006 6il6t2006 6lt8l2w 612012006 61242006 612412006 6126/2006 6128/2006 6t30t2006
+-B-l r B-3 Tide Height
SUBSURFACE CROUP,
, LLC
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Groundwater Impact Evaluation
Statesman Corporation
Measured Groundwater Level
Fluctuations Compared to Tidal
Fluctuations
Project Number
sG060l-02
Figure 6
I \fl
/J
J I
1
o
0.8 ;
6
q)
0.6 o.
-€)
cl
€)
lJJ
o
oJ
iD
GI
I l.,m
r 1.20
ll.m
t0.80
10.60
10.lm
r0.20
10.00
9.80
9.60
1.4
t.2
0.4
0.2
9.40
6/tt2o06 6/612W6 6lltl2006 6ll6l2fi6 6l2V2W6 6126120M 7ltl206 716/20M 7lttlzffi6 711612006 7l2tl20X)
--+Precipitation ---o- B-l B-3
0
SUBSURFACE GROUP,
. LLC
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Groundwater Impact Evaluation
Statesman Corporation
Measured Groundwater Level
Fluctuations Compared to Precipitation
Project Number
sG060 t-02
Figure 7
IIITIIIIIIIITIIIIII
I
\,
t]l-
1
\,
,l rr
l'r l
Jr
II'IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
A
Northwest
r
i
I
I
I
1'
l
I
A
Southeast
-i
I
+-
I
i
I
3m
-1- -I
level
FUuu
zz
tr
U)U
l
LEGEND
.E- 4/16/86 Grcundwater l6vsl ild
Basalt Bedmck
PR:.VASHON AGE OEPOSITS
date msasurcd
VASHON AGE OEPOSITS NOTES:
'l . Refer to Figure 5 for sect'pn location.
2. Verti€l wle is four times lhe horizonlal sele.
3. Borings shown are Subsurraca Group test bodngs.
4. Wells shown are existing domeslic water wells.
i
Prvashon Non-G,acial Stratifs, Defnsils (Ou)
Rffissional Outwash Depcits (Qw)
lecontacl (Qvi)
(not separated into suFunits)
Basal Till (Ovt)
Advance Outwash (Ova)
0+m STATIONING IN FEET 20fi 40+m
Elevation Oatum: NAVO88
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC
t /21 /2ffi
dcigncd b, OAY
As Shown
630 6lh Sr@e, Sout r
Kikland, WA 9@33
ph: (425) 82E-7515
THE STATESMAN COFPOFATION
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA & GOLF RESORT
GENEFALIZED
GEOLOGIC PROFILE A.A'
06101
Figurs I
200
?????
7
????
??
6121106 ,)
0 7??,???
???
7
?
,,
60s
,]
I
B'
m
200
1m
B
North
i
;
l
l
--t ft ff)- *+
I
I
-+.-l
Sea
level
0
?
{m
FUUrz
z
tr
@JU
-200 LEGEND VASHON AGE DEPOSITS
94/16/86 Grcundwatsrlovelanddat€measur€d lcecontacl (Qvi)
gasalt B€dmk (not separatei inlo sub-units)
Basal Till (Qvt)
NOTES:
1 . Refer to Figure 5 for section location.
2. Verti€l scale is four times the horizontal s€l€.
3. Borings shown are Subsurla@ Group test borings.
4. Wells shown are existing dom6st'E water wells.
PRE.VASHON ACE OEPOSITS
PBVashm Non-Glachl Stratifi 6d
Oeposits (Ou)
Advaflce Outwash (Ova)
L
0{0 STATIONING IN FEET 20+m a0+00 60ff
ElevatonOatum: NAVD88
Elevation Dalum: NAVD 88
SUBSURFACE GROUP, LLC
THE STATESMAN CORPORATION
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA & GOLF BESORT
GENERALIZED
GEOLOGIC PNOFILE +B'
06101
Figure 9
630 6r,r Sr@t Sourt
Xirklild. WA 98033
ph: (425) 828-7515
III'IIIIIIIIIIIIIIT
g"
??
???2 7
11t3t92
7 ???
??????
I 6121t06
?6121t067 ,2???1
?????7
???
.>
?
?
?
7 /27 /2W
&si9.d by OAY
scola
IIIIIIIIIIITIIIIIII
c C'
EastWest
300
200 i
1
I
LEGEND
g 4/16/66 Grcundwaterlevel and datemeasured
Basalt B€drock
?
VASHON AGE DEPOSITS
?Reessional Oulwash Dopoeits (Qvo
lG Contact (Ovi)
(not separatsd into suEunits)
Advance Outwash (Ova)?
?
??FUUuz
z
F-
uJu
NOTES:
1 . Rofsr to Figuro 5 for sclion location.
2. Verti€l scle is tour timss the horiztrtal s€le.
3. Borings shom are Subsurface Group test bsings.
4. Wells shown are existing domestic water rells.
0{0 STATIONING IN FEET 20100 40+00
SUBSURFACE GROUP. LLC
t /27 /2@6
As Shorn
THE STATESMAN COBPOBATION
PLEASANT HARBOR MABINA & GOLF RESOFrT
GENERALIZED
GEOLOGIC PROFILE C.C'
06101
Figure 10
630 6tn Slreo, S@lh
Kh*land, WA 9E033
ph: (125) 828-75as
{
?713t68 7 ?
?
?
??2 ?
7123t03
0
?
???
.,
.1m ?
?
-200
70.000.000 3000
I 95 ac-ft \
60,000,000
2500
50,000,000
2000
40.000.000
D
t500 .96t86 ac-f't
30,000,000
56 ac-ft I 000
500
10,000,000
0 0
0l/0t/09 0t/01/r0 }UDvlt 0v0ln2 ly3vlz tv3ut3 ta3ut4 la3vt5 t2l30lt6 ta30fi7
+ Hawested Water Storage Reserve (Pond C) ---.- Wastewater Storage Reserve (Pond B)
+-Cummulative Annual Well Supply +Occupied Units
Aquilbr Recharge
I 2 I ac-ft
T
SUBSURFACE GROUP,
. LLC
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Groundwater Impact Evaluation
Statesman Corporation
ater Balance for Initial Development
Full Build-Out
Project Number
sG060 I -02
Figure l l
IIIIIIIIII'IIIIIIII
20.000.000
l-zs "; l
/T I
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIITI
700.000
600.000
500.000
,m0,000
cq
300.000
200,000
100,000 a ll
Jan-17 Jan-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17 May-17 Jun-17
-o- Goundwater/Potable Use ''-r-' Wastewater Crnerated
Jul-17 Aug-17 Sep-17 Oct-17 Nov-17
Harvested Water --x-- Inigation (Cnlf and Firesmart)
Dec-t7
SUBSURFACE GROUP,
. LLC
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Groundwater Impact Evaluation
Statesman Corporation
Annual Water Cycle
Project Number
sG060 r -02
Figure l2
t:
T
I
I
I
T
I
I
T
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
T
t
I
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County, WA
Transportation lmpact Study - Revised
August 28, 2OO-7
Prepared for
Statesman Group
7370 Sierra fVlorena Boulevard SW
Calgary, Alberta T3H 4Hg
CANADA
Prepared by
P Transportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC
Transportation Engineering/Operations . lmpact Studies o Design Services o Transportation Planning/Forecasting
Seattte Office: PO Box 65254 . Seaule, WA 98] 55 o Office/Fax (206) 361-7333 r Toll Free (888) 220-1333
Eastside Office: 816 - 6rh Street South I Kirkland, WA 98033
APPENDIX 6
Pleasant Harbor EIS
]e[98949q!E ]ryA Transportation lmpact Stud] - Revised
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION
Project ldentification.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Roadway Conditions
Existing Traffic Volumes.......
Intersection Levels of Service
Collision History
Public Transportation Services..............
Nonmotorized Transportation Facllities.
Planned Roadway lmprovements .........
TRANSPORTATION IM PACTS
Non-Project Traffic Forecasts...
Project Trip Generation ............
Trip Distribution and Assignment
Traffic Volume lmpacts
Public Transportation lmpacts........
Nonmotorized Transportation lmpacts
lntersection Level of Service 1mpacts................
Site Access, Safety, and Circulation lssues......
PROJECT MITIGATION MEASURES
Attachment A - Daily Traffic Counts & P.M. Peak Hour Turning Movement Counts
Attachment B - Level of Service Calculations at Study lntersections
Attachment C - Resort Residential Unit Program
Attachment D - 2017 Future Daily and P.Ntl. Peak Hour Traffic Volume Forecasts
Attachment E - Turn Lane Wanant Analysis at SR 101 and Black Point Road
1
1
6
b
7
7
..11
,,12
P Transportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
August 28, 2OO7
Page i
List of Figures
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
1 : Project Site Vicinity ..
2: Proposed Development Districts
3. Existing Channelization and Traffic Control
4: 2006 Daily Traffic Volumes.......
5: 2006 P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes.......
6: Project Trip Distribution ...............
7. 2017 Without Project Daily Traffic Volumes.......
8'. 2017 No Action Alternative Daily Traffic Volumes
9: 2017 Brinnon Alternative Daily Traffic Volumes......
10. 2017 Statesman Alternative Daily Traffic Volumes......
11'. 2017 Hybrid Alternative Daily Traffic V01umes................
12. 2017 Without Project P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
13. 2017 No Action Alternative P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ....
14. 2017 Brinnon Alternative P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes .......
15. 2017 Statesman Alternative P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes...
16. 2017 Hybrid Alternative P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes .........
.)
L
oU
o
...11
...11
. .12
,,'14
...1 5
.16
.lo
.27
,28
29
.30
31
List of Tables
1: Level of Service Criteria at lntersections....,............
2. 2006 Existing P.lM. Peak lntersection Levels of Service
3: lntersection 3-Year Historical Collision Rates...........
4: No Action Alternative - Net Project Trip Generati0n................
5: Brinnon Subarea Plan Alternative - Net Project Trip Generation .........
6. Typical Buyer Profiles and Annual Residency Estimates.....
7: Typical Non-Owner Profiles and Average Durations of Occupancy.....
8: Seasonality of tt/ain Trip Generation Categories ..................
9. Statesman Alternative - Net Project Trip Generati0n...............
10: Hybrid Alternative - Net Project Trip Generation...............
11. 2017 Daily Traffic Volumes by Alternative
12'. 2017 P.M. Peak lntersection Levelof Service lmpacts........
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
16
17
18
19
21
)aJL
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County, WA Transportation lmpact Study - Revised
P Transportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
August 28, 2007
Page ii
.20
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County, WA Transportation lmpact Study - Revised
INTRODUCTION
This study summaries ransponation impacts associated with the proposed developmenr on
propenies known as the Plusart Hafutr Z1S in Jefferson Counry \X/A. This study documents
transponation impacts associated with this proposed action, including:
effons and field reconnaissance.
1. SR 104 atCertoRrndRarrp
2. SR 104 Ranp at @tlerRud
3. SR 101 atCetzrRMd
4. SR 101 at Daatallip Rud
5. SR 101 at BrirvwtLarre
6. SR 1A1 at Daewallips Park EwarreRud
7. SR 101 at Bk& Poirt RMd
B. SR 101 at D,r&abusb Rud
based upon Jefferson Counry and the 'Washington State Department of Transponation
$X/SDOT) standards and guidelines.
Project !dentification
The Pleaart Harhtr development is located on SR 101 in the viciniry of Black Point Road in
Jefferson C-ounry Washington. A project site viciniry map is shown in Figure 1. The subject
propenies wou.ld include rwo main development districts under the Statesman Alternative:
Black Point Properry and Maritime Village (see Figure 2). Under the No Action, Brinnon
Subarea Plan, and Hyrbrid land use altematives, future development on additional propenies
west of SR 101 opposite BlackPoint Road (not controlled bythe applicant) were also eva-luated
(see Figure 2 f.or general location of these properties).
August 28, 2O07
Page 1PTransportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County. WA Transportation lmpact Study - Revised
August 28, 20O7
Page 2
19104
104Rd
3
I
3
Project
Site
1 \
(Nol to
Pleasant
Harbor EIS
lefferson County, WAPTr.rnsportation
Engineerirrg
NorthWest, LLC
Figure 1
Project Site Vicinity
P Transportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County, WA Transportation lmpact Studv - Revised
August 28, 20O7
Page 3
Proposed Egress
frori Maritimie Itlaritime Village
Development District
Village
I
lI
I
N.T.5,
I
-iI
o'i
strict
Hooo CAHAL i
aoBno-t.L grxuo Uat
i,
a
:
:
li:i
I
1i
I
i:
Hooo CANAL
BulunrNG LocATtoNS
PLEASANT HARBoR MARINA &
GoLF RrsoRr _ Dnerr EIS
LEGEND
,,.,.,,r DIAFr El6 AnEA
fffi t Lrvel vtur-es
I e lev:r TowNHoMEs
ffi t*t*.o uuuu 0
(Nol io Scale)
Transport:tiorr
Engineering
NorthWest, LLCP Figure 2
Potential Development Districts
Pleasant
Harbor EIS
lefferson County, WA
P Transportation Engineering NorrnWest, LLC
.,,1 .,
ii
i;
Iilit#d.tFs4x,
\G
f
:
/l
i
I
i
Jefferson Counrv, WA
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Transportation lmpact Study - Revised
Full build-out and occupancy of the propenies are assruned over a five to seven year period of
development. For the purposes of the traffic analpis a horizon lear of 2017 was assumed.
Vehicular site access would be consolidated for the Maritime Village and Black Point Properry at
SR 101 and Black Point Road under the Statesman Alternative. The existing nofthem driveway
on SR 101 wouid be limited to an exit-only driveway from the Maritime Village onto SR 101.
All other existing access connecdons onto SR 101 would be closed and removed. Existing
drivewap to the existing madna would remain under the No Action and Brinnon Subarea Plan
Altematives.
There are rwo new site access roadways proposed onto Black Point Road for the Black Point
Property and Maritime Village with the Statesman Alternadve, including:
Maritime Village. Existing traffic associated with the State of Vashington Boat Launch
at Pleasant Flarbor would intersect this new frontage road in a consolidated access onto
Black Point Road.
feet east of SR 1
emergency access roadway onto
01 that would serve all vaffic to/
Black Point Road,300
from the Communiry Center align
with the frontage road into t}e Maritime Village.
101 would serve all raffic o/{rom the Black Point properry.
Under the No Action Altemative, propenies west of SR 101 opposite Black Point Road were
assumed to access an existing driveway onto SR 101 nonh of Black Point Road and the SR 101
at Mount Jupiter Road intersection. Under the Hybrid and Brinnon Subarea Plan Alternatives,
properties west of SR 101 opposite Black Point Road were assumed to have access at the SR 101
and Black Point Road intersection, making the existing T-intersection into a 4-way intersection
under this land use alternative.
The studyevaluates four altemative land use scenarios, which are further summarized below:
No Action Alternative
The No Action Altemative would construct a 9-hole golf course and up to 30 new single-family
homes. All existing facilities currently on-site including the boat launch, beach, parking area, and
approximateiy 30 acres of forest were assurned to remain and continue exisdng operations. The
Tudor Propeny wculd construct rwo, 2,500 square foot commercial retail buildings (for a totai
of 5,000 square feet). The Jupiter Properq,would consist of a gas station (maximum of 4 vehicle
fueling positions) with convenience market/RV repair/storage area.
P Transportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC
August 28, 2007
Page 4
Pleasant Harbor EIS
.Jefferson County, WA Transponation lmpact Study - Revised
Brinnon Subarea Plan Alternative
The Brinnon Subarea Plan Altemative would construct an 18-hole golf course, 200-room hotel
with conference center, and up to 25 single-family homes on the Black Poinr Propery.. On the
Pleasant Flarbor Propeny, a 7,000 square foot mar-ina expansion wou-ld replace existing
buildings. The Tudor Propeny would construct a 20,000 square foot retail commercial building,
a2}-room inn, and up to 20 townhouses. The Jupiter Propertywould consist of a gas srarion
(maximum of 4 vehicle fueLing positions) vrith convenience market/RY repir/ storage area.
Statesman Alternative
The subject properties would include two main development districts: The Black Point Property
and The Maritime Village. The development involves creation of a Master Planned Reson
(IvIPR) that would rnclude an 18-hole golf course with a 3,000 square foot refreshment center,
890 residential units, a 50,000 square foot resort/retaVspa conference center, a 200-seat (10,000
square foot) community center/chapel, a 15,500 square foot commercial retail Maririme Village,
and incolporation of an existing 311-slip marina.
Hybrid Alternative
The Hybrid Alternative assurnes the same land uses Statesman Alternative except for the
additional development of the adjacent Tudor and Jupiter Properties. The Tudor Property
would construct a 5O-unit RV park, 4 rental cabins, and rwo commercial remil buildings totaling
10,000 square feet. The Jupiter Properry would consist of a gas station (maximum of 4 vehicle
fueling positions) with convenience market/automotive repair shop. From a transportation
impact perspective, this altemative represents the worst-case scenado as it has the potential to
generate the highest number of vehicle trips as well as genente the highest number of turning
and crossing movements at the BlackPoint Road and SR 101 intersection.
August 28, 20O7
Page 5PTransportation Engineering Nor&rWest, LLC
il
EX!STING CONDITIONS
This section describes existing transponation s)6tem condirions in the study area. It includes an
inventory of existing roadway conditions, traffic volumes, intersection levels of service, collision
history public ransponation services, nonmotorized transportation facilities, and planned
roadway improvements.
Roadway Conditions
The following paragraphs describe existing anerial roadways that would be used x major routes
for site access. Roadwaycharacteristics are described in terms of number of lanes, posted speed
limits and shoulder types and widths.
SR 101 is classified by \7SDOT as a rural principal anerial. The roadway generally consists of
2 travel lanes 11 feet wide with 3-to 1O-fooi prr.i shoulden. The posted-speed limit is 50 mph
in the viciniryof the subject properties.
SR 104 is classified by \flSDOT as a rural principal anerial. The roadway consists of 2 travel
lanes 11 feet wide with S-foot paved shoulders. The speed limit is posted at 60 mph.
Crnter Road north of SR 101 is a two-lane major collector roadwaywith t1-foot travel lanes
andT- to 9-foot paved shoulders. C-.urbs, gutters, and sidewalls are located on the west side of
the street, and a raised cr:rb is located on the east side of the street. The curb-to-curb pavement
width is 38 feet. The posted speed limit is 30 mph in the vicinity of Quilcene and 35 mph
funher nonh of Quilcene.
Dosewallips Road is a two-lane minor collector roadwaywith t1-foot travel lanes and 1-foot
paved shoulden. The speed limit is posted at 35 mph.
Dosewallips Par{< Entrance Road is a two-lane, 2O-foot local access roadway. The posted
speed limit is 10 mph west of and 5 mph east of SR 101.
Black Point Road is a two-lane local access street, with existing demand of less than 300 daily
vehicles. TheJefferson CountyPublic Vorls Road Log identifies 24-{eet of pavement and 3-
foot shoulders. However, based upon measured conditions in the field by TENS7 at several
points along Black Point Road (in the vicinity of all proposed access points), the toml pavement
width ranges berween 26 and 27 feet in width with 1- to 3-foot grass/gravel shou]ders. The
speed limit is posted at 35 mph. Black Point Road was constructed 'n 1,974-75 with a structwal
section of 12-inches of Class B gravel base overlaid with 2 shots of bituminous surface
ueatment.
OId Black Point Road is an undefined Counry Road that potentially serves as the first 0.04
miles of the existing enrance into the K.O.A. campground on the subject properties. According
to the Co.*ry Road Log, it intersections Black Point Road at approximately 0.05 miles from SR
101 and was establishe d as a l2-foot of right-of-way. No record of this right-of-way is noted on
recent properry AIta surve)6 or title repons.
Duckabush Road is a rwo-lane minor collector roadway with t l-foot travel lanes and no
shoulders. The posted speed limit is 25 mph.
P Transportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
August 28, 2007
Page 6
Pleasant Harbor EIS
-,efferson County, WA Transportation lmpact Stqdy ; le1pqd
n
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson Countv. WA Transportation lmpact Studv - Revised
Existing Traffic Volumes
Daily traffic volumes represent the number of vehicles traveling a roadway segmenr over a 24-
hour period on an average weekday. Peak hour traffic volumes represent the highest hourly
volurne of vehicles passing through an intersection during a q.pical 4-6 p.m. peak period. For
the pulposes of this traffic study, the p.m. peak period was used as the peak hour since the
proposed project would generate the highest traffic dunng this period. Figure 3 illustrates
existing channelization and traffic control at all study intersections, and Figures 4 and 5 show
existing daily and p.m. peak hour traffic volumes.
Daily traffic volumes were obtained from \7SDOT. Traffic C-ount C-onsuimnts, Inc. also
conducted daily traffic counts on SR 101 (south of Quilcene and south of Brinnon) and C-enrer
Road and p.m. peak hour tuming movement counts at all study intersections in
August/September 2006 (traffic colints are provided in Attachment A). Historical traffic
volumes on SR 101 and study intersection roadwals in the project site vicinity indicate a
weighted average growth rate of 2 percent per year berween l99B and 2004. Funhermore,
Jeffenon Corrr.y raffic and population forecasts in Quilcene and Brinnon estimate a 2 percent
annual growth rate out to 2024t . Therefore, a 2 percent per year growth rate was used to factor
historical daily traffic volumes to estimate existing conditions.
At milepost 324.80 on SR ]!1 (apprgximately 15 miles south of .Black Point Road), \7SDOT
maintains a perrnanent traffic recorder smtion. During the peak suruner monrh of August,
raffic volumes recorded on SR 101 are approximately one-third higher than the annual average
dailyvolumes. Traffic counts collected by TENW were collected prior to and during the Labor
Day \Teekend in 2006, representing a conservative period and allowing for evaluation of
potential traffic impacts during a worst-case scenar-io of peak use of the proposed reson facilities
during peak summer traffic flows in the smdy area.
lntersection Levels of Service
Level of service (LOS) sewes as an indicator of the quality of traffic flow at an intersection or
road segment. The LOS grading ranges from A to F, such that LOS A is assigned when minimal
delap are present and lowvolumes are expedenced. LOS F indicates long delap and/or forced
flow. Table 1 summar-izes the delay range for each level of service at unsignalized intenections.
The methods used to calculate the levels of service are described in rhe updated 2000 Higbwry
Apaty Manaal (Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board). The measure of
effectiveness for unsigna]ized intersections, a level of service and estimate of average control
delay is determined for each minor or controlled movement based upon a sequential analpis of
gaps in the major traffic streams and conflicting traffic movements. In addition, given that
unsignalized intersections create different driver expectations and congestion levels than
signalized intersections, their delay criteria are lower. Control delay at unsignalized intersections
include deceleration delan queue move-up time, stopped delay in waiting for an adequate gap in
flows through the intersection, and final acceleration delay. Level of service standards in
Jefferson C-ounry are LOS C for rural roads and LOS D for all other roads.
' Sor.ce' Transponation Element of the Jefferson Co unty Comprel-rensive Plan, December 2004
P Transportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC
August 28, 2OO7
Page 7
Pleasant Harbor EIS
.Jefferson County, WA Iq$S4q!9! l'npqg! Stqdy 1 lq1ryd
1
1,.
l':
)
r04 ,{l0t
A x_
<__"tI
_J
--->
!
Rd r04
5R l0l / Center Rd
"{. ('{>
Ce.!q Fd
I.<>\l \I(
Puget Saund
5R l0l/Dosew3llipr Rd
4 SR lOllBrinnon L.rne
4"
{>\tl /--.e\1 v l
SR l0l/Blrck Poirrt Rd
'F.
,F
thi* .rh,nl E,SR lOl /Doretlallipt Park
v
"+"
{r/
SR l0l./Duck:bush Rd -J-1 vl 3
4
Ro<l s Project
Site
L d
5 top Sign (Not to
P Transportatiorr
Errgineering
NorthWest, LLC
Figure 3
Existing Channelization
and Traffic Control
Pleasant
Harbor EIS
lefferson County, WA
P Transportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
August 28. 2OO7
Page 8
2
3
5
6
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County, WA Transportation lmpact Study - Revised
2,AoO t9r04
I
2,80O
6,4O0
104
2,800 2,900
5,200
3
600
4,100
3390
300
2,800
r0r
Project
Site
I
J
Puget Sound
Bbck
lo
P Tr.rnsportation
Engineering
NorthWest, LLC
Figure 4
20A6 Existing
Daily Traffic Volumes
Pleasant
Harbor EIS
lefferson County, WA
P Transportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
August 28, 2OO7
Page I
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County, WA Transportation lmpact Study - Revised
2t 72
I 04 )+I\- et
<- 245
SR lOJ \tt4 34
)\38J
67-\34 80
15J
243 --->
t04
5R l0l / C€nter Rd
4
I 1 +B
t \r 99
?Jl-+
5-\
\t(
l0 rll 96
Puget Sound
5R lOl/Dosew3lliDs Rd
t6 ll7 5R lOl /Brinnon L:ne)+\_2
+0
v-?+\7Jr{1
\rtt 125 eilnfrt LaMeJ
o-->
16-\
\ t(I t322
3
5R l0l/Black Poinr Rd
t22 I \_l
rs+\tsi4ti Pnn! Rd l0l/Dosewallips Parkt(l0t3 I 352t\+05 126 I )2
Bhck 0 \ t(st29?Rd
16lil E
o->lc1)+
1r\abvsii Pd \r Project
Site
't2J
2--:r 6 t12 r0
(l'Jqt to
P Transportation
Engineering
NorthWest, LLC
Figure 5
2006 Existing
P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Pleasant
Harbor EIS
]efferson County, WA
P August 28, 2OO7
Page 1 O
2
I uq/
5
5R 101/DuckJbush Rd
Transportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County, WA Transportation lmpqct Study - Revised
Table 1: Level of Service Criteria at lntersections
Source; "Fhghuy Capacity Repon 209, Traruponarion Research BoarC,2000, Updare.
Existing p.m. peak hour levels of service at study intersections are surunarized in Table 2. All
intersections currendy operate at LOS B or better. Detailed level of service summary
worlsheets are provided in Attachment B.
Table 2: 2006 P.M. Peak lntersection Levels of Service
Nore: Analsis on HCS 2OO0 uing HOI 2000 LOS.
Collision History
The frequency and severiry of collisions are corunonly weighted against speed, volume, and
functional classification of a roadway segment or intersection. These variables are considered in
determining if a cenain location has an unusually high collision rate. The average annual
collision rate is calculated by summing the total number of collisions that occurred at a specified
intersection or roadway segment during the past three years, and dividing the total by three.
August 28, 2O07
Page 1 1
Level of Service
Sign ali zed I ntersection
Delay Ranqe (sec)
U nsignal ize d I ntersection
Delay Ranqe (sec)
A < 10 < 10
DD > 10 to < 20 > lOto<15
C > 20to<35 > 15to<25
D > 35to<55 > 25to<35
E > 55to<BO > 35to<50
>80F >50
Unsignalized lntersections
Control
Type
Level of
Service
Average
Delay
EB Left A I#1 - SR 104 at Center Road Ramp
SB B 14
EB B 10
NB Left A B
#2 - SR 104 Ramp at Center Road
Lb B 10
WB B 12
NB Left A I
#3 - SR 1 01 at Center Road
SB Left o
EB A 10#4 - SR 'l 01 at Dosewallips Road
NB Left A oo
EB A 10
WB B 10
NB Left A 8
#5 - SR 101 at Brinnon Lane
SB Left o
EB B 1-l
WB '10
NB Left A o()
#6 - SR 10'l at
Dosewallips Park Entrance Road
SB Left A I
WB A 10#7 - SR 10'l at Black Point Road
SB Left A 8
EB B 10
NB Left
#B - SR .1 01 at Duckabush Road
A 8
P Transportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County, WA Transportation lmpact Study - Revised
Collision data for an intersection is also measured by collision rates per million entering vehicles
GvtEV). Crllisions per m.e.v. reflect the number of vehicles raveling through an intersection,
providing a different indication of design-related versus volume-related incidences.
Table 3 summarizrs historical collision data as provided by the \fSDOT for the most recent
3-yrear period between January I , 2004 to Decembe r 31,, 2006 at all study intersections. There
have been no fatal collisions within the project site viciniry in the most recenr 3-year period.
There were no reponed collisions at the intersections of SR 104 Ramp at Crnter Road and
SR101 atCrnterRoad. Allsmdyintersectionshaveanaverageannualcollisionrateequaltoor
less than 1.3 and a collision rate per MEV equal to or less than 1.17. None of the study
intersections are considered to be high collision locations.
Table 3: lntersection 3-Year Historical Collision Rates
Source: \X6DOT R.po.,Augut 2006 Jmuary 1,2004 to 31, 2046.
MEV- Million enrerirg vehicles.
Public Transportation Services
Jefferson Transit Route 1 provides public uansportation services in the area, urith a stop on
SR 101 at BlackPoint Road, adjacent to the project site. Route l provides Mondayto Saturday
service to Brinnon, Quilcene and the Tri-Area. Service at SR 101 and Black Point Road is
provided berween 7:10 a-m. until 7:55 p.m. with stops every 2 to 3 hours- Saturday service is
provided at the SR 101 and Black Point Road intersection from 8:55 a.m. until 7:10 p.m. with
stops every4 to 5 hours.
Nonmotorized Transportation Facilities
SR 101 consists of 3- to lO-foot paved shoulders. Black Point Road provides 1- to 3-foot
grass/ gravel shoulden.
Planned Roadway lmprovements
Jefferson .County's. 2.007-2012 Trarrp.ortatian Inprazurert Prqg'.a? (XP). identified no
transportation-capacity improvement project that would be impacted by vehicular trips from the
proposed project.
August 28. 2007
Page 12
I ntersections
Fatal
Collisions
lnjury
Collisions
PDO
Collisions
Total
Collisions
Average
Annual
Collision Rate
Collision
Rate per
MEV
#1 - SR 104 at Center Road Ramp 0 2 2 o.7 o.29
#2 - SR 104 Ramp at Center Road 0 o 0 o 0.o 0.oo
#3 - SR -'l 01 at Center Road o 0 0 o o.0 o.00
#4 - SR 101 at Dosewallips Road o o 1 1 0.3 0.31
#5 - SR 'l01 at Brinnon Lane 0 o 1 1 0.3 o.30
#6 - SR 101 at
Dosewallips Park Entrance Road
0 2 2 4 1.3 1.11
#7 - SR 101 at Black Point Road o o 1 1 o.3 o.34
#8 - SR i01 at Duckabush Road o 2 0 2 o.7 o.71
P Transportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC
0
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson Countv. WA Transportat.ion lmpact Studv - Revised
TRANSPORTATI ON I MPACTS
The following secdon describes ransportadon impacts the proposed Ploxart Harh:r
development would have on the surrounding anerial network and critical intersections in the site
viciniry The discussion includes non-project related traffic forecasts, new trips generated bythe
proposed development, distribution and assignment of new project trips, traffic volume impacts,
impacts on levels of service at nearby significant intersections, public ransponadon services,
non-motorized facilities, and site access, circulation, and safety issues.
Non-Project Traffic Forecasts
For the purpose of this traffic analpis, year 2017 was selected as the build-out year based upon
full completion and occupancy of the proposed Plertsart. Harkr development. fu summanzed
previously, historical and forecasted traffic volumes indicate an average growh rate of 2 percent
per War during. Therefore, existing traffic volumes were factore d by 2 percent per ).ear to
estimate year 2017 baseline conditions without the proposed development alternatives-
Project Trip Generation
This section summarizes trip generation for the four land use ahernatives. From a trip
generation standpoint, all proposed uses would involve tlpical or traditional residential,
commercial, resoft, or recreational uses.
Trip generation rates compiled by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Tnp
Gereratian, / e dtron,2003, were used to estimate daily traffic and p.m. peak hour raffic that
would be generated by the four land use altematives. Given the reson nature and proposed land
use alternatives, a.m. peak hour trip generation and the associated background traffic on adjacent
streets would not be significant. Therefore, to evaluate a worst-case scenario p.m. peak hour
vehicle trip generation was considered assuming peak summer traffic conditions in combination
with no reductions for seasonal occupancyfactors.
As a conservative assurnption, it was assurned that 20 percent of all trips would be internal in
nature; therefore, the remaining 80 percent of vehicular trips were considered to be reuvehicle
trips generated by the development, impacting the immediate vicinity street s)ctem. This
internalization assumption also reflects the potential for additional trip making off-site due to
Iimited supponing retail services within the reson. The intemal trip reduction also assumes tdps
traveling berween the proposed development and the off-site Tudor and Jupiter Properties. In
addition, pass-by rates for gas station with convenience market on the Jupiter Properry were
assumed to be the average rate of 56 percent identified in the ITT, Trb Gseration Handb*,
2003.
No Action Alternative Trip Generation
Based upon recorunended practices and procedures in the ITE Tip Gmeration, 7h Edition,2OO3,
average trip rates for on-site land uses including golf cor.rse (ITE Land Use Code 430) and
single-family detached housing (ITE Land Use Code 210), and off-site land uses including
specialty retail (ITE Land Use Code B1a) and gas station *'ith convenience market (ITE Land
Use Code 945) were used to estimate net new trips generated bythe proposed development.
August 28, 2007
Page 1 3PTransportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County. WA Transportation lmpact Study - Revised
Table 4 summarizes estinlated net trip generation by the No Action Altemative. As shown, a
net roral of approximatelyg00 dailyand 74 p.m. peak hour vehicular trips (38 enrering and 36
exiting) would be generated at fuil build-out.
Table 4: No Action Alternative - Net Tri Generation
1
7 - DUis Unit,
amal, 7,h Edition, 2Q03.
, GLA is Gross kxable Area, md VFP is Vehicle Fueling Posirioro
3 ... Based on avenge pxs-byrrip lxrcemage for gas starion wirh convenience market in rhe ITE Tip GozatiaHarullmk,2OO3.
Brinnon Subarea Plan Alternative Trip Generation
Bxed upon recommended practices and procedures in the lTE Tnp Gmeratian, / f,dinon,ZOOI,
a combination of average tdp rates and fitted cu.rve equations for on-site land uses including golf
course (iTE Land Use Code 430), all suites hotel (ITE Land Use Code 3l\), a 25O-person
conference faciliry (Salish Lodge Expansion activities-based approach'), single-family detached
housing (ITE Land Use Code 210), and off-site land uses including specialry retail (ITE Land
Use Code 814), motel (ITE Land Use C-ode 320), condominiums/townhouses (ITE Land Use
C-ode 230), and gas station with convenience market-(ITE Land Use Code 9a5) were used to
esdmate net new trips generated bythe proposed developrnent.
Table 5 summarizes estimated net trip generation by the Brinnon Subarea Plan Alternative. An
estimated net total of approximately 3,000 daily and 250 p.m. peak hour vehicular tnps (117
entering and 133 exiting) would be generated at full build-out and occupancy of the Brinnon
Subarea Plan Altemative.
Source: Srrlish Lodge Expansion, Transportation lmpact Stud1, TEN
P.M. Peak Hour
TotalLand Use
ITE Land
Use Codel Size2 Enter Exit
Daily
Trips
Golf Course 430 t holes 1',I 14 25 300
Single Family Detached Housing 210 30 DU 19 11 30 300
Specialty Retail 814 5,OOO GLA 6 oo 14 200
Gas Station with Convenience [Vlarket 945 4 VFP 21 21 54 700
Less Pass-by Trips -(56%)3 -15 15 30 400
92Gross Total Trip Generation 48 44 1 ,100
10 I 18 200Less Internal Trips - Assume 2O%o Total
Net Project Trip Generation J(f 36 74 900
P Transportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
\\'. Novernber 2001
August 28, 2OO7
Page 1 4
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County. WA Transportation lmpact Study - Revised
P.M. Peak
Land Use
ITE Land
Use Codel Size2 Enter Exit Trips
Daily
Trips
Golf Course 430 'l 8 holes aa 28 49 600
All Suites Hotel 311 200 rooms 36 44 80 1,000
Conference Facility (Salish Lodqe)n/a 250 persons 25 35 60 400
Sinqle Family Detached Housinq 210 25 DU 16 o 1E 200
Specialty Retail 814 20,000 GLA 24 30 54 900
lVotel 320 20 rooms 5 4 9 100
Condomi n iums/Townhouses 230 20 DU 1 3 10 200
945Gas Station with Convenience [Vlarket 4 VFP 21 54 1,000
Less Pass-by Trips (56%)"15 15 an 600
Gross Total Trip Generation 146 166 312 3.800
Less lnternal Trips - Assume 20% Totat 20 33 62 BO0
Net Proiect Trip Generation 117 133 250 3,OO0
1 - ITE Tnp
Table 5: Brinnon Subarea Plan Alternative - Net Pro
,2@3.
2 - DU is Drclling Unit, GLA is Gross Leasable Area, and VFP is Vehicle Fueling Posirions
3 ..- Bmed on avenge pass-by trip percemage for gas station widr convenience market in the lTE Tnp GwattotHanlh&.,21n3.
Statesman Alternative Trip Generation
The subject properties under the Statesman Alternative would include two main development
districts: The Black Point Property and The Maritime Village. The development involves
creation of a Master Plarured Resort [\PR) that wou-ld include an l8-hole golf cou$e with a
3,000 square foot refreshment center, 890 residential units, a 60,000 square foot reson/ retalV spa
conference center, a 200-seat (10,000 square foot) communiry center/chapel, a 16,500 square
foot commercial retail Maritime Village, and incolporation of an existing 31l-slip marina.
The proposed resort residential product would be units that are sold to a purchaser or investor
for their benefit of occasional seasonal occupancy atd/ or investment income. The market of
owners,/investors of these reson residential properties would be directed to:
these market areas, berween 10 and 15 percent are esdmated to be from iVashington
State. Berween 45 and 50 percent of the market are expected from other 'West C-oast
states noted above.
market is expected from outside the United States.
Other similar Condo-tel resort developments are being built in Invermere, B.C, Arizona,
Califomia, and Mexico and would be managed and operated by the same company. As such,
many owners/investors would use these properties cooperatively to live and recreate seasonally
in different pans of the Americas similar to "timeshare" rype condominium resorts. The
supponing propeny featr.res, management, and ownenhip of the Condo-tel reson residential
units however, would offer owners/investors with many features found in reson hotels.
Amenities and services such as resident/guest check-in/check-out, concierge and activiry
booking, housekeeping and linens, secuity, factlhy maintenance/landscaping, convention and
booking agents, shuttle bus s1retem, chefs and group dining rooms, massage therapists, and real
estate broker/ agents.
E
August 28, 2007
Page 1 5PTransportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
D
Generation
t
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County, WA Transportation lmpact Study , Revised
Typical buy". p.ofrl., hr* b"., d"*i*d by r*p. gr.ry, with anticipated annual use in
Table 6. As shown, a majority of the buyers (more than 60 percent) would be retired/semi-
retired couples and second home buyen and would have seasonal occupancies ranging between
3 and 5 months every year- Based upon these assumptions, occupancy and associated vehicle
trip generation would be a mixture of traditional owner-occupied units and recreational homes.
Table 6: T r Profiles and Annual Estimates
NOTE: The CC & R's and Regulations) resrrict OVNER'S Use to No More than 6 momhs
Source: Statesman Corpontion, September 2006.
For those guests that would stay at the reson for vacation, to rec.reate, or anend small
conventions at the reson, occupancies would be rypical of a reson hotel or recreational home,
with stap lasting berween 3 and 5 da1s. Table 7 outlines the major non-owner groups and
utilization rates and shows that approximately 70 percent of this "weekende/' non-ou.ner
market wouid be comprised of vacationers and conference attendees.
Table 7: T Non-Owner Profiles and Avera Durations of O
Source: .Sratesmm Colponrion, Seprember 2006. h should be nored, that rhese mticipared markes md vehicle mres rere ued to
appropriare trip genention ntes, and q'ere nor used x the basis Ior vehicle trip genemrion.
These rypes of occupants would be similar to those at other such resort hoteVconference
facilities in \X/ashington State including the Semiahmoo Reson (\{hatcom Counry), the Salish
Lodge. (Krng Crunry), and the Skamania Lodge. (Skamania -G*,y). TENY has conducted
enensive trip generation research and smdies of these qpes of reson hoteyconference facilities,
the most recent involving the Transportation Impact Study for the Salish Ldg: Exparrion,
November 2001. Based upon these assumptions, occupancy and associated vehicle trip
geneftrtion would include both reson hoteland conferencing/event functions.
August 28, 2007
Page 1 6
BUYER GROUP ANTICIPATED %
OF TOTAL SALES
ANTICIPATED
ANNUAL USE
ANTICIPATED
VEHICLES PER OWNER
Double lncome no kids 5Yo 1-3 months 1
Double lncome with kids
(under 1 2)
10/L/O I -2 months 1
Recently Sinqles )o/J/O -l -2 months 1
N/lature Empty Nesters 28%3-5 months 1or2
Second Home Buyers 31%3-5 months 1or2
I nvestors 11Yo 'l -3 months 1
1Boaters1Yo1-4 months
,oa tL
NON.OWNER
GROUPS
ANTICIPATED
% OF TOTAL MAIN ATTRACTIONS AVERAGE
STAY
ANTICIPATED
VEHICLE(S)
Vacationers 4BYo Golf, Spa/Grotto, Atmosphere
Arcade 3 to 5 Days 1 vehicle
2 to 3 Days No vehicleConventioneers22o/o Conventions Facilities,
Activities for Significant Others
Boaters/Yacht Club B%Boat Trips, Yacht Club, Dive
and Fishinq Shop 3 to 5 Days 1 vehicle
Golfers 1OY"Challenging Golf in area -
Men's Escape
2 to 3 Days 1 vehicle
Health Club and Spa 6o/o
Hiking Trails, Spa - Grotto,
Heath Club 3 to 5 Days 1 vehicle
1 vehicleWeddings60/o
Relaxation, Romantic
Atmosphere 3 to 5 Days
P Transportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC
T
T
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson Cou Tr tion I Str-rd Revised
Occupancy rates of the proposed Cnndo-tel resort development would varyby season for both
owner and non-owner guests. There are currently no other reson experiences or conference
facilities within Jefferson Counry that would have similar facilities that would afiract a vacadoner
or conventioneer. As such, occupancyestimates in Table 8 reflect the combination of seasonal
residents and high vacation/convention use during peak seasons.
Table 8: Seasonal of Main Tri Generation Cate
Source: Staresmm Corporarion, Seprember 2006- It
trip genemdon rates, and were not used as the bast
genention calculations.
be noted, rhat rhese occupmcy ntes rere ued to aPProPnare
for vehicle trip genemion. As no reducrions were made for rconr occupancy in rrip
Nore 1: These trip genentors would not involve an ovemighr sray, bui uould include rrip genenrion oi golf, day muina or limied ue of other
comercial rces proposed as pan of rhe projecr.
Supponing exisring occupancy statistics re available upon requesr to Jef{enon County.
Based upon program information, anticipated market, and unit rypes, the demiled reson
residential unit program- (provided as Attachment C) was stratified into four main I IE trip
generation cate gories including:
produc$. It shatld b nod on a p unit hsis, this farility has a similnr trip geratianrate to
rc idertial condarnfu/ toulthonE
occupied units were assumed to have trip making similar to these rypical residential unit
qpes. Based upon anticipated market demand for second home buyers, 37 percent of all
Resort Villas and Reson Towrfiomes were assurned as generation trips similar to
condominiurn / townhome.
have similar trip generation rates as recreational home category and the remaining
C-ondo-tel units were grouped into this carcgory.
the general public. Although staff housing trips would remain, for the most part within
the site, no trip reductions were taken to specifically account for staff housing.
Orher proposed uses on-site that would be off-site trip generators include:
restaurant/lounge.
Based Llpon recornmended practices and procedures in the ITE Trip Generation Flandbook, a
combination of average trip rates and fitted curve equations for all suites hotel (ITE Land Use
August 28, 20O7
Page -1 7
PEAK SEASONS MID SEASONS LOW SEASONS
.)une to September April, May, October November to MarchMain Trip Generation Categories
Occupancy of Condo-Tel Resort BO% to 90%50 to 55%20 to 30%
Marina Permanent and Transient
Boat Occupied Slips 85% to 9O%50 to 65%25 to 45%
100-125
persons per day
25 to 35
persons per davDaily Visitorsl 1 50 to 2OO
persons per day
P Transportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC
il
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County, WA Transportation lmpact Study - Revised
C-ode 311;, .orrdo.r-r 230), recreadonal homes (ITE
Land Use Code 260), golf coune (ITE Land Use C-ode 430), specialry retail (ITE Land Use
Code 824), Iow-rise apartmenr (ITE Land Use Code 221), a 25O-person conference faciliry
(Salish Lodge Expansion activities-based approach'), a.rd marina (ITE Land Use C-ode 420) were
used to estimate net new trips generated by the proposed development. Table 9 summarizes
estimated net trip generation by the proposed Statesman Altemative. An estimated total of
approximately 4,100 daily and 363 p.m. peak hour vehicular trips (186 entering and 177 exiting)
would be generated at full build-out and occupancy of the Statesman Alternative.
Table 9: Statesman Alternative - Net Pro Tri Generation
Source: ITE Tip Gerwatiot M aual, 76 Edtrion, 2003, md TENV.
Given the anticipated limited buildout of supporting retail uses for resort occupants (owners,
guest, or renters), trip generation rates were selected for reson residential uses that reflect trip
making during the p.m. peak hour for shopping, service, and other such activities to commercial
areas outside of the development. In addition, as a conservative assumption, it was assumed that
20 percent of all trips would be internal in nature; therefore, the remaining 80 percent of
vehicular trips were considered to be rewvehicle trips generated by the development, impacdng
the immediate viciniry sreet s)6tem. This internalization assrxnption also reflects the potential
for additional trip making off-site due to limited supporting retail services within the reson.
Trip making by resort employrnent (properry management, on-site spa, concierge,lawdry/dry
cleaning, golf course, and other resort hotel functions) are inherent within trip generation rates
of those noted commercial or proposed uses.
Hybrid Alternative Trip Generation
Table 10 summarizes estimated net trip generation by the proposed Hybrid Altemative. fu
noted previously, this alternadve combines land uses under the Statesman Altemative with
development of the adjacent Tudor and Jupiter Properties. The Tudor Properry would
construct a 5O-unit RV park (ITE Land Use Code 416),4 rental cabins (ITE Land Use Code
260),andrwo comrnercialretail buildings totaling 10,000 square feet (ITE Land Use Code 8la).
I Srcme Sa/rs/r ,/-od,ge 6:?ansion, TLansportation lrnpacl Stud), TEN\\', Novernber 2001
August 28, 2OO7
Page 1 8
P.M. Peak
New
LU
Code Units Enter Exit Trips
Daily
Trips
All Suites Hotel 3'11 154 ?B )AJ+62 800
Condomi niums/Townhouses 230 216 16 J/113 1,200
Recreational Homes/Adult Community 260 420 45 64 109 1 ,300
Golf Course (acres)430 123 4 B 12 200
Specialty Retail 824 16 5 to 26 45 700
Low-Rise Apartments 221 100 42 Atr 6B 700
Conference Facility
(Salish Lodqe -max attendees)n/a 250 )t-?(60 400
lVarina (existinq vested use)420 311 )trJJ 24 59 900
Gross Total Trip Generation 274 250 523 6,200
Less lnternal Trips - Assume 20%o Total 55 -50 105 1,200
Alarina (Existing Uses)2E -24 59 -900
Net Project Trip Generation 186 177 363 4,1 00
P Transportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
I
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County, WA Transportation lmpact Study - Revised
The Jupiter Propeny would consist of a gas station (maximum of 4 vehicle fueling positions)
with convenience market/automotive repair shop (iTE Land Use C-ode 9a5). \il/ith these
additional uses, an estimated net total of approximately 5,000 daily and 396 p.m. peak hour
vehicuiar trips (216 entering and 180 exiting) would be generated at full build-out and occupancy
of the i{ybnd Alternative.
Table 1O: H brid Alternative - Net ect T Generation
1 - l-fE Tip GwatiotM,7th 2003.
2 - DU is Dwelling Unir, GFA t Gross Floor Am, GIA is Gross lrruable Area, OCS is Occupied Camps Sites, and VFP is Vehtle Ftaling
Posiriors.
3 - Based on avenge pass-by rip percenrage for gas station wirh convenience market in the ITE Tip Gaoatin HarlW,2@3.
Trip Distribution and Assignment
Using standard engineering practices and guidelines, new vehicle trips generated bythe proposed
Plmsart Harlor development were disributed and assigned to the surrounding street s)stem
based on local raffic pattems and recent traffic smdies conducted in the sudy area and
approved byJefferson Co,r.,ry. As shown in Figurc 5, project trip disribution was assumed to
follow these patterns from the proposed site:
Townsend, and \X4ridbey Island.
August 28, 2OO7
Page 1 9
P.M. Peak
ExitLand Use
ITE Land
Use Codel 5tze-Enter Trips
Daily
Trips
311 )oLO 34 62 800Resort Rentals ITE All Suites Hotel 154
230 216 16 113 1,200Condominiums/Townhouses
260 420 45 64 109 1,300Recreational Homes/Adult Community
430 I ZJ 4 o 12Golf Course
Specialtv Retail 824 16.5 18 26 45 700
?21 100 45 22 6BLow-Rise Apartments
Conference Facility (Salish Lodqe)n/a 250 25 35 60 400
I\zlarina (existinq vested use)420 31't 24 59 900
RV Park 416 50 13 6 19 200
Recreational Homes 260 4 o 1
-t 10
54 1,000Gas Station with Convenience Store 945 4 2l 27
30Less Pass-by Trips (56%)15 600
301 269 s70 6,800Gross Total Trip Generation
-54 -t14 -1,400Less lnternal Trips- Assume 20% Total
25 -35 -60 -400It/larina (Existing Uses)
216 180 396 5,O00Net Project Trip Generation
P Transportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
200
700
-60
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County, WA Transportation Imp3glStglll8eyiEd
19104
r04
l
l
Puget Sound
5eJilk/
I:conu
Project
Site
To
Olympic
PenmJub
Port
To
Whidbey
To
(Not to
Pleasant
Harbor EIS
lefferson County, WAPTransport:tion
Engineering
NorthWest, LLC
Figure 6
Project Trip Distribution
T
t
I
I
1
T
I
I
I
I
t
T
I
t
t
I
T
I
t
P Transportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC
August 28, 2OO7
Page 2O
Pleasant Harbor EIS
-Jefferson County, WA Transportation lmpact Study - Revised
Traffic Volume lmpacts
Traffic volumes were estimated for daily and p.m. peak hour conditions under 2017 without the
proposed project and with the four land use alternatives. Figures 7 through 11 summarize daily
traffic impacts along viciniry roadways, and Figures 12 through 16 show p.m. peak hour traffic
impacts at study intersections n 2017 without the project and under ali development
altematives. Traffic volume forecast estimates are provided in Attachment D.
Table 11 summariz.es darly traffic volumes n 2017 without the proposed development and
under all development alternatives. Black Point Road would experience the greatest increase in
daily traffic voltrmes with the addition of approximately 4,300 vehicles under the Hybrid
Alternative, 3,500 vehicles under the Statesman Alternative, and 2,400 vehicles under the
Brinnon Subarea Plan Altemative. All roadwalc within the project site vicinirywould experience
a generally higher number of traffic volumes by 2017 under all development alternatives except
for the No Action Alternative, however, all of these roadways are designed to handle this
additional demand.
Table 11: 2017 Dail Traffic Volumes Alternative
Public Transportation lmpacts
Jefferson Transit Route 1 stops approximately one-third of a mile from the project site at the
intersection of SR 101 at Black Point Road, providing transit service four times per day to the
main entrance of the Pleasart Harhr propenies. The applicant proposes to purchase and
maintain a van or small shuttle bus available for guests and tenanm to utilize on an as needed
basis for use in group trip making, coordinated events, airpon shuttle, and other miscellaneous
traffic. The applicant also proposes to work with Jefferson Transit in scheduling and expanding
service as necessary to the resort as well as consider joint opponunities in providing layover or
transit service and facilities within the site.
Nonmotorized Transportation lmpacts
SR 101 currently consists of 3- to lO-foot paved shoulders. Biack Point Road provides 1- to 3-
foot grass/gravel shoulders. The applicant may be required to fully fund and construct
associated fiontage improvements onto SR 101 and Black Point Road to accommodate
nonmotorized facility improvements such as sidewalls, improved shou-lder widths, or paved
August 28, 2007
Page 21
No Action Brinnon Statesman Hybrid
Roadway Location
Without
Project Traffic
Volumes
Traffic
Volumes lncrease
Traffic
Volumes I ncrease
Tralfic
Volumes
o/o
lncrease
Traffic
Volumes lncrease
3,500 3,600 3,800 8%3,900 I t/o 4.OO0sR 10.1 n/o Center Rd
SR 101 s/o Quilcene 6,500 7, 100 8Yo 8.500 23./"9,200 29Y"9,BOO 33"/o
s/o Woodpecker 5,100 5,700 1jyo 7,100 28"/"8,600 41yo 7,OOOSR 101
sR rol s/o Duckabush Rd 3,500 3,800 J o/"4,400 2OY"4,100 26"/"8,400 39"/o
SR 104 e/o SR -l O1 B,OOO 8,300 4o/o 9,1 00 9,400 1sYo s,ooo 3OY"
600 lOYo 600 13o/"9,BOO 18"/oDuckabush Rd w/o SR .1 0i 500 500 4Yo
Black Point Rd e/o SR 1O1 400 1,200 64Vo 3,OOO A5Y"3,900 89o/"4,100 9OY"
700 700 700 4Yo 700 60/"800 60/"Dosewallips Rd w/o SR 101
Center Road n/o SR 104 Overpass 2,500 2,600 5Y"3.OOO 1 5Y"3,1 00 2OY"3,300 23Y"
s/o SR 104 Overpass 3,500 4,O00 1 1Yo 5,OO0 3Oo/"5,600 37o/"6,OO0 4?%Center Road
Center Road n/o SR 101 Quilcene 3.600 4,100 11o/o 5,1 00 29o/"5,700 36Y"6,1 00 41o/o
P Transportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
n
il
D
n
Pteasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County, WA Transportation lmpact Studv' Revised
2,500 l9104
10r
3,500
000
104
3,500 3,600
6,500
l
700
5,loo
l504400
3,50O
Puget Sound
(Not to
Pleasant
Harbor EIS
lefferson County, WAPTransportation
Engineering
NorthWest, LLC
Figure 7
2017 Without Proiect
Daily Traffic Volunres
P Transportation Engineering NorttrWest, LLC
August 28, 2007
Page 22
il
Project
Site
L
n
I
I
n
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County, WA Transportation lmpact Study - Revised
I
)
i
( I'iot to
P Transportation
Engineering
NorthWest, LLC
Figure B
2A17 No Action Alternative
Daily Traffic Volumes
Pleasant
Harbor EIS
lefferson County, WA
P Transportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
August 28, 2OO7
Page 23
l9
2,5OO
< 100)3,600
(100)
8,(t r00
oo)
o4
3,7OO
(t0o)
3
700<l
(
500
(<l600
(200)
Project
Site No A(oon Alrerutive Valunfts
l
fl
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson Countv, WA Transportation lmpact Studv - Revised
l9104
0 2,900
(40o)4,7OO
( t ,200)
8,800
(8Oo)
104
3,700
Qao)4,goo
(1,2o0)
8,O0O
( 1,500)
3
700(< too)
!,
Rd
J
i
6,600
(t,500)
600(< t0o)
I
^J
l2,400
(2,O0O)4,200
(704)
Project
Site AWDT DJily Volunres with Brinnon AlrernJrive
(AWDT) Bthlilon NtefiJive CenenteLl Daily vollntet {Not to
P Transportatiorr
Engineering
NorthWest, LLC
Figure 9
20 I 7 Brin non Alternative
Daily Traffic Volumes
Pleasant
Harbor EIS
lefferson County, WA
P Transportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
August 28, 2007
Page 24
1
Puget Sound
N
!
I
n
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County, WA Transportation lmpact Study - Revised
August 28, 2OO7
Page 25
t9104
0 3,-l0o
(600)5,600
(2,000)
9,400
(1,440)
104
3,900
(400)5,7O4
(2,400)
9,200
(2,700)
3
76<tffi)
Rd
7,800
(2,700)
600
(too)l
Puget Sotnd
Rd
4,7OO
1,20O)tr,
Project
Site AWDT Daily Vohrmes rvith SuretnrJn Alrernative
aAWDf) JtJremJn Al(e.nJriye CeDeruted Daily Volumes lo
b
P Transportation
Engineering
NorthWest, LLC
Figure I 0
2O1 7 Statesman Alternative
Daily Traffic Volumes
Pleasant Harbor
EIS
lefferson County, WA
Transponation lnrpact Study
P Transportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC
I
1
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County, WA Transportation Impact Study - Revised
t9r04
l0t 3,300
(8o0)6,
(2,
ooo
5OO)
9,800
( t,8oo)
t04
4,000
(sa))6,1 00
Q,sa))
9,800
(3,30O)
3
800
< t00
8,4O0
(3,3OO)
Rd
g
600
(1oo)l4,700
(4,300)
5,OOO
( l,5oo)
Project
Site Hybrid AlrernJrive Cenerrfed Yolunet
AWDT Drily Volunles with Hybrid AlternJtive
i
:
I Puget Sound
llJol to
P Transportation
Engineering
NorthWest, LLC
Figure 1 1
2O1 7 Hybrid Alternative
Daily Traffic Volunres
Pleasant
Harbor EIS
]effer:on County, WA
P Transportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
August 28, 2007
Page 26
I
I
t
t
I
T
T
1
I
I
I
I
104104/
)n-Off R:tnn
26 90)+
T
i:
t7 42
)\
\r- ror
{- 105
-\R 1A Cn-all Fdntr
47J
831
\r
42 99
uroo ,rJ
302-->
104Rd
0t
l->12 163 119
20
)
)
dixkkn! Fd
\
7 179
(Not to
61
3
I
t
2 l
t
9J
145
t
5
)l\
t(
+\.
+\
E rs7 I
,) +
r 123
2
SR l0l/Dosew3llips Rd
0->
ro 119 2 <- lo
5R l0l/Brinnor [3ne
158 2
SR l0l/Black Point Rd
r2
zo
5R lOl/Duckilrurh Rd
20 138
5
<-o
2
5R l0l/Dosewallips Prrl
t2
<-0
\r
a l4 r55
Black
Polnt Rd \f
6 160
Project
Site
eJ
171 LAlEtrJo->
,SJ
2-\
152 r I
\_4
r6
l6
)
\ t(to t64 2
168 2t\
P Tr.rnsportation
Engineering
NorthWest, LLC
Figure I2
20l7 Without Project
P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volunres
Pleasant
Harbor EIS
]efferson County, WA
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County, WA Transportation lmpact Study - Revlsed
August 28, 2OO7
Page 27PTransportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC
I
I
t
I
I
I
t
I
I
3 SR lol / Cerrer Rd
N
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County, WA Transportation lmpact Studv - Revised
(0) (6)26 96
,)+104
l0
(o) (t3) E17 55 p) t*
}r- r rq {rg)
<- 30s (0)@)ctJ
(13) 961
\t
55 104(t3) (s)
{,sR ,04
Q) nJ
(a) 3o2-->
104
a,-r'
i
1ld,.
ol
5Joi"U]
Rd
5R l0l/Dosewrllios Rd
SR l0l/Bl:(k Poinr Rd
R lOl/Doservrllips Prrk
3
Bhck
Point Rd
3
{
t(
il)
49
+
(t) (2t1
,I
\r
(Not to
(o)
2
\
(o)
LafiertJ
\
+\r 142 (t9)
5R l0l / Cenrer Rd
5R I0l/Brinnon Lene
SR lOl/Duckrbush Rd
(0)
6
(0) (s)
lo 144
2 (O)
+O(0)
2 (o)
t0) (2s)20 170)t
@)sJ
(o) 171
\r
14 178(o) (23)
l0 188 2(o) (24) (0)
Pe* Ent erfe
P)tzJ
(0) o'->
(o) s1
\r7 r50(0) (il)
Project
Site
(t)toJ
(o) 21 rx --r. P.M. TrJffic VolumeJ with No A(tion Alkrna(ive
(xx)--> No Adion Allefirtive CenerJted P,M. Traffic Volo,nes
t62 tO(s) (e)
(2s)l8ll
(0) o -->
(0) 201
(o) (2s) (
t6 193)t
\<- I 2 (o)
<- 0 (0)
r2(o)\ t(
6 1842(o) (24) (01
5 (o)
r0 (0)
@eJ
(o) t ->
(0) 6-\
\t(
t2 167 137(0) (4) (t8)
(s) (2s)157 36+\
lilerceclion 17
Accofrls lu
lnler@l ftips
to ofl.Sile
Ptopcdi$
\- za e+)
y- t4 (8)
Pleasant Harbor
EIS
]efferson County, WA
Transponation lnrpact Study
P Transport:tiorr
Engineering
NorthWest, LLC
Figure 13
2O17 No Action Alternative
P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
P Transportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
August 28, 2007
Page 2B
2
I 5R lU4l
Cenrpr Rd On-Otf Rrrnn
3
5
i
7
I
n
i
I
I
I
I
1
n
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County, WA Transportation lmpact Study - Revised
August 28, 2007
Page 29
104
(o) (t8)26 tog)+101
(o) (47)t7 89
)\
\- r+z (+r)
<-- 305 (0)Q)qtJ
(4') r24-\
\r
89 I 19
(47) (2o)
(0) te J
(0) 3o2->
Rd 104
5R lol / Cenrer Rd
(o) (14)ro t5l
s (0)
<- ro (0)+\r 182 (s9,
@eJ
(o) 1--+
(o) 61
\t (
t2 t79
(0) (t6)186
(67)
Puget Sound
SR 101/Dosewallips Rd
(o) (76)20 22',1)+5R l0l/Brinnon L,rne
(o) (77) (ol62352 ? (o)
@sJ
(l) r8-\
\r t\.<-- 0 (0)
F- 2 (o)
15 24t(t) (85)Eiitnh Lane
@) tlJ
(o) o--+
{o) 201
\r 3
5R IOI/Blrck Point Rd
to 2s2(o) (88)
2
(0)
(?) (8)9 r60
){
7
74 (70)
2t lzt)
33 (27)\lntssfrti@ tl
Accounts lor
lnlffiel Tips
to off-sife
Prcp&ies
lOl lDoservallips Prrk En
Porrl Road \titrirtJ (o) (77)
16 245)t
(0)
2
t2 (0)
o (o)
3 (t)
(17) t7 -->I 166(e) (e)(rr)ll1 \.
SR 101/Duckrbush Rd Black (0)\r
(3)
)
(40)
118
(0) o'->
{,) 61 7 2483(t) (68) (t)3
+
D$kabush Rd
Q) 17J
(o) 2 -\
\r7 174(o) (35)1
Project
Site u --> P.M. Trafllt Vohrmes with Briono[ Alternarlve
lxr)+ Brinnon Akemztiye Genetated P.N. fnffic Vokmes to
P Transportation
Engirreering
NorthWest, LLC
Figure 14
2Ol7 Brinnon Alternative
P.M. Peal< Hour Traffic Volumes
Pleasant Harbor
EIS
]efferson County, WA
Transponarion lnrp:ct Study
P Transportation Engineering Nor*rWest, LLC
D
II ro'*,r On-Off Rrrnn
I
3
I
(Nor
I
t
I
Pleasant Harbor EIS
-Jefferson County, WA Transportation Impact Study - Revised
L
i
3 (o) (28)26 I l8
,)+r04
Rd
(o) (62)t7 104
)\
\- ros ras)
<- 105 (0)p)47J
(6{l r471
\r
r04 r25
(62) (26)
(o) t9
(o) 3o2-->
Rd t04
5R lol / Cenrer Rd
(o)
IO
122)
161
{
5 (o)
<_o (0)
\.r2 5 (92)
p)eJ
lo) t-->
(o) 61
t(t2 184 207(o) (2t) (88)
Puget Sound
5R l0l/Dosewrllips Rd
(o) (t20)70 265
){
5R lOl/Erirnon hne
(o)(t2l.
779
)(0)
2
2 (o)
o (o)
2 (o)\
16
tt)
t
269
(r t4)
6
peJ
(2) r9-\
l \
(0)ttJ t l
{o) 0-->
(o) 2o-\
lo 280 2
SR lOl/Bhck Poinr Rd (o) (t t6) (o)
(7) (94)
| 59 t05l\
4t (17)
57 (5t)
P:,lek Poinl P.d l0l/Doservallips Parkt((t2t)
289
{
(o)
2
\- tz (o)
<-- 0 (0)
r4(2)
t64 53(7) (52)\
Enfr'aNe t(5R I Ol /Duckrbush Rd Black tot ti-l
(0) 0-->
(2) 71
Rd I
(2)
276(t t6)
4
(2)(4) (si)24 191)+
3
fi)tsJ
(o) 21
\r7 194(o) (ss)
Project
Site
L
xx -' P.M, Truffic Volum(5 wirh 5ureJm3o Alrern3tlve
(xx)--> SEreimin AIterDJt,ve Cederrred P.M. TtJlfic Volumet (Not to
P Transportation
Engineering
NorthWest, LLC
Figure 15
2A1 7 Statesman Alternative
P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Pleasant
Harbor EIS
lefferson County, WA
P Transportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
August 28, 2007
Page 30
I
8
4
,
t
T
I
E
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County. WA Transportation lmpact Study - Revised
5Rl Ramp/
104
(o) (32)26 122)+
(0) t61)17 tO5
)\
177 (76)\r<- 30s (0)P) 47J
(76) 159-\t05 126
(63) (27)
sR 104
@) wJ
(0) 3o2-->
!
Rd 104
5R l0l ,/ Center Rd
(a) (26)r0 165
s (0)
l0 (o)
23t (t+\
oeJ
(o) t-'>(o)61
t/
I 85 209(22) (?0)
12
(o)I
I
Puget Sound
SR l0l/Dosewrllip6 Rd
(0) u40)?o 285,)+
SR lOl/Brinnon Line
(o) (t43) (0)6301 2
\_
<--
2 (0)
o (o)
2 (o)@)eJ
(2) 191
\r
16 272(2) (n7)
+\.
(0) tt J \t 3
(o) o-->ro 283(0) (t te)
2
(o)I
l5R I01/Black Point Rd (0) 201
i (6)
r58
{
(t
I 41
\
85 (8t)
33 (3j)
s3 (4t)l0l/Dosewrllips Parkt((0)
16
(t4J) (o),3tt 2 |rt t2 (o)
(23) 23 --->
(e) e-\
1 t 162t) (5)
58
(s4
<- o (a)
r4(2))
Enlratca t (5R l0l/Ducklburh Rd Blark
Point Rd @ lir
(0) 0 -->
(2,) 7-\(4) (s4)24 t92)+
I
(2)(
279 4
t te) (2)3
ft)leJ
(o)21
\t Project
Site7 204(0) (6s)0l xx -> P.M. Trifnc Volum€t Mlh Hybrld Alternative
--+Arrc.n.rti!" Gerented P.M- Ttef li< Volunet (Not to
P Transportation
Engineering
NorthWest, LLC
Figure 16
2Ol 7 Hybrid Alternative
P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volunres
Pleasant
Harbor EIS
lefferson County, WA
P Transportation Engineering NorurWest, LLC
August 28, 2O07
Page 3-1
7
8
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County, WA Transportation lmpact Study - Revised
pathways. The applicant proposes to work with Jefferson Counry in developing a privare
nonmotodzed circulation s).ttem within the site that would not impact C-ounry or Srate highwap
and would provide for pedestrian and bicple circulation between the two main development
districts (i.e., Black Point Propenies and Maritime Village).
Under the No Action, Brinnon Subarea Plan and Hybrid Altematives, the potential to generate
pedestrian crossings of SR 101 in the vicinity of Black Point Road would increase as residential,
commercial and/ or recreational development are assurned west of SR 101. Increased pedestrian
crossings of SR 101 may require installation of a pedestrian crossing treatment to provide
advanced waming to drivers or other measures of pedestrian activity.
lntersection Level of Service lmpacts
fu summarized in Table 12, intersection levels of service impacts during the p.m. peak hour
were evaluated at study intersections in 2017 without the proposed project and under all
development altematives. Under the Hlbrid Altemative, the eastbound approach at intersection
of SR 101 and Black Point Road would operate at LOS D, creating a significant adverse traffic
impact. Mitigation could include signal control treatments or grade separation. All other stop-
controlled movements at study intersections would operare at LOS C or better with and without
rhe development alternatives in 2017, thereby meeting adopted local and State level of service
standards. Detailed level of service summaryworksheets are provided in Attachment B.
Table 12: 2017 P.M. Peak lntersection Level of Service
Analyris bred on HCS 2000 resuhs using HCM 2000 conrrcl
Baseline No Action Brinnon Statesman HybridUnsignalized
lntersections
Control
Type LOS Delay LOS LOS Delay Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay
EB Left A B B A o A IAA9#1 - SR .lO4 at
Center Road Ramp 5B C 15 L 16 C 19 C 21 C 21
EB B 'l 1 B 11 B 12 B 12 B 12#2 - SR 104 Ramp at
Center Road NB Left A B A B A B A B A B
EB B 11 B 11 ts 11 B 11 B 11
WB B 13 B 13 DD 14 C 15 C .1 5
NB Left A B A B A B A B A B
#3 - SR 101 at
Center Road
SB Left A B A B A B A B A B
EB B 10 B 10 B
.1
1 B 12 B 12#4 - SR 101 at
Dosewallips Road NB Left A B A B A B A B A B
EB A 10 B 1at-)B 1T B 12 B 12
WB B 10 B 1T B 12 B 13 B 12
NB Left A B A B A B A B A B
#5 - SR 1O1 at
Brinnon Lane
SB Left A o B A BABAoA
EB B 1.1 B 12 B 'l 3 B 14 B 14
11WBA10A10D'l 1 B 1'l B
NB Left A B A B A B A B A B
#6 - SR 101 at
Dosewallips Park
Entrance Road
SB Left A B A B A B A B A B
EB D 25C16
WB 10 10 B 14 14 C 19
NB Left A B A B
#7 - SR 101 at
Black Point Road
SB Left A B B A B A BABA
EB B 11 B 11 B 12 B 12 B 12#B - SR 1O1 at
Duckabush Road NB Left A B A B A B A B A o
P Transportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
August 28, 2007
Page 32
B B B
Pleasant Harbor E lS
..lefferson County, WA Transportatron lmpact Study - Revised
Site Access, Safety, and Circulation lssues
Full build-out and occupancy of the propenies are assumed by 2017. Vehicular site access
would be consolidated for the Maritime Village and Black Point Property at SR 101 and Black
Point Road under the Statesman Alternative. The existing nonhern drivewayon SR 101 would
be limited to an exit-only driveway from the Maritime Village onto SR 101. All other existing
access conxections onto SR 101 would be closed and removed. Existing drivewap to the
existing marina would remain under rhe No Action and Brinnon Subarea Plan Alternatives.
There are rwo new site access roadwap proposed onto Black Point Road for the Black Point
Propertl. and Maritime Village with the Statesman Altemative, including:
Maritime Village. Existing traffic associated with the State of \Washington Boat Launch
at Pleasant Flarbor would intersect this new frontage road in a consolidated access onto
Black Point Road.
feet east of SR 101 that would serve all traffic to/f.rom the Community C-enter and align
with the fronrage road into the Maritime Village.
101 would serve all traffic rc/fromthe Black Point properry.
Under the No Action AJternative, propenies west of SR 101 opposite Black Point Road were
assumed to access an existing drivewayonto SR 101 nonh of BlackPoint Road and the SR 101
at Moum Jupiter Road intersection. Under the Hybrid and Brinnon Subarea Plan Alternatives,
propenies west of SR 101 opposite Black Point Road were assumed to have access at the SR 1Oi
and Black Point Road intersection, making the existing T-intersection into a 4-way intersection
under this land use alternative.
The developers of the Tudor and Jupiter Propenies (west of SR 101) wou-ld be required to
evaluate and apply for access connection permits to VSDOT in order to secure property access
under any development alternative. Through this permit process, site specific plans and
Iocations of access/egress would be detenrrined and prepared for WSDOT review and approval.
Site access connections onto SR 101 would be subject to \X/SDOT Highway Access
Management guidelines on Managed Access State Highwap within the Olynpic Region,
however, and would be independent of the propose d Plmsart Harkr development envisioned
under the Statesman Altemative. It should be noted that the existing nonhern driveway for the
Tudor propenies is located approximately 300 feet nonh of SR 101 and cr.rrently does not meet
WSDOT's access management guidelines, which requires a minimum of 000 feet of spacing
from existing public and private access connections on a Class 2 facilty.
The intemal roadway within proposed within the Statesman Alternative yorl-d provide adequate
on-site, rwo-way circu-lation. The applicant would be required to fuily fund and construct the
necessary internal site roadwap and associated improvements onto SR 101 and Black Point
Road. fu noted previously, Black Point Road was originally constructed approximately 20 years
ago with a 12-inch C,lass B gravel base and two shots of bituminous surface treatment. Based
upon increased traffic loads during constmction and at full buildout and occupancy, the
structurai section and roadway width may not be adequate.
August 28, 2OO7
Page 33PTransportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jef ferson County, WA Transportation lmpact Study - Revised
Access Management Standards
Access management standards identified in the Wasbirglwt A&nin*tratite Cute WAg Chapter
468-52-040-2 - Highway Access Management - Access Cnntrol Classification Sptem and
Standard were evaluated in relation to the proposed action. SR 101 in the site vicinity is
classified as a Class 2 facitty under VSDOT's access management standards. Based on
proposed closure of all existing access connections into the Maritime Village area and a
proposed limited acces.s right-nrm, exit-on1y-driveway from the Maritime Village, the proposed
private access connection onto SR 101 would be located more than 660 feet away from other
existing private access connections, exceeding minimum access management standards under the
Statesman Alternative,
Site Access Operations
All critical stop-controlled entering/exiting movements at project site driveways onto SR 101
and Black Point Road would operate at LOS B or better with little or no vehicular queuing
under the Statesman Alternative. The critical site access intenection of SR 101 at Black Point
Road would operate at LOS C or bener with queues of 2 vehicles or less.
Under the Hlbrid A,lternative tn 2017 , the addition of a fourth leg to the SR 101 and Black Point
Road intersection would add increased delay, turning movement conflicm, and safety concems
as no refuge areas for left turns from the minor street approaches could be provided under a
standard 4-way intersection. fu summarized in Intersection Level of Service Impacts section of
this report, dre eastbound approach from the Tudor/Jupiter properties under the Hlbrid
Altemative would not meet adopted level of service standards and create a significant adverse
traffic impact. In addition, given adjacent topography along the western edge of SR 101 and the
uncenainry of right-of-way acquisition of properties not controlled by the applicant, the
feasibility of constmcting a 4-way intersection under the Brinnon Subarea Plan and Hybrid
A,ltematives to \X/SDOT standards is likely not achievable.
fu a majoriry of all vehicle Marina Development access is proposed at the SR 101 and Black
Point intenection, vehicle queuing analpis and a conceptual channelization layout for Black
Point Road between SR 101 and the proposed Maritime Village private road that would parallel
SR 101 was conducted in order to idendfy mitigation improvements between the highway and
site access under the Statesman Alternative. However, given the close proximiry of this
intersection, improvements to Black Point Road would be required by the applicant to ensure a
smooth, safe, and efficient access s)ctem is provided for the project and to the other existing
users/demands in the viciniry. Funher evaluation of site access onto Black Point Road and its
proximiryto SR 101 would be required to ensure safe and efficient movements between private
access roadwap and SR 101 along Black Point Road. Tuming movement forecasts and resuldng
intersection levels of service for the remaining limited access right-turn, exit-only connection
onto SR 101 are provided in Attachment B and D.
Sight Distance
Based upon 'WSDOT design requirements for a 60 mph design speed (10 mph over posted
speed limit of 50 mph) onto SR 101, a minimum of g+o feet is required for entering sight
distance (\fSDOT Daign Marwal, January 2005, Figure 91,0-l7a Sight Distance at Intersections)
and 525 feet for design stopping sight distance (WSDOT Daign Maraaal Jr.-" 1.999,Figwe 650-2
August 28, 2007
Page 34PTransportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
Pleasant Harbor EIS
Jefferson County, WA Transportation lmpact Study - Revised
Design Stopping Sight Distance). Field-measured entering sight distances would exceed the
minimum 840 feet of entering sight distance at the proposed site access point onto SR 101 (Gll
D driveway and right-out only access from the Maritime Village). Therefore, sight distance is
met to both the nonh and south of the project site access locations.
Based upon 'STSDOT design requirements for a 45 mph design speed (10 mph over posted
speed limit of 35 mph) onto Black Point Road, a minimum of qgO feet is required for entering
sight distance (VSDOT Daign Maru.nl, January 2005, Figure 91.0-l7a Sight Distance at
Intersections) and 345 feet for design stopping sight distance flVSDOT Daign Marwa[ ]we
1999, Figure 650-2 Design Stopping Sight Distance). Based on this criterion, the proposed
consolidate intersection onto Black Point Road (located approximately 275 feet east of its
intersection wirh SR 101) is met to the west, but not to the east. To the east of the consolidated
intersection onto Black Point Road, vegetation on the nonh side of the road limits entering sight
distance to approximately 350 feet. By reducing this vegetation within the public right-of-way,
entering sight disrance would be improved to provide the minimum 490-foot requirement.
Left-Turn Lane Warrants
Left-turn movements represent critical turning movements at unsignalized intersections,
increxing the potential for intersection delay and safery issues. Therefore, at the critical site
access intersection of SR 101 at Black Point Road, the potential need for a nonhbound left-turn
lane under the Brinnon Subarea Plan and Hybnd Altematives and a southbound left-tum lane
under all development altematives was analyzed considering qpical evening corrunute periods.
Based upon procedures and guidelines found in WSDOTs Daign Mara.ul, January 2005 (Figure
9i0-8a Left-Turn Storage Guidelines Two Lane-Unsignalized), at the SR 101 at Black Point
Road intersecrion, a nonhbound left-urn lane is not warranted, however, a southbound left-turn
lane is warranted under the three development alternatives of Brinnon Subarea Plan, Hybrid,
and Statesman. Based upon '!7SDOT's Daig,t Marual, January 2005 (Figure 910-9c Left-Turn
Storage Length: Two Lane-Unsignalized), the southbound left-tum lane should be a minimum
of 100 feet underthe Brinnon Subarea Plan and Statesman Altematives and a minimum of tSo
feet under the Hlbrid Altemative. Attachment E contains the results of this warrant analpis.
Right-Turn Lane Warrants
Right-turn movements represent critical turning movements at unsignalized intenections,
increasing the potential for intersection delay and safery issues. Therefore, at the critical site
access intersection of SR 101 at Black Point Road, the potential need for a northbound right-
turn lane under all development alternatives and a southbound right-tum lane under the Brinnon
Subarea Pian and Hybrid Alternatives was analszed considering qpical evening corrmute
periods.
Based upon procedures and guidelines found in \fSDOT's Daign Maru.ul,January 2005 (Figure
910-11 Right-Turn Lane Guidelines), at the SR 101 at Black Point Road intersection, a
southbound right-turn lane is not warranted, however, a northbound right-tum pocket is
warranted under the Statesman A.lternative and a full right tum lane is warranted under the
Hybrid Alternadve. Based upon 'STSDOT's Daign Marural, January 2005 (Figure 910-13 Right-
Turn Lane), the nonhbound right-turn lane should be a minimum of 530 feet with a 5O-foot
taper for the Hybrid Altemative. Attachment E contains the results of this warant analpis.
August 28, 20O7
Page 35PTransportation Engineering NortrWest, LLC
Pleasant Harbor EIS
-Jefferson County, WA Transportation lmpact Study - Revised
PROJECT MITIGATION MEASURES
A review was conducted of vehicular trip generation, public ransportation and nonmororized
transportation impacts, and site access and safety issues of the development alternadves
considered underthe proposed Pleasart HarhyEIS. Based upon this traffic impact analpis, the
following mitigation measures may be required:
Black Point Road to meer Crunry standards.
Road to improve and maximize entering sight distance.
warranted under three development alternatives: Brinnon Subarea Plan Altemative,
rytl{ Altemative, and Statesman Alternative. The southbound left-turn lane shou.ld be
a rurunurn of tOO feet under the Brinnon Subarea Plan Alternative and Statesman
AJternative, and a minimum of 150 feet under the Hlbrid Altemative. \XAth rhe Brinnon
Subarea Plan and Hybrid Alternative, the expansion of the existing T-intersection would
also provide for a median refuge area for left tums from Black Point Road onto SR 101.
intersection under the Hybrid Alternative, which should be a minimum of s3O feet with
a 5O-foot taper. Under the Smtesman Altemative, a right turn pocket or taper is
warranted at the SR 101 at Black Point Road.
widened approach onto SR 101, and an "entry treatment" on Black Point Road at SR
101. The proposed site access concept would also include a consolidated intersection
onto Black Point Road with a realignment of the State boat launch at Pleasant Flarbor.
or small shuttle bus available for guests and tenants to utilize on an as needed basis for
use in group trip making, coordinated events, airpon shuttle, and other miscellaneous
traffic. The applicant also proposes to work with Jeffenon Transit in scheduling and
expanding sewice as necessary to the resort as well as consider joint opponunities in
providing layover or transit service and facilities within the site.
nonmotor-ized circulation s) tem within the site that would not impact Co.-ry or State
highwap, but 1et provided for pedestrian and bicycle circu-lation berween the two main
development districts (i.e., BlackPoint Propenies and Maritime Village).
engrneenng analpis of the Black Point Road structural section and suitabiliry of
projected vehicle traffic to evaluate the need for widening or asphalt overlay berween the
maln slte access roadway into the Black Point Propenies and SR 101.
August 28, 2OO7
Page 36PTransportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
Attachment A
Daily Traffic Counts and P. tvl. Peak Hour Turnin
[Vlovement Counts
g
P Transportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC
L_{
L*L-,ffi
Preparedfor. TransportationEngineeringNorthrvest,LLC
Traffic Count Consultants, Inc Phone: (425) 861-8866 FAX: (425) 861-8877
lntersection
Location:
SR 104 @ Center Rd Ramp
Jefterson County
Date of Count
Checked By:
Weds 8-30-2006
JTVIP
Trme
lnterval
Ending at
From North on (SB)
Ramp from Center Rd
From South on (NB)
0
From East on (WB)
SR 104
From West on (EB)
SR 104
I nterval
Total
T L S R T L S R T L S R T L 5 R
4:15 P
4:30 P
2 14 0 7 0 0 5 0 4 11 2 69,0
1 I 0 2 0 0 4 0 4 1 62 0 141
4:45 P 0 0 0 73 59r 0
5:00 P 0 tt 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 0 21 7 5 IJ 0 188
5:15 P I 6 0 I 0 0 0 0 41 21 3 5 49 ..0 131
5:30 P 1 '10 0 4 0 0 0 0 49 23 3 1 49 l5t)
5:45 P 13 4 0 0 0 0 64 19 7 64 171
6:00 P 1 '15 0 2 0 0 0 5 0 46 20 5 3 144
6:15 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:30 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:45 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:00 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total
Survey 7 do 0 31 0 0 0 0 30 0 431 147 43 483 0 1206
Peak Hour: 4: I 5 PN{to 5:15 PN4
Total 2 34 0 14 0 0 0 0 14 0 245 81 17 t5 243 0 bJl
Approach 48 0 326 258 632
%HV 4.2./o nla 4.30/.5.2%
PHF 0.80 nla 0.82 0.83 0.84
SR IO4 SR I04
PEDs arross:
INT 01
INT 02
INT 03
INT 04
INT 05
INT 06
INT 07
INT 08
INT 09
INT 10
INT 11
INT 12
NSEW
0
0
0
0
0
PHl' %HV
Check
In:
Out:
EB
wr]
NB
SB
0.82 4-3Yo
632
632
da nla
0.80 4.2o/o
No Peds
0 0 0 0
0 I n tersectioD 0.84 5.2Yo
0
0
0
Bicycles From
INT 01
INT 02
INT 03
INT 04
INT 05
INT 06
INT 07
INT 08
c
0
0
0
0
0
No Bikes 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0
144
tl -1.1
8l
215 326
603
5l r5
25E 2:13
48 96
259
27',|
Ranrp fronr Center Rd
lo Ir---ii .o- *i5: 15 PM
\
I o lgix.
Iii l-i-:1...
l: lS PXI lo
0
0
Bike
Ped
N E
Special Notes:
T[/01.1P061 17
0 0
0 0 54 13
0 0 0 3
0 3
0 4
1 0 0 2 7
5
0 0 0
U U U U U
0 0 0
0
I
L-{ .-[.rL+,ffi
Preparedfor: 1-ransportationEngineeringNorthwest,LLC
Traffic Count ConsultuntS, InC. phone: (425) 86r-8866 FAX:(425) 861-8877
lntersection:
Location:
Center Rd @ SR 104 Ramp
Jefferson County
Date of Count:
Checked By:
Weds 8-30-2006
JMP
Time
lnterval
Endinq at
From North on (SB)
Center Rd
From South on (NB)
Center Rd
From East on (WB)
0
From West on (EB)
SR 104
lnterval
Total
T L c R T L S R T L S R T L S R
4:15 P
4:30 P
1 26 1 14 0 0 0 4 66
1 0 23 4 1 6 1E 0 0 0 1 62
4:45 P 1 0 10 4 6 It)0 0 0 3 13 0 74
5:00 P 1 26 5 0 25 0 0 0 1 0 18 91
5:15 P 0 0 4 3 11 24 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 17 /J
5:30 P 0 0 19 8 2 1E 0 0 2 8 16 74
5:45 P 0 aa 5 1 10 0 0 0 '16 1a
6:00 P 0 10 6 1 5 0 0 0 0 15
6:15 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:30 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:45 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:00 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total
Survey 0 tol 43 12 t3 1)1 0 0 0 0 0 7 59 0
Peak Hour: 4:30 PM to
T
T
t
T
I
T
I
I
t
I
I
I
t
I
T
T
T
I
I
ITotal072 at 80 0 0 0 0 0 312
Approach o?114 0 '105 Jtz
%HV 7.0%nla 5.1%
PHF 75 0.91 0.86
211
1 nla
71 72
I 38
105
67
]J n0
0.91 5.7Yo
nJa nla
0.8 r 7.0%
253
N
0.-7 5 2.2o/o
086 s.1%
93
55
r39
Center Rd
I
N
1
{:-10 PII 5:10 Pl\l
Center Rd
lo
t
I o lBik"'i-",-.i,"
Bikel___0 __ I
Ped
Bike
E
No Bikes
0 0 0
SR I04
itross:NSE\Y
INT O,I
INT 02
INT 03
INT 04
INT 05
INT 06
INT 07
INT 08
INT 09
INT 1O
INT 11
INT 12
0
0
0
0
0
PTIF %HV
Check
ln:
Out:
E
w
N
S
3t2
3t2
No Peds
0 0 0 0
0 I ntel.sectio
0
0
0
Bicycles From
INT 01
INT 02
INT 03
INT 04
INT 05
INT 06
INT 07
INT 08
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
00
0
0
0
Special Notes:
TI\,401 110
7 13 0 0 0 2 0
0 3 11
3 0 0 16
I 0 0 B
0
0 0
0 0 0 10 0
0 10 0 0 0 6
0 0 I U
0 0
4 I tJ
5:30 PM
E
_0
l- n4l
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
TC 2
Tralfic Count Consultartts, Inc.Woodinville, WA 98012
Phone: (425) 861-8866 FAX: (425) 861-8877
Center Road
31-_-J
HVs Peds
SR 101
142
264
122 HVs
Peds 112
L- O-J
+
I
L- o--.i
Peds
N
126
39
1)IJ
HVs
i
Bowen Road
(Grocery )
Nole:i - -^- -t
L--*--l
Check:
In:
Out:
483
4834 of the Peds were equestrians Peds
lrue north divided Center Rd & SR 101
HVs
Center Road / SR 101
I n tersection :
Location:
Date of Count:
Peak Period:
Checked By:
Prepared For:
SR 101 @ Center Road / Bowen Street
Quilcene
Thur 8/31/09
4:30P - 5:30P
LBP
Transportation Engineering N W
,AHY PHF
SB
WB
NB
NEB
EB
I n tersection
2
7
1
t.8%0.90
n/a nla
n/a n/a
s.9%0.86
n/a 0.8 1
6.6%0.82
s.0%0.90
TM02p061 1 7
1-.l
216 237
TC Tro.ffic Counl Consulltrrrls, Inc.Woodinville- WA 98072
Vehicle Volume Summary
)a
I nte rs ecti on
Location:
Thur 8/3 1 /09
LBP
SR 101 @ Center Road / Bowen Street
Quilcene
Phone: (425) 861-8866 FAX: (425) 861-8877
Date of Count:
Checked By:
lnterval
Tota I
From North (SB)
Center Road
From E (WB)0 From South (NB)
Cenler Road / SR 101
From SW (NEB)
Bowen Road
From NW (SEB)
SR 101
SL HL T HR R 0 Thru L
Time
I nterval
Ends at T R SR Thru 0 L SL T 0 R Thru L HL T HR 0 SR
2 0 0 17 39 3 0 1 0 0 3 0 1 1 20 0 0 1 1no4:15 P 0 1 0 23 0 0 0
0 18 JI 3 0 1 0 0 0 5 1 1 0 0 2 1184.30 P 0 2 0 30 0 0 0 4 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 24 28 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 24 0 0 0 1054:45 P 0 3 1 22
15:00 P 1 0 2 0 0 0 7 0 0 28 ao 2 0 1 0 0 0 3 4 3 JJ 0 0 134
26 0 0 0 4 0 0 z2 29 3 0 ?0 0 0 1 1 3 32 0 0 0 1255:15 P 1 I 3
3 2 0 0 15:30 P 0 0 2 ,o 0 0 0 2 0 0 19 4 0 ,]0 0 1 ?119
0 0 0 4 0 0 t0 22 2 0 4 0 0 1 2 2 3 20 0 0 0 85C,IE D 2 0 0 21
6:00 P 0 1 1 22 0 0 0 1 0 0 15 27 3 0 2 0 0 2 1 1 2 29 0 0 0 105
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26:15 P 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 06:30 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:45 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:00 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total
Survey 4 8 9 I OE 0 0 0 0 0 158 21 0 13 0 0 7 15 13 15 0 0 5 942
4:30 P to 5r3o P Peak Hour Summary
fotal 2 4 8 99 0 0 0 14 0 0 96 131 10 0 5 0 0 1 7 8 8 112 0 0 2 483
11 0 13 122 483
%HV 1.8%nla nla 5.9%nla 6.6ak 5.0%
PHF 0.90 nla nla 0.86 0.81 u.6t 0.90
PEDs 3 0 4 0 0
Total Peds
5 0 4 2 11Peds Total Survey
ared For:on TMO2 117
ITI'IIIII'IIIIIIIIT
0
Ll
-t::tL:
ffiffiHM
Preparedfor: TransportationEnginceringNorthrvest,l,LC
Truffic Count Consultunts, Inc.Phone: (425) 861-8866 FAX: (425) 861-8877
lntersection
Location:
SR 101 @ Dosewallip Rd
Brinnon
Dale of Count:
Checked By:
Thurs 8-31 -2006
JN/P
Time
lnterval
Ending at
From North on (SB)
SR 101
From South on (NB)
SR 101
From East on (WB)
0
From West on (EB)
Dosewallips Rd
lnterval
Total
T L S R T L 5 R T L S R T L S R
4:15 P
4:30 P
I 0 27 3 3 37 0 0 0
4 0 2 4 0 0 0 1 0
4:45 P 3 0 6 )0 1 2 0 4 84
5:00 P 3 0 )E,5 2 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 tr t)
5:15 P 4 0 )o a 22 0 0 1 0 64
5:30 P 4 0 21 4 22 0 4
5:45 P a1 2 aJ 2 22 0 0
6:00 P a 0 22 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 J
6:15 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:30 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:45 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:00 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I otal
Survey 0 212 1A 28 ZJ 211 0 0 0 0 J 16 0 30 526
Peak Hour: 4:00 PM to 5:00 PM
Total 12 0 117 16 18 11 125 0 0 0 0 0 2 7 0 14 290
Approach IJJ 136 0 tt 290
%HV 9.0%nla 9.50k 11.O%
PHF 0.85 0.85
265
nla 0.86
t6 tt'1
48
2t
l,l
il r25
0.8 8 9.5%
nla nla
0.85 13.2o/o
267
N S
0.85 9.0%
t33
21
t3r l16
SR IOI
5:00 P^l
SR IOI
I
I o laike
N i ri,"
4:00 PNI lo
Bikel__-L__ |
Ped
Bike
0.86 11.O%
E
1
0 0 0 1
Doservallips Rd
acr0ss:NSEW
INT 01
INT 02
INT 03
INT 04
INT 05
INT 06
INT 07
INT 08
INT 09
INT 1O
INT 11
INT 12
0
0
0
0
0
PTIF %HV
Check
ln:
Out:
EB
WB
290 NB
290 SB
lntersectionNo Bikes
0 0 0 0
0
0
0
0
Bicycles From:
INT 01
INT 02
INT 03
INT 04
INT 05
INT 06
INT 07
INT 08
0
0
0
0
0
0
I
0
00
0
0
Soecial Notes:
TMO3 17
J 0 0 2 0 3
1 22 I 4 ti5
0
q 0 0 0 0 4
6 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 (o
1 2 0 7
5 3 0 0
0 0 0
U U U
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0
7
r,,,
1
L-rl.;r. .,
MWffi
Preparedfor. TransportationEngineeringNorthlyest,LLC
Phone: (425) 861-8866 FAX: (425) 861-8877Traffic Co unt Cortsultants, Inc.
ntersection: SR 101 @ Dosewallip State Park Entrance Date of Count:
Brinnon Checked By:
From North on (SB)
SR 101
From South on (
SR 101 Dosewal Stale Park
From East on
Dosewall State Park
From West on (EB)lnterval
Totallnterval
at T L S R T S R T L S R T L S R
4:30 P 4 1 38 2 2 0 17 0
5:00 P 4 1 43 4 4 2 29 0 0 1 0 5 0 2 0 1 88
0
5:30 P 3 1 tz 4 4 2 It)0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 EO
16:00 P 1 0 25 1 It)I 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 (o
07:00 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T
I
I
T
t
I
t
I
I
t
t
T
I
I
t
t
t
I
T
Peak Hour: 4:00 PM to
12 0 9)a 242 229 4 0 3 0 0 19
1 2 13 20 5 110 2 0 2 0 10 10 4 312
roach 150 136 4a 14 312
14.7%nla 9.90/.%7.3./o nla
PHF 0.78 o.77 0.50 0.70 0.89
291)
l3 r35 2
l0
0 12
2 1
32 l0
l4 0
4
5 129 a
0.70 nla
0.50 nla
0.77 14.7%
0.7 8277
N
rs0 149
l8
141
.t
SR TOI
I
N
I
5:00 Pxl
Bikel___1) -_ |
SR IOI
\
<_Peaffi
Bik.f-iil
t).-s,"
4:00 PII ro
t0 tl----;lOt,'-
Brke
Ped
I t lBik"
0.89 9.9%
E
1
1 0 0 0
Li. _
l#fuE,,:
ffiffiffi
Dosewallip State Park Doservallip State Parl<
across:NSEW
INT 01
INT 02
INT 03
INT 04
INT 05
INT 06
INT 07
INT 08
INT 09
INT 1O
INT ,]1
INT 12
0
3
I
0
0
Plll'
Check
ln:
Out:
EB
WB
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3l?
312
I n terse
4
Bicycles From:
INT 01
INT 02
INT 03
INT 04
INT 05
INT 06
INT 07
INT OB
0
0
0
I
0
0
0
0
T 17
3
I
4 0 0 0
Special Notes:
E
Thurs 8-3'1-2006
J[/P
L
2 0 31 3 5 1 43 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 82.
0 0 0 2 0 1 62
4:45 P 1 2 40 ,0 1 n 4 1
5:15 P 3 1 26 0 0 0 0 2 0
5:45 P 5 5 I 4 22 0 0 0 0 4 0
0
6:15 P 0 0 0 0 o 0
b:JU I-U U U 0 0 0 U U U U U U
.'b'.45 P 'U 0 U
0 0 0 0
lotar
Survev 12
5:00 PM
Total 0 0
f,-El
1
L_l _
l oiL-,r
ffiffiffi
Preparedfor: TransportationEngineering Northlvest,LLC
TraJfic Count Consultants, Inc.Phone: (425) 861-8866 FAX: (a25) 861-8877
lntersection
Location:
SR 101 @ Black Point Rd Date of Count
Checked By:
Thurs 8-31 -2006
JMPBrinnon
Time
lnterval
Endinq at
From North on (SB)
SR 101
From South on (NB)
SR 101
From East on (WB)
Black Point Rd
From West on (EB)
0
lnterval
Total
T L S R T L S R T L a R T L S R
4:00 P
4:15 P
4 0 4 32 0 0 0 2 61
1 1 26 0 1 0 0 57
4:30 P 4 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 71
4'.45 P 2 0 J 0 30 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 65
5:00 P 0 J5 0 0 1 U 0 0 0 0
5:15 P 24 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:30 P a 't7 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 P 34 0 JJ 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 75
6:00 P 2 24 0 0 22 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 50
ti:1 5 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (.)0 0
6:30 P 0 0 0 0 0 0
6:45 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
lotal
Survey 24 19 246 0 28 0 7 0 7 0 11 0 0 0 0 548
Peak Flour: 4:00 PM to 5:00 PM
Total 7 I 122 0 14 0 tto 1 0 5 0 3 0 0 0 0 266
Approach 131 127 0 266
%HV 11.Oo/.nla nla 7.9%
PHF 0.86 0.670.84
260
nla 0.91
122 9
-l
8
5 I
126 I
r/a nla
0.67 nla
0.84 11.0%
251
N S
086
t29
t2'7
SR 1OI
I 0 lBike
i---.0--- j.*S:00 PII
SR IOI
\
I
I o lBik.
bl l-*'J*'
4:00 Ptll to
Bikel_-_(, __ |
0.9 t 7.9%
E
No Bikes
0 0 0 0
Black ['oint Rd
'EDs ircross
INT 01
INT 02
INT 03
INT 04
INT 05
INT 06
INT 07
INT 08
INT 09
INT 1O
INT ,11
INT 12
NSEW
0
0
0
0
0
PIII; %HV
Check
ln:
Out:
E
w
N
S
No Peds
0 0 0 0
0
266
266
lntcrsec
0
0
0
Bicycles From
INT O1
INT 02
INT 03
INT 04
INT 05
INT 06
INT 07
INT 08
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 11
Special Notes:
0 1 0
0 ?0 tt 0 0 0 0
0 6
1 )31 J 0
1 2 27 0 1
I J 18 1 2
4
2 Z 0 0
U U U U U U U
0 0 t)0 0 0 0
0 0 0 U
t-;-l
E
a1i1
L-l
-kiMffi
Preparedfor. 1'ransportation EngineeringNorthwest, LLC
Traffic Count Consultants, fnc.Phone: (425) 861-8866 FAX: (425) 861-8877
SR 101 @ Duckabush (River) Rd
Brinnon
Thurs 8-31-2006
JMP
ntersection:Date of Count
Checked By
From North on (SB)
SR 101
From South on (NB)
SR,]01
East on
0
on
Duckabush Rd
lnterval
Total
at
Tlme
lnterval
T L R 5 R T L S R T L c R
4:30 P 4 0 25 1 4 3 29
5:00 P 2 0 40 6 4 )30 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 80
5:30 P 2 0 22 1 3 3 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 48
7 2 3 16 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 43
7.OO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
@EEIil EEEE
28
lotal
Survey 24 0 188 36 15 203 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 473
Peak Hour: 4:00 PM to 5:00 PM
Total tz 0 111 16 6 112 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 2 2ss
Approach 118 0 14 259
9A%14.4%nlao/oHY nla
PHF 0.69 0.92
25t
nla 0.70 0.81
l6 lll
t2
l.t
2
6 tt2
0.10 nla
n/a nla
0.92 14/%
2.31
N q
0.69 9.40/o
t27 121
2Z
lrl il8
0
SR IOI
I
N
5:00 Pl\l
SR lOI
0 I
rl 0
Ped
I o lB;r.
f----1i o.jneo
4:00 PNI ro
Bikel___11 __ |
0 8r 11.2%
E
1
1 0 0 0
Duckabush Rd
Ds across:
INT 01
INT 02
INT 03
INT 04
INT 05
INT 06
INT 07
INT 08
INT 09
INT 1O
INT,I,I
INT ,I2
NSEW
0
0
0
0
0
PHF %HV
Check
In:
Out:
EB
WB
NB
SB
759
259
No Peds
0 0 0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Bicycles From:
INT 01
INT 02
INT 03
INT 04
INT 05
INT 06
INT 07
INT 08
0
0
0
0
I
0
0
0
Special Notes:
l-he stleet sign had no "River"
The road sign pointed to :
"Duckabush River Rd" ---->
11
S T L
3 0 22 7 4 0 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 ,1 ot
t)0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0
4:45 P 3 0 2 5 1 26 0 0 0 0 0 4 1
5:'15 P 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 1 EA
5:45 P 0 0 (0 0 c 0 0 i6
6:15 P 0 IJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
b:JU I'U 0 0 0 U U U U U U U 0
ti:45 P U 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0
0
1
Traffic Count Consultants, Inc.
Woodinville, WA
98072
Titlel
Title2
Title3
SRl01, n/o Quilcene Site:
Date:
15
08128t06
lnterval
Begin
ir:AM --
0l:00
02:00
03:00
04:00
05:00
06:00
07:00
08:00
09:00
l0:00
I l:00
l2:PM
0l :00
02:00
03:00
04:00
05:00
06:00
07:00
08:00
09:00
l0:00
I l:00
Mon 28 Tue 29 Wed 30
NB SB--* -t
Thu 3l
NI} SB
4g
5t
13
15
|4
l1 )4
56 53
88 64
8t 82
88 8l
98 36l0r r00tol 9?
l 12 32
l 08 107
ilO r13
il5 t24
76 123
19 91
46 13
42 62
3t 5l
12t
14 16
Fri I Sat 2
NB
io
3
4
2
3
6
20
33
s9
82
90
t4t
t1?
t28
94
98
9-7
96
88
'73
86
40
l4
ll
Sun 3 Weekday Avg.
NB SB NB SB NB
8
J
5
9
4
27
47
84
92
H6
80
102
l l8
100
106
ll6
136
90
68
11
54
37
20
't2
SB'11
0
l0
2
5
20
46
57
66
77
90
il3
r30
142
150
r28
145
t52
135
102
80
55
46
7t
)BS
SB NB SB NB
t2
t2
4
2
3
l4
48
16
103
139
148
170
t44
I t'7
142
170
r02
87
54
49
30
30
l6
6
7
5
I
5
4
l5
38
44
69
80
l0t
t20
t2l
123
144
I ltr
140
ll0
r02
'16
4t
25
l0
8
6
I
4
4
l0
14
30
36
79
lt4
lr6
154
lll
108
I06
102
82
69
60
50
22
24
t2t.iri
6
4
6
8
1
l0
-sl
86
86
102
89
102
r r0
106
107
1r3
125
83
-73
58
48
3l
ll
ll
Totals
Combined
Split %
0 0 0 0 0 t,424 1 ,463
2,8 87
49.3 50.7
r,500 I.
1,2 89
1,390 1 ,U7
3,037
45.8 54.7
l,5l 3 |,457 I
0 0 0 ) R',ls
5i4 466
3,0't 6
0.0 .0 0.0 .0 0.0 0 4-5.6 54.4 47.4 52.6
AM
Peak Il r
\/olume
I I:00
r02
I l:00
100
09:0Ct
I I6
I l:00
l13
I l:00
l4l
I l:00
1,13
I l:00
r0r
I l:00
ll6
09:00
102
I l:00
t06
PM
Peakllr
Volume
04:00
lt5
04:00
124
04:00
tJb
Cl5:00
r52
0l :00
t28
12:00
110
03:00
144
l2:00
t54
04:00
r25
05:00
t37*
Printed : 9/8/2006 Page: I
SB-i,
0
6
3
4
t'1
49
60
14
79
88
r06
lll
n2
t28
120
134
137
ll6
87
7l
5l
JJ
l8
,or s.
Data File : Ouilcene N
Traffic Count Consultants, Inc.
Woodinville, WA
98072
T
I
T
t
T
I
I
I
T
T
t
t
I
I
I
I
T
I
T
Titlel
Title2
Title3
SR101, n/o Quilcene Site:
Date:
t5
09104t06
I nte rval
Be.qin
Mon 4
NB SB
Tue 5
NI}
Wed 6 Thu 7
NB SB
Fri 8 Sat 9 Sun 10 WeekdaY Avg.
SB NB SB Nti SB NI}SB NB SB NB st]
l2:AM
0l :00
02:00
03:00
04:00
05:00
06:00
07:00
08:00
09:00
l0:00
I l:00
l2:PM
0l :00
02:00
03:00
04:00
05:00
06:00
07:00
08:00
09:00
l0:00
ll:00
6
4
5
4
0
8
21
32
s8
90
t42
202
160
160
13't
122
124
t2t
r06
88
44
32
4
4
6
2
3
I
I
l6
22
28
45
68
89
106
r03
100
r04
98
78
60
68
38
32
2t
9
6
3
6
4
6
t2
34
69
102
t23
lll
96
r08
108
r06
86
87
n4
102
58
36
1A
14
4
3
9
0
l
2
t2
8
48
66
82
70
65
100
ltl
93
88
t26
t74
n8
't9
53
50
29
I5
5
I
2
4
4
9
30
50
107
104
96
98
98
80
r03
96
r00
95
86
't2
44
28
l8
t0
6
4
I
0
2
5
t6
44
72
76
77
74
l l0
88
77
103
r l9
r08
130
94
51
43
3l
l2
I
I
2
2
6
7
3l
66
87
102
o<
8l
R7
88
68
96
102
110
1'7
'70
48
39
t3
il
6
i,zso
6
0
2
0
6
12
56
62
16
72
68
100
82
82
98
123
ll6
il4
89
5l
38
3I
t4
t2
0
2
J
3
5
7
25
51
80
96
95
104
t22
r09
r09
r03
t02
r r0
96
16
54
3l
19
7
4
6
0
I
I
6
ll
42
57
69
l4
t04
96
88
98
116
106
105
82
48
+:
28
t7
't
Totals 1.674 1,104
2;178
60.3 39.7
I,4t 6 [356 r Jj6 i.jso 1,312
? iq')
50.6
0 0 0 1,:ll5 1272
a 6R7
52.7 41 .3
Combined ) 1'1)2,686 0 0
.0 0.0
0
Split'1,5l .l 48.9 49.7 50.3 49.4 0.0 .0 0.0 .0
AM
Peak llr
Volunrc
I l:00
202
l1:00
r06
08:00
l2i
I l:00 08:00
r00 t04
I l:00
il0
08:00
r02
t l:00
r00
t I l:00
t22
I l:00
104
PM
PeakH r
Volrr mc
l2:00
160
02:00
r04
04:00
n4
03:00
176
01 :00
103
05:00
r30
04:00
lt0
03:00
l2l
04:00
I t0
03:00
il6
Printed : 9/8/2006 Pase : 2Data Fiie :Ouilcene N
Tralfic Count Consultants, Inc.
Woodinville. WA 98072
Titlel
Title2
Title3
SR l0l s/o Quilcene Site:
Date:
t4
08t78106
Interval Mon 28
pegin NB SB
Tue 29
NB
Sat 2
NB
Sun 3
NB
Wed 30 Thu 3l Fri I
SB NB
t5 \7
56
9 tl
r0 8
5t 2t
t9 l4
83 s9
r08 98
f40 142
I t3 t76
t19 I 86
t99 r8l
I 78 202
2t4 248
223 222
1.19 225
16t 227
I 68 164
140 163
99 t45
83 r28
58 70
:13 60
2t 32
Weekday,Avg.
SB Nli srlSB NB Sts NB SB SB
l2:AM
0l:00
02:00
03:00
04:00
05:00
06:00
07:00
08:00
09:00
l0:00
ll:00
l2:PM
0l:00
02:00
03:00
04:00
05:00
06:00
07:00
08:00
09:00
l0:00
I l:00
l8
t4
il
8
l8
32
60
lll
t04
168
165
't94
t9l
204
199
197
t93
139
130
8t
65
42
38
t5
l4
't
24
38
34
6'.7
72
lt9
r83
r99
206
208
256
233
229
231
213
2u
t75
l0r
76
66
27
28
l0
l0
5
il
l6
54
t02
172
228
254
289
269
731
240
20t
l'74
144
ll8
108
54
36
?9
2,82t
l4
ll
l0
2
5
l8
26
45
64
125
154
209
233
254
204
213
2t't
209
172
160
102
71
24
22
l6
2t
36
88
150
156
2t6
224
244
2t0
203
173
213
t67
I t9
87
50
73
_ _lq
2,494
t6
l9
9
1l
7
l5
34
53
lt6
206
222
2ti
230
225
208
206
r90
188
132
97
106
6l
4'7
25
t8
l0
t2
8
20
33
60
t05
't23
172
t'16
189
197
226
2|
211
2t0
152
t47
I l3
97
56
49
32
t5
l0
8
t7
45
75
90
130
t6l
r89
203
t93
23s
228
t89
't91
l9l
'17 6
92
67
55
24
Totals
Com bined
Split'%
AI\,I
Peak Hr
Volume
Pl\l
Peak ll r
\rolume
0
0:00
0 0
0:00 0:00 0:00
0
2,4t4 2,5 I i 2.829 1.006
4,927 5.835
49.0 5 L0 48.5 5l 5
2,658
5,4'19
48.5
I l:00
2.581 ?,622 27 60
0 0 0 5.07 8 5.181
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 5l .5 50.9 49.1 48.7 5l .i
I :00
235
0:00
0
0:00
0
11:00
t99
10:00
r86
ll:00
206
I l:00
209
ll:00
216
I l:00
r89
ll:00
203
I I:00
t94
I l:00
254
I 2:00
289
0:00 O:00 0:00
000
2230
0:00
0
0:00
0
I :00
204
I :00 l:00
256
l2:00
210
I :00
254
l:00
214
l:00
226
0:00 2:00
Printed: 9i8;06 Page. IDataFile i\106 l1714
000
Traffic Count Consultants, Inc
Woodinville. WA 98072
l'itlel
l-i t Ie2
l'itle3
SR l0l s/o Quilcene Site l4
09t04/06Date
Interval
Begin
l2:AM
0l:00
02:00
0l:00
04:00
05:00
06:00
07:00
08:00
09:00
I 0:00
I l:00
l2:PM
0l:00
02:00
03:00
04:00
05:00
06:00
07:00
08:00
09:00
l0:00
I l:00
Mon 4 Tue 5
NB
Wed 6
NB
Thu 7
NB
Irri 8
NB
Sun l0 Weekday Avg
NB SB SB SB SB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB
I3
8
6
l2
3
l7
3l
36
7t
l]l
220
304
254
28'7
235
239
2t'7
t9'7
t'16
92
69
34
l4
lt
t7
6
t0
ll
51
43
92
120
155
153
199
221
198
238
248
165
179
186
I55
I r0
92
o4
48
23
4
6
6
4
24
54
'74
r55
137
l6l
188
2r8
200
r90
r83
176
189
145
102
85
4l
23
t8
9
t5
5
9
l0
50
38
8l
t06
't37
I35
t75
195
t74
2t0
2t9
146
158
t65
t3'7
9'7
8l
57
42
2t
't2
8
4
9
l4
47
73
133
r 18
160
t70
177
165
163
196
1'19
159
128
il6
54
48
32
l9
I6
t4
5
I
9
46
35
'76
98
12'.7
't26
t63
t8l
162
t95
203
r36
14',7
153
127
90
'16
53
39
I9
10
7
5
8
1.1
t9
59
108
109
I5l
r93
233
206
213
205
r98
t88
t57
llt
17
5l
30
1',7
l2
15
5
9
l0
5l
39
83
108
140
r38
t79
t99
178
214
221
149
l6l
I68
140
99
83
58
43
Totals
Combined
Split'2,
AM
Peak Hr
Volume
PNI
Peak Hr
Yolume
2,6't't 2,789 2,394 7,463 2,200 2,287
5,466 4,85',7 4,48't
49.0 51,0 49.3 50.1 49.0 51.0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 4,937
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 49.1 50.9
I 'l :00
304
I l:00
221
ll:00
218
ll:00
t95
ll:00
'177
ll:00
t8t
0:00
0
0:00 0;00
0
0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00
0
ll:00
233
ll:00
19900000
I :00
287
2:00
248
l2:00
200
2:00
219
2:00
t96
2:00 0:00
0
0:00 0:00 0:00
0
0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 I :00
2ll
2:00
22320i00000
DataFile Nl06l17ll
0 000
0
Printed gi3'06 Paqe 2
TrafficCount Consu Inc.
WoodiWA
98012
Titlel Center n/o
Title2 :
Title3 :
Inten,zMon 28
Begin NB SB
l2:AN * *
l:00 * *
2:00 * *
3:00 * *
4:00 * *
5:00 * *
6:00 * *
7:00 * *
8:00 * *
9:00 * *
10:00 * *
Il:00 * *
I2:PM * *
l-:00 * *
2:00 * *
3:00 * *
4:00 * *
5:00 * *
6:00 * *
7:00 * *
8:00 * *
9:00 * *
10:00 * *
ll:00 * *
Totals 0
Quilcene
Wed 30
NB SB
0
0
0
Thu 3l
NB SB
15
Arg-
SB
l3
0
6
3
4
t7
49
60
74
19
88
106
lll
n2
t28
120
134
l)/
I l6
87
7t
53
33
l8
1,6t9
Site:
Date
Fri I Sat 2 Sun 3
NB SB NB SB NB
8
3
5
9
4
27
47
84
g2
I r6
80
r02
il8
r00
106
lr6
136
90
68
7t
54
32
20
l2
r,500
Tue 29
NB SI]
00
r02
103
112
r08
lt0
I l5
76
79
46
42
3l
7
t4
0 1,424
8
6
I
4
4
l0
l4
30
JO
19
114
u6
154
ill
108
r06
t02
82
69
60
8t2812006
Weekday
NB
6
4
6
8
'7
30
51
86
86
102
89
t02
IIO
t06
101
I r3
125
8l
73
58
48
3t
l3
l3
t,45'l
SB
49
5l
73
75
ll 4
34 14
56 53
88 64
8l 82
88 81
98 86
t] r0 t2 6
03127
100
92
82
107
I ll
124
123
97
11
62
5l
21
l6
1,463
22
24
t2
1322
i0 4 4 5
2221
5335
206144
46 20 25 15
57 33 48 38
66 59 76 44
77 82 103 69
90 90 139 80
I l3 141 148 l0l
130 ttz 170 120
142 I28 t44 121
l 50 94 117 123
128 98 142 144
't45 91 120 t26
152 96 tO2 t40r3s 88 87 r r0
102 73 54 102
80 86 49 76
55 40 30 41
46 t4 30 25
50
2t u 16 l0
r,789 r,390 |,64'7 t,s13
Combi 0
AM
Peak l *
Volum *
PM
PeakH *
Volum *
0 2,887 3,289 3,03 7 2,83s
9:00 ll:00 ll:00 ll:00 ll:00 ll:00
il6 il3 l4t 148 lOt I 16
3,076
9:00 I l:00
102 106
SplitT 0 0 0 0 0 49.3 50.',7 45.6 54.4 45.8 54.2 53.4 46.6 47.4 52.6
I I:00 I l:00
102 r00
4;00
ll5
4:00
t24
4:00
t36
5:00
152
4:00
t25
5:00
137
l:00 l2:00
128 110
3:00 l2:00
144 154
Traffic Count Consul Inc,
WoodirWA
98072
Titlel : CenterQuilcene
lnterval Mon 4 Tue 5
Site:
Date
t5
9t412006
Wed 6Thu7 Fn8
NB
6*
0*
2*
0+
6*
12*
56*
62E
16*
77*
68*
100 *
82*
82*
gg*
123 +
116 *
l14 *
89*
53*
38*
3l *
14*
12*
Sat 9
NB SB
Sun l0
NB SB
00
Weekday
NB
2
l
3
.5
7
25
5l
30
96
95
104
122
109
r09
r03
102
I t0
96
76
54
l3
l9
7
4
0 1,415
Avg.
SB
6
0
I
I
6
I3
42
57
69
7'l
74
r04
96
88
98
1t6
106
105
82
48
42
28
12
7
1,272
Begin NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB SB
l2:AM
l:00
2:00
3:00
4:00
5:00
6:00
7:00
8:00
9:00
l0:00
I l:00
t2:PM
l:00
2:00
3:00
4:00
5:00
6:00
7:00
8:00
9:00
l0:00
I l:00
Totals
6
4
5
0
8
2t
32
58
90
142
202
160
r60
t37
122
t24
t2t
106
88
44
6
2
3
I
I
l6
22
28
45
68
89
r06
103
r00
r04
98
78
60
68
38
32
2t
9
6
3
6
4
6
12
34
69
102
123
ltl
96
108
108
106
86
87
114
t02
58
36
24
t4
4
J
1,416
914
021
140
242
t295
8 30 16
48 50 44
66 102 72
82 r04 76
70 96 77
65 98 '14
r00 98 l l0
il3 80 88
93 r 03 ',77
88 96 103
t26 r00 I 19
t24 95 r08
l 18 86 r30
79 72 94
53 44 5t
50 28 48
29 18 3r
15 t0 t2
568
I
2
2
6
7
3l
66
87
102
85
8l
82
88
68
96
102
ll0
77
70
48
39
t3
ll
6
r,280
32
4
4
I ,674 1,104
2,7'78
60.3 39.7
r,356 r,336 r,350
2,772 2,686
48.9 49.7 50.1
1,312 0 0 0
Combined ? 50')0
0
00 2,687
Split %5l.l 49.4 50.6 0 0 0 0 0 52.7 41 .3
AM
Peak Hr I l:00
Volume 202
I l:00
r06
8:00 I l:00
123 r00
8:00
104
I l:00
I l0
8:00
102
I l:00 *
100 *
I l:00
122
I l:00
r04
PM
PeakHr
Volume
I 2:00
160
2:00
104
4:00
l14
3:00
126
l:00
103
5:00
l]0
4:00
ll0
3:00 t
123 *
4:00
I t0
3:00
ll6
Attachment B
Level of Service Calculations at Study Intersections
P Transportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
T
I
I
I
T
I
T
I
T
T
T
T
T
I
I
I
I
I
T
HCS2000: Unsignal-ized Intersections Release 4.1f
TWO_WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst: JGT
Agency/Co. : TENW
Date Perfbrmed: 9/76/2005
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #l - SR 104 / Center Rd R.amps
Jurisdiction: WSDOT,/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2006 Existing
Prol ect I D: Pleasant Harbor
East/i/iest Street: SR 104
North/South Street: Center Rd Ramps
Intersection Orientation: EW Study period thrs)0.25
Maio. sr.eer, ^"*...Xehicre ";l:T;:r::d Adiustme"","..-*,,*
MovementI231456
LTRILTR
Vofume
Peak-Hour Eactor, PHF
HourJ.y Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type/Storage
RT Channe]i zed?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
15 243
0 - 83 0.83
18 292'7 --
Undivided
245 B1
0 -82
98
0 .82
298
01 0
LT TR
No No
Minor Street: Approach Northbound
18
LT
Sou thbound
11 72
1K
Movement 9 10
R L
Vofume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
HourIy Flow.Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicfes
Percent Grade (Z)
FIared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes
Conf ig ura ti on
1n
0. B0
42
4
L4
0. B0
7'7
4
0 0
No
0 0
LR
De 1a y,Queue
WB
4
Length, and Level of Service
Northbound Southbound
| '7 I 9 I 10 11 t2
IILR
Approach EB
1
LT
Movement
Lane Config
v (vph)
C (m) (vph )
v/c
95% queue lengLh
Control Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
1B
113 6
0 -02
0.05
8.2
A
(o
464
0.13
0.43
13.9
B
13.9
B
1
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Refease 4.1f
TWO_WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst: JGT
Agency/Co. : TENW
Date Perfbrmed: 9/\6/2006
Analysrs Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #1 - SR 104 / Center Rd
Jurisdlction: WSDOT,/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 Without Prolect
Proj ect I D: Pleasant Harbor
East/V,jest Street: SR 104
North/South Street: Center Rd Ramps
Intersection Orientation: EW
Ramps
Study period (hrs): 0.25
@Vehrcle ";l:I;:"::d Adjustment",,u".o-,*-
Movementl231456
LTRILTR
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
HourIy Fl-ow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type/Storage
RT ChannelLzed?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
19 302
0. 90 0. 90
21 335'1 --
Undivided
30s.
0.90
JJO
101
0.90
7t2
01 I
NoNo
0
TRLT
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
Northbound
B
T
9 10
Southbound
t1
T
721
L R L R
Vol- ume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
HourIy Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicl-es
Percent Grade (Z)
Fl-ared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes
Configuration
42
0.90
46
4
71
0.90
1B
4
00
0 0
LR
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
Delay,
EB
1
LT
Queue Length, and Level- of Service
WB Northbound Southbound
4 | 1 8 9 | 10 11 t2
IILR
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95* queue length
Control Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
2t
1084
0 -02
0 .06
8.4
A
64
411
0.16
0.55
C
15.4
C
No/
HCS2000: Unsignafized Intersections Refease 4.1f
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
^.:l,,cr. JGTrrrrua IrL.
Agency/Co. : TENW
Date Perfbrmed: 8/15/2001
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #1 - SR 104 / Center Rd Ramps
Jurisdiction: WSDOT,/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 No Action Al-ternative
Project ID: Pleasant Harbor
East/West Street: SR 104
North/South Street: Center Rd Ramps
Intersectj-on Orlentation: EW Study period (hrs)0 -25
M,ro, st.."r, App."".lehicle ";l:I;:"::d Adjustments
Movementl23l4
LTRIL
We stbound
56
TR
Vol-ume
Peak-Hour EacLor, PHF
Hourly Fl-ow Rate, HER
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Con fi guration
Upstream Signal?
19 302
0.90 0.90
27 335
1 --
Undivided
305
0.90
338
114
0. 90
726
01 10
LT TR
No No
Minor Street: Approach Northbound
789
LTR
Movement 10 72
R
So ut hbound
11
TL
Vo1 ume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Percent Grade (%)
F-Iared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lane s
Confj-guration
trE
0.90
6I
4
t'7
0.90
1B
4
00
0
No
0
LR
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
Delay, Queue
EB WB
).4
LT
Length, and Levef of Service_
Northbound Southbound
| 1 B 9 I 10 11 72
IILR
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95% queue length
Control Delay
T ne
Approach Defay
Approach LOS
2l
1.012
0.02
0.06
A
19
396
0 .20
0.73
3
3
16
C
16
C
HCS2000: Unsignafized Intersections Release 4.1f
TWO_WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst:
Agency/Co. : TENW
Date Perfbrmed: I /16/2001
Analysrs Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #1 - SR 104 / Center Rd Ramps
Jurisdiction: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Unitsr U. S. Customary
Anal-ysis Year: 201? Brinnon Alternatrve
Project ID: Pleasant Harbor
East/West Street: SR 104
North/South Street: Center Rd Ramps
Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs )a ?\
Maror srreer: Approacvehicle ";l:l;:"::d Adiustments
Movement723l4
LTRIL
Westbound
5
T
6
R
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehiqles
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
19 302
0.90 0.90
2t 335
1 --
Undivided
305
0-90
338
142
0.90
157
01 1 0
TRLT
No No
Minor Street Approach
Movement
Northbound
B9
TR
S outhbound
11
T
1
L
10 l2
L P,
Vo.l- ume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Percent Grade (?)
Ffared Approach: Exists?/Storage
La nes
Configuration
89
0.90
9B
4
1'l
0.90
10
4
0 0
No
0 0
LR
Appr"..-h "i;''
Movement 1
Lane Config LT
Queue Length, and Level of Service
WB Northbound Southbound
4 | 1 8 9 I 10 11 L2
IILR
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue length
Controf Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
21
1043
0 .02
0.05
8.5
A
116
31 4
0.31
I - 30
18.9
C
18.9
C
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Refease 4 - 1f
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst:
AgencY,/Co - : TENW
Date Perf6rmed: 9/I6/2006
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #1 - SR 104 ,/ Center Rd Ramps
Jurisdictj-on: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 Statesman Alternative
Project ID: Pleasant Harbor
East/west Street: SR 104
North/South Street: Center Rd Ramps
Intersection Orientation: EW Study period
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Major Street
(hrs ) :0 -25
Approach
Movement
Ea stbound
T23
LTR
l4
lL
Westbound
56
TR
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHE
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type/Storage
RT Channe-I ized?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
305
0. 90
338
165
0.90
183
19 3020.90 0. 902t 3351 --
Undi.vided
01 1 0
TRLT
No No
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
Northbound
189
LTR
10
S ou thbound
11 12
TRL
Volune
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
HourIy Fl-ow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicl-es
Percent Grade (?)
Ffared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lane s
Configuratlon
104
0.90
115
4
l1
0.90
18
4
00
0
No/
0
LR
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
Del-ay,
EB
1
LT
Queue Length, and LeveI of Service_
WB Northbound Southbound
4 | 1 B 9 | 10 11 72
IILR
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue length
Control Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
2l
t020
0 -02
0.06
8.6
A
133
363
0 .37
I .64
20 .5
C
20.5
c
HCS2000: Unsigna.Iized Intersections Release 4.1f
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst: JGT
Agency/Co. : TENW
Date Perfbrmed: 8/16/20O1
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #1 - SR 104 / Center Rd Ramps
Jurisdiction: WSDOT,/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 Hybrid Afternative
Project ID: Pfeasant Harbor
East,/West Street: SR 104
North/South Street: Center Rd Ramps
Intersection Orientation: EW Study period
Vehicle Vol-umes and Adjustments
(hrs)0.25
Major Street Approach
Movement
Eas tbound
23
1K
We s tbound
456
LTR
1
L
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
HourJ-y Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicfes
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
19 302
0.90 0.90
2l 335
1 --
Undivided
30s
0.90
338
165
0.90
183
01 1 0
TRLT
No No
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
Northbound
89
TR
1
L
10 l2
Southbound
11
TL R
Vofume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HER
Percent Heavy Vehicl-es
Percent Grade (Z)
FIared Approach: Exlsts?/Storage
Lanes
Confrguration
104
0.90
115
4
1
on
I
1
0
1
4
0 0
No
0
LR
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
De1 a y,
EB
1
LT
Queue Length, and Levef of Servrce
WB Northbound Southbound
4 I 1 I 9 I 10 11 t2
IILR
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue Iength
Control Del-ay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
2l
7020
0 -02
0.06
B-6
A
133
363
0.37
7 .64
q20
C
20
(-
5
0
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1f
TWO_WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst: JGT
Agency/Co - : TENW
Date Perfbrmed: 9/16/2006
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: +2 - SR 104 Ramps / Center Rd
Jurisdiction: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2006 Existing
Project ID: Pleasant Harbor
East/West Street: SR 104 Ramps
North/South Street: Center Rd
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs)0 -25
@Vehicre ";::ffi;"::d Adjustme"t"
**noo,,* -
Movement7231456
LTRILTR
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Elow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
12
0.75
96
27
0.75
2B
34 B0
0.81 0.81
41 98
1 --
Undivided
01
LT
No
1 0
TR
No
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
Westbound
1B
LT
9
R
Eastbound
10 11
LT
t2
R
Volume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly FIow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Percent Grade (%)
Ffared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes
Con figu ra tr on
38
0. 91
4t
6
61
0.91
13
t)
00
LR
No
0 0
DeIa y,
Approactr NB
Movement 1
Lane Config LT
Queue Length, and Levef of Service__
SB Westbound Eastbound
4 | 't I 9 I 10 11 t2
IILR
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue length
Controf Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
41.
1432
0.03
0.09
1.6
A
114
819
0.14
0.48
10.1
B
10.1
B
HCS2000: Unsignal-ized Intersections Release 4.1f
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
An: l rrct .
Agency/Co-: TENW
Date Peiformed: 9/L6/2A06
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #2 - SR 104 Ramps / Center Rd
Jurisdiction: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Anal-ysis Year: 2017 Without Project
Proj ect ID: Pleasant Harbor
East/West Street: SR 104 Ramps
North,/South Street: Center Rd
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs)0.25
Vehicle Vofumes and Adjustments_
Maj or Street : Approach
Movement
No r thbound
723
LTR
Southbound
14s6
ILTR
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Fl-ow Rate, HER
Percent Heavy Vehicl-es
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
42 99
0.86 0.86
48 115'7 --
Undivided
26
0.86
30
01
LT
No
1
No
0
TR
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
Westbound
789
LTR
Eastbound
10 11
LT
l2
R
Vo1 ume
Peak Hour Factor, PHE
HourIy Ffow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Percent Grade (%)
Fl-ared Approach: Ex.ists?/Storage
Lanes
Configuration
4'l
0.86
54
6
83
0. B6
96
6
00
0
No
LR
Approach
Movement
Lane Confrg
4
De1 ay,
NB
1
LT
Queue Length, and Level of Service
SB Wes tbound
B 9 101
Eastbound
1L
LR
l2
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue l-ength
Control- Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
4B
7420
0.03
0.10
'7 .6
A
150
792
0.19
n 6q
10.5
B
10.5
B
90
o.B6
104
0
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Refease 4.1f
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Dn:'l rrcr.
Agency/Co..: TENW
Date Performed: B/76/2001
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #2 - SR 104 Ramps / Center Rd
Jurisdiction: IiSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 No Action Afternative
Project ID: Pfeasant Harbor
East/Viest Street: SR 104 Ramps
North/South Street: Center Rd
fntersectron Orientatron: NS Study period (hrs )0 .25
@o u.-x "
n t " " "; : :lil
"
: ld Ad ; u s tm e n "'
=
o* n o o,, *
Movementl231456
LTRILTR
Vofume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
HourIy Flow Rate, HER
Percent Heavy Vehicfes
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Configura tion
Upstream Signal?
55 104
0.86 0.86
6 3 ).20'1 --
Undi-vided
01
96
0. B6
111
No
26
0.86
30
10
LT fh
No
Minor Street:Approach
Movement
We s tbound
189
LTR
Ea s tbound
10 11
LT
72
R
Volume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Elow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Percent Grade (?)
FIared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lane s
Conf i gura ti on
41
0. B6
54
6
96
0.86
111
6
00
0
No
LR
App.o-.h
-DelaY'Movement 1
Lane Conflg LT
Queue Length, and LeveI of Service
SB Westbound Eastbound
4 | 7 B 9 I 10 11 12
IILR
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95t queue length
Control- Delay
LOS
Approach DeIay
Approach LOS
63
74L2
0.04
0.14
'7 .1
A
165
1'7 6
0 -21
0.80
10.9
B
10.9
D
0
u
HCS2000: Unsignal-i-zed Intersections Release 4.1f
TWO_WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst:
Agency/Co.. : TENW
Date Performed: B/L6/20A1
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: +2 - SR 104 Ramps / Center Rd
Jurisdiction: wSDOT,/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 Brinnon Alternative
Project ID: Pl-easant Harbor
East/West Street: SR 104 Ramps
North/South Street: Center Rd
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs)0.25
Major Street: Approach
Movement
Vehicle Vol-umes and Ad I ustments
Northbound
123
LTR
4
L
Southbound
56
TR
VoIume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
PercenL Heavy Vehicles
I4edian Type/Storage
RT Channe.I ized?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
89 119
0.86 0.86
103 138"t --
Undivided
108
0.86
125
26
0. B6
30
01 1 0
TRLT
No No
Mrnor Street:Approach
Movement
Vie s tbound
B
T
9
R
1
L
Eastbound
10 11
LT
t2
R
Vol-ume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicl-es
Percent Grade (?)
Fl-ared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lane s
Con fi gurat i on
41
0. B6
54
6
124
0.86
144
6
0 0
No
0 0
LR
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
De 1a y,
NB
1
LT
Queue Length, and Level- of Service
SB
4 1
Wes tbound
I 9 10 72
Eastbound
l1
LR
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95* queue Iength
Control Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
103
1395
0 .07
0.24
7.8
A
198
134
0 .21
1.09
11.7
B
11. -'7
B-
HCS2000: Unsignafized Intersections Release 4.1f
TWO_I{AY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Anal-yst:
Agency,/Co. : TENIi
Date Perfbrmed: 9/16/2006
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: *2 - SR 104 Ramps / Center Rd
Jurisdiction: t,,/SDOT/Jef f erson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 Stalesman Alternative
Project ID: Pleasant Harbor
East/V,lest Street: SR 104 Ramps
Norlh/South Street: Center Rd
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period
Vehicle Volumes
0 -2s
Maj or Street : Approach
Movement
Northbound
123
LTR
(hrs)
Southbound
456
LTR
and AdjustmenLs_
VoIume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
HourIy El,ow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type,/Storage
RT Channefized?
Lane s
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
1 04 725
0.86 0.86
tza 145
1 --
Undivided
118
0. B6
131
26
0.86
30
01 1
No
0
LT TR
No
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
Westbound
789
LTR
10
Eastbound
11
T
72
L R
Volume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Fl-ow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Percent Grade (Z)
Efared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes
Con f igur ation
47
0.86
54
u
141
0.86
170
6
00
0
No
LR
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
De 1a y.
NB
1
LT
Queue Length, and Level of Service
SB Westbound Eastbound
4 | 't B 9 I 10 11 12
IILR
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue length
Controf Delay
Approach DeIay
Approach LOS
0
0
1
t2a
13 81
224
124
0.31
1.33
t2.2
B
12.2
B
09
2B
9
p-
I
T
0
HCS2000: Unsignafized Intersectrons Refease 4.1f
TWO_WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst: JGT
Agency/Co. : TENW
Date Perfbrmed: B/L5/2001
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #2 - SR 104 Ramps / Center Rd
Jurisdiction: WSDOT,zJefferson County
Unrts: U, S. Customary
Analysi.s Year: 2017 Hybrid Alternative
Proj ect ID: Pleasant Harbor
East/West Street: SR 104 Ramps
North/South Street: Center Rd
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs)n ?q
M"r., srr".r, ^rr..".X
hicre ';::lil.::d Ad;ustme""
,ou.noou',o
Movementl231456
LTRILTR
VoIume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHE
Hourly Ffow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type/Storage
RT Channel-ized?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal-?
104 t25
0. 86 0. 86
720 145
1 --
Undivided
118
0.86
137
2t)
0.86
30
01 1 0
TRLT
No No
Mi.nor Street: Approach
Movement
We s tbound
18
LT
Ea s tbou nd
I 10 11
ILT
9
R
l2
R
Volume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Percent Grade (Z)
El-ared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Con f igur ati on
41
0.86
54
6
7 4'l
0.86
170
6
00
0
No
0
LR
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
Delay,
NB
1
LT
Queue Length, and LeveI of Service_
SB Westbound Eastbound
4 I 1 B 9 I 10 11 ).2
IILR
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95* queue length
Control Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
r20
13 81
0.09
0 -28?o
A
224
120
0.31
1 - 33
t2 -2
B
12.2
B
!
HCS2000: Unsignalized fntersectlons Release 4. lf
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst: JGT
Agency/Co. : TENW
Date Perfbrmed: 9/L6/20A6
Analysis Trme Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #3 - SR 101 / Center Rd
Jurisdj-ction: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2006 Existing
Project ID: Pfeasant Harbor
East/West Street; SR 101
North/South Street: Center Rd
Tntersectron Orientation: NS Study perrod (hrs)0.25
@Vehicle ";::T;;"::d Adrustme"' .-,*o-,*
MovementI231456
LTRILTR
Vofume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly FIow Rate, IIFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type,/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
10
0.90
11
2
TWLTL
131
0.90
145
96
0.90
106
772
0.90
t24
B
0
I
2
0
2
't
90 90
1
No
1 1
T
No
1 110
L R L TR
No
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
Westbound
189
LTR
10
L
l2
R
Eastbound
11
T
Volume 99
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.90
HourJ-y Flow Rate, HFR 110
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2
Percent Grade (?)
Flared Approach: Exrsts?/Storage
Lanes 0
Con fi g urat i on
90 90 90 90
No
1
LTR
B
0
B
2
0
90
5
0
5
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
4
0
4
2
No
1
LTR
0 0 0
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
DeJ-ay, Queue Length, and Level- of Service
NB SB !0estbound
t 4 | 1 B 9 I 10
LLILTRI
Eastbound
11
LTR
L2
v (vph)
c (m) (vph)
v/c
95% queue length
Control- Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
722
6'71
0. 18
0. 65
11.5
B
11 .5
B
13
7l-6
0 .02
0.06
10.1
B
10.1
B
11
1453
0.01
0.02
A
2
7286
0 .00
0 .00?o
A
il
t
t
HCS2000: Unslgna-Iized Intersections Refease 4. lf
TWO_WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Anal-yst:
Agency/Co-: TENW
DaLe Performed: 9/16/2A06
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #3 - SR 101 / Center Rd
Jurisdiction: v,lSDOT/Jef f erson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 Without ProjecL
Project ID: Pl-easant Harbor
East/West Street: SR 101
North/South Street: Center Rd
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period
Vehicle Vo.Iumes and Ad j ustments
Maj or Street r Approach
(hrs)0.25
Movement
Northbound
23
TR
1
L
4
L
Southbound
56
TR
Vol-ume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly FIow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Configur at ion
Upstream Signaj-?
119
0 .90
t32
10
0.90
11
l2
0. 90
13
2
TWLTL
163
0.90
181
2
0
2
1
139
on 0.90
154
1
No
1 11
T
No
110
L R L TR
No
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
Wes tbound'789
!1X
10
Eastbound
11
T
L2
L R
Volume 123
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 136
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2
Percent Grade (%)
Fl-ared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes 0
Con figur at j- on
10
0.90
11
2
0
6
0
6
0
I
0
1
0
0
5
0
5
2
90
9
0.90
10
0
90 90
No No
1
LTR
0 0 1
LTR
0
Appr.r.h -'*i3'' 0":;" ""nntn;.:l:"::;"'
Movement]' 4llS9
LaneConfig L L I LTR
of Service
10
Eastbound
11
LTR
l2
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue length
Control Delay
l,u5
Approach D
Approach L
152
629
0.24
n 01
72.5
B
LZ. J
B
L7
656oo?
0.08
10.6
B
10.6
B
13
14 13
0.01
0.03
't .6
A
2
t220
0.00
0.00
8.0
A
el
OS
ay
HCS2000: Unsj-gnalized Intersections Release 4.1f
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
hrrdf y5 L .
Agency/Co.. : TENW
Date Performed: B/16/2001
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #3 - SR 101 / Center Rd
Jurisdiction: WSDOT,/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 No Action Alternative
Project ID: Pleasant Harbor
East/West Street: SR 101
North/South Street: Center Rd
Intersection Orientationr NS Study period (hrs)0 .25
r,4.r". sr...a, ooo..".X"n"t"';::[;;.::: Adiustment"
*o..,oou*
Movementl231456
LTRILTR
Vol-ume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicl-es
Median Type/Storage
RT Channefized?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
r6't
0.90
185
744
0.90
160
10
0. 90
11
72
0. 90
13
2
TWLTL
l3'l
0.90
752
2
0
2
1
90
/t
No
111
LTR
No
110
L TR
No
Minor Street Approach
Movement
We s tbound
789
LTR
Eastbound
10 11
LT
t2
R
Vofume 142
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0 . 90
Hourly Flow Rate. HFR 157
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2
Percent Grade (%)
FIared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes 0
Confi guration
10
0. 90
11
2
0
6
0
6
0
1
0
1
0
0
5
0
5
2
No
9
0.90
10
0
0
No
90 90 90
1
LTR
0 1
LTR
0
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
De1ay,
NB
1
L
Queue Length, and Level of Service
SB Westbound
4 | 1 I 9 I 10
LILTRI
Eastbound
11
LTR
L2
v (vph)
C (m) (vph )
v/c
95? queue length
Control Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
13
1406
0.01
0.03
1.6
A
2
1195
0 .00
0.01
8.0
A
t1 3
623
0.28
1.13
L'7
644
0.03
0.08
10 .7
B
t0.7
B
013
B
13
B
0
n
HCS2000: Unsrgnafized Intersections ReLease
TWO_WAY STOP CONTROL
4.tf
SUMMARY
Anr'l rrct.
Agency/Co.. : TENW
Date Performed: I /16/2001
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #3 - SR 101 ,z Center Rd
Jurisdiction: WSDOT,/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 Brinnon Alternative
Project ID: Pleasant Harbor
East/West Street: SR 101
North/South Street: Center Rd
Intersect-ion Orientation: NS Study perl-od (hrs)0 -25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Major Street: Approach
Movement
No r thbou ndt23
LTR
S ou t hbound
14s6
ILTR
VoIume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Fl-ow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicl-es
Medi-an Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Con figurati on
Upstream Signal?
186
0.90
206
1s3
0.90
170
10
0. 90
11
IZ
0. 90
13
2
TWLTL
11 9
0.90
198
2
0
2
1
90
1
No
1 1
T
No
1 1 I 0
TRLRL
No
M.inor Street: Approach
Movement
hie s tbound
QO
TR
1
L
10
Ea s tbound
11
T
t2
RL
Volume 182
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 202
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2
Percent Grade (?)
Elared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes 0
Con fi gur at i on
10
0.90
11
2
0
6
0
6
0
1
0
1
0
0
5
0
5
2
90
9
0.90
10
0
90 90
NoNo
1
LTR
0 0 1
LTR
0
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
DeIay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
NB SB Westbound
r 4 | '1 8 9 I 10
LLILTRI
Eastbound
11
LTR
72
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue l-ength
Controf Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
2tB
609
0.36
t .62
l4 .2
B
14.2
B
t'1
61.1
0 .03
0 .0q
11.0
B
11.0
B
13
7394
0.01
0.03
1-6
A
Z
tr28
0.00
0.01
8-2
A
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4 .1f
TWO_WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst:
Agency,/Co. : TENW
Date Performed: 9/16/2006
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #3 - SR 101 / Center Rd
Jurisdiction: V,ISDOT/Jefferson County
Un j-ts: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2A)J Statesman Afternative
Project ID: Pleasant Harbor
East/West Street: SR 101
North/South Street: Center Rd
lntersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs)0 .25
Ma@Vehicre ";::l;;.::d Ad;ustme"'
.--,.r,,oou*
Movement 7 2 .3 | 4 5 6
LTRILTR
Vofume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF'
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
l'{edian Type,/ Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Configuration
UpsLream Signal?
184
0.90
204
201
0. 90
230
10
0.90
11
72
0.90
13
2
TWLTL
2
0
2
1
90
161
0.90
178
1
No
1
L
11
T
No
1 1 0
TRLR
No
Minor Street Approach
Movement
We s tbound
1a
LI
9
R
Eastbound
10 11
LT
1.2
R
Volume 275
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.90
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 238
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2
Percent Grade (%)
F-lared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes 0
Con fi gur at i on
6
0
6
0
I
0
1
0
0
1
q
0
5
2
0
10
0.
11
2
0
90 90
No
9
0.90
10
0
90 .90
No
1
LTR
0 0
LTR
De1ay,Queue Length, and Level of Service
SB Westbound
4 | 1 B 9 I 10
LILTRI
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
NB
1
L
Eastbound
11
L1K
T2
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue length
Control Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
13
1385
0.01
0.03
1.6
A
254
601o a)
2.09
C
1E a
t1
603
0.03
0.09
11.1
B
11.1
B
2
10 99
0.00
0.01
8.3
A
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersectj-ons Release 4.1f
TWO_h]AY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
an:]r,cr. JGT
Agency/Co. : TENW
Date Performed: B/16/20A1
Analysis Trme Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #3 - SR 101 / Center Rd
Jurisdiction: WSDO?/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysi-s Year: 2017 Hybrid Al-ternative
Project ID: Pl-easant Harbor
East/West Street: SR 101
North/South Street: Center Rd
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs)u-ta
@Veh
i c'I e "i::I;;.::d Ad, us tme n t ",*,.r,oouno
Movementl231456
LTRILTR
Vol-ume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicl-es
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
t2
0.90
13
TWLTL
184
0.90
204
201
0.90
230
2
0
2
1
90
161
0.90
178
l0
0.90
11
1
No
1 1
T
No
1 11 0
L R L TR
No
Minor Street: Approach Wes tbound
1B
LT
Eastbound
11
T
Movement 9
R
10 L2
L R
Vo1ume 215
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.90
Hourly Fl-ow Rate, HFR 238
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2
Percent Grade (?)
Flared Approach : Exrsts ?/Storage
Lanes 0
Configuration
10
0-90
11
2
0
5
0
5
2
90
q
0.90
10
0
1
0
1
0
0
qn
6
0
6
0
No No
1
LTR
0 0 1
LTR
0
De 1a y,Queue Length, and Level of Service
SB lrlestbound Eastbound
4 I '7 B 9 I 10 11 t2
LlLTRllrn
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
NB
1
L
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue length
Control Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
13
1385
0.01
0 -03
T -6
A
2
1099
0.00
0.01
8.3
A
254
601
0 .42
2.09
15.3
C
15.3
C
L1
603
0 .03
0.09
11.1
B
l1- 1
B
90
HCS2000: Unsi-gnalj-zed Intersections Refease 4.1f
TWO.WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst: JGT
Agency/Co. : TENi.^l
Date Performed: 9/16/2006
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #4 - SR 101 / Dosewallrps Road
Jurisdictron: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2006 Existing
Project ID: Pfeasant Harbor
East/West Street: Dosewallips Road
North/South Street: SR 101
fntersectlon Orientation: NS Study period
Vehicle Vofumes and Adjustments
(hrs )a ?\
Maj or Street : Approach
Movement
Northbound
123
LTR
4
L
Southbound
56
TR
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicfes
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
11 t25
0.85 0. 85
t2 74't
13
Undi-vided
117
0. 85
L31
16
0.85
1B
1 1
T
No
1 0
TRL
No
Minor Street: Approach
l4ovement
Wes tbound
?89
LTR
10
Ea s tbound
11
T
l2
RL
Vof ume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicl-es
Percent Grade lZ)
FIared Approach: Exrsts?,/Storage
Lane s
Configuration
7
0. 8B
1
10
l4
0.88
15
10
10
0
No
LR
De1ay, Queue Length, and LeveI of Service
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
NB
1
L
SB Itles tbound
I
Eas tbound
11
LR
14 9 l0 72
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue Iength
Controf Delay
LOS
Approach DeIay
Approach LOS
12
1361
0.01
0.03
7.1
A
22
193
0.03
0.09
9.1
A
9.1
A
0
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Refease 4.1f
TWO_WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst:
Agency/Co.. : TENW
Date Performed: 9/76/2006
Analysis Tirne Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #4 - SR 101 / Dosewallips Road
Jurrsdiction: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 !,lithout Project
Project ID: Pleasant Harbor
East/West Street: Dosewallips Road
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orientation: NS Study perrod (hrs)0 .25
M"r ". sr,eer , Ano.ou.lunt"' ";::T;;"::: Adj ustment"
,o*noo.,,-,oMovement7231456
LTRILTR
Vol-ume
Peak-Hour Eactor, PHF
Hourly Ffow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehi-cles
Median Type/Storage
RT ChanneLized?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
74 155
0.86 0.86
16 180
13
Undivided
145
0.86
168
20
0. B6
23
I 1
T
No
l-0
TR
No
Minor Street:Approach
Movement
We s tbound
,OO
LTR
Ea s tbound
11
T
10 l2
L R
Vo l ume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate. HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Percent Grade (%)
Ffared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lane s
Conf igur a ti on
o
0.86
10
10
L1
0.86
19
10
0 1
No/
0 0
LR
Approach
DeIay, Queue Length, and Levef of Service
NB SB Westbound Eastbound
I 4 | 1 B 9 I r0 11 L2
LI ILR
Movement
Lane Config
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue length
Control Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
l6
1319
0.01
0 .04
7.8
A
29
134
0.04
0 .12
10.1
B
10-1
B
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Refease 4.1f
T!{O_WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
an:rvcr' JGT
Agency/Co.. : TEMiI
Date Performed: B/L6/200'1
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #4 - SR 101 / Dosewallips Road
Jurisdiction: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 No Action Alternative
Pro j ect I D: P.Ieasant Harbor
East/West Street: Dosewallips Road
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orj-entation: NS Study period (hrs )0.25
M"jo. dt.er, App.oacVehicle ";::l;;"::d Adjustme""
.-r.noou-
Movementl231456
LTRILTR
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicl-es
Median Type/Storage
RT Channel"ized?
Lane s
Con figurat ion
Upstream Signal?
L4 178
0.86 0.86
16 206
13
Undivided
170
0.85
r91
20
0.86
1 0
TR
1
T
No
1
L
No
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
We s tbound
189
LTR
10 ).2
RL
Ea s tbound
11
T
Vol ume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
HourIy Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Percent Grade (%)
Efared Approach: Exrsts?/Storage
Lane s
Configuratj-on
9
0.86
10
10
l-'l
0.86
19
10
0 1
LR
No
0 0
Approach
Movement
Lane Confj-g
Delay,
NB
1
L
Queue Length, and Level of Service
SB Westbound Eastbound
4 | 1 I 9 I 10 11 L2
IILR
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue length
Controf Delay
!vJ
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
0
0
1
16
L2B1
l9
691
0 .04
0.13
10.4
B
10.4
B
01
04
B
A
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Refease 4.1f
TWO_WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst:
Agency/Co.. : TENW
Date Performed: 8/16/2001
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #4 - SR 101 / Dosewallips Road
Jurisdiction: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Unlts: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 Brinnon Alternat.ive
Project ID: Pleasant Harbor
East/!Vest Street: Dosewallips Road
North/South Street: SR 101
fntersection Orientationr NS Study period (hrs)n ,q
Vehicle Volumes and Adj ustments_
Major Street: Approach
Movement
Northbound
23
TR
Southbound
456
LTR
1
L
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHE
Hourly Fl-ow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicfes
Median Type/Storage
RT Channel:-zed?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
15 2470.86 0.86r7 280
13
Undivided
22t
0.86
256
20
0.86
23
1 11
T
No
0
TRL
No
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
Westbound
1ao
LTR
10 I2
Ea s tbound
11
TL R
Volume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
HourIy Elow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Percent Grade (?)
Flared Approach: Exrsts?,/Storage
Lane s
Con figur ati on
9
0.86
10
10
18
0.86
20
10
10
0
No
0
LR
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Serv:-ce_
NB SB Westbound Eastbound
1 4 | 1 I 9 I 10 11 72
LI ILR
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95% queue length
Control Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
0.01
0 .04
8.0
71
1223
30
618
0.05
0.15
11.1
B
11-1
B
A.
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4-1f
TViO_WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst:
Agency/Co.. : TENW
Date Performed: 9/16/2006
Analysis Trme Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #4 SR 101 / Dosewalfips Road
Jurisdictron: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 Statesman Al-ternative
Project ID: Pl-easant Harbor
East/West Street: Dosewallips Road
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersecti-on Orientation: NS Study period
Vehicl-e Vol-umes and Adj ustments
(hrs )0.25
Major Street: Approach
Movement
Northbound
123
LTR
Southbound
1456
ILTR
Vol,ume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHf
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Configurati on
Upstream Signal?
t6 269
0.86 0.86
18 312
13
Undivided
285
0-86
331
20
0.86
23
1 1
T
No
1 0
1KL
No
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
Westbound
18
LT
9
R
10
L
Eastbound
11
T
l2
R
Vo 1 ume
Peak Hour Factor. PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Percent Grade (U )
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lane s
Con f i gur ati on
9
0.86
10
10
19
0.86,,
10
1
No
0 0
LR
.DeIay, Queue Length, and LeveI of Service
Approach
Movement
Lane Confiq
NB
1
L
SB Westbound
B
Ea s tbound
10 t1
LR
4 '1 9 t2
v (vph)
C (m) (vph )
v/c
95? queue length
Control Delay
LOS
Approach DeJ-ay
Approach LOS
0
0
8
1B
tL4 6
)a
JJJ
0.06
0.18
tt o
B
11 0
B
n,
05
2
A
0
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Refease 4.1f
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst: JGT
Agency/Co. : TENW
Date Performed: B/ I6/2001
Analysrs Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #4 - SR 101 / Dosewallips Road
Jurisdiction: I{SDOT,/Jef f erson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 Hybrid Afternative
Project ID: Pleasant Harbor
East/West Street: Dosewallips Road
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orientatron: NS Study period thrs)0.25
@Vehicle ";::l;;":ld Adjustme"'
.o,,.noou*
Movementl23145.6
LTRILTR
Vofume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicl-es
Median Type/Storage
RT Channel-ized?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream SignaI?
16 269
0.86 0.86
18 372
13
Undivided
26s
0.86
308
20
0.86
23
1 11
T
No
0
TRL
No
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
Westbound'78
LT
Eastbound
11
T
1,29
R
10
L R
Volume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Fl-ow Rate, HER
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Percent Grade (?)
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lane s
Confi gu rat i on
9
0. B6
1n
10
19
0. B6
22
10
1
No/
0 0
LR
Delay,Queue Length, and Level of Service
SB Westbound Eastbound
4 I 1 I 9 I 10 11 12
IILR
Approach
Movement
Lane Confrg
NB
1
L
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95t queue length
Control Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
0
0
B
1B
1169
02
05
I
512
0.06
0.18
7l .1
B
11.7
B
A
t
0
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1f
TWO-tllAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Anal-yst: JGT
atonetr /Ca TENW
Date Perfbrmed: 9/21 /2AA5
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #5 - SR 101 / Brinnon
Jurisdiction: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysrs Year: 2006 Existing
Project ID: Pleasant Harbor EIS
East/West Street: Brinnon Lane
North/South Street: SR 101
Tntersection Orientation: NS
Lane
Study period (hrs): 0.25
@Vehicre ";::iil":ld Adlustme"' **n*u*
Movementl231456
LTRILTR
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
HourIy Elow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicl-es
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
B t32
0.85 0. 85
9 155
L4
Undivi ded
2
0
2
B5
2
0
2
85
121
0.85
149
5
0
5
B5
01
LTR
No
0 010
LTR
No
Minor Street: Approach Westbound
1B
LT
Ea s tbound
11
T
Movement 9
R
10 72
L R
Volume 2
Peak Hour Factor, PHE 0 . 85
Hourly Flow Rate, HER 2
Percent Heavy Vehrcles 0
Percent Grade (Z)
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes 0
Configuration
0
0.8s
0
0
0
2
0
2
0
85
9
0. 85
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
B5
16
0. Bs
1B
0
No No
1
LTR
0 0 1
LTR
0
DeI ay,Queue Length, and Levef of Service
SB $lestbound E""tb"r"d
4 | 1 I 9 I 10 1r t2
LTRI LTR I LTR
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
NB
1
LTR
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95t queue length
Control De1ay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
9
1356
0.01
0 -02
1 .1
A
2
1387
0.00
0.00
1-6
A
4
121
0.01
0.02
28
115
0.04
0.11oo
A
9,8
A
10
B
10
B
0+
0+
HCS2000: Unsignaflzed Intersections Refease 4.1f
TWO_WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst:
Agency/Co, : TENW
Date Perfbrmed: 9/21 /2006
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersectlon: #5 - SR 101 / Brinnon Lane
Jurisdiction: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 Without Project
Project ID: Pleasant Harbor EIS
East/West Street: Brinnon Lane
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orientatj-on: NS Study perj-od (hrs)0 .25
Vehicle Vol-umes and Ad j ustments
Maj or Street : Approach Northbound
2
T
Southbound
56
TR
Movement 1
L
3
R
VoIume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicfes
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Configurati on
Upstream Signal?
10 764
0.85 '0.85
11 792
14
Undivided
2
0
2
B5
2
0
2
o
.85
158
0.85
185
6
0
1
aq
01
LTR
No
0 01 0
LTR
No
Minor Street: Approach We s tbound
7B
LT
Ea s tbound
10 11
LT
Movement 9
R
l2
R
Vofume ?
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.85
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 2
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0
Percent Grade (?)
EIared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes 0
Con fi gura t i on
0
0
0
0
0
oq
2
0
2
0
B5
11
0.85
t2
0
0
0
0
0
0
B5
20
0. B5
,a
0
No No
I
LTR
0 0 1
LTR
0
De1ay, Queue Length, and Level- of Service
lrlestbound Eastbound
| '7 B 9 I 10 11 t2
I LTR I LTR
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
NB
1
LTR
CD
4
LTR
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
958 queue length
Control Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
11
1313
0.01
0.03
1 .8
A
2
t344
0-00
0.00
1-1
A
4
6s3
0.01
0 .02
10.5
B
10.5
B
35
121
0.05
0 - 15
70 -2
B
10.2
B
l4
lL
Z
I
HCS2000: Unsignali-zed Intersectaons Refease 4.1f
TWO_WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
lnr'l uct.
Agency/Co. : TENW
Date Performed: B/76/2001
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #5 - SR 101 ,/ Brlnnon Lane
Jurisdrction: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S, Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 No Action Afternative
Prolect ID: Pleasant Harbor EIS
East/west Street: Brinnon Lane
North/South Street: SR 101
lntersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs )0 .25
@Vehrcre';::ffi;.:ld
Adlustme"" *,,**,,*
Movementl231456
LTRILTR
Volume
Peak-Hour Eactor, PHP
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehj-cfes
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
10 1BB
0.85 0.85
11 22t
L4
Undivided
01
LlK
No
2
0
2
6
0.85
1
B5
2
0
2
B
B5
01
183
0.85
275
No
0 0
LTR
Mj-nor Street: Approach
Movement
Westbound
1B
LT
9
R
Eastboundr0 11
LT
l2
R
VoIume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly FIow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicl-es
Percent Grade (%)
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes 0
Configuration
?
0. B5
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
85
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
2
0
B5 85
11
0. Bs
72
0
IU
0.85
23
0
No No
1
LTR
0 0 1
LTR
0
Approach
Movement
Lane Confj-g
Del- ay,
NB
1
LTR
Queue Length, and Level of Service
SB liestbound
4 | 7 B 9 I 10
LTR I LTR I
Eastbound
l1
LTR
I2
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95% queue length
Control DeIay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
4
609
0.01
0.02
11.0
B
11.0
B
?q
611
0.05
0.16
10.6
B
10.6
TJ
11
721 9
2
131 1
0.00
0.00
-o
A
0
0
1
01
03
B
A
HCS2000: Unsignalrzed Intersections Refease 4.1f
TWO_WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst:
Agency/Co. : TENW
Date Performed: 8/16/2001
Analysl-s Trme Period: PM Peak
Intersect.ion: #5 - SR 101 ,z Brinnon Lane
Jurisdiction: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 Brrnnon Alternative
Project ID: Pfeasant Harbor EIS
East/West Street: Brinnon Lane
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs)0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Ad j ustments
Maj or Street: Approach Nor thbou nd
2
T
S out hbound
56
TR
Movement 1
L
3 4
LR
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Elow Rate, HER
Percent Heavy Vehicl-es
I,ledian Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lane s
Cohfiguration
Upstream Signal?
10 262
0. Bs 0.85
11 308
1n
Undivided
2
0. B5
2
2
0
2
I
B5
235
0. 85
21 6
6
0.85
1
01
LTR
No
0 01 0
LTR
No
Minor Street Approach
Movement,
Wes tbound
1B
LT
Eastbound
11
T
9
R
10 l2
L R
Vo1ume 2
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.85
Hourly Ffow Rate, HFR 2
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0
Percent Grade (%)
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes 0
Configuration
0
0
0
0
0
85
2
0
2
0
B5
11
0.85
1,2
0
0
0
0
0
0
.85
20
0. B5
23
0
No No
1
LTR
0 1
LlK
0
Delay,Queue Length, and LeveI of Service
SB Westbound
4 | '7 I 9 I 10
LTR I LTR I
Approach NB
1
LTR
Eastbound
11
LTR
Movement 12
Lane Config
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95t queue length
Control- Delay
l,u5
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
11
721.3
0.01
0.03
8.0
A
2
t2\1
0.00
0.00
8.0
A
4
505
0.01
0.02
12.2
B
72 -2
TJ
35
s83
0.06
0.19
11-6
B
11.6
B
0
HCS2000: Unsignal-ized Intersections Release 4.1f
TWO_WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
An:'l rrcl.
Agency/Co. : TENW
Date Perfbrmed: 9/21 /2006
Analysls Time Perrod: PM Peak
Intersectron: #5 - SR 101 / Brinnon Lane
Jurisdictron: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 Statesman Al-ternatrve
Project ID: Pleasant Harbor EIS
East/West Street: Brinnon Lane
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orientation: NS Study perj-od
Vehicle Vol-umes and Adjustments
l4a j or Street
(hrs) : 0.25
Approach
Movement.
Northbound
123
LTR
Southbound
456
LTR
Volume
Peak-Hour factor, PHF
Hourly Fl-ow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicl-es
Median Type/Storage
RT Channel-ized?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
10 280
0.85 0-85
11 329
74
Undivided
01
LTR
No
2
0
2
I
2
0
2
B5 85
21 9
0. B5
328
6
0. Bs
1
0 010
LTR
No
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
Westbound"/89
LTR
10
L
Ea s tbound
11
T
t2
R
Vol-ume 2
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0 . 85
Hourly Ffow Rate, HFR 2
Percent Heavy Vehicl-es 0
Percent Grade (?)
Flared Approach : Exrsts ?/Storage
Lanes 0
Configuration
0
0. Bs
0
0
0
1
LTR
2
0
2
0
85
11
0. 85
t2
0
- Bs
1
LTR
20
0. Bs
23
0
0
0
0
0
0
No No
0 0 0
DeIay,Queue Length, and LeveI of Servrce
SB Westbound
4 I 1 B 9 I 10
LTR i LTR I
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
NB
1
LTR
Eastbound
11
LTR
t2
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue length
Control- Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
11
11 60
0.01
0.03
8.1
A
2
1196
0.00
0.01
8.0
A
4
463
0.01
0.03
L2.B
B
t2 .8
B
3s
532
0.07
0.21
1) 'D
12.2
B
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1f
TU]O_WAY STOP CONTROL SUM}IARY
JCTHrldaysL.
Agency/Co. : TENW
Date Perfbrmed: B/16/2001
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
fntersecti-on: #5 - SR 101 / Brinnon Lane
Jurisdiction: WSDOT,/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 Hybrid Alternative
Project ID: P-Ieasant- Harbor EIS
East/t{est Street: Brinnon Lane
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period
Vehicfe Vofumes and Adjustments
(hrs)0.25
Major Street: Approach
Movement
N or t hbound
L23
LTR
Southbound
1456
ILTR
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHE
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicfes
Median Type/Storage
RT Channefized?
Lane s
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
10 21 6
0.85 0.85
11 324
l4
Undivided
01
LTR
No
2
0.85
2
6
0
1
2
0
2
o
B5 B5
LTR
289
0-85
339
No
0 010
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
We s tbound
fo
LT
9
R
10 l2
RL
Ea s tbound
11
T
Volume 2
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.85
Hourly Fl-ow Rate, HFR 2
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0
Percent Grade (Z)
Ffared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes 0
Con f i- gurat i on
11
0.85
72
0
20
0 . Bs
23
0
0
0. B5
0
0
0
1
LTR
2
0
2
0
B5
0
0
0
0
0
B5
No No
0 0 1
LTR
0
App.oach o"i3''
Movement 1
Lane Config LTR
Queue Length, and Level of Service
SB Westbound Eastbound
4 I 1 I 9 I 10 11 12
LTRI LTR I LTR
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue length
Control- Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
11
114 9
0.01
0.03
8.2
A
2
1201
0.00
0.01
8.0
A
4
461
0.01
0-03
1) q
R
1,2 -9
B
35
521
0.07
0.21
72 .3
B
1a 1
B
II
ll
ll
ll
ll
lt
lr
lr
lr
ll
ll
l
It
ll
li
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1f
TWO_V.]AY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Anrl,rcr. JCT
Agency/Co. : TENW
Date Perfbrmed: 9/L6/2006
AnaJ-ysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #6 - SR 101 / Dosewallips Park
Jurisdiction: WSDOT,/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2006 Existing
Project ID: Pleasant Harbor
East/West Street: Dosewallips Park Ent
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersect.ron Orientation: NS Study perrod (hrs ) :o -25
M"ror srreet, Appro.aX'nt""'i::lil"::d Adlustme""m
Movementl231456
LTRJLTR
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehj-cl-es
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lane s
Con figurat ion
Upstream Signal?
2
0.78
2
1
2
0
2
q
0.11
6
129
0.11
t6't
0.78
L73
No
13
0.78
16
r35
1'l
AJ
Undivided
01
LTR
No
0 01
LTR
Minor Street Approach
Movement
Ite s tbound
789
LTR
Ea s tbound
l0 11
LT
t2
R
Vol-ume 2
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.50
Hourly EIow Rate, HER 4
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0
Percent Grade (Z)
Ffared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes 0
Conf igurat i on
4
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
6
50
10
0.50
20
0
10
0. ?0
t4
0
10 .10
No
1
LTR
0 0 I
LT R
affi
o'l;''
Movement 1
Lane Config LTR
Queue Length, and Levef of Service
SB i^lestbound
4 | 1 B 9 I 10
LTRI LTR I LT
Eastbound
11 72
R
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue length
Control DeIay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
6
1311
0.00
0.01
'7 .8
A
2
131 9
0. 00
0.00
7.6
A
24
8t2
0.03n no
9.6
A
9.6
A
14
570
5
861
0.01
0.02
v.z
A
0.02
0-08
11.5
B
10.9
B
HCS2000: Unsignallzed Intersections Release
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL
4 -rf
SUMMARY
n n 1 'l rrc t -
Agency/Co. : TENII
Date Perfbrmed: 9/16/2AA6
Analysrs Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #6 - SR 101 / Dosewal.lips Park
Jurisdiction: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 Without Project
Project ID: Pfeasant Harbor
East/1r'lest Street: Dosewallrps Park Ent
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs)0 .25
Vehicl"e Volumes and Adjustments_
Maj or Street : Approach
Movement
Northbound
123
LTR
Southbound
56
TR
4
L
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Fl-ow Rate, HER
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
160
0. B9
7'1 9
168
0. B9
188
6
0. B9
6
.89
2
0
2
1
2
0
2
89
16
0.89
l1
15
Undivided
01
LTR
No
0 010
LTR
No
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
We s tbound
189
LTR
10 72
RL
Eastbound
11
T
Vol-ume 2
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.89
Hourly Flow Rate. HFR 2
Percent Heavy Vehicfes 0
Percent Grade (%)
FIared Approach: Exj-sts?/Storage
Lanes 0
Configuration
5
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
6
89
12
0. B9
13
0
L2
0.89
13
0
.89 89
No
1
LTR
0 0
LT R
DeIay, Q
NB
1
LfK
ueue Length, and Levef of
SB Westbound
4l'1 89
LTR I LTR
Service
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
Eastbound
1110
LT
l2
R
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue length
Control Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
6
t293
0.00
0.01
7.8
A
2
13 65
0.00
0.00
1.6
A
15
809
9.5
13
trc(
0.02
0.07
11.6
B
5
Bs0
0.01
0.02
9-3
A
0.02
0. 06
oq
A
11.0
BA
HCS2000: Unsj-gnalized Intersections Release 4.1f
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Allda y5 L :
Agency/Co. : TENW
Date Perfbrmed: 8/76/2001
AnaJ,ysrs Time Period: PM Peak
Intersectron: #6 - SR 101 / Dosewallips Park
Jurisdrction: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 No Action Alternatrve
Project ID: Pfeasant Harbor
East/West Street: DosewalJ-ips Park Ent
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs)0.25
M-", st..r, nppro.cVehicle';::i;;"::d
Adjustment"
r-.,.noo,,*
Movementl231456
LTRILTR
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flo\", Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type/Storage
RT Channefized?
Lanes
Conf igurati-on
Upstream Signal?
184
0. 89
206
193
0. B9
lrh
16
0.89
71
6
0.89
6
2
0
2
89 .89
2
0
2
1AJ
Undivided
01
LTR
No
0 010
LTR
No
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
tr{es tbound
?89
LTR
10 t2
Ea s tbound
11
TL R
Volume 2
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.89
HourJ-y FLow Rate, HFR 2
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0
Percent Grade (%)
E.Iared Approach: Exists?/SLorage
Lanes 0
Configuration
0
0
0
0
6
B9
0
0
0
0
0
10
LI
0.89
13
0
1.2
0.89
13
0
89
LT R
5
0.89
5
0
1
LTR
0
Approach
Movement
Lane Confj-g
De1ay,
NB
1
LTR
Queue Length. and Levef of Service
SB Westbound
4 I 1 8 9 I 10
LTRI LTR I LT
Eastbound
11 l2
R
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue length
Control- Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
6
rlbl
0 .00
0.01
1.9
A
13
509
0.03
0.08
L2 .3
B
5
820
0.0r
0 .02
9.4
A
2
1334
0.00
0.00
1-1
A
15
114
0
0
9
02
06
1
A
of tf.J
BA
No/
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1f
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Anal-yst:
Agency/Co. : TEN!{
Date Perfbrmed: 8/I6/2001
Analysrs Time Period: PM Peak
Intersectron: #6 - SR 101 / Dosewallips Park
Jurisdiction: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysrs Year: 2017 Brinnon AlteLnative
Proj ect I D: Pfeasant Harbor
East/West Street: DosewaIJ-ips Park Ent
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs)4.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments_
Major Street Approach
Movement
Northboundt23
LTR
Southbound
5
T
l4
lL
6
R
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
7
0-89
1
248
0. 89
218
3
0
3
B9
2
0
2
1
B9
245
0-89
21 5
16
0.89
l1
AJ
Undivided
01
LTR
No
0 01
L1K
No
Minor Street: Approach Westbound
1B
LT
Eastbound
11
T
Movement o
R
10 t2
L R
Volume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
HourIy Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Percent Grade (?)
1J
,0
3
0
89
0
0
0
0
6
B9
TI
0. B9
13
0
II
0. 89
13
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
89
6
0. B9
6
0
Ffared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes 0
Con figur a ti on
No
1
LTR
0 0 1
LT R
Delay Queue Length, and LeveI of Se.r.c._
SB Westbound Eastbound
4 I 1 I 9 I 10 11 t2
LTRI LTR I LT R
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
NB
1
L1K
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue length
Control Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
'7
119 9
0-01
0 .02
8.0
A
2
L253
0.00
0 .00
?o
A
16
661
0 -02
0.07
10 - 6
B
r0.6
D
13
413
0.03
0.10
14.0
B
6
'7 60
0.01
0 -02
oa
A
72
B
1
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Refease 4,1f
TWO_WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Ah:'l uct
Agency/Co. : TENW
Date Perfbrmed: 9/16/2006
Analysis Time Period: Pl{ Peak
Intersecti.onr #6 - SR 101 / Dosewallips Park
Jurisdiction: I,JSDOT,/Jef f erson County
Units: U- S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 Statesman Alternative
Project ID: Pfeasant Harbor
East/West Street: Dosewalllps Park Ent
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs )0 -25
*u,o. st.eet, npo,.".Xunt""'i::l;;"::: oo'""t*"nt' s;;[[a-;;o
MovementT231456
LTRILTR
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehi-cles
Medj-an Type/Storage
RT Channe-Iized?
Lanes
Configurat ion
Upstream Signal?
21 6
0. B9
310
4
0. B9
4
16
0. B9
l'7
B
0.89
8
2
0
2
1
B9
01
289
0.89
324
No
15
Undivided
01
LTR
No
0
LTR
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
Westbound
189
LTR
Ea s tbound
10 11
LT
l2
R
Volume 4
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.89
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4
Percent Heavy Vehicfes 0
Percent Grade (?)
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes 0
Con fi gu rati on
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
6
89
I2
0.89
13
0
t2
0. 89
13
0
. 89 B9
No
1
LTR
0 0 1
LT R
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
De1ay, Queue
NB
1
LTR
Length. and LeveI of
We s tbound
t'1 QO
I LTR
SB
4
LTR
Servi ce
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95% queue length
Control Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
B
7149
2
1218
0.00
0.00
8.0
A
77
595
0.03
0.09
tt -2
B
7L .2
B
1
'114
0.01
0.03
10.1
B
13
363
0.01
o.02
d -z
A
0.04
0.11
15.3
C
13.5
B
E". tb"".d
I 10 11 t2
ILTR
HCS2000 : Unsignafized Intersections Re l- eas e
CONTROLTWO WAY STOP SUMMARY
Analyst: JGT
Agency/Co., : TENW
Date Performed: 8/16/2001
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #6 - SR 101 / Dosewallips Park
Jurisdicti-on: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2Ol'l Hybrid Alternative
Pro;ect ID: Pleasant Harbor
East/West Street: Dosewallips Park Ent
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period
VehicLe Volumes and Adjustments
Major Street
4.tf
(hrs)0 -25
Approach
Movement
Northbound
23
TR
Southbound
456
tlK
I
L
Vol-ume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
I 21 6
0-89 0.89
B 310
AJ
Undi vi ded
01
L]K
No
89 B9
289
0. B9
324
76
0.89
1,1
2
0
2
1
4
0
4
0 01 0
LTR
No
Minor Street: Approach We s tbound
789
LTR
Ea s tbound
10 11
LT
Movement l2
R
Volume 4
Peak Hour Factor, PHE 0.89
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4
Percent Heavy Vehicfes 0
Percent Grade (?)
Flared Approach: Exrsts?/Storage
Lanes 0
Configuration
1
0
I
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
6
89
L2
0.89
13
0
l2
0. 89
13
0
B9 89
No
1
LTR
0 1
LT R
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
Delay,
NB
1
LTR
Servi ce
10
LT
Eastbound
I1
Queue Length, and Level- of
SB Westbound
41t89
LTR I LTR
t2
R
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95* queue length
Control Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
B
1t-49
0.01
0 .02
a)
A
2
12t8
0.00
0.00
8.0
A
L1
594
0 - 03
0.09
lL.2
B
l7 .2
tJ
'7
714
0.01
0.03
10. 1
B
13
363
0.04
0.11
15.3
13 -5
B
HCS2000: Unsignalized lntersections Rel-ease 4.1f
TVIO_hJAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst: JGT
Agency/Co. : TENW
Date Perfbrmed: 9/16/2006
Analysis Trme Period: PM Peak
Intersection: +7 - SR 101 / Black Point Rd
Jurisdrction: WSDOT,/Jefferson County
Unfts: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2006 Existing
Project 1D: Pleasant Harbor
East/West Street: Bfack Poj-nt Rd
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0-25
M" j., st6et: ApproacVehicl.e ";::T;;"::d Adjustment'
.o*-n*u*
Movementl231456
LTRILTR
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly El-ow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicl-es
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lane s
Conf j-guration
Upstream Signal?
125
0.84
150
9
0.86
10
5
0. B6
141
No
1
0
1
122
84
Undivided
1
No
0
TR
01
LT
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
Westbound
189
LTR
10 72
Eastbound
11
TL R
Volume 5
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.6'l
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 1
Percent Heavy Vehicl-es 0
Percent Grade (?)
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes 0
Conf J- gur at i on
3
0
4
0
61
1 0
No
0
LR
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
De1ay, Queue Length, and Leve.l- of Service
NB SB Westbound
7 4 l 1 B 9 I 10
LTILRI
Eas tbound
11 72
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue length
Control Delay
LOS
Approach Delalz
Approach LOS
10
t472
0.01
0.02
'7 -6
A
11
148
0.01
0.04oo
A
9.9
A
HCS2OOO Unsj-gnaJ-ized Intersections Refease 4.1f
TWO_WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Anal-yst:
Agency,/Co. : TENW
Date Performed: 9/16/2006
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #7 - SR 101 ,/ Bl-ack Point Rd
Jurisdiction: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Uni-ts: U. S. Customary
AnaJ-ysis Year: 2017 !t/ithout Project
Project ID: Pleasant Harbor
East/WesL Street: Black Pornt Rd
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orientatj-on: NS Study period (hrs)0.25
@vehrcre'i::Til.::d
Adlustment"
.o,,.noou*
Movement7231456
LTRILTR
Vol-ume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Ffow Rate. HFR
Percent Heavy Vehic.l-es
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lane s
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
15?
n o1
1.'7 2
1
0
a
9).
11
0 .91
l2
5
152
0. 91
1,6'1
Undivided
1
No
0
TR
01
LT
No
Minor Street: Approach Westbound
189
LTR
Eastbound
1I
T
Movement 10 l2
L R
Volume 6
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0 . 91
Hourly Fl-ow Rate, HFR 6
Percent Heavy Vehrcfes 0
Percent Grade (%)
Fl-ared Approach: Exrsts?/Storage
Lanes 0
Configuration
4
0
4
0
.91
0
No
0
LR
Epp."".h o"ii'' o';;" """ntn;"::3"::;"
MovementL4)189
Lane Confiq LT I LR
of Service
10
Eastbound
11 \2
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95% queue length
Control DeIay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
t2
1386
0.01
0.03
1-6
A
10
'7 1,3
0.01
0.04
10. 1
B
10. r.
B
1
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Rel-ease 4.1f
TWO-I{IAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst: JGT
Agency/Co. : TENW
Date Performed: 8/16/200'7
Analysrs Tlme Period: PM Peak
lntersect-ion: #7 - SR 101 / Black Point Rd
Jurisdiction: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 No Actlon Al,ternative
Project ID: Pleasant Harbor
East/West Street: Black Point Rd
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period
Vehicl-e Vofumes and Adj ustments
Major Street: Approach Northbound
723
LTR
thrs)0.25
Movement
Sou thbound
14s6
ILTR
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHf
HourJ-y Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicfes
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Confi gurati on
Upstream Signal?
162
n o1
r7B
10
0.91
10
157
0.91
112
36
0.91
39
5
Undivi ded
1
No
0
TR LT
01
No
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
We s tbound
18
LT
9
R
10 I2
RL
Ea s tbound
11
T
Volume 74
Peak Hour Factor. PHF 0.91
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 15
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0
Percent Grade (%)
Flared Approach: Exi,sts?/Storage
Lanes 0
Configuration
zd
0. 91
30
0
1
LR
0
No
0
Appr"".J. "i;''
Movement 1
Lane Config
Queue Length, and LeveI
SB Westbound
411 89
LTILR
of Service
10
Eastbound
11 72
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
952 queue length
Controf Del-ay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
20
1368
0 .03
0.09
1 .1
A
45
735
0.06
0 .20
10.2
B
L0.2
B
HCS2000: Unsignalized lntersections Release 4.1f
Tt^lO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst: JGT
Agency/Co. : TENW
Date Perf6rmed: B/16/2A01
Anal-ysis Time Period: PM Peak
lntersection: #7 - SR 101 ,/ Black Point Rd
Jurrsdiction: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 Brrnnon Alternative
Project ID: Pleasant Harbor
East/West Street: Black Point Rd
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orientation: NS Study peri-od (hrs): 0.25
Maj or Street : Approach
Movement
Vehicl-e Vofumes and Adjustments
Northbound
123
LTR
Southbound
1456
ILTR
Vo1 ume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHE
Hourl-y Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelt-zed?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
13
0.91
BO
5
160
0.91
175
29
0.91
31
13 t66
0. 91 0.91
14 782
0 --
Undivided
26
0.91
2B
01
LTR
No
0 010
LTR
No
Minor Street: Approach Wes tbound
189
LTR
Movement 10 I2
Ea s tbound
11
TL R
Volume 33
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.91
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 36
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0
Percent Grade (%)
FIared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes 0
Confr gu rat i on
14
0.91
BI
0
)?
0.91
z5
0
?)
0.91
35
0
0
11
0.91
72
0
27
0.91
23
0
1
No No
1
LTR
00 I
LTR
0
Delay,
Appr.".t NB
Movement 1
Lane Config LTR
Queue Length, and LeveI of Service
SB Westbound Eastbound
4 | 1 B 9 I 10 11 t2
LTRI LTR I LTR
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue Iength
Control Del-ay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
140
551
0 .25
1..00
1,3 -1
B
13.7
B
12
399
0. 1B
0. 65
16.0
C
16.0
C
74
731 1
0.01
0.03
1.6
A
BO
1343
0.05
0.19
fo
A
t
HCS2000 r Unsignal-ized Intersections Refease 4.1f
TWO_WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst: JGT
Agency/Co. : TENbI
Date Performed: 9/76/2006
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
fntersection: #7 - SR 101 / Black Poi-nt Rd
Jurisdi-ction: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Unrts: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 Statesman
Project ID: Pfeasant Harbor
East,/West Street: Black Point Rd
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period
Vehicl-e Vofumes and Adjustments
(hrs):0 .25
Major Street: Approach
Movement
. Northbound
t23
LTR
Southbound
1456
ILTR
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HER
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lane s
Configuration
Upstream SignaI?
r64
0.91
180
159
0.91
1.1 4
s3
n o1
5B
105
0.91
115
5
Undivided
1
No
0 01
TR LT
No
Mrnor Street Approach
Movement
Westbound
18
LT
9
R
10
L
t2
R
Eastbound
11
T
Volume 5'1
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.91
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 62
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0
Percent Grade (%)
Flared Approach: Exrsts?/Storage
Lanes 0
Configuration
4t
0.91
45
0
1 0
No/
0
LR
Delay,
Appr"..h NB
Movement 1
Lane Config
Queue Length, and Level of
SB Westbound
411 89
LTILR
Service
l0
Eastbound
11 II
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95t queue length
Control- DeIay
LUJ
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
0
0
B
115
1311
107
s30
0.20
0.75
11 CAJ.J
B
13.5
B
09
29
0
A
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1f
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst: JGT
Agency/Co. : TENIV
Date Perf6rmed: B/76/20A1
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #7 - SR 101 / Black Point Rd
Jurisdiction: WSDOT,/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 Hybrid
Project ID: Pleasant Harbor
East/West Street: Black Poi-nt Rd
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orientatj-on: NS Study peri,od
M"r., sr..ea Appro.cVehicle';::l;;"::d
Adiustments
]vlovement723l4
LTRIL
thrs)0 .25
S out hbound
56
IX
Vo1 ume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
5B
0.91
63
14).
0.91
154
J
158
0.91
t] 3
22
0.91
24
11 752
0 - 91 0.91
72 178
0 --
Undi vi ded
110
L
110
TRTRL
No No
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
I^le s t.bound
189
LTR
Ea s tbound
10 11
LT
t2
R
Vol- ume 5 3
Peak Hour Factor, PHE 0.91
HourJ-y Flow Rate, HFR 58
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0
Percent Grade (Z)
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes 0
Configuration LT
33
0.91
35
0
1
B5
0 - 91
93
0
Z5
0. B0
31
10
25
0.80
31
10
0
o
0. B0
11
10
No
11
R
0 1
LTR
0
DeIay, Queue Length, and LeveI of Service_
App."r.-h NB SB W e s tbound Ea s t-bound
Movement 7 4 | '1 B 9 I 10 11 1,2
LaneConfig L L I LT R I LTR
v (vph)
c (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue length
Control Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
t2
1342
0.01
0 .03
1 .1
A
154
1.265
0 -12
0-41
8.2
A
94
ZJJ
0. 37
1-62
21 .l
D
93
784
0 .72
0.40
ta -2
B
13
250
0 .29
1.17
at a
D
25.2
D
1B 1
C
HCS2000: Unsignafized Intersections Release 4.1f
TV,}O_!^]AY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Anal-yst:
Agency,/Co
Date Performed
Analysis Time
Intersection:
Jurisdiction:
Units: U. S.
Major Street: Approach
Movement
JGT
TENW
: 9/16/2006
Period: PM Peak
#B - SR 101 / Duckabush Rd
WSDOT,/Jefferson County
Vehicfe Vofumes and Adjustments
Cus tomary
Analysis Year: 2006 Existing
Project ID: Pleasant Harbor
East/West Street: Duckabush Rd
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orientation: NS
Northbound
t23
LTR
Study period (hrs)0.25
Sou lhbound
1456
ILTR
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicfes
Medj-an Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Con f igurati on
Upstream Signal?
112nq)
12t
111
0 - 69
160
6
0
6
92
t6
0.69
23
1.4
Undi-vided
01 1 0
TRLT
No No
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
We stbound
189
LTR
10 t2
Ea stbound
11
TL R
Vo I ume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HER
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Percenl Grade (%)
Ffared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes
Con fi gu r a tion
12
0.70
l1
0
2
0
2
0
70
0
No
0 0
LR
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
DeIay.
NB
1
LT
Queue Length. and Level of Service
SB Westbound Eastbound
4 1 1 B 9 I 10 11 t2
IILR
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue length
Control DeJ-ay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
6
t323
0.00
0 - 01
1 .1
A
19
104
0 .03
0 .08
10.3
B
10-3
B
1
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Refease 4 .1f
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
agency/Co. : TENV,i
Date Perf6rmed: 9/76/20O6
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: +B - SR 101 / Duckabush Rd
Jurisdiction: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 Without Project
Project ID: Pfeasant Harbor
East/West Street: Duckabush Rd
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs)0 -25
Ma j or Street Approach
Movement
Vehicfe Vo]umes and Adj ustments
No r thbou nd
t23
LTR
S outhbound
56
TR
4
L
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicl-es
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized2
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
139
0 -92
151
138
0.69
200
1
0
1
92
20
0.69
28
T4
Undivided
01 1 0
TRLT
No No
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
We s tbound
189
LTR
r0 I1
Ea s tbound
11
TL R
Vol- ume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Percent Grade (Z)
Fl-ared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes
Con figur ati on
15
0.70
21
0
2
0
2
0
10
0 I
No
0 0
LR
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
Delay,
NB
I
LT
Queue Length, and Level of Service_
SB llestbound Eastbound
4 | I I 9 I 10 11 t2
IILR
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue J-ength
Control Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
1
t21 3
0.01
0 -02
1R
A
23
638
0.04
0.11
10.9
B
10.9
B
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Rel-ease 4 - 1f
TWO_WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Airdr y5 L :
Agency/Co.: TENW
Dale Performed: 8/16/2001
Analysis Time Perrod: PM Peak
Intersecti-on: #B - SR 101 ,/ Duckabush Rd
Jurisdiction: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysl-s Year: 2017 No Action Alternative
Project ID: P,Leasant Harbor
East/West Street: Duckabush Rd
North,/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs )0 .25
Mar o. srreer , Appr"..Vehrcle ";::l;;.:ld Ad j ustment",o*noor*
Movement7231456
LTRILTR
Vol-ume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Ffow Rate, HER
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized?
Lanes
Con figurati on
Upstream Signal?
I
0
1
92
150
0 -92
163
r49
0.69
2t5
No
2l
0.59
30
t4
Undivi-ded
01
LT
No
0
TR
Minor Street: Approach
Movement
tr{e s tbo und
189
LTR
10
Ea s tbound
11
T
t2
L R
Vol ume
Peak Hour Eactor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Percent Grade (Z)
Ffared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes
Configuration
l6
0.70
22
0
2
0.70
2
0
10
0
No
0
LR
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
Delay
NB
I
LT
Queue Length, and Level of Service
SB Westbound Eastbound
4 | 1 B 9 I 10 11 t2
IILR
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue length
Control Delay
LOS
Approach Del,ay
Approach LOS
aq/
1
1
0
0
1
24
6t4
0.04
0.72
11.1
B
11.1
B
.01
.02
o
A
1
HCS2000: Unsignafized Intersections Refease 4.1f
TWO-I{AY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Hr!d1y5L
Agency/Co - : TEN[^]
Date Performed: B/16/2001
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
lntersection: #B - SR 101 / Duckabush Rd
Jurisdictj-on: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 Brinnon Alternative
Project ID: Pleasant Harbor
East/West Street: Duckabush Rd
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs)0.25
Major sr.eer, Ap*o".X'n"t"';::i;;.:13 oo""*"'t'
so;.noo;;a
Movement),231456
LTRILTR
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type/Storage
RT Channeltzed?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
'7
0
1
92
71 4
0 -92
189
718
0 .59
251
23
0 .69
33
74
Undivided
01 1 0
LT TR
No No
Minor Street: Approach Westbound
18
LT
Eastbound
11
T
Movement 9
R
10 ).2
L R
Vol-ume
Peak Hour Factor, PHf
HourIy Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicl-es
Percent Grade (%)
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lane s
Con fi gura I i on
l'7
0.70
24
0
2
0
2
0
10
0 1
No
0 0
LR
-De1ay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
NB
1
LT
e
4
B Idestbound
I
Ea s tbound
11
LR
1 9 10 t2
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95% queue length
Control- Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
1
1206
0.01
0 -02
8.0
A
26
559
0.05
0.1s
11. B
B
11 0
B
I
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Refease 4.1f
T[^]O-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst:
Agency/Co. : TENW
Date Perf6rmed: 9/T6/2006
AnaLysis Time Period: PM Peak
Intersection: #B - SR 101 ,/ Duckabush Rd
Jurisdiction: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2017 Statesman Al-ternative
Proj ect I D: Pl-easant Harbor
East-/West Street: Duckabush Rd
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersectron Orientation: NS Study period
Vehicl-e Volumes and AdjusLments
(hrs): 0-25
Maj or Street : Approach No r t hbound
723
LTR
Southbound
56
1K
Movement 4
L
Volume
Peak-Hour Factor. PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type/Storage
RT Channelized2
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
1 794
o -92 0.92
1 2L0
T4
Undivided
191
0.69
21 6
24
0.69
34
01 1 0
TRLT
No No
Mj-nor Street: Approach lrle s tbound
189
LTR
Eastbound
11
T
Movement 10 72
L R
VoIume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
Hour-Iy FIow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehrcfes
Percent crade (%)
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes
Configuration
19
0.70
21
0
2
0
2
0
10
0 1
No
0
LR
Delay,Queue
SB
4
Length, and Level of Service
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
NB
1
LT
1
Westbound
B 9 10
Eastbound
11
LR
l2
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95% queue length
Control Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
1
1185
0.01
0 .02
8.1
A
29
530
0.05
0.17
L2 .2
B
12.2
a
0
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1f
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst: JGT
Agency/Co,: TENW
Date Performed: 8 /76/2001
Analysis Time Period: PM Peak
lntersection: #B - SR 101 ,/ Duckabush Rd
Jurisdiction: WSDOT/Jefferson County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2011 Hybrid Alternative
Project ID: Pleasant Harbor
East/West Street: Duckabush Rd
North/South Street: SR 101
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs)0.25
Maj or Street : Approach
Movement
Vehicle Volumes and Ad j ustments
No r thbound
t23
LTR
S ou t hbound
456
LTR
VoIume
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF
HourIy FIow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Median Type/Storage
RT Channefized?
Lanes
Configuration
Upstream Signal?
'1 204
0 .92 0 .92
1 227
l4
Undi vi ded
192
0.69
21 B
24
n 6q
34
01 1
No
0
TRLT
No
Minor Street Approach
Movement
We s tbound
189
LTR
10 l2
RL
Eastbound
11
T
Vo1 ume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR
Percent Heavy Vehicfes
Percent Grade (%)
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes
Con f igurati on
19
0.70
21
0
2
0
2
0
10
10
0
No
0
LR
Approach
Movement
Lane Config
Delay,
NB
1
LT
Queue
SB
4
Length, and Levef of Service
Westbound Eastbound
| 1 B 9 I 10 11 L2
IILR
v (vph)
C (m) (vph)
v/c
95? queue length
Control- Delay
LOS
Approach Delay
Approach LOS
1
1183
0.01
0 .02
8.1
A
29
52t
0.06
0.18
t2.3
B
12 -3
B
Attachment C
Resort Residential Unit Program
qe
(9 Transportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC
I
I
I
i
T
1
I
I
I
T
T
I
T
I
I
I
T
I
t
I I I'- I' -.-I I I I - I' - -T I I I
ATTACHIVENT 1
Pleasant Harbor EIS - Program Elements for Trip Generation Analysis
Statesman Alternative
Stalesman Group (8-2007)
E}LACK POINT PROPERTY # of tJnits Sq.Ft.-Persln special Remarks/Notescapacly Classification for Trip Generation
Residential Resort Units
1 Level - Villas
2 Level - Townhomes
Low-Rise Resort Condo-Tel
Staff Housing
Commercial Resort Units
Gol, Course
18-Hole Executive Course
Ramada
Resort/Course Maintenance Facility
Conference Center
Clubhouse Lounge/Deck
Pro-Shop
Hat I
Restauranl
lvleditetrean Grolto-Spa
ToLirist ShoP
Sub.Total
Sub-7otal
97
462
128
52
Privately Owned - included in Condo-Tel
Privately Owned - included in Condo.Tel
Privately Owned. included in Condo.Tel - upper levels
Corporale Owned Suites
123-acre Semi-Private: Membership, Resort Access, Conterence, Group Bookings/Evenls
'112 Way House belween holes 9 & 10i downstairs for golters, upslairs for restaurant, & outdoor lanae
Not an off-sile tnp gererator.
Localed in the Conference Center building - lower level.
Located ln the Conference Center building - lower level.
One large room with partitions to creale 4 smaller rooms or combination.
Recreational Home/Townhome-Condo Trip Gen [rix
Recreational Home/Townhome.Condo Trip Gen lilix
Suite Hotel - ITE Category 31 1 (alt. Semiahmoo Trip Gen Study al Resort Hotel)
Low-Rise Apartments
Conference facrlily apply Salish Lodge study resulls using actrvities-based approach.
Classificatlon for Trip Generation
Recreational Home/Townhome-Condo Trip Gen [/ix
Low-Rise Apartmenls
Recreational Home/Townhome-Condo Trip Gen l\,4ix
3.000
45,000
250
14.750
1 ,750
'15,000
7.500
20,000
1,000
739 60,000 250
pLEASANT HARBoR pRopERTy # of units
Residential Resort Unils
2 Level - Townhomes 63
Maralime Village Aparhents 48
2 Level - Terraces 40
Commercial Resod Units
Pleasant Harbor [rarina
Pleasant Harbor Yacht Club
Two (2) Restaurarrts
LaundromaL/Showers
Bait and Dive Shop
Speciality Gift Shop
Nurse Practitioner Office
Convenience Slore
lnstitutional Resort Units
Community Chapel
Tribute Square
jerso.l speciat Remarks/NotesuapacrrySq.Ft.
2,000
8.000
1,500
1,500
1,000
500
2,000
2,500
151 19,000
Market?
Privaiely Owned - included in Condo-Tel
Privately Owned - included in Condo-Tel
Privately Owned - included in Condo-Tel
Exisling - can accommodate approximately 31 1 boats. fuel station, sewage pump-
ouls, seruiced and non-seryiced slips/connects (no changes proposed) Exisling vesled uses, no increase in off-site vehicle lrip generation.
Proposed with rules and regulations to improve environmental stewardship Specialty rela I generator.
Proposed - ltalian and Seafood to replace the small snack/przza services Specialty relail generator.
Existing - to b€ upgraded to provide higher level ot seryice for boaters Specialty relail generator.
Fishing and Scuba Diving exercusions scheduled and group bookings Specialty relail generator.
Promote Local and Regional arls/crafls, €tc... Specialty relail generator,
To provide preliminary medical atlenlion Specialty retail generator,
Exisling - to be upgraded lo provide higher level ol serulce for boaters. resort. and publi Sp8cialty retail generator.
Won t be a lrip generator factor dunng our pm peak period
Area to Recognize Aborigrnal History in Pleasant Harbor - end of pedestnan
promenade along waterfront - emergency access only
0
Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC 8t26t2007
Church
Page 1
TOTAL
t
I
!
T
T
I
T
I
T
T
T
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
t
Attachment D
2O17 Future Daily and P.lvl. Peak Hour
Traffic Volume Forecasts
P Transportation Engineering NortnWest, LLC
Pleasant Harbor EIS
2017 With No Action Allernalive
weekday PM Peak Turning Movement Forecasts
Growlh Rale = 2.0%
2017 Baseline lntcrnal 2017 With No Action Alt
249
2*
320 322
321
13
13 357
EE
NA
SB
0.43
o:,
Hour: a S-5 S, m
o%
9
0
3rES
NB
sa
6.0
,;
20
091
I
s
122
:
r9
ET'TJtt-tlr2l_jl 161157I'l 6{ lrol
$;
EA
NA
20
60
Bo-, l,elmp..
27
21
0 0
0 26
EB
NA
SB
83
€B
Ng
SB
22
I I
qEA
NA 150
Futu,e Year = 20'r7
E
2A
r3
32
:
0 0 0
r2
n
Eristing Yea, = 2006
Future Year = 2017
Pleasant Harbor EIS
2017 With No Action Alternative
Weekday PM Peak Turning Movement Forecasts
TM INFO 2006 2017 Baseline Distribution 2017 With No Action All
0
10
:
;
25
?t
oEB
NB
SB
o0
5.O
22
9
?1
s
2A
q
EA
Ng
sa
0
0
EB
9 E
3EB
M
SB
12 0 0 39 12
€s
NA
5B
67
12
0
!
Eristing Year = 2006
Future Year = 2017
Pleasant Harbor EIS
2017 With Brinnon Subarea Plan Alternative
Weekday PM Peak Turning Movement Forecasts
2017 Baseline Distribution
?s 13
22 25
lnte.nal
279
2S
326
2t7
322
321
0EO
NB
o?,
ro5
2 I
I
EB
M
s8
60
20
H6ui. lGsSp m
s
E
r _-E-T---tl=l:l^lL__!_l [__i_l ls
I ! I e llnl
I 6 I I 1^l 121--I;T{r-
E5
% |tu..- ' 240%
32 sa 59 x2EB
NA
SB
2.O
60
7o 0a2
21
21
sl
35
?1NS
SB
130
10 036
13
2t
0o
Hou.: a@.5mp.0
1?22
:I
0
33
EB
NS
SB
TM INFO 2005 2017 With Brinnon Subarea
1t2
I
I
0
0 0 0
0
EA
NB
0
0
u2
Pleasant Harbor EIS
2017 With Brinnon Subarea Plan Alternative
Weekday PM Peak Turning Movement Forecasts 2S 33
22 ?5
lnternalTM201 7 Baseline 2017 With Erinnon Subarea
12 a22\
21
32
12eEB
WB
NB
SB
0.0
5.0
0.67
a0
22
3
sEO
NB
sa
0EB
B
SB
0%
g g
NB
sg
6 lo
12 0 t2
EA
NB
SB
Future 2017 I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
T
)
0
0
3
2
0 0
0
0
2006
2017
Existing Year =
Future Year =
Pleasant Harbor EIS
2017 With Statesman Alternative
Growth Rate = 2.0%
20'17 Baseline
Weekday PM Peak Turning Movement Forecasls
TM INFO 2006 Oistribution 2017 With Statesman Alt
Counr Drt.: m&
Hou.:4Jt5:r5p,m
259 326
!
321
65
6?
EB
NB
SB
o:'
50
Aouri a.$5:Sp.n
$
,05
I
62
65
EB
NB
SB 2A
0
0.75
6
s
E
32
122
I :
:
o n1
211
€a
ss
00
2.0
60 0&
032
sR lorr erdtih. Rd
Hour:4.G5.mp nr
21
21
s
I
I
2
2
$
26
EA
NB
SB
0.&
oa5
r3
25
0 r6
31
EA
N8
SB
13 22
2
EA
NS
se
00
0.73
I
I
0
0
12 2 2
6
Future Year =
Existing
Pleasant Harbor EIS
2017 With Statesman Alternative
GroMh Rate = 2-0%
Weekday PM Peak Turning Movement Forecasts
TM INFO 2006 201? Baseline Distribution 2017 With Statesman Alt
Hou aAS@p6
0 0
0
ES
Hour: ae5.@ ph.
22 2t
21
ES
NS
SB
2n
0
t
n
I
Future Year = 2017
Pleasant Harbor EIS
2017 with Hybrid Alternative
Wcekday PM Peak Turning Movement Forecasts
Growth Rate = 2.0%
TM INFO 2006
Hour:..1ttrl5a6
x
E
259
254
326 322
321
76
6
o.o 032
c'nt.'RdlsR 10.R;,
0
o
rs
33
I
a 0€a
SB
,o'
2_O
036
Hou. aS5Spn
26
E
32
r6 122
:
:
1G
8
:
32
212
EB
NB
sa
00
20
a2
Hou,: . m,5 mp D
2t
a 0
2
2
0E8
M
sa
25
r6
31 0
EB
M
sa
22
I
2
a
3
x8
sg
n
1
I
0
0
12 2
2 0
2017
Existing Year =
Future Year =
Pleasant Harbor EIS
2017 With Hybrid Allernative
Weekday PM Peak Turning Movement Forecasts
TM INFO 20't7 with Art
12 a5a
22 126 26 26
a
EB
067
iour: 4@,S.m p,n
22 21 3r
21
EA
Sg 00
061
n
Attachment E
Turn Lane Warrant Analysis at
SR 101 and Black Point Road
qeo Transportation Engineering NorthWest, LLC
n
D
E
t
I
I
I
I
I
1
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
T
///
ill
tl
Below curve,
storage not
needed for
capacity.
KEY:
Above curve,
further analysis
recommended.
Hybrid Alternaliv*
u/"
J ,/ql///
1sN\e99-=\-^--, ,/
4
,."1 tKI -/1
Alte(n
'1200
1 100
1000
900
800
700
600
Io
(t,
F
500
400
300
25
(1) DHV is total volume irom both directions.
(2) Speeds are posted speeds.
201510s
% Total DHV Turning Left (single tuming movement)
0
Left-Turn Storage Guidelines (Two-Lane. UnsjgLalized)
Flgure 910-9a
lntersecllons At Grade
Page 910-18
Deslgn Manual
Itay 2001Engllsh Verslon
It
60MPH
(2)
n
n
'100
:f a^
ouv
(l)
El
o
CLf
I
.Cg).E40
L
=o-l<3zooIL
0
0 100 200 300 400 500
Peak Hour Approach Volume (DDHV) (1)
600 700
(1) For two-lane highways, use the peak hour DDHV (through + right-turn).
For multilane, high speed highways (posted speed 45 mph or above), use lhe right-lane peak hour
approach volume ithlough + right-turn).
For mrrllilane, low speed highways (posted speed less than 45 mph), there is no traliic volume
right-turn lane or taper requirement.
(2) When all lhree oi the following conditions are met, reduce the right-turn DDHV by 20
. The posted speed is 45 mph or less
. The right-lurn volume is greater than 40 VPH.
. The peak hour approach volume (DDHV) is less lhan 300 VPH.
(3) See Figure 910-$ lor righl{urn corner design.
(4) See Figure 910-13 for right-turn pocket or laper design.
(5) See Figure 910-1{ for righl-turn lane design.
(6) For addilional guidance, see 910,07(2) in the text.
Hight-Turn Lane Guidelines(6)
Hgure 914-1!.
Hybrid Alternative
Consider
pocket
Consider right-turn
lsns(s)
-\-\
\----- Statesman Alte
I
rnative\
Radius onl,
1
lnlersectlons At Grade
Page 910-28
Design hlanual
May 2001Engltsh Verslon
n
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
I
I
t
I
t
I
I
I
I
Rrponr
FrsH AND Wuoure Hlarlr Assessutsnr
PlgAsnur Hlneon Maru]tll nuo
GoI-r Resonr
JEFFERSoN CouNTY, WAsulucron
Julv 20, 2006
Fon
Stetesmlx CoRponalcitt
I
I
I
t
t
I
I
I I
;
ll
'GroENctNre APPENDIX 7
FileNo.12677-001-03
I
I
I
I I
iiliti
I
'' ,'J'
:
*se
t
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
t
T
I
Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment
File No. 1 2677 -001 -03
July 20, 2006
Prepared for:
Statesman Corporation
7370 Sierra Morena Blvd SW
Calgary, Alberta, Canada T3H 4Hg
Attention: James Mazak
Prepared by:
GeoEngineers, lnc,
1550 Woodridge Drive SE
Port Orchard, Washington 98366
(360) 75e-8400
GeoEngineers, lnc.
Greg
E lScientist
Principal
GJA;\\'SW:jl
ORCH:' I 2, 1167700 l' 0i' Finals'. I 167700 I 03Rl doc
Disclaimer: ,{nl electronrc [orm. facsrmrle or hard copl'ol the origrnal document (emajl. tert. table. and;or fi-:ure). if prorided. anrJ an"u-
attachmenls are onll a copl' of the origrnal document. The origrnal document is stored b1 GeoEngineers, lnc. and l'ill sene as the official
document of record.
Coplrrghtii )006 b1 GeoEngineers. lnc .{ll riehts resened
!
tl
T
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
t
I
t
I
I
t
t
I
T
I
I
I
TeaLe or Courerurs
Paqe No.
INTRODUCTION.....
PROJECT LOCATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION...
PROJECT SCOPE
SITE DESCRIPTION
METHODS
PAPER INVENTORY
FIELD RECONNAISSANCE ......
RESULTS..,
VEGETATION STRUCTURE.......,........
STREAMS AND WETLANDS ..............,
HUMAN ACTIVITY
RARE AND ENDANGERED PLANTS..
FtsH...........
Chinook Salmon
Chum Salmon......
Steelhead.............
BullTrout
Forage Fish..........
WILDLIFE...
CONCLUSIONS
LrMtTATrONS..............
REFERENCES
Bald Eagles
Marbled Murrelet
Northern Spotted Owl .............
Short-tailed Albatross
Harbor Sea|s..........
Waterfowl Concentrations and Non-listed Birds
Mammals
Herpetiles....
File No. 12677-001-03
luly 20, 2006
Page i GrcEr*rctxems3l
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
7
7
7
8
8
I
8
Teele or ConreNTS (Continued)
Paqe No.
List of Figures
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Figure 2. Washington Natural Heritage Program Map
Figure 3. Fish and Wildlife Use Map
Figure 4. Fish and Wildlife Corridor Map
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A - SITE PHOTOGRAPHS ...........
APPENDIX B - NOAA ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT STATUS OF WEST COAST
SALMON AND STEELHEAD
APPENDIX C _ U.S. FOREST SERVICE SPECIES TA81E........
APPENDIX D - U.S FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE LIST
A-1...A-3
c-1...c-3
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Page ii GeoExeueeesiQ
Frsu aNo Wtlourre HRetmr AssessmeNr
Pleeslrur HaRaon MeRrNe nno Golr Resonr
JerrensoN GouNw, MsxtNororu
Fon
Sraresman Conpomrton
INTRODUCTION
GeoEngineers, Inc (GeoEngineers) was contracted by Statesman Corporation to perform a fish and
wildlife habitat assessment pertaining to the proposed Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort located on
Black Point, south of Brinnon, Washington. GcoEngineers evaluated the potential presence of fish and
wildlife species on the site in general accordance with Jefferson County Fish and Wildlife Habitat Areas
Classification, Chapter I 8. I 5.285.
PROJEGT LOCATION
The proposed development is located in Section 15 of Township 25 North, Range 2 West of the
Willamette Meridian in Jefferson County (Figure 1). The site consists of approximately 250 acres of
sporadic forest and is partially developed. It is located in the Skokomish-Dosewallips Water Resource
Inventory Area (WRIA) and is part of the East Olympic and Hood Canal River Basins.
The proposed project site is located on Black Point, which extends east approximately I mile into Hood
Canal, and the southwestem shoreline of Pteasant Harbor, a shallow cove located north of Black Point.
The peninsula consists ofhills, ravines and deep kettles shaped by glacial processes. The surface geology
consists of Vashon-age till, outwash and ice-contact sediments underlain by pre-Vashon non-glacial
stratified deposits (Subsurface Group, Inc. draft Site Geology map 2006). A portion of the project area is
currently being used as an RV Resort (Pleasant Harbor RV Resort) with developed roads, RV pads with
water and electricity and restrooms located through out the developed area of the site. A commercial
marina and store are located along the Pleasant Harbor shoreline. State Route (SR) 101 transects the site.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Statesman Corporation intends to develop a mixed-use resort development on the subject property.
However, the exact location and details of the development have not been defined at the time of this
work. Therefore, we have not evaluated potential impacts of the proposed multi-use development.
PROJECT SCOPE
GeoEngineers was requested to conduct a fish and wildlife habitat assessment on the proposed project
site. The assessment included the review of fish and wildlife habitat data, such as Priority Habitat and
Species (PHS) map data. An onsite inventory assessment was conducted simultaneously with and in
addition to the wetland delineation and shoreline characterization. Observations of wildlife indicators
such as nests, burrows, scat or tracks as well as fish indicators such as streams and ponds were observed
and collected. This fish and wildlife habitat assessment is presented as a stand-alone report and is
technical appendix quality for use in the Environmental Impact Statement effort. A list of pertinent
references is included with this report.
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Poge I GeoErerxs:n1l
SITE DESCRIPTION
The site is bordered to the south by the Hood Canal of the Puget Sound. The eastern edge of the site is
bordcrcd by forested land and several single-family residences. The northern portion of the site is
bordered by light residential housing and most of the western edge is bordered by SR 101. The project
area is composed of four sections (Figure l). Section 1, the largest of the sections, is 220.1 (+) acres,
located on the southwest portion of Black Point, east of SR 101 and south of Black Point Road. Section 2
is a narrow strip of land (7.8 + acres) that runs along thc cast to southeastern side of SR l0l and
immcdiately north of Black Point Road. Section 3 encompasses the commercial marina and associatcd
parking area (9.8 + acres) on the southern side of SR 101 and Section 4 is the triangular shaped 11.9 (+)
acres located to the north of Section 3 on the northem side of SR 101.
METHODS
Plpen luvexronv
GeoEngineers completed a file review of availablc information on cxisting and historic sensitive fish,
wildlife and plant species occurring in the vicinity of the project area. This information was obtained
from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Scrvice (USFWS) species list for Jeffcrson County (USFWS 2005), the
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) PHS maps and database (WDFW 2006), the
Washington Department of Natural Resources (DI.IR) Natural Heritage Program CNHP) (DI.[R 2005a) and
Jcffcrson County critical areas information (Jefferson County 2006). GeoEngineers reviewed the l98l
United States Geological Service (USGS) map and topographic maps. GeoEngincers also reviewcd
recent aerial photographs to determine changes in cover and land use practices that have occurred in and
around the projcct area (USGS 1981 and USGS 1990).
Freuo RecoHr,rlrssANcE
GeoEngineers biologists performed a field reconnaissance to assess the presence of fish and wildlife on
thc project site on April 26 and 27 and June 19,2006. Thc field rcconnaissance started at 10:00 AM and
ended at 5:00 PM on all days. The weather was partly cloudy to sunny all days and the temperature
rangcd from 60oF to 70'F. Portions of the fish and wildlife habitat asscssmcnt were performed concurrent
with the shoreline assessment and the three wetland delineations. Wildlife habitat characteristics of the
site were documented as well as direct observations of the physical habitat features (snags, nests, burrows,
trails, dens, streams, marine shoreline habitat, etc.). Visual observations of fish, wildlifc, tracks and scat
were also documented. Vegetation on the site was assessed for gencral sizc and maturity and compared
with surrounding land uses. Photographs were taken during the investigation to accurately depict the
cxisting condition of the site and are included with this document as Appcndix A.
RESULTS
The results of our literature review and field reconnaissance are presented in the following scctions.
VeeerenoN SrRUcruRE
The vegetation structure on the proposed development site is primarily comprised of a second-$owth
mature coniferous forest with a healthy understory of shrubs. Tree size varicd between 18 and 30 inches
diameter at basc height (dbh). The coniferous species present on the site includes Wcstern hemlock
(Tsuga heterophylla), Douglas ftr (Pseudotsuga menseizii), Western red cedar (Thuja plicata) and Eastern
white pine (Pirus strobes). Several deciduous species such as Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii), red
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Page 2
alder (Alnus rubra) and big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum) were also observed on the site. There are
many suitable mature nesting trees located throughout the site for osprey, eagles and hawks. Numerous
dead snags and downed woody debris are located throughout the site at varying elevations.
The understory composition varied depending on topography. The upland areas contained species such as
ocean spray (Holodiscus discolor), Pacific ninebark (Physocarpus capitatus), salal (Gaultheria shallon),
evergreen huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum), red huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifulium), bracken fern
(Pteridium aquilnum), deer fern (Blechrum spicant), sword fern (Polystichum munihtm), Scot's broom
(Cytistts scoparius) and Himalayan blackberry (Rubns armeniacus). The areas sulrounding and in the
wetlands onsite contained shrubs such as Scouler's willow (Salix scouleriana), salmonberry (Rubus
spectabilis), hardhack (Spiraea douglasii), baldhip rose (Rosa gtmnocarpa), thimbleberry (Rubus
parttiJloris),lady fern (Athyrium filix-femina), slough sedge (Carex obnupta) and false lily-of-the-valley
(Ma i anthemum d i I atatum).
The majority of the site consisted of the plant community designation Temperate Coniferous Forest
(United States Departrnent of Agriculture [USDA] 1985). The stand structure on the site consists of a
coniferous overstory, an evcrgreen shrub layer, an herbaceous layer, few snags and few downed woody
debris (Appendix A - Photographs 3 and 4). The overstory is classified as a Cedar-Hemlock-Douglas fir
plant composition. The stand condition of this plant community includes grass-forbs and shrubs in recent
clearcut areas, open sapling-pole and closed sapling-pole-sawtimber in partially developed areas and large
sawtimber in the undisturbed portions of the site including along the shoreline (Appendix A - Photograph
5).
Several deep kettle-holes created from glaciers are present throughout the site. Three ofthese kettle-holes
contain wetlands in the bottom. These kettle-hole wetlands (Tiner 2003) are classified as Coniferous
Wetland plant community (USDA 1985). This plant community is dominated by Western red cedar and
slough sedge (Appendix A - Photographs I and 2). Coniferous Wetlands are different from Temperate
Coniferous Forest because of the saturated soil moisture conditions which significantly influence ground-
dwelling wildlife (USDA 1985). The stand condition of this plant community includes grass-forbs,
shrubs, open sapling-poles, closed sapling-pole-sawtimber and large sawtimber.
Srneams AND WETLANDS
Three wetlands were identified and delineated on the site during the reconnaissance. The surrounding
land use and vegetation structure was consistent with conditions observed onsite. There are no direct
hydrologic connections between wetlands onsite to wetlands or streams located offsite. GeoEngineers
report titled "Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort Wetland Delineation" (2006) presents the wetland
features identified onsite. There is numerous connective upland corridors located throughout the site that
could help wildlife migrate into, out of or through the site. Soils on the site are listed in the Soil Survey of
Jefferson County Area, Washinton (USDA 1975) to be of the Hoodsport-Grove very gravelly sandy
loams, 0 to 30 percent slopes in the southem section and Hoodsport very gravelly sandy loams, 15 to 30
percent slopes in the northern section. Neither of the soils on site is listed as hydric in the hydric soils list
for Jefferson County (USDA 2001).
Five unnamed streams are ranked as seasonal "Type N" based on impassible fish barriers. GeoEngineers
report titled "Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort Wetland Delineation" (2006) details the stream
features identified onsite. Stream A is labeled as a seasonal fish-bearing stream off site until it reaches a
hung culvert 50 feet south of the site. [t then changes into a non-fish-bearing stream above this fish
barrier and continues north through the site. Streams B, C, D and E are non-fish-bearing, seasonal
streams that exit the site at the shoreline from hung culverts and impassible gradients.
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Page 3
Huueru Acnvrw
Section I of the site is currently developed as a RV resort. Asphalt and gravcl roads were constructed
throughout the site to provide access to various camping locations on Black Point. Water and electricity
are located at each RV pad. There are also numerous restrooms located throughout the site. At the time
of the site visit, RV camping was limited to a small section close to the main entrance. There was no
direct human disturbance associated with the rest of Section l. Section 3 contains a marina area that
contains roads and parking lots associated with the marina. This area experiences a moderate lcvel of
human disturbance. Indirect human disturbance on wildlife may occur from the roads and associated
structures located throughout the site. These roads and structures may cause wildlife to detour from thcse
areas. However, SR l0l separates Sections l, 2 and 3 from Section 4. SR l0l is a heavily traveled road
and is considered a large detour to wildlife.
RANe AND ENDANGERED PIauTs
No current cndangered or threatened plants (as listed under the Endangered Species Act [ESA]) within
the limits of the proposed development site were identified on the DNR NHP rare plants list (2005a)
shown on Figure 2. However, the presence of current scnsitive species occurring within 1.5 miles of the
project area were documented on the list. A small patch of chain-fern (\4/oodwardia fimbriata) cxists
about l-mile to the northeast of the site along SR 1 0 I . A largc patch of sensitive plants is present at the
mouth of the Duckabush River approximately 0.5 miles to the southwest of site. This community
includes saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), pickleweed (Salicornia virginica), sea-milkwort (Glaux maritime),
Pacific silverweed (Potentilla anserina), Baltic rush (Juncus balticus), Lyngby sedge (Carex lyngbyei)
and seaside alrowgrass (Triglochin maritimum). There is also historic prcscncc of A Moss (Brotherella
roellii) on the site. Howevcr, A Moss was observed to be present onsite in 1913 and no evidence of its
prcsence has been recorded since then (DI.IR 2005b). Golden paintbrush (Castilleja levisecta) is listed in
USFWS (2005) to occur within the limits of Jefferson County. This species was not documented in the
DNR rare plants list (2005a) to occur at the site, nor were suitable habitat or individual plants observed
during the site investigation.
Frsx
No evidence of fish spccics or associated habitat presence on the upland portion of the site has been
prcviously documented (DFW 2006) or confirmed during the site reconnaissance . Five streams were
identified to flow through the site in Section 3, but no accessible fish habitat was observed. All sections
of the site are exposed to the shoreline of the Hood Canal (Figure l). Hood Canal contains many fish
species in the shoreline cnvironment throughout its reach. Fish presence is assumed to occur along the
shoreline during certain times of the year. Priority anadromous fish species that may occur along the
shoreline of the site includc chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), chum salmon (Oncorhynchus
keta), coho salmon (Oncorhynchtrs kisutch), pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha), steelhead
(Oncorhynchus mykiss) and bull troat (Salveliruts con/hrentus). T\e Duckabush River and one unnamed
creek are located approximately I mile to the south of the site. The Duckabush fuver is documcnted to
support chinook, chum, coho, pink salmon, steelhead and the historical use of bull hout. The unnamed
creek is documented to support chum, coho and steelhead. Priority resident fish in thc Duckabush River
and the unnamed crcek include cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki) (WDFW 2006).
Chinook Salmon
Puget Sound chinook salmon are listed as threatened under the ESA as shown in Appendix B. Their
currcnt designated critical habitat is nearshore marine areas of the Puget Sound including the Hood Canal
FileNo.12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Page 4
(Figure 3). Portions of the project are located along designated critical habitat marine nearshore areas of
Hood Canal. The Duckabush fuver which is located approximately one mile to the south of the site
contains listed chinook salmon spawning and rearing areas and is also listed as critical habitat (70 FR
52630-52853 and WDFW 2006).
Chum Salmon
The Hood Canal summer-run chum salmon are listed as threatened under the ESA as shown in Appendix
B. Their current designated critical habitat is nearshore marine areas of the Hood Canal (Figure 3).
Portions of the project are located along designated marine nearshore areas of Hood Canal. The
Duckabush River which is located approximately one mile to the south of the site contains summer-run
chum salmon critical habitat (70 FR 52630-52853 and WDFW 2006).
Steelhead
Puget Sound steelhead are currently proposed threatened under the ESA (71 FR 15666-15680) as shown
in Appendix B. The marine waters within the vicinity of the site are known to contain different life
history stages of Puget Sound steelhead at various times of year. The nearest natural steelhead-producing
stream in the project vicinity is the Duckabush River (WDFW 2006). The shorelines in the vicinity of the
project site are known to support the spawning and production of salmonid prey species. WDFW
documented surf smelt spawning grounds occurring in the vicinity of the project site. Consequently,
steelhead may be found foraging on surf smelt (Ifypomesus pretiosus), sand lance (Ammodytes
hexapterus) and Pacific herring (Clupea harengus pallasi) in the immediate project vicinity as well as in
other habitats identified around the project area throughout the year.
Bull Trout
Bull trout have been historically documented to occur in the Duckabush River (WDFW 2000b) one mile
to the south of the project site. There has been no recent documented presence in the Duckabush fuver;
however, this does not mean that they are not present in the river system or its tributaries. The shorelines
in the vicinity of the project site are listed as nearshore critical habitat for bull hout (70 FR 56212-5631 1)
as shown on Figure 3. Bull trout may be found foraging along the shoreline in the vicinity of the project
area during certain times of the year.
Forage Fish
Forage fish including surf smelt, sand lance and Pacific hening are present in the vicinity of the site.
There are no spawning areas along the shoreline of the site however spawning areas do exist along the
eastern shoreline of Black Point. Forage fish will likely be present in the nearshore marine areas of the
site during certain times of the year. A discussion of forage fish presence in the vicinity of the site is
found in report titled "Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort Shoreline Characterization"
(GeoEngineers 2006).
Wrr-olrre
Wildlife presence and use of the site was evaluated through a thorough review of available literature as
well as a site investigation. Sources consulted during the assessment included the USFWS table (USDA
1985) of possible wildlife species use of Temperate Coniferous Forest and Coniferous Wetland in
Washington State (Appendix C), the USFWS endangered and threatened species list for Jefferson County,
Washington (2005) (Appendix D) and the WDFW PHS map (2006) of the site and surrounding area.
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Page 5
Appendix C presents a longer list of thosc wildlife species expected to inhabit the site for at least portions
of any given year. This list is not intended to be exhaustive but captures the most likely species to be
present on the site based on habitat type, amount and landscape position.
The USFWS identifies several listed species that may occur in non-coastal Jefferson County. Thcse
species include bald eagles (Haliaeetus lettcocephalas), marbled murrelets (Brachyramphus marmoratus),
Northern spotted owls (Srrx occidentalis caurina) and the short-tailed albatross (Phoebastria albatrtts).
The WDFW PHS maps identifr many listed and non-listed species in the arca. The field reconnaissance
on April 26 and27 and June 19,2006 revealed the presence of numerous mammals, birds, reptiles and
amphibian species.
The wildlife use of the southern sections of the site is cssentially isolated from the Olympic Peninsula by
SR 101. However, the wildlife described below may use the site through corridors that connect the site
with the Olympic Peninsula habitat wcst of SR l0l. Figure 4 shows the wildlife corridors as the area of
temperate coniferous forest that could connect the project site to the peninsula and additional undeveloped
parcels in the vicinity.
Bald Eagles
Bald eagles occur in Jefferson County but no nests, concentration points or foraging arcas are documentcd
on the site. The WDFW PHS maps indicate the presence of two bald eagle nests on the eastern shoreline
of Black Point just under 0.5 mile east from the proposed development site. There are also two more
nests located 2.5 milcs to thc southwest along the shorelinc of thc Hood Canal and one more nest located
to the north approximately I mile, about 1,200 feet inland (WDFW 2006). The shoreline on the southern
edge of Section I is undcvclopcd and contains mature trces suitablc for eagle perching. Portion of
Sections 2 and 3 are partially developed and also contain mature trees suitable for eagle pcrching. There
are no nests, communal roosts, foraging areas or buffers locatcd on the sitc. Howevet, there is presence
of bald eagles in the project vicinity, which means there is potential for bald eagles to utilizc thc sitc on a
regular occurrence. During the field reconnaissance, one immature and one adult bald eagle were
obscrved flying over the site and two adult bald eagles were observed perched in mafure Douglas-fir trees
in Section I (Appendix A - Photographs 6 and 7).
Marbled Murrelet
Marbled murrelets are associated with marine environments and old-growth forests. There is no suitable
nesting habitat present near the site. Therc is no documentcd presence of marblcd murrelets in the projcct
vicinity (WDFW 2006). However, because the site is adjacent to nearshore marine environments, there is
potential for foraging marbled murrelets to bc present during certain times of the year.
Northern Spotted Owl
The northcrn spotted owl lives in old-growth forests away from human disturbance. The site and
surrounding land has been historically logged; thus, there is no suitable nesting or foraging habitat for
northern spotted owls. There is no documentcd presence of northern spottcd owls in the project vicinity
(WDFW 2006).
Short-tai led Albatross
The short-tailed albatross breeds in Asia and migrates in thc ocean for the remainder of the year. Few
sightings have been noted off the coast of Washington in the Pacific Ocean. There is no documented
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Page 6
presence of short-tailed albatrosses in the project vicinity (WDFW 2006). Therefore, the presence of a
short-tailed albatross at or near the site is not likely.
Harbor Seals
There are two documented harbor seal (Phoca vitulina) haulout sites at the mouth of the Duckabush River
about I mile to the south of the site (WDFW 2000a and 2006). One group consisted of less than 100
seals and the other contained between 100 and 500 seals. Harbor seals typically congregate in flat beach
areas. The shoreline along the site consists of steep cliffs; therefore, it is not likely for harbor seals to
inhabit the shoreline along Section l.
Wabrtoil Concentrations and Non-listed Birds
Migratory water fowl, such as ducks, geese and swans, are expected to be present within the vicinity of
the site. The Duckabush River enters the hood canal about I mile to the southwest of the site (Appendix
A - Photograph 12). This area is extremely good habitat for waterfowl, thus, they can be expected to feed
or migrate through the site during varying times of the year. There is a documented waterfowl
concentration of trumpeter swans (Cygnus buccinators) along the southern shoreline of the site that is
associated with the mouth of the Duckabush fuver (WDFW 2006). There is also documented presence of
hooded merganser (Lophodytes cucullatus) concentrations in a pond less than 0.5 mile to the east of the
site (WDFW 2006).
Numerous snags were observed throughout the site that contained signs of use by woodpeckers and
insects. The holes were not of consistent size and pattern to be identified as pileated woodpecker
(Dryocoptts pileatus) holes. It is likely that the indicators of woodpecker use on the snags were caused by
the Northern flicker (Colaptes aurattrs). Visual observations of various birds were made during the
investigation. These birds included American robins (Turdus migratorius), American crows (Corvus
brachyrhynchos), red-tziled hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), hummingbirds (Trochilidae family), great blue
heron (Ardea herodias) and California quail (Callipepla californicus). Although several bird species
were observed at the site, no nests were identified to be present during the site investigation. There is a
documented osprey (Pandion haliaetus) nest located offsite about 300 feet to the south of Pleasant
Harbor. Two ospreys were observed to be present in the nest during the reconnaissance (Appendix A -
Photograph 10). Figure 3 identifies range of waterfowl and non-listed birds in the vicinity of the project.
Mammals
Several signs of mammal presence were observed during the field reconnaissance. Black-tail deer
(Odocoileus hemioruts columbianus) scat and hacks were observed throughout the site from the shoreline
to the upland in all sections. Coyote (Canis latrans) scat and tracks were also observed onsite. There
were no visual confirmations of mammals made during the field reconnaissance. Mammals feed on grass
and shrubs which contain berries and fruits during all times of the year. Numerous species were observed
onsite that mammals would browse such as vine maple, (Acer circinatum), red alder, salal, Douglas-fir,
cascara (Rhamruts purshiana), blackberry (Rubus spp.), thimbleberry, salmonberry, willow (Salix spp.),
red elderberry, Western red cedar and red huckleberry.
There is documented presence of regular large concentrations of Roosevelt elk (Cervus elaphus
roosevelti) in the vicinity of the site including Section 4 (WDFW 2006). Elk migrate on a seasonal
pattem and can be expected to be in the project vicinity during certain times of the year. Elk could
potentially wander onto Black Point and inhabit the site for short durations during the year. However, SR
l0l intersects the Sections l, 2 and 3 from the elk range. Elk are not expected to cross over heavily
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Page 7
haveled roads such as Highway. Approximately 2 miles northeast of the site there are "Elk Crossing"
signs posted in Brinnon, so thc potcntial for elk to cross ovcr SR l0l is present (Appendix A -
Photograph 11).
Herpetiles
Several different common garter snakes(Thamnophis sirtalis) were observcd at various locations on the
site. They were typically found in upland areas with low-lying grass and shrub layers. Numerous
Western fence lizards (Sceloporus occidentails) were observed on the southern shoreline of the site
(Appendix A - Photograph 9). The lizards were observed while they were sunbathing on large logs and
boulders. These lizards are preyed upon by birds and snakes. Pacific tree frog (Hyla regilla) was heard
calling during the delineation of a wetland that contained standing water.
CONCLUSIONS
The proposed development site contains large amounts of natural vegetation. The majority of the
developed portions of the site has been abandoned and no longer incurs a regular human disturbance. The
site is isolated in the southern sections by SR l0l. Additional undcveloped parcels in the vicinity of the
site connect habitat corridors on Black Point and in several locations to the westem side of SR 101. The
investigated sitc is cxpected to provide quality habitat for mammalian, avian and herpetile species but no
suitable fish habitat was observed on the site. However, listed salmon and steelhead spccies are likcly to
be present along the marine shoreline of the site during ccrtain times of thc year. Due to the semi-isolated
nature of this site and the high level of past human disturbance, the site was assessed to have average
overall habitat valuc.
LIMITATIONS
GeoEngincers has performed this Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment of the proposed development at
Pleasant Harbor, Washington in general accordance with the scope and limitations of our proposal.
Within thc limitations of scopc, schcdulc and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with
the generally accepted practices for Wildlife Habitat Evaluations in this atea at the time this report was
prepared. No warranty or other conditions, express or implied, should be understood.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Statesman Corporation, their authorized agents and
regulatory agencies following the described methods and information available at the time of the work.
No other party may rely on the product of our services unlcss we agrce in advance to such reliance in
writing. The information contained herein should not be applied for any purpose or project except the one
originally contemplated.
REFERENCES
70 FR 52630-52853. 2005. 50 CFR Part226. Endangcrcd and Thrcatcncd Species; Designation of Critical
Habitat for 12 Evolutionary Significant Units of West Coast Salmon and Stcelhcad in
Washington, Oregon and [daho. Federal Registcr, Vol. 70, No. 170.
70 FR 56212-56311. 2005. 50 CFR Part 17. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Endangercd and Threatcncnd
and Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Bull Trout. Federal Register, Vol. 70,
No. 185.
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Page I
7l FR 15666-15680. 2006. 50 CFR Part223. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administraion. Listing
Endangered and Threatened Species and Designating Critical Habitat: l2-Month Finding on
Petition to List Puget Sound Steelhead as an Endangered or Threatened Species under the
Endangered Species Act. Federal Register, Vol. 771, No. 60.
GeoEngineers. 2006. Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort Shoreline Characterization.
GeoEngineers. 2006. Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort Wetland Delineation.
Jefferson County. 2006. jMAP.
<http://maps.cojefferson.wa.us/Website/mspub/viewer.htm?mapset{emp_esa>
(Accessed April 25, 2006)
Tiner, R. W. 2003. Geographically isolated wetlands of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Northeast Region 300 Westgate Center Drive Hadley, Massachusetts, USA 01035E
Unitcd States Department of Agriculture. 1975. Soil Survey of Jefferson County Arca, Washington.
United States Department of Agriculture. 1985. Management of Wildlife and Fish Habitats in Forests of
Westem Oregon and Washington.
United States Department of Agriculture. 2001. Hydric Soils List Jefferson County, Washington: Detailed
Soil Map Legend.
< http://www.wa.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/soils/hydric_lists,4rydsoil-wa-63l.pdf>
(Accessed April 25, 2006).
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2005. Listed and Proposed Endangered and Threatened Species
and Critical Habitat; Candidate Species; and Species of Concern in Western Washington as
Prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Western Washington Fish and Wildlife Office.
Jefferson County. Revised December 20,2005.
http ://www.fivs. gov/westwafivo/se/SE_List/JEFFERSO.htm
(Accessed April 25, 2006).
United States Geological Survey. 1981. Brinnon, Washington; l:24000,7.5-minute quadrangle.
United States Geological Survey. 1990. Aerial photograph. Available online at:
<http://www.terraserverusa.com/image.aspx?T=1&S:12&Z:10&X:633&Y-6597&W:3>
(Accessed Apil 25, 2006)
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2000a. Atlas of Seal and Sea LionHaulout Sites in
Washington.
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2000b. Salmonscape.
http ://wdfiv.wa. gov/mapping/salmonscape/index.htm
(Accessed July 14, 2006).
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2006. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
Priority habitat and Species Map-Habitats and Species Map in the Vicinity of T25R02W Sections
15 and 22.May 19,2006.
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Page 9
Washington State Department of Natural Resources. 2005a. Washington Natural Heritage Program data,
GIS and Metadata. l:24K. Olympia, Washington.
Washington State Department of Natural Resources. 2005b. Washington Natural Heritage Program.
http ://www. dnr. wa. gov/nhp/refdesk/fguide/pdflbroroe.pdf
(Accessed May 5,2006)
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Page 10
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
T
t
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
q)
cf-ijo
.9
o
(L
i
o(L
I
x.
o)o
o
Section 4
Section 3
Section 2
101
Section 1
Ec
o
t
B|,r
'r:::r_l:._'Qurrrrg polnt
Clallam
Grays Haabor
Notes:
1. The locations of all features shown are approximate.
2. This drawing is for information purposes. lt is intended to assist in
showing features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, lnc.
can not guarantee the accuracy and content of electronic files. The master
file is stored by GeoEngineers, lnc. and will serve as lhe official record of
this communication.
3. lt is unlaMul to copy or reproduce all or any part thereof, whether for
personal use or resale, without permission.
Vicinity Map
Pleasant Harbor Marina & Golf Course
Brinnon, Washington
GeoErucrNEE *tC Figure 1
SITE
2,000 2,000
m
0
.+,
Feet
Data Sources: lnterstates, state routes, and roads from TIGER 2000.
County boundaries, cities, and waterbodies from Department of Ecology.
Lambert Confomal Conic. Washington State Plane Norh, North American Datum 1983
-Lg
o
(
5 I
\ri
I
I
t
T
T
T
T
I
t
T
t
T
I
t
T
I
T
I
t
@
oN
No
-ii
0).2
o
d.
o
x
Erio)
(f)o
o
t-
F--
@N
a(,(,o
ooF-t-
@N
N
0-
i
o
t_
=oto
il
E
o
\o(
'r'tt-
Ro
-f
Rd
( .-''?'rl./
A Moss
\
\
SITE
101
cr
Elk
@r\
\.
\.
\)
/(.
(
Y
I
ooc*aouso
r)
\/
\
\.
\
\
ot
o0.
G
@l i
i
i
i
i
i
Saltgrass - (Pickleweed)
Sea-milkwort
Pacific Silverweed - Baltic Rush
Lyngby's Sedge (Saltgrass - Seaside i
Organic: Partly Enclosed, Backshore,(Marsh) Ptn iSan d : P artly Enclosed, Eu I itto ral,(Marsh) Ptn
Mesohaline 1ltariil Ptni
/'/'t?
9a
o_!
4El-
.eb
o'
o
/./' +'
/' -e./' o)--' {\.\.\._._.
Notes:
1. The locations of all foatures shown are approximate.
2. This drawing is for information purposes. lt is intended to assist in
showing features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, lnc.
can not guarantee thg accuracy and content of alectronic files. The master
file is stored by GeoEnginsers, lnc. and will s6rvo as lhe official record of
this communication.
3. lt is unlaMul to copy or roproducs all or any part thereof, whelher for
personal use or resale, without permrssion.
Washington Natural Heritage Program Map
Pleasant Harbor Resort
Brinnon, Washington
GeoErucrNEE Rs//Figure 2
0.5
Lambert Conromal Conic,Slate Plane North, North Ameri€n Datum 1983
0.5mEI
.+,
0
MilesI 1.5 IUILES FROM SITE
SITE WANHP DATA (Historic)
WANHP DATA (Current)
Data Sources: Washington Natural Heritage Program (WANHP) data from
Washington Deparlment of Natural Resources. lnterstates, state routes, and
roads from TIGER 2000. County boundaries, cities, and waterbodies from
Department of Ecology.
I
I
I
!
!
I
I
Gravel: Partly Enclosed,
Mixed-fine and Mud:
Ocean
J
Eulittoral,
I ffi I T
E
I
a3\
o-'
o N
\E
I
I I
T
E
o
I
n
I
Ma Revised: Jul 17th 2006re3a.mxdOffice: ORCH Path: P.\12\1267700'1\03\GlS\1 267700103 F
zo
o
-o
l
foa
lI
oo
.6'
€o
ainm
a
n
m
Da
@
o
!
ozo
7zol
3
o,
0oc
3
@
PE:!r=se;i
Esiig qEEAB
r 6 L
=: O L O = -+14 3 e5 aE 9d iH=e6$ci5oi
:gd€gEqx9s*69< ;rfqrA
I[;* E c aia55'Eg !6a1"=d -- = -< oE ogF3L IiiE:[[qi 1ealr
38 ; 6iHlE
55 a $gafl*
=J o =o-q3+ I if.o=9n I 3iH;
ilgiriEs@ - =lo' o q-i
-iri O
o@<n=!m7m
z
m
U'i
MTf> 'nn(D>o2n
9)alr m-I
CroC-{>o)z-,
Briuo
o
a
2o
1m
U)
O
mzI
IaI
!7m
U)
mz
c)
m
o-{o ont- @rO= ao5Q T
IH; EBAP P11= r>Zo o-i? m
MC ;:< ;E9T
V< Y*o m"'z clt
9o
t!C--
N
=+mnT
=-
z
mz-lv
I
ozo
l.)(,o
<>
Tloo
N(Too
-Tl
6'.
q,
CL
=d
o
oo
=q)tt.Tt
6'
o
(.,
1 rr
I
g
7
1l
t
I
I
/
I
I
.t
t
!l lhr:
\
\
f1
l
f
\'\
6)momz
ezmmD
[)
!
o
0)a
0)
=@-a4
-U:l ciooJa<<<0)o=.aa
=o)3ao
OUJ50
=oo-aao
"+"o
oo
(oooN
=-.U
0)a't
o)
x.
E'xq
(Estg
f
oo
ooF-F.(o
N
L(i
ooF.F.
@N
N
(L
I
6
o-
I
Otro
ido
o
SITE STREAMS / RIVERS
CONIFEROUS WETLAND
MARINA - BOAT LAUNCH
RESIDENTIAL
TEMPERATE CONI FEROUS FOREST
Notes:
1. The locations of all features shown are approximate.
2. This drawing is for information purposes. lt is intended to assist in
showing features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, lnc.
can not guarantee the accuracy and content of electronic flles. The master
file is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the omcial record of
this communication.
3. lt is unlawful to copy or reproduce all or any part hereof, whether tor
personal use or resale, without permission.
Data Sources: lnterstates, state routes, and roads from TIGER 2000.
County boundaries, cities, and waterbodies from Department of Ecology.
Lambert Cmlormal Conic. Washingtm Stale Plane North. North American Datum 1983
2,500 2,500
Fish and Wildlife Gorridor Map
Pleasant Harbor [t/arina and Golf Resort
Brinnon, Washington
+
Figure 4
\
\\1 o(}r
I Dusty Rd
\lloodPecker
Dr
--f .!
t'2-6"
2/
g.
oc
4'e
.tI
t
J
Ne-
a
s
s\(o
GeoEucrNEE RsJ,
0
Feet
GeoENGrN rr*t1f,
T
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
I
I
t
T
I
(
J.
I
Appenotx A
Srre PuoroeRAPHs
T
I
T
t
t
t
t
I
T
I
T
T
I
T
I
T
T
I
I
APPENDIX A
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
Photograph 1
Wetland B vegetation and habitat
Photograph 3
Onsite kettle-hole hillside containing shrub and
herbaceous layer
Photograph 2
Wetland D vegetation and open water
Photograph 4
Vegetation in the kettle-hole where Wetland B is
located
File No 12677-001-03
July 20,2006
Page A-I GeoExenezeslQ
E
:t
x
4-L
Photograph 5
Southern shoreline of site containing mature conifer
and deciduous trees
Photograph 6
lmmature bald eagle flying on southern shoreline
Photograph 7
Adult bald eagle perched on a Douglas fir near the
shoreline onsite
Photograph 8
Canada Goose concentration located at Quatsap
Point east of the Section 1
File No. 12677-001-03
Julv 20, 2006
Page A-2 GtoEneweeesiQ
?f tT9 t{
7'V,f E--
,tq
b7-.-
EL
qr*.
l!-L .i , i, qi
)
Photograph 9
Western fence lizard on debris on the southern
shoreline of Section 1
Photograph 11
Elk crossing sign 2 miles to the northeast at
Brinnon, Washington
Photograph 10
Osprey nest located to the north of Section '1
Photograph 12
Waterfowl concentration area and mouth of the
Duckabush River looking west from southern
shoreline of site
Page A-3 GeoEr,rcrxeenslFile No. 12677-001-03
July 20.2006
-
-t
t
:\
L;T
!
L.--
'f
T
4
,r{.
Earlp
-E
GroEr,rc ,nrr*21Q
Appettotx B
NOAA EnoettoERED Speses Acr Srarus orWest
Coesr Setuox AND Steetueeo
I
I
T
T
t
I
T
I
I
T
T
T
I
T
T
I
T
T
T
Endangered Species Act Status of West Coast Salmon & Steelhead
Speciesr
Currenl
Endangered
Species Act
ESA Listing Actions
Under Reviw
Critical habitat
Protective regulatioDs
Statili
Saake fuver
Ozenc Lakc
Baker River
Okaogu Rivcr
Lake Wcoatchee
Quhalt Lakc
Plcosant
Cbinook Salmon
Sammctrto River WiDlcr.m
Uppcr Columbia fuver Spritrg-m
Soake Riv6 Sprhg/Summcr-run
Smke Rivr Fall-m
Puget Sound
lprvcr Columbia Nvcr
Upps Willamcttc Rivcr
Cental Valley Spring-run
Catifomia Coastal
Ceutral Vallcy Fall ud Latc Fall-ro
Upper Klamath-Trinity fu vcr
Orcgoo Coast
Washington Coast
Middlc Columbia fuver spring-ruo
Upper Columbia fuver summcr/fall-ro
Souhcm Orcgoo ild Northcm Califoroia Coast
(O. tthu\)1schd)
24 Deschutes Rivq summcr/foll-run Not Wanznted
. 25 Centml Califomia Coasl
CohoSalmon,26southenloregoD/NortlremCalifomiaE
(O kisut(h)
Sockcyc SalmoD
(Oncorhl'nchrs
nerka\
Chum Salmon
(O. keto\
Sleelhead
(O. ntkiss)
Not Warranted
Not Warrahted
Not lf'qranted
Nol lYilranted
Not llo'ranled
Not WurMted
Nol Woilante.l
Not lYorranled
Not lYarranted
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
l0
ll
l2
l3
ll
l5
l6
l1
l8
l9
20
ll
72
2l
27
28
29
30
ll
32
33
t4
35
OregoD Coast
Lorvq Columbia fuver
Southwest WasbingtoD
Pugcr Sound/StEit of Gcorgia
Hood Caual Summer-run
Columbia River
Puget Soud/Strait of Georgia
Pacific Coast
Soutbm Califomia E
Uppcr Columbia Rivcr
Cenrnl Califom.ia Coast
South Central Califomia Coast
Snake River Basin
Lorvcr Columbia fuvcr
Califomia Ccnaal Vallcy
Uppcr Willanert fuvcr
Middle Columbia fuvcr
Northem Califomia
Oregoo Coast
Southrvcst Woshingtotr
Olympic Pcninsula
Puget Sound l
Klamath Moutahs Provincc
\',)t ll(r rltntul
fhrufenad' Crrll.irlhithil:rl
I nlrrtt tnttttrl
Species ofConcert
Not lYarranted
Not Wananted
Nol ,Yarrznted
36
31
38
39
40
4l
42
13
44
45
46
47
48
,19
50
Specles of Conccrn
Yot ll'arrantel
.\ol ll'urrunted
Prcposetl Threatened
-\ol lfdrrilntcl
Pink Salmon
(O. gtrhwcha)Ever-ycar
Odd-ycar
Not lYartonted
Nol ty'arrznled
5t
52
Thc ESA defines a "species" to iDcludc any distitrct populalioD segment ofuy spccies ofvcrtebrate {ish or wildlife. For Pacific salmon, NOAA
Fisheries Senicc corsiders ar evolulionarily siguificaut unit, or "ESU," a "species" undcr the ESA. For Pacific steelhcad. NOA Fisherics Scrvice
has dclileared distinct population scgments (DPSs) for considqation as "specics" under the ES..\.
Updated final tisting dctemiratioas for l6 salmol spccies rvoe issued on June 28, 2005 (70FR371 60). Updatcd firal listing detemitrltioos for I 0
Wcst Coast stee lhcad specics rverc issucd on Jatr. 5, 2006 (71 FRB34). The lual "rot rvamoted' Iisting deteminaiioa for Oregon Coast coho
salmon rvas uroulccd on Jatr. 19. 2006 (7 I FR3033). On Scpt. 2, 2005, NOAA Fishcrics Service issued final critical habitat designations for 19
Wcst Coast salmoo oDd steelheod spccies (70FR52,188 and 52630).
Pugct Sound stccllead rvas prcposed for listing as thrcutened on Mar. 29. 2006 (71 FR I 5 666). A fuul detemination. if one is rvmntcd. should
occur rvithin a ycar
Thrtst ned
Thrcaraned
Thrcatencd
Thrcokncd
Thtuobn2d
Thr.elencd
Endongetcd
Thrcolmcd
Threutzncl
I
T
t
T
I
t
I
I
t
I
T
T
I
I
I
t
T
T
I
GroEuc t*rr*t1fi
u.s. Fonesr Senwce ,rr"f:l:!?! "
lL
I
Table C-1. Possible Wildlife Species Use Table
Common Name Scientific Name
Temperate Coniferous
Forest Coniferous Wetland
Amphibians
Northwestern Salamander Ambystoma gracile X X
Long-toed salaander Ambystoma macrodactylum X x
Western redback salamander Plethodon vehiculum X x
Ensatina Ensatina eschscholtzi X X
Roughskin newt Taricha granulose X X
Western toad Bufo boreas x X
Pacific tree frog Hyla regilla x X
Redlegged frog Rana aurora X X
Reptiles
Northern alligator lizard Elgaia coerulea x
Western fence lizard Sce/oporus occidentalis X
Rubber boa Chaina boftae X
Western terrestrial garter
snake
Thamnophis elegans X x
Northwestern garter snake Thanmophis ordinoides x
Common garter snake Thamnophis sirtalis X X
Birds
Canada goose Branta canadensis X
Wood duck Ax sponsa X
Ring-necked duck Aythya collais x
Bald eagle H al iaeetu s leucoceph alus X X
Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos X
Northern Harrier Circus cyaneus X
Sharp-shinned hawk Accipiter striatus X X
Coopers hawk Accipiter coopeii X X
Red-tailed hawk Buteo jamaicensis X x
American Kestrel Falco sparverius X X
Merlin Falco columbarius X X
Peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus X X
Ring-necked pheasant Phasianus colchicus X X
Ruffed grouse Bonasa unbellus X X
Blue grouse Dendragapus obscurus X
California quail C a ll i pe pl a cal ifo m i cu s X x
Common snipe Gallinago gallinago x
Marbled murrelet Brachyramph u s marmoratu s x x
Band-tailed pigeon X XColumba fasciata
Page C-l GeoExerxsens/File No. 12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Table C-l. Possible Wildlife Species Use Table (Continued)
Common Name Scientific Name
Temperate Coniferous
Forest Coniferous Wetland
Mouming dove Zenaida macroura X X
Anna's hummingbird Calypte anna X X
Rufous hummingbird Se/asphorus Rufous X x
Allen's hummingbird Se/asphorus sasln X X
Purple martin Progne subls X X
Barn swallow Hirundo rustica X X
Stellar jay Cyanocitta stelleri X X
American robin Turdus migratorius X X
Northern flicker Colaptes auratus X x
Downy woodpecker Picoides pubescens X
Hermit thrush Catharus guttatus X X
Townsend's solitaire Myadestes townsendi x X
Orange-crowned warbler Vermivora celata X X
Nashville warbler Vermivora ruficapilla x X
Yellow-rumped warbler Dendroica coronata X X
Black{hroated gray warbler Dendroica nlgrescens X X
Great blue heron Ardea herodias X x
Osprey Pandion haliaetus X X
Northern spotted owl Strix occidental is cauina X
Black-headed grosbeak Ph eucticus melanoceph al us x X
Spotted towhee Pipilo erythrophthalamus x X
Chipping sparrow Spizella passenha X X
Fox sparrow Passerella iliaca X X
Song sparrow Melospiza melodia X x
Dark-eyed junco Junco hyemalis X X
American crow Corvus brachyrhynchos X X
Turkey vulture Catharies aura x X
Solitary vireo Viero solitarius X X
Mammals
Masked shrew Sorex cinereus X X
Vagrant shrew Sorex vagrans X X
Water shrew Sorex palustrls X
Virginia opossum Didelphis virgiiniana x X
Coast mole Scapanus orarius X X
Deer mouse Pero my sc u s m an i cul at u s X x
Hoary bat Lasiurus c,neeus x x
Big brown bat X XEptesicus fuscus
July 20, 2006
Page C-2 GeoExemeeeslQFile No. 12677-001-03
Table G-l. Possible Wildlife Species Use Table (Continued)
Gommon Name Scientific Name
Temperate Coniferous
Forest Coniferous Wetland
Bobcat Lynx rufus X X
Coyote Canis latrans x x
Black bear Ursus americanus X X
Raccoon Procyon lotor X X
Striped skunk Arlephitis mephitis x X
Spotted skunk Spilogale putorius X X
Mule deer/black{ailed deer Odocoileus hemionus X X
Western gray squirrel Scurius grlseus x
American beaver Casfor Canadensls X x
Porcupine Erethizon dorsatum X X
Snowshoe hare Lepus americanus X x
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Page C-3 GeoEne rxeens-l
T
T
t
I
T
I
T
I
T
T
T
T
t
I
T
I
T
T
I
GeoEr,rc r*rr*yfr
t
I
t
t
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
I
t
It
I
AppruDx D
U.S Flsa ANDWttoure SeRwceLlsr
T
I
T
I
I
I
t
I
T
T
I
T
I
I
I
t
T
T
I
II I I - I'l- I I I !t I I IT II II T I
Pleasant Harbor Critical Habitat
METT
N
I
+
+
+
Critical Habitat
Federal Land
National Park Service
Bureau of Land Management
Bureau of Reclamation
Bureau of lndian Affairs
Department of Defense
Forest Service
Department of Energy
Coast Guard
Tennessee Valley Authority
lnactive Mines
Active Mines
Air Release
Landfills
Superfund Sites
Water Discharge Permits
Toxic Release lnventory
-Y"t
\
*-/
)
?\.
I
Map center: 47'39'22'N, 122" 55'5'W
Disclaimer: This map DOES NOT represent all of the critical habitat designated by Scale 1:33,290
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Printed: May 4,2006 10:18:00 AM
U.$ Eish & Wildlife Service. lt shows only the available digitized critical habitats @have been submitted into this system as ol rint date.
7'l 1 o18
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\l\-)
',vt
vl-
ILJ
Page I of -l
LISTED AND PROPOSED EI{DANGERED A\D THREATENED SPECIES AND CRITICAL
HABITAT; CANDIDATE SPECIES; AND SPECIES OF CONCER:.i
IT{ WESTERN WASHINGTON
AS PREPARED BI'
THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
WESTERN WASHINGTON FISH AND }VILDLIFE OFFICE
(Revised December 20, 2005)
JEFFERSON COUNT}'
LISTED
Winterin,e bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocetrthalrrs) occur in the county from about October 3l through
i\,larch 31.
There are three bald eagle communal lvinter night roosts located in the count_v.
There are t',vo bald eagle rvintering concentrations located in the counry along the Quinault River and the
Washington coast.
There are 9l trald eagle nesting territories located in the counry-. Nesting activities occur from about
January I through August 15.
Brorm pelicans (Pelecaruts occidentalis) occur along the outer coast in the county.
Bull trout (Solvelirus confluentus) occur in the count-v.
Green sea turtles (Chelonia mwlas) may occur along the outer coast in the count;".
Leatherback sea ftrrtles (Dermochelys coriacea) mav occur along the outer coast in the county'.
Loggerhead sea turtles (Caretta coretta) mav occur along the outer coast in the county.
Ivlarbled murrelets (Brachyramphus marmoratus) occur in the county. Nesting murrelets occur from
April I through September 15.
Northern sponed orvls (Strlr occidentalis caurina) occur in the countl.' throughout the 1'ear.
Olivc ridlel sea turtles (Lepiclochel.u-s olivacea) ma,,- occur along the outer coast in the countl'.
Short-tailed albatross (Phoehastria albatrus) ma)- occur in the counf).
lvlajor concerns that should be addressed in y'our Biological Assessment of p.q..t inrpacts to tirt"a
species include:
l. Level of use of the project area by'listed species.
l. Effect of the project on listed species'primary tbod stocks. pre) species. and tbraging
http :.' r.r'* u, fws. qor,'*'estu,at\r'o,'se,''SE L isL J E FF ERSO. htm _i,61006
Page 2 of3
areas in all areas int'luenced by' the project.
Impacts from project activities and implementation (e.8., increased noise levels, increased
human activity and/or access, loss or degradation of habitat) that may result in
disturbance to listed species and/or their avoidance ofthe project area.
Castilleja levisecta (-eolden paintbrush) may occur in the countl'
lvlajor concerns that should be addressed in your Biological Assessment for this listed plant species
include:
Distribution of taxon in project vicinity.
Disturbance (trampling, uprooting, collecting, etc.) of individual plants and habitat loss.
Changes in hydrology where taxon is fbund.
DESIGNATED
Critical habitat tbr the northern spotted owl has been designated in Jefferson County'
Critical habitat for the marbled murrelet has been designated in Jefferson Countv.
Critical habitat tbr the bull trout has been desienated in Jefferson Countv.
PROPOSED
None
CANDIDATE
Fisher (,\,[artes pennonti pttcilicu) (West Coast distinct population segment)
SPECIES OF CONCERT\
Aleutian Canada goose (Brunta canatlensis leucopareia)
California rvolverine (Gulo gulo luteus)
Cascades frog (Ranu cascadue)
Coastal cutthroat trout (Oricorhynchus clarki clttrki\
Destruction Island shreu (Scrrer trov,bridgii destruc'lioni)
Long-eared m,votis (,V$'o t i s ev o t is)
Long-legged m.,-'otis (,1. ly o t i s vo I u nsl
J
2
J
httD :,//uu,rv. f'ws. so r.,'\.r'e strvafu'o;'se, S E L i st,'J E F F E RS O. htm 5 6 1006
Northern gosharvk (Accipiter gentilis)
Northern sea otter lEnh.vdra lun'is kenyoni)
Olive-sided fl ;-catcher (C o nto p us c oo pe r i)
Olympic torrent salamander (Rhyacotiton olympicus)
Pacit-rc lamprey (Lampe tra tr i de ntata)
Pacit'ic Tor,r,nsend's big-eared bat (Corynorhinus tovvnsendii townsendii)
Peregrine t'alcon (Falco peregrinus)
River lampre,v (Lampetra a.vresi)
Tailed tiog (lscaphu.s truei)
Van Dyke's salamander (Plethodon vanclykei)
Western toad (BuJb boreas)
Page 3 of3
http: uurr..t\r s.gor''riests atrvo seiSE List..lEI:Irt:RSO.htm 5 6,1006
CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT
FOR THE PROPOSED PLEASANT HARBOR
MARINA AND GOLF RESORT,
JEFFERSONI COUNTY, WASHINGTON
BY
CAMILLE A. MATHER,
JENNIFER CHAMBERS,
& JAMES SCHUMACHER
GLENN D. HARTMANN, PRINCIPLE INVESTIGATOR
SUBMITTED TO:
STATESMAN CORPORATION
7370 SIERRA MORENA BLVD. SW
CALGARY, AB T3H 4H9
WEsreRN Snonp HgRrtlcr Senvrcps, INc.
8001 Dnv Rono WESr, Surre B
BlrNsRrocE IsLlNo, WA 98110
TecnNrcal Reponr #274
JUNE 30,2006
Wrsrenru SHonr HrRrrncr Senvrcrs, Ir'.lc.
APPENDIX 8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
Authors:
Date:
Location:
USGS Quad:
T, R, S:
CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT
FOR THE PROPOSED PLEASANT HARBOR
MARINA AND GOLF RESORT,
JEFFERSON COUNTY, WASHINGTON
WESTERN SHORE HeRNECn SERVICES, INC
TECHNICALREPoRT #274
Camille A. Mather, Jennifer Chambers, and James Schumacher
June 30, 2006
Pleasant Harbor/Black Point, Hood Canal, Jefferson County, Washington
Brinnon, WA 7.5'
Township 25 North, Range 2 West, Section 15 and22
MaxecnMENT Suuprnnv
Western Shore Heritage Services, Inc. (WSHS) was contracted by Statesman Corporation to
conduct a cultural resource assessment for the proposed Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort,
located on the Hood Canal near the town of Brinnon, Washington. This assessment, as detailed
in this repoft, consists of a review of published and unpublished sources relevant to the project
area, review of records of nearby recorded archaeological sites and similar information, and
recommendations regarding the potential for as-yet unidentified cultural heritage sites that could
be in the general project vicinity. This assessment should be considered as a review of existing
information; no field investigations were conducted in preparation of this report.
The project entails two components: the Maritime Village and the Golf Resort. The Maritime
Village will encompass the existing 290 slips within Pleasant Harbor and include the additional
construction of approximately 150 residential units. Also, the current retail buildings will be
reconstructed into a 10,000 square foot Maritime Center. The Golf Resort will include the
construction of an eighteen-hole golf course with a conference center, spa and approximately 100
condominium units located within the complex. In addition, 800 residential town home units are
planned for construction throughout the golf course area. The proposed resort is in response to
the 20O4 Comprehensive Plan for Jefferson County, which invited the development of a master-
planned destination resort in south Jefferson County. The proposed resort is anticipated to
increase tourism and provide permanent jobs to an area that has a declining economy in resource
industries.
Cultural Resource Assessment for the Proposed Pleasant Harbor
Maina and Golf Resort, Jefferson County, Washington
Western Shore Heritage Services, lnc.I
Background research and preliminary on-site reconnaissance suggests high probability for pre-
contact or ethnographic archaeological sites in the proposed marina and golf resort development
areas. This determination is based on the nature of the onsite landforms and the proximity of the
project areas to two ethnographic village sites. The likelihood of encountering historic-period
cultural resources is also considered high, due to historic settlement and logging practices that
occurred in the Dosewallips and Duckabush river drainages and the associated logging and
habitation structures documented at Pleasant Harbor and Black Point. It is recommended that the
project proponent engage in consultation with the Washington State Department of Archaeology
and Historic Preservation, affected Indian tribes, and stakeholders at the earliest opportunity;
consultation should include discussion of an appropriate program of systematic archaeological
field investigations for the subject property.
Cultural Resource Assessmen/ for the Proposed Pleasant Hahor
Maina and Golf Resoft, Jefferson County, Washington
Western Shore Heritage Services, lnc.
il
Tlnln on Conrrxrs
Management Summary
Introduction
Project Area Location and Description
Methods...
Project Area Background
Environmental Setting
Cultural Setting
Pre-contact Period
Ethnohi storic Period ......
Historic Period
Previous Cultural Resources Investigations
Results and Recommendations ...............
Limitations of This Assessment .............
References Cited
Appendix A: Project Correspondence
Cultural Resource Assessment for the Proposed Pleasant Harbor
Maina and Golf Resort, Jefferson County, Washington
Western Shore Heritage Services, lnc.
It
...i
..1
..1
,,4
,.4
..4
..5
,.5
..6
..7
11
l5
l5
16
A
I
Lrsr or Frc.unE
Figure 1. Portion of Brinnon, WA USGS 7.5' quadrangle depicting the approximate
locations of the proposed Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort. ......2
Figure 2. Site Plan Map depicting areas of development and anticipated phases of
construction (courtesy of Statesman Corporation)..
Figure 3. Native camp on the spit at the northern mouth of Pleasant Harbor, looking
southwest. Photo taken by Asahel Curtis, before 1910.. ............7
Figure 4. 1893 map of project area, indicating historic settlement locations. . . . .
Figure 5. 1910-1926 map of project area, indicating historic settlement locations and railroad
structures.9
Figure 6. Robert Whitney logging camp at Pleasant Harbor.... .10
Figure 7. Thompson/Robinson homestead located on Black Point, near the mouth of the
Duckabush River. Ephraim Robinson pictured on porch, early 1900s...... ..........11
Cultural Resource Assessmenf for the Proposed Pleasant Harbor
Maina and Golf Resoft, Jefferson County, Washington
Western Shore Heritage Services, lnc.
tv
3
9
l
IxrnooucrroN
Western Shore Heritage Services, Inc. (WSHS) was requested by Statesman Corporation to
conduct a cultural resources assessment for the proposed 253-acre Pleasant Harbor Marina and
Golf Resort, located on the Hood Canal near the town of Brinnon, Washington (Figure 1),
hereafter referenced as the 'study area'. This assessment describes the two development
components and assesses the potential of the project to affect significant cultural resources. This
cultural resource assessment is provided to support the historic, cultural and archaeological
component of a State Environmental Protection Act (SEPA) Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) prior to development. Determination of archaeological potentials and potential impacts to
cultural resources was accomplished by reviewing the environmental, cultural and archaeological
setting of the study area.
PnoJBcr Anpl LoclrtoN AND DnscruprroN
The proposed Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort development project is located in central
western Washington, in Jefferson County, along the western shore of the Hood Canal, south of
Brinnon, at Pleasant Harbor and on Black Point, in allfour quarters of Section,l5 and in the
NW7+ and NE'/+ of Section 22, Township 25 North, Range 2 West (Figure l).
The project entails two components: the Maritime Village/Marina and the Golf Resort. The
Maritime Village will encompass the existing 290 slips within Pleasant Harbor and include the
additional construction of approximately 150 residential units. Also, the current retail buildings
will be reconstructed into a 10,000 square foot Maritime Center. The Golf Resort will include
the construction of an eighteen-hole golf course with a conference center, spa, lounge and
approximately 100 condominium units located within the complex. In addition, 800 residential
town home units are planned for construction throughout the golf course area. The area slated
for development as a Golf Resort is currently a RV Resort. The proposed resort is in response to
the 2004 Comprehensive Plan for Jefferson County, which invited the development of a master-
planned destination resort in south Jefferson County. The marina and resort are anticipated to
increase tourism and provide permanent jobs to an area that has experienced a declining
economy in resource industries.
Ground disturbing activities associated with the development of the Marina and Golf Resort are
anticipated to be extensive (Figure 2). Construction of the Maritime Village and Staff Housing
will require tree removal and vegetation brushing, site grading, foundation construction,
transportation improvements and the installation of sub-surface utilities. Construction associated
with the 10,000-square foot commercial marina facility will additionally impact the current,
previously modified, Pleasant Harbor shoreline. Although some major topographic features of
Black Point will be incorporated into the golf course layout, substantial site grading and
modification of the existing landscape will be required to shape the proposed eighteen-hole
course and install the associated sub-surface irrigation and utilities. The proposed resort
construction and housing units will also require tree and vegetation removal, site grading,
foundation construction, the installation of sub-surface utilities and transportation improvements.
Cultural Resource Assessmenf for the Proposed Pleasant Harbor
Marina and Golf Resort, Jefferson County, Washington
Western Shore Heritage Services, lnc.
Page 1 of '18I
a:ri: i ;i li - t: i
l!
1 :'''
L.'t; . r:l :.:.,: l:
.c"
,.]
'..i
.i ri ri ,,.
i-i,i:;
''n
Golf Resort
Figure 1. Portion of Brinnon, WA USGS 7.5' quadrangle depicting the approximate locations of the proposed Pleasant
Harbor Marina and Golf Resort.
Cultural Resource Assessment for the Proposed Pleasant Harbor
Maina and Golf Resoft, Jefferson County, Washington
Western Shore Heritage Services, lnc.
Page 2 of 18
:.,., ::.t.i:::..t:,. r r'l1l'
",.,.
. i. l-
l
B) Tho Maritime Vlllage:
# Pnaevr
.ilacilSlrEl irE rffiEEid@ipanont h rrdul,y
staidMdi ('i10.00O)
j[ rtmvr,
. CsrlrlEEn ol Martr8 IoF lhfts owrlogilng
PIoEnnl Hilbdr(.1 1501 {Ccli 8 and C)
Ph.!. Vll
. Cof,dosd cl Anpnitca aid Pieast ltalts
t4
f ccttc
,.T.'r'L'.:,'"/
b
*,
w
,/t*t'
THE
Coll E PHASING PLAN(ovrn4to6vrnps)
rt
"r/"t'*
.rf'
i
aatJ
HIIIT B;
JCFTTNIOH COU'{TY, WA
A) Black Point Lands:
:l Phel
. Codsuh ol Roadr ilrd Parhray!
. Silo Sa."@g {SE/a$ T.6ah.nl Pril!
w$6( Tr0drn€it naitl
- Goi Cods Cd$ud6
' C6.[Eia{ or Sbi Ho@g rcoll Ol
# Phasll.
. CNs*ton ot IIE Gd{ R.E t Cent6
. CGbdin oa G.d|d SFa
. C@fffi ql Coolrreffi C*ler sd
Lenod8r. ind 100 R.lir.niEl Crildo
** PhrsllarldlV'
, Co6$nlds to 6nd.h [{ bal4c8 oa lm
R.s{t Vli6 ard ABn6 roin Hoffi ( i"750}
,d Sits
^l*.t!s3
Figure 2. Site Plan Map depicting areas of development and anticipated phases of construction (courtesy
of Statesman Corporation).
Cultural Resource Assessrnenf for the Proposed Pleasant Haftor
Marina and Golf Resod, Jefferson County, Washington
Western Shore Heritage Services, lnc.
Page 3 of 18
f* :r4 'fi* IF, 'nEt
f qcrontailbor
to'+f
-+-
Mnrnons
This cultural resource assessment was conducted by consulting archived records at the
Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) for previously
recorded sites within and immediately surrounding the project area, reviewing documented
ethnographic and cultural resource investigations in the local area, examining pertinent historical
maps, documents and locally compiled histories, and preparation of this report. WSHS contacted
technical staff of the Skokomish Tribe, Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe, Port Gamble S'Klallam
Tribe, Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe, Suquamish Tribe, and Squaxin Island Tribe to elicit
information regarding potential culturally sensitive areas in the local area (Appendix A).
Literature review was followed by a visual reconnaissance field-visit to verify secondary
information and to observe contemporary project area conditions.
Pnotrccr AnsA. Blcrcnouxn
The potential distribution of cultural resources in the project area and the identification of
conditions that may have affected contemporaneous preservation of these resources are
determined, in part, by understanding the environmental changes that have occurred locally over
time. Archaeological evidence suggests human occupation in Puget Sound occurred following
the last glacial retreat at the end of the Pleistocene, approximately 14,000 - 12,000 years ago.
Subsequent environmental changes, including landforms, climate and vegetation significantly
influenced the spatial distribution of human activities due to the availability of resources, and the
suitability of certain landforms for occupation. The following sections outline the
environmental, cultural and historical setting of the project area.
Bnvironmental Setting
The geologic processes that shaped the current topography and soil composition within the
project began 25,AO0 years ago, during the Late Pleistocene Epoch. At this time, the southern
Cordilleran ice sheet made its slow advance southward from British Columbia, covering the
northwestern section of North America and extending into the Puget Lowlands (On and Orr
1996). The Vashon stade of the Fraser glaciation was the most recent glacial advance of the
Puget Lobe into western Washington, beginning approximately 17,00-18,000 years ago and
continuing until roughly 14,000 years ago (Kruckeberg 1991: l2). As the ice advanced south
from Canada, it encountered preexisting stream channels. The massive thrust of ice deepened
these channels to well below sea level. When the ice retreated and sea level rose, the glacial
troughs became fjords, creating Hood Canal, as well as Puget Sound and the Straight of Juan de
Fuca (Babcock and Carson 2000). Warming of the climate caused the retreat of the Puget Lobe,
leaving the regional landscape ice-free and suitable for human habitation by approximately
12,000 years ago (Kruckeberg l99l:22).
On the Hood Canal, valley glaciers occupying the Duckabush and Dosewallips river drainages
flowed towards the ocean and converged to form large piedmont lobes terminating at sea level.
As the ice in these drainages recessed, the associated alluvial fans left large deposits of
unconsolidated glacial till at sea level (Spicer 1986). The landform in which the project area is
located is a product of these glacial processes. The Black Point landform is composed entirely of
glacial soils, specifically Hoodsport very gravelly sandy loam, Grove very gravelly loam/very
Cultural Resource Assessmenf for the Proposed Pleasant Harbor
Maina and Golf Resoft, Jefferson County, Washington
Western Shore Heritage Services, lnc.
Page 4 of '18
n
n
gravelly sand and Triton very gravelly loam. Soils surrounding Pleasant Harbor are also
composed of Hoodsport very gravelly sandy loam and Triton very gravelly loam (NRCS Soil
Survey 2006).
Following glacial retreat, the newly deglaciated landscape of the project area supported a sparse
vegetal environment of subalpine grasses, sedges, lodgepole pine and red alder. By 12,000 BP,
gradual changes in the temperature and climate over time led to the replacement of the subalpine
vegetation with Douglas fir, western fir and western hemlock (Leopold etal.1982; Suttles 1990).
Beginning as early as 11,000 BP, prairies developed on the residual glacial outwash plains of the
Puget Lowlands and uplands became forested, with density increasing through the Holocene.
Prairies supported several grass, ferns, roots and berries varieties. Barring minor changes
(largely due to extensive logging in the l9h and 20s centuries), ecological landscapes have
remained relatively stable for the past 5000 years (Leopold et al. 1982).
Cultural Setting
Regional and local studies have provided an archaeological and historical synthesis of
approximately the last 10,000 years of human occupation in Puget Sound based on
archaeological materials, ethnohistoric texts, and historical documents (Nelson 1990).
Pre-contact Period
Archeologists have identified broad similarities in site and lithic assemblages dated to between
9000-5000 BP. Many of these early archaeological sites comprise the Olcott Phase in Western
Washington and are contemporaneous with similar Cascade Phase sites identified east of the
Cascade Mountains. The Olcott Phase is characterized by upland site occupation or atop upper
river terraces, lithic workshops, and temporary hunting camps that contain a wide variety of
flaked stone tools and laurel-leaf-shaped bifaces, suggestive of large game hunting, butchering
and processing (Morgan et al. 1999). Several Olcott sites have been documented and studied
throughout Western Washington and the Olympic Peninsula (e.g. Dancey 1968; Greengo and
Houston l97O1, Morgan et al. 1999; Samuels 1993).
Changes in subsistence economy and occupation patterns are generally reflected in
archaeological assemblages that date between 5000-3000 BP. During this time, an increasing
number of tools were manufactured by the grinding of stone, and more antler and bone were
utilized for tools. This middle pre-contact period is also indicated by the occurrence of smaller
triangular projectile points. Living floors, evidence of structural supports and hearths are more
common during this period in contrast to earlier cultural phases. In Puget Sound, evidence of
task-specific, year-round, broad-based activities, including salmon and clam processing,
woodworking, basket and tool manufacture, date from approximately 4200 BP (Larson and
Lewarch 1995).
Characteristic of the ethnographic pattern in Puget Sound, seasonal residence and logistical
mobility occurred from about 3000 BP. Organic materials, including basketry, wood and food
stuffs, are more likely to be preserved in sites of this late pre-contact period, both in submerged,
anaerobic sites and in sealed storage pits. Sites dating from this period represent specialized
Cultural Resource Assessment for the Proposed Pleasant Harbor
Maina and Golf Resort, Jefferson County, Washington
Western Shore Heritage Services, lnc.
Page 5 of 18
I
I
!
n
seasonal spring and summer fishing, shellfishing and root-gathering campsites and winter village
locations. Sites of this nature have been identified in the Puget Sound lowlands, typically
located adjacent to, or near, river or marine transportation routes. Fish weirs and other
permanent constructions are often associated with large occupation sites. Common artifact
assemblages consist of a range of hunting, fishing and food processing tools, bone and shell
implements and midden deposits. Similar economic and occupational trends persisted
throughout the Puget Sound region until the arrival of European explorers.
Ethnohistoric Period
Ethnohistoric economies of people in southern Puget Sound were structured upon a variable
rotation of seasonally available resources. Permanent villages provided a central hub from which
seasonal activities radiated. During the spring, summer and fall, temporary camps were utilized
while traveling to obtain resources, which included foodstuffs such as fish, shellfish, waterfowl,
deer, elk, roots and berries. Salmon is argued to be the single most important food source and
was caught in weirs, traps, nets and otherfashioned inrplements (Smith 1940). In the project
area, a variety of fish, including steelhead and cutthroat trout and four species of salmon, were
available for harvest from the Dosewallips and Duckabush Rivers. Plant gathering activities
included collection of roots, bulbs and reeds from available wetland, estuary and forest
environments. Foods collected at temporary/seasonal camps were often transported to villages
and prepared for later use.
The proposed Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf resort is located within the traditional territory of
the Twana people and the Skokomish Tribe (Elmendorf and Kroeber 1992). Twana territory
included the shores and drainages of Hood Canal, from Port Ludlow in the north to the
Skokomish River in the south (Elmendorf and Kroeber 1992). The Treaty of Point-No-Point in
1855 resulted in many Twana, Klallam and Chimakum people being compelled to move to the
3,840-acre Skokomish Reservation, located on the lower Skokomish River (Ruby and Brown
t992).
Nine Twana-speaking winter-village communities were documented within the Hood Canal area;
two of these were located at the mouth of the Dosewallips and Duckabush Rivers (Elmendorf
and Kroeber 1992). The ethnographic village of dux'yabu's, or'place of crooked-jaw salmon' is
indicated at the Duckabush River, th. mile southwest of the project area. This name refers to both
the river and to the winter village located there. During the salmon season, Twana and Klallam
visitors would camp nearby. A notable village leader in the early nineteenth century was a
warrior named hnahna'k*s b (Elmendorf and Kroeber 1992).
The second ethnographic village, duswa'ylups or "place of thieves, selfish people, people who'll
take it away from you" was located two miles north of the project area at the mouth of the
Dosewallips River. The name refers to the village, the river and to a mountain far inland (on the
left if traveling upstream) (Elmendorf and Kroeber 1992).
Culturally significant places are recorded in the project vicinity (see Appendix A; Elmendorf and
Kroeber 1992:41-42). The southeast tip of Black Point is named k"aca p, from which Quatsap
Cultural Resource Assessment for the Proposed Pleasant Harbor
Marina and Golf Resoft, Jefferson County, Washington
Western Shore Heritage Services, lnc.
Page 6 of 18
I
Point was derived. A small lake north of Quatsap Point, qaqaq le'w t, was the domain of
guardian spirits (swa'das) that took the form of reptiles. [t is said that when loggers drained the
lake long ago, the swa'das reptiles came rushing down the outlet. The loggers fled, except for
one who was laterfound dead on the spot and with contorted limbs, struck down by these spirits.
Lastly,thepointonthesouthsideof themouthof PleasantHarborisnamed q'cqc',or"between
two creeks".
Two ethnographic camping sites are also located within V+ mile of the project area. Immediately
north of Quatsap Point, on Old Orchard Beach, is k"ak*a'cqs, or "between two points". This
place is recorded as a seasonal camping site. At the mouth of Pleasant Harbor, on the north side,
iscc'o'ca't d,or"baracrossmouthofchannel". ThisnamereferstoPleasantHarbor,a
camping site located there, as well as a seasonal fishing station (Figure 3).
Figure 3. Native camp on the spit at the northern mouth of Pleasant Harbor, looking
southrvest. Photo taken by Asahel Curtis, before 1910. Washington State Historical
Soclety photo, courtesy of Bailey and Bailey 1997: 13.
Historic Period
The first exploration and mapping of Puget Sound is credited to Captain George Vancouver in
1792, under the auspices of the British Royal Navy. Vancouver surveyed much of the Sound,
but the exploration did not extend inland and failed to record the Columbia, Puyallup, Nisqually
and Fraser Rivers (Morgan 1979: 16). Decades later, in 1841, the Wilkes Expedition traveled to
chart what was then called Oregon Territory. The territory was jointly occupied by the United
States and Britain, but the British Hudson Bay Company held primary economic control within
the territory. In an attempt to increase American presence in the Oregon Territory, the Wilkes
Expedition produced the first detailed map and commercialized the potential for economic
Cultural Resource Assessment fo r the Proposed Pleasant Harbor
Marina and Golf Resort, Jefferson County, Washington
Western Shore Heritage Services, lnc.
Page 7 of 18
E
development. Four years after the arrival of the Wilkes party, more Americans began to settle in
the area.
Washington Territory was created in 1853 (Ficken 2002). The first white inhabitants began to
settle along the Hood Canal at the mouths of the Duckabush and Dosewallips Rivers about this
time. Although other Euro-Americans had visited the area, Elwell Brinnon is considered to be
the first non-Native American to settle there permanently. In the mid 1850s, Mr, Brinnon settled
on a claim at the mouth of the Duckabush River and married a Clallam woman named Kate,
sister of Chief Chetzemoka. In the I 860s, he sold his Duckabush claim to recent arrival Thomas
Pierce and moved to the mouth of the Dosewallips River (Hermanson 2001: 54) (Figure 4).
Pierce began hand-logging the Brinnon Flats in 1859 for the nearby Washington Mill Company
in Seabeck, across Hood Canal. John Clements, who came from Maine and settled in the area in
the 1870s, drove logs down the Dosewallips River and hauled them to the beach with oxen.
These and other early settlers would tow their harvested timber across the canal to the closest
mill, located at Seabeck or to the Pope and Talbot facility at Port Gamble (Bailey and Bailey
1997:95).
Euro-American settlement in the Brinnon area increased in the mid-1860s following the
endorsement of the Homestead Act of 1862, which offered 160 acres to new settlers who lived
on and improved their land for five years. After relocating to the Dosewallips, Brinnon
continued to acquire homestead rights of other relocating settlers through purchase, and by the
1870s owned nearly all the property in the lower Dosewallips Valley; however, he sold tracts of
his land to new-coming settlers (Balch 1947). ln the 1860s, records refer to the district from the
Duckabush River to the Dosewallips River as Quackaboor, sometimes spelled Quagaboor. In the
1870s and 1880s, the name Ducaboos was used exclusively.
Thomas and Mary Pierce established the first school of the area in 1881, primarily for their eight
children. The school was built at the head of Pleasant Harbor in order to make it available to
children living in the Duckabush as well as the Dosewallips area (Bailey and Bailey 1997).
Local settlers first applied for a post office in 1886, but the post office was not established until
May 1888. The names Quagaboor and Ducaboos were difficult to pronounce for some settlers,
so it was decided to call the post office Brinnon to honor Ewell Brinnon, who had assumed a
position of leadership in the small community (Bailey and Bailey 1997). After statehood in
1889, the two precincts at the river mouths were referred to as Brinnon and Duckabush. A post
office was also located for a short time at Pleasant Harbor, operated from l89l to I893 by John
Freeney. A telegraph office was operated at Pleasant Harbor in the 1890s by a Civil War veteran
named Dawson, who also resided in a house at the head of the harbor (Balch 1947; Bailey and
Bailey 1997:125).
Cultural Resource Assessrnent for the Proposed Pleasant Harbor
Maina and Golf Resoft, Jefferson County, Washington
Western Shore Heritage Services, lnc.
Page8of18
T
I
I
5
E
rb
l.
e7
/o
2t
+?
1
looId
/d
I
J?:
g /o
&et
Hal Ia
s
7
Blsck Polnt
t5
I Roblnson
2t
I
Day ton
t/\
Or ch {rd
r910-1925
Do ck
I
60orqo
Id
Figure 4. 1893 map of project area, indicating historic
settlement locations (Bailey and Bailey 1997:. 191).
Figure 5. l9l0-1926 map of project area, indicating historic
settlement locations and railroad structures (Bailey and Bailey
1997:198).
Like other settlements along Hood Canal, Brinnon was isolated and only served at first by small
sailing vessels, later replaced by steamboats. However, Brinnon was more isolated than most
communities, positioned forty miles south of Port Townsend and forty miles north of Shelton
(Jefferson County Historical Society 1966: 170). At first, Brinnon had no dock for boats to land
and to discharge passengers and freight. Passengers and freight were rowed ashore in a smaller
boat and livestock were thrown overboard to swim ashore, where they were recaptured (Bailey
and Bailey 1997:126). In the late 1800s, a dock was built, which extended from a road attached
to the general store and post office (Figure 5). This addition greatly improved Brinnon's ability
to transport freight and passengers. The railroad boom of the 1890s brought hope to Brinnon
area residents that a rail line would soon service their town. In anticipation, towns were platted
all along the canal. The town site of Arbaculla had been laid out in Pleasant Harbor. However,
the boom burst, followed by the depression of the late 1800s and many claims, including
Arbaculla, were deserted (Balch 1947; Bailey and Bailey 1997:3). For twenty-six years, the
residents of Brinnon and Duckabush struggled and petitioned for a road to be built between
Quilcene and Duckabush. Finally, in 1896, a road was completed that connected Duckabush and
Brinnon to Quilcene (Jefferson County Historical Society 1966: 174).
C u ltu ral Re so u rce Assessrnent fo r th e P ropose d Ple a san t H a rbo r
Maina and Golf Resod, Jefferson County, Washington
Westem Shore Heritage Services, lnc.
Page9of18
.tl'rt
q ,.,---]
sr
Jom
fo.d
/
/
Logging was the economic life-blood of the early settlers to the Brinnon area. Starting with hand
logging, evolving to ox teams, horse teams, then railroad and logging trucks, Brinnon has been
witness to all methods of moving logs from the dense forests of the Olympic Peninsula (Bailey
and Bailey 1997:15). Early homesteader Robert Whitney came to the Brinnon area in 1874 and
logged at Brinnon, Point Whitney (his namesake), Pleasant Harbor and Duckabush. Sometime
between 1874 and 1886, Whitney ran a logging camp located at Pleasant Harbor (Figure 6)
(Bailey and Bailey 199'71A2). At the turn of the century, James lzett built Brinnon's first
logging railroad on the south side of the Dosewallips drainage, terminating just north of the
Brinnon dock (Figure 5). In 1920, the Webb Logging Company built a railroad up the
Duckabush River drainage that terminated at Pleasant Harbor. Also located at Pleasant Harbor
was the Webb Logging Camp and a large log chute used to bring the timber down from the rail
line to the waters edge (Bailey and Bailey 1997:15,124).
Figure 6. Robert Whitney logging camp at Pleasant Harbor (Bailey and Bailey 1997:102)
One historic homestead (Thompson/Robinson) is indicated on historic maps within the proposed
Golf Resort development area (Figures 4 and 5). The property was originally surveyed in March
1896 and was the thirty-five acre homestead of settler Nels Thompson. It was sold in 1906 and
changed hands three times before being purchased in I940 by the son of Ephraim Robinson;
Ephraim and Sarah Robinson lived in the house in the early 1900s (Figure 7) (Bailey and Bailey
r9n).
Cultural Resource Assessmenf for the Proposed P/easant Harbor
Marina and Golf Resoft, Jefferson County, Washington
Western Shore Heritage Services, lnc.
Page 10 of 18
Figure 7. Thompson/Robinson homestead located on Black Point, near the mouth of the
Duckabush River. Ephraim Robinson pictured on porch, early 1900s (Bailey and Bailey 1997:
r 59).
Pnnvrous CwrunAL RESoURCES [xvnsucATroNs
Previously recorded archaeological sites, cultural resources surveys, historical properties on the
National Register of Historical Places (NRHP) and the Washington Heritage Register (WHR),
and historic structure inventory forms were reviewed on February 15, 2006. No cultural
resources surveys have been previously conducted in the project area or within the immediate
vicinity. Additionally, no previously recorded archaeological sites are located within one mile of
the project area. Nearby recorded historic sites include the remains of the Webb Logging
Railroad, located five miles up the Duckabush River drainage. Twenty-four site locations were
recorded and inventoried up the Duckabush River, near Little Hump (elevation 1600 feet),
including the remains of the Iogging railroad, trestles, skid sleds, spurs, camps and associated
dumps, and other miscellaneous logging debris (Western Heritage 1983). The recorded logging
camps contained the remains of tin cans, stove pipe, broken crockery and other historic debris.
The twenty-four sites recorded by this survey were inventoried and may be eligible for inclusion
on the NRHP. However, eligibility could not be determined without a more detailed assessment
of these remains (Whitlam 1984).
RBsulrs AND RECoMMENDATToNS
Based on the environmental, cultural and archaeological background of the project area, the
proposed development area for the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort is considered to have
high potential for archaeological deposits. Specifically, the headlands of Pleasant Harbor would
have provided a protected area for occupation, an excellent area for canoe launching and a
resource rich environment for the collection of shellfish, fish, waterfowl and berries. The
presence of the two known ethnographic village sites (north and south of project area) signifies
Cultural Resource Assessment for the Proposed Pleasant Harbor
Manna and Golf Resoft, Jefferson County,'Washington
Westem Shore Heritage Services, lnc.
Page 11 of18
substantial activity in the immediate area. Ethnographic accounts also state "during the salmon
season, Twana and Klallam visitors would camp nearby" (Elmendorf and Kroeber 1992:41).
Archaeological remains of unrecorded village activity areas, short-term camps, or other cultural
phenomena could be present at Pleasant Harbor within the area slated for development. In
addition, the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer of the Skokomish Indian Tribe has identified
numerous culturally significant locations, both within and in the vicinity of the project area (see
Appendix A).
Any pre-contact archaeological sites present on the southern end of Black Point could potentially
be smaller or more ephemeralthan any at Pleasant Harbor, primarily due to the nature of the
landform. The southern portion of Black Point is composed of glacial till and is an actively
eroding 60-80 ft. tall bluff. Access to this portion of the landform would be relatively difficult
and occupation of this area would be unlikely due to its proximity to higher probability
habitation locations, such as the mouth of the Duckabush River, Pleasant Harbor, Quatsap Point
and Old Orchard Beach. Any archaeological evidence previously located at the southern margin
of the landform would have eroded to the beach below due to the wave processes that are
actively undercutting the bluff. Substantial erosion was noted during reconnaissance, and is
confirmed with the comparison of present bluff condition to aerial shoreline photographs taken
in 1992, which indicate a more gradual slope of the southern Black Point bluff (Department of
Ecology 1992). Pre-contact utilization of Black Point would might have been transitory in
nature, and evidence may present itself in the form of bark-stripped trees, lithic scatters, caches
and gear storage sites.
The probability for historical cultural resources within the project area is considered to be high.
Locally compiled histories indicate several historical structures were/are present within or
adjacent to the proposed project boundaries. A portion of the Webb Logging Railroad and
associated log chute was present (Figure 5) in the area currently staged for development as retail
space and staff housing. The northeast margin of the proposed marina development is located
within or near the area inhabited by the Webb Logging Camp. Additionally, several structures,
including the first schoolhouse in the area, the Dawson home, post office and telegraph station,
were located at the head of Pleasant Harbor in the area slated for town home development. On
Black Point, the Thompson/Robinson homestead is indicated by local historic maps as existing
within the boundaries of the Golf Resort development. It is highly likely that remains of these
historic structures are present within the project areas.
Assessment of potential impacts begins with the identification of cultural resources and historic
properties within a project area; evaluation of the significance of such properties; and then
consideration of the scope of potential short-term and long-term impacts. Cultural resources may
be protected by law and must be considered for special management or mitigation of adverse
impacts if they are identified and evaluated as of particular significance, as defined by federal
and state guidelines. Under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), the Department of
Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) is the sole state agency with technical expertise
with regard to cultural resources. Under the National Historic Preservation Act, federal agencies
must consider cultural resources in all licensing, permitting, and funding decisions. Agencies
Cultural Resource Assessmenf for the Proposed Pleasant Harbor
Marina and Golf Resoft, Jefferson County, Washington
Westem Shore Heritage Services, Inc.
Page 12 of 18
must consult with DAHP to ensure that cultural resources are identified. Federal agencies must
obtain the forrnal opinion of DAHP as regards each site's significance and the potential impacts
of Agency actions upon the site. Under SEPA, DAHP provides formal opinions to local
governments and state agencies as regards a site's significance and the potential impacts of
proposed projects.
Resources are typically defined as significant or potentially significant if they are identified as of
special importance to an ethnic group or Indian tribe; or if the resource is considered to meet
certain eligibility criteria for local, state, or national historic registers, such as the National
Register of Historic Places (NRHP). NRHP assessment criteria were developed by the National
Park Service (NRHP 1991). Resources may qualify for NRHP listing if they:
A. Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of
our history; or
B. Are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or
C. Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or that
represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a
significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction;
or
D. Have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
According to the NRHP guidelines, the "essential physical features" of a property must be
intact for it to convey its significance, and the resource must retain its integrity, or "the ability
of a property to convey its significance." The seven aspects of integrity are:
. Locatiorz (the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the
historic event occurred);. Design (the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and
style of a property);
' Setting (the physical environment of a historic property);
' Materials (the physical elements that were cornbined or deposited during a particular
period of time and in a particular pattem or configuration to form a historic property);. Workmanship (the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people
during any given period of history or prehistory);. Feeling (a property's expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period
of time), and;
' Association (the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic
property).
Criteria used for assessment of potential eligibility for the Washington Heritage Register are
similar to NRHP criteria. Criteria to qualify include:
Age of at least 50 years. If newer, the resource should have documented exceptional
significance.
Cultural Resource Assessment for the Proposed Pleasant Harbor
Maina and Golf Resoft, Jefferson County, Washington
Western Shore Heritage Services, lnc.
Page 13 of 18
a
. The resource should have a high to medium level of integrity.. The resource should have documented historical significance at the local or state level
Potential eligibility for historic registers is related to a site or structure's integrity and historical
significance, as well as its age. Age alone is rarely sufficient to demonstrate potential eligibility;
integrity is an important aspect of eligibility. Integrity is defined by DAHP as the "ability of a
property to accurately represent the past through original design qualities, materials, landscape,
setting, etc.". For historic structures, integrity of design and materials may often be established
by consideration of the original construction details, subsequent changes, and the permanence of
any changes, alterations, or additions. Alterations to original structural features and the original
interior or exterior plan can all affect integrity. Qualities such as landscape and setting evocative
of the past must be considered to affect a property's integrity as well.
Impacts to cultural resources typically result from activities that occur in the vicinity of the
resource. Adverse impacts to buried archaeological deposits could be consequences of ground
disturbing, excavation, earthmoving, and construction activities. Adverse impacts to above-
ground resources, such as historic structures, canals, and dams can result from demolition, partial
removal of structural elements, the addition of new features, and changes in the surrounding
historical context of a resource. Traditional cultural properties are identified in consultation with
cultural specialists from affected Indian tribes, or other users, who could ascertain potential
adverse impacts. Definition of adverse impacts to cultural resources should be conducted in
consultation with DAHP.
The scope of adverse impacts is only properly defined in conjunction with adequate
identification of cultural resources and historic properties. Identification efforts should typically
include archival and historical research; review of project construction plans, drawings, and
available geotechnical information; and subsequent on-site examination and field survey of
project areas by an archaeologist and/or historian. Assessment of preferred alternative project
designs would be necessary in order to identify potential impacts to properties that might be
determined to be of historical significance.
Field examination could include pedestrian survey and visual reconnaissance; small-scale test
excayations or other subsurface investigations; and inventory and documentation of cultural and
historic properties. Field survey should be intended to account for possible minor changes in
project design. Field survey could incorporate identification strategies based on the occurrence
of archaeological materials within environments and on landforms near to the project area.
Identification efforts should include consultation and review by DAHP and tribal cultural
resources specialists.
In order to support adequate identification of potential resources, and subsequent definition of
impacts and potential mitigation, it is recommended that a complete archaeological and cultural
survey be completed following final project design and prior to any construction.
Cultural Resource Assessmenf for the Proposed Pleasant Harbor
Maina and Golf Resoft, Jefferson County, Washington
Western Shore Heritage Services, lnc.
Page 14 of 18
LrnnrurroNs oF Turs AssnssvrnNr
No cultural resources study can wholly eliminate the uncertainty regarding the potential for
prehistoric sites, historic properties or traditional cultural properties (TCPs) to exist within the
proposed project boundaries. The recommendations presented in this report are based on
professional opinions derived from our analysis and interpretation of available documents,
records, literature, and consideration of on-site landforms. Conclusions and recommendations
presented apply to the currently proposed project area and could potentially change if the
development scope is altered. The data, conclusions, and interpretations in this report should not
be construed as the analysis of subsurface conditions.
It should be recognized that this assessment was not intended to be a definitive investigation of
potential cultural resource concerns within the project area. Within the limitations of the scope,
schedule and budget, our analyses, conclusions and recommendations were prepared in
accordance with the generally accepted cultural resources management principles practiced in
this area. We make no other warranty, either expressed or implied. These conditions and
recommendations were based on our understanding of the project as described in this report and
the site conditions as observed at the time of our site visit.
This report was prepared by WSHS for the sole use by the Statesman Corporation. Our
conclusions and recommendations are intended exclusively for the purpose outlined herein and
the project indicated. The scope of services performed in execution of this investigation may not
be appropriate to satisfy the needs of other users, and any use or re-use of this document,
including findings, conclusions, and/or recommendations, is at the sole risk of said user. If there
is a substantial lapse of time between the submission of this report and the start of construction,
or if conditions have changed due to project redesign, or appear to be different from those
described in this report, WSHS should be notified so that we can review our report to determine
the applicability of the conclusions and recommendations considering the changed conditions.
Cultural Resource Assessmenf for the Proposed Pleasant Hahor
Marina and Golf Resort, Jefferson County, Washington
Western Shore Heritage Services, lnc.
Page 15 of 18
Rrmnpxcns Crrnn
Babcock, Scott and Bob Carson
2000 Hiking Washington's Geology. The Mountaineers, Seattle, WA
Bailey, Ida and Vern Bailey
1997 A Scrapbook History of Brtnnon Perry Publishing, Bremerton, WA.
Balch, T. B.
1947 History of Brinnon. ln Hood Canal Kitchen Kapers.
Dancey, W. S.
1968 Archaeology of Mossyrock Reservoir, Washingron. Unpublished Master's Thesis,
Department of Anthropology, University of Washington, Seattle.
Department of Ecology
2006 Shoreline Arial Photographs. Electronic document, www.apps.ecy.wa.gov/shorephotos,
accessed June 19, 2006..
Elmendorf, W. W. and A. L. Kroeber
1992 The Structure of Twana Culture, Wrth Comparative Notes on the Structure of Yurok
Culture. Washington State University Press, Pullman, WA.
Ficken, R.E.
2002 Washington Territory. WSU Press, Pullman.
Greengo, R. E. and R. Houston
1970 Excavations at the Marymoor Sile. Reports in Archaeology No.4. Department of
Anthropology, University of Washington, Seattle.
Hermanson, James
2001 Rural Jffirson County, Its Heritage and Maritime History. Published by author
Jefferson County Historical Society
1966 With Pride in Heritage: History of Jefferson County. Professional Publishing Printing,
Inc., Portland, OR.
Kruckeberg, A.R.
1991 The Natural History of Puget Sound County. University of Washington Press. Seattle.
Larson, L.L., and D.E. Lewarch (eds.)
1995 The Archaeology of West Point, Seattle, Washington:4,000 Years of Hunter-Fisher-
Gatherer Land Use in Southern Puget Soun"d. Larson Anthropological/Archaeological
Services, Gig Harbor, Washington.
Cultural Resource Assessment for the Proposed Pleasant Harbor
Maina and Golf Resoft, Jefferson County, Washington
Westem Shore Heritage Services, lnc.
Page 16 of 18
Leopold, E. B., R. J. Nickman, J. I. Hedges, and J. R. Ertel
1982 Pollen and Lignin Records of Late Quaternary Vegetation, Lake Washington. Science
218: 1305-1307.
Morgan, M.
1979 Puget's Sound: A Narrative of Early Tacoma and the Southern Sound. University of
Washington Press, Seattle.
Morgan, V., G. Hartmann, S. Axton, and C. Holstine
1999 Cultural Context. ln The SR-101 Sequim Bypass Archaeological Project: Mid- to lnte-
Holocene Occupations on the Northern Olympic Peninsula, Clallam County,
Washington, edited by V.E. Morgan, pp. 3.1-3.36. Report prepared for Washington
Department of Transportation. Eastern Washington University Reports in Archaeology
and History 100-108, Archaeology and Historical Services, Cheney.
Nelson, C.M.
1990 Prehistory of the Puget Sound Region. ln Handbook of North American Ind,ians, Volume
7: Northwest Coast, pp.48l-484. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
2006 Soil Survey of Jefferson County. Electronic document, www.soils.usda.gov/, accessed
June 19,2006.
Orr, Elizabeth and William N. Orr
1996 Geology of the Pacific Northwest. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Ruby, R. H., and J. A. Brown
1992 A Guide to the Indian Tribes of the Pacific Northwest. University of Oklahoma Press,
Norman and London.
Samuels, S. R. (editor)
1993 The Archaeology of Chester Morse Lake: Long-Term Human Utilization of the Foothills
in the Washington Cascade Range. Center for Northwest Anthropology Project Report
No. 21. Department of Anthropology, Washington State University, Pullman.
Smith, M. W.
l94o The Puyallup-Nisqualiy. Columbia University Press. New York.
Spicer, Richard C.
1986 Glaciers in the Olympic Mountains, Washington: Present Distribution and Recent
Variations. Master's Thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Washington,
Seattle.
Cultural Resource Assessmenf for the Proposed Pleasant Harbor
Marina and Golf Resort, Jefferson County, Washington
Western Shore Heritage Services, lnc.
Page 17 of 18
Suttles, W.
1990 Environment. In Han"dbook of North American Indians Volume 7, edited by Wayne
Suttles, pp. 16-29. Smithsonian Institution, Washington.
Western Heritage, lnc.
1983 Forest Service Cultural Resource Inventory of the Webb Logging Company Railroad.
Copy on file at the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic
Preservation, Olympia, WA.
Whitlam, Robert G.
1984 Letter ,o U.. R. Robert Burns, Olympic National Forest, Regarding Eligibility of the
Webb Logging Company Railroad. Copy on file at the Washington State Department of
Archaeology and Historic heservation, Olympia, WA.
Cultural Resource Assessmenf for the Proposed Pleasant Hahor
Maina and Golf Resort, Jefferson County, Washington
Weslern Shore Heritage Services, lnc.
Page 18 of 18
Appnxux A: Pnolncr ConRESPoNDENCE
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
T
I
I
I
I
T
T
I
T
I
I
T
T
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
t
T
T
T
I
June 23,2006
Kathy Duncan
Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe
1033 Old Blyn Highway
Sequim, WA 98382
Re: Cultural Resource Reconnaissance for the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort,
Jefferson County.
Dear Ms. Duncan,
Western Shore Heritage Services, lnc. (WSHS) has been retained by Statesman Corporation to
conduct a cultural resource reconnaissance for the proposed253 acre Pleasant Harbor Marina
and Golf Resort, located on the Hood Canal near the town of Brinnon, Washington (Figure 1).
The project entails 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. The 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.
At this time, WSHS is aware of two village sites located near the proposed development area.
Elmendorf and Kroeber (l99l2) indicate villages located both at the mouth of the Dosewallips
River (north of the project area) and at the mouth of the Duckabush River (south of the project
area). We are aware that not all information is contained within published sources.
Should the Tribe have additional information to support our reconnaissance, specifically in
regards to these known village locations, we would very much like to include it in our study.
Please contact me by phone (206.855.9020) or email (camillemather@gmail.com) should you
wish to provide any comments. I appreciate your assistance and look forward to hearing from
you.
Sincerely,
Camille A. Mather
Archaeologist
i- r.,'' l:,' i..i' ::i.' :
!
!i
*
t,
Marina
Golf Resort
Figure 2. Portion of Brinnon, 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 Twana Cultttre, With Comparative Notes on the Structure of Yurok Culture.
Washington State University Press, Pullman, WA.
i ''-. ! l tt:t l
. '- .r I I - :1-i,'ri.-;li ;';
I ':1:i -it
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
t
June 23,2006
Francis Charles
Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe
2851 Lower Elwha Road
Port Angeles, WA 98363
Re: Cultural Resource Reconnaissance for the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort,
Jefferson County.
Dear Ms. Charles,
Western Shore Heritage Services,Inc. (WSHS) has been retained by Statesman Corporation to
conduct a cultural resource reconnaissance for the proposed253 acre Pleasant Harbor Marina
and Golf Resort, located on the Hood Canal near the town of Brinnon, Washington (Figure I ).
The project entails 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. The 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
OIympia, 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.
At this time, WSHS is aware of two village sites located near the proposed development area.
Elmendorf and Kroeber (1992) indicate villages located both at the mouth of the Dosewallips
River (north of the project area) and at the mouth of the Duckabush River (south of the project
area). We are aware that notall information is contained within published sources.
Should the Tribe have additional information to support our reconnaissance, specifically in
regards to these known village locations, we would very much like to include it in our study.
Please contact me by phone (206.855.9020) or email (camillemather@gmail.com) should you
wish to provide any comments. I appreciate your assistance and look.forward to hearing from
you.
Sincerely,
i .,,,;'-'i' ; ':fr'-: r':i ;,,': r,trr,'i l .-.i'r-!il -
j. riii'.i',,iii
.j
'I
:-;.:.1 ."-, ;i,l:
Marina
Golf Resort
:-.
iij *
i:l:I
iir:
Camille A. Mather
Archaeologist
Figure 3. Portion of Brinnon, 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 Twana Culture, With Comparative Notes on the Structure of Yurok Culture
Washington State University Press, Pullman, WA.
i,,,."'. ,.,,,
i__-
L!
,,i
June 23,2006
Tom Strong
Skokomish Tribe
N. 80 Tribal Center Road
Skokomish, Washington 98584
Re: Cultural Resource Reconnaissance for the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort,
Jefferson County.
Dear Mr. Strong,
Western Shore Heritage Services, Inc. (WSHS) has been retained by Statesman Corporation to
conduct a cultural resource reconnaissance for the proposed253 acre Pleasant Harbor Marina
and Golf Resort, located on the Hood Canal near the town of Brinnon, Washington (Figure l).
The project entails 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. The 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 heservation (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.
At this time, WSHS is aware of two village sites Iocated near the proposed development area.
Elmendorf and Kroeber (1992) indicate villages located both at the mouth of the Dosewallips
River (north of the project area) and at the mouth of the Duckabush River (south of the project
area). We are aware that not all information is contained within published sources.
Should the Tribe have additional information to support our reconnaissance, specifically in
regards to these known village locations, we would very much like to include it in our study.
Please contact me by phone (206.855.9020) or email (camillemather@gmail.com) should you
wish to provide any comments. I appreciate your assistance and look forward to hearing from
you.
Sincerely,
, .r t. ir.. :
:r ,,
i -.r
v
't
i;: 1
,
, ,.-,,.,, .]
i:, i!:! , :i !l. ,;,,...,:'
Marina
Golf Resort
Camille A. Mather
Archaeologist
Figure 4. Portion of Brinnon, 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 Twana Culture, With Comparative Notes on the Structure of Yurok Culture
Washington State University Press, Pullman, WA.
'L .,,1:,: I !r'ti r' ::_i -'--":,t:., :-lir,.' ,'.,',,:; i ,. ,',,1 _ri:r; ;r:
.:.,:..
I
June 23, 2006
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 proposed253 acre Pleasant Harbor Marina
and Golf Resort, located on the Hood Canal near the town of Brinnon, Washington (Figure 1).
The project entails 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. The 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, subsuface testing will be recommended. Results of the
reconnaissance will be presented in a prepared technical report.
At this time, WSHS is aware of two village sites located near the proposed development area.
Elmendorf and Kroeber (1992) indicate villages located both at the mouth of the Dosewallips
River (north of the project area) and at the mouth of the Duckabush River (south of the project
area). We are aware that not all information is contained within published sources.
Should the Tribe have additional information to support our reconnaissance, specifically in
regards to these known village locations, we would very much like to include it in our study.
Please contact me by phone (206.855.9020) or email (camillemather@gmail.com) should you
wish to provide any comments. I appreciate your assistance and look forward to hearing from
you.
Sincerely,
'1,
ri
ft! * i,.!l;
I
t:- :.
Marina
Golf Resort
Camille A. Mather
Archaeologist
Figure 5. Portion of Brinnon, 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 Twarn Culture, With Comparative Notes on the Structure of Yurok Culture.
Washington State University Press, Pullman, WA.
Lr' .,-' :," . ' ri .'
a:
'1:;.:,',;.;.:1 i. ":....";..,.i. 1ii-ii-f i,:-r
1;
I
. ., r-i ".'-t .'i.'.
. 1i: :
, 1,.,,: ,; . , :
June 23, 2006
Rhonda Foster
Squaxin Island Tribe
SE l0 Squaxin Lane
shelton, wA 98584
Re: Cultural Resource Reconnaissance for the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort,
Jefferson County.
Dear Ms. Foster,
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 l).
The project entails 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. The 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 wilt be recommended. Results of the
reconnaissance will be presented in a prepared technical report.
At this time, WSHS is aware of two village sites located near the proposed development area.
Elmendorf and Kroeber (1992) indicate villages located both at the mouth of the Dosewallips
River (north of the project area) and at the mouth of the Duckabush River (south of the project
area). We are aware that not all information is contained within published sources.
Should the Tribe have additional information to support our reconnaissance, specifically in
regards to these known village locations, we would very much like to include it in our study.
PIease contact me by phone (206.855.9020) or email (camillemather@gmail.com) should you
wish to provide any comments. I appreciate your assistance and look forward to hearing from
you-
Sincerely,
t;i r ' :,i .. ,:,
Marina
Golf Resort
!:;'
! :.',":,' :,i-i',
ji:/i,,
':'i.:
ir ''i;t,]1.l: :
, ',' .i ' '1..: .:"., ,
.:ii,:l; :t,,) i; ii:,
Camille A. Mather
Archaeologist
Figure 6. Portion of Brinnon, 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 Twana Culture, With Comparative Notes on the Structure of Yurok Culture
Washington State University Press, Pullman, WA.
'a.: + .-'_t.:: .i ,.r tL,,'!l ?l
:......
June 23,2C0,6
Rob Purser
Suquamish Tribe
P.O. Box 498
Suquamish, WA 98392
Re: Cultural Resource Reconnaissance for the Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort,
Jefferson County.
Dear Mr. Purser,
Western Shore Heritage Services, Inc. (WSHS) has been retained by Statesman Corporation to
conduct a cultural resource reconnaissance for the proposed253 acre Pleasant Harbor Marina
and Golf Resort, located on the Hood Canal near the town of Brinnon, Washington (Figure 1).
The project entails two components: the Maritime Village and the Colf 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. The 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 heservation (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. Subsudace 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.
At this time, WSHS is aware of two village sites located near the proposed development area.
Elmendorf and Kroeber (1992) indicate villages located both at the mouth of the Dosewallips
River (north of the project area) and at the mouth of the Duckabush River (south of the project
area). We are aware that not all information is contained within published sources.
Should the Tribe have additional information to support our reconnaissance, specifically in
regards to these known village locations, we would very much like to include it in our study,
Please contact me by phone (206.855.9020) or email (camillemather@gmail.com) should you
wish to provide any comments. I appreciate your assistance and look forward to hearing from
you.
Sincerely,
Marina
Golf Resort
t:, -::": i:il--: .l , - ,".'i_, "l ! iiji : :.)
I'
1"
,i ,i. ,
r i.tl t.:_.:. . l
ir!i::i rii.t:1,ii': '*
Camille A. Mather
Archaeologist
Figure 7. Portion of Brinnon, 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 Twana Culture, With Comparative Notes on the Structure of Yurok Culture
Washington State University Press, Pullman, WA.
; ..!r 1../:_ ! li-,1"1' :::i
f,ii,
ilffiTffi
N. 80 Tribal Center Road
Skokomish Indian Tribe
Tribal Center (360) 4264232
FAX (360) 877-5943 Skokomish Nation, WA 98584
June 28, 2006
Dr. Camil[e Mather, Archaeologist
Western Shore Heritage Services. Inc.
8001 Day Road West. Suite B
Bainbridge Istand, WA 98 I I0
Re: Cultural Resource Reconnaissance for the Pleasant harbor Marina and Golf
Resort, Jefferson County
Dear Dr. Mather,
My name is Delbert Miller and I am the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer for the
Skokomish Tribe. My former assistant. Tom Strong, received a letter from you dated
June 23, 2006, regarding the proposed Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort. I
sincerely appreciate the efforts of Western Shore Heritage Services, and thc Statesman
Corporation, towards identifying cultural resources within and nearby the proposed
project area.
As you are aware, Elmendorf (1992) noted two major village sites within the vicinity of
the project area. [n addition to these sites, which were extensive villages comprised of
single large houses combined with numerous smaller houses extending along the
shoreline, there are a number of sites of trernendous spiritual, cultural, and historical
significance to the tuwaduq people (known today as the Skokomish Tribe) within the
propsed project area. These locations include an additional rnajor village site and
asscci:ted buricl grcunds within Pleasant Harbor itself; a guardian spirit locality, a
locality which continues to be used use by practitioners of taditional hrwaduq lifeways
and is extremely integral within tuwaduq (Skokomish) creation and sacred history;
sigrrificant fishing and shellfish gathering locations; and numerous seasonal camp sites.
There may well be additional signifioant sites within the proposed project area. The fact
that the vicinity has been inhabited by tuwaduq people for countless generations. and that
there were two major villages nearby, greatly increases the likelihood that ground
disrurbance will lead to the inadvertent discovery of human remains, and sensitive
culrural resources, within the project area. Development and construction within the
vicinity also has the potential to negatively impact the ability of the tuwaduq peopie to
freely continue spirirual practices associated with sites and landscapes within dre project
Because of the highly sigrificant nature of the cultural resources within the proposed
project area, the Skokomish Tribe is extremely interested in being fully involved in all
phases of this proposed proJect. I have taken the liberty of sending a copy of this letter to
Dr. Allyson Brooks of the Deparunent of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, and it is
rny intention to ask Dr. Brooks for her advice as to how to best ensure that the sensitive
culrural resources within the proposed pmject area be protected, and that any potential
impacts to these resources be mitigated in consultation and cooperation with the
Skokomish Tribe. I will be in contact again as soon as I have discussed the matter wi&
Dr. Brooks, and the Skokomisb Legal Department.
Again, I offer my sincerest apprreciation for your communications regarding this proposed
project.
Sincerely
Miller
Tribal Historic Preservation Oflicer, Skokomish Tribe
(360) 4264232, ext.234
dmiller@skokomish.or g
cc: Dr. Allyson Brooks, WA Departrnent of Archaeology and Historic Preservation
Brian Collins, Skokomish Tribal Anorney
REPORT
PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA AND
GoLF RESoRT
WETLAND DELINEATIoN
JEFFERSoN CoUNTY, WASHINGToN
JULY 20, 2006
FOR
STATESMAN CoRPoRATIoN
GroErucrrurrns 42;File ,\'o I 2677 0() I -t)-1
I
I
I
t
I
I
T
t
T
t
t
T
t
I
I
T
I
I
t
Wetland Delineation
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20,2006
Prepared for:
Statesman Corporation
7370 Sierra Morena Boulevard Southwest
Calgary, Alberta Canada T3H 4Hg
Attention: Garth Mann
Prepared by:
GeoEngineers, lnc.
1550 Woodridge Drive SE
Port Orchard, Washington 98366
(360) 76e-8400
GeoEngineers, lnc.
Ke A.B
Environmental Scientist
S. Wright,
Principal
KAB:WS\\':jl
ORCI I:\ I l\ I 267700 I t03\Finals\ I 267700 I 03R.doc
Disclaimcr: Any electronic lbnn, lacsinrile or hard copl' ol'the original document (ernail, te.rt, table, andior Iigure), il'povided, and an1'
atlachrnents are only a copl ol the original dtrcument. 'I'he original docu,nent is stored bl CeoEngineers. lnc. and rlill sene as the otllcial
docurnenl ofrecord.
Copy'rightC 2006 b1'GeoEnginecrs. lnc. All rights reserred.
T
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
t
T
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
TISLE or Corurrnrs
Paoe No.
INTRODUCTION..
PROJECT LOCATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION...-.
PROJECT SCOPE
GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTION
METHODS
WETLAND PARAMETERS
PAPER INVENTORY
FIELD DELINEATION
STREAM CLASSIFICATION..................
Hydrophytic Plants
Hydric Soils
Hydrology
WETLAND EVAIUATION.................
Wetland Category.....
Wetland Functional Assessment
RESULTS.....
PAPER INVENTORY
GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS
STREAMS
Stream Characlerization and Classifi cation
WETLANDS
Wetland Characterization .
Wetland Evaluation.......,...
CONCLUSIONS
LtMtTATtONS.......
REFERENCES
10
11
.....'.,.....,12
......_......12
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
J
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
6
6
6
7
7
I
9
File,\'o. I 2677-00 l -03
Jul.r'20. 2006
Paga i
GeoEnctxrens/
TaeLe or Gorurenrs (Cor,rrrruueo)
TABLE Paqe No.
................3
.............,..9
..............10
Table 1. Water Type Conversion Table
Table 2. Classificat on and Buffer Requirr-'ments of Streams
Table 3. Categorization and Area of Wetlands Delineated
FIGURES
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Figure 2. Aerial Photo
Figure 3. NationalWetland lnventory Map
Figure 4. Soils Survey Map
Figure 5. Approximate Locations of Streams A through E Based on Field Observations and GPS Data
APPENDlCES
APPENDIX A _ SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
APPENDIX B _ WETLAND DATA FORMS
APPENDIX C _ WETLAND RATING FORMS
APPENDIX D _ WETLAND SITE IUAP
File Xo. 12677-N)l-03
Jult 2t).2l)06
Page ii
GeoEncrxrrnsj/
l
Puasarur Hnneon MaRtrua RNo Golr Rrsonr
Weruano DelrNearoru
J errensoru CoutltY, WRsnlrucroru
Fon
SraresuaH Conponanoru
INTRODUCTION
GeoEngineers, Inc (GeoEngineers) was contracted by Stalesuran Corporation to perfonn a wetland
delineation for the proposed Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort located on Black Point south of
Brinnon, Washington. GeoEngineers evaluated the potential presence of wetlands and streams on the site
in general accordance with Title l8 of the Jefferson County Code Chapter 18.15.325.
PROJECT LOCATION
The proposed development is located on the Olympic Peninsula adjacent to Hood Canal in Sections I5
and 22 of Torvnship 25 North, Range 2 West of the Willamette Meridian in Jefferson County (Fi-eure I ).
The subject property, herein refered to as the site, consists of approxirrately 250 acres and is partially
developed. It is located in the Skokomish-Dosewallips Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA l6) and is
part of the East Olyrnpic and Hood Canal River Basins.
The proposed project site is located on Black Point, which extends east approximately 1 mile into Hood
Canal, and the southwestern shoreline of Pleasant Harbor, a shallow cove located north of Black Point.
The peninsula consists ofhills, ravines and deep kettles shaped by glacial processes. The surface geology
consists of Vashon-age lill, outrvash and ice-contact sedilnents underlain by pre-Vashon non-glacial
stratified deposits (Subsurface Group, Inc. draft Site Geology rnap 2006). A portion of the project area is
currently being used as an RV Resort (Pleasant Ilar-bor RV Resort) r,vith developed roads, RV pads with
u,ater and electricity and restroonrs located through out the developed area of the site. A comrnercial
tnarina and store are located along the Pleasant Harbor shoreline. State Route (SR) l0l transects the site.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Statesman Corporation intends to develop a rnixed-use resort developrnent on the subject propeny.
However, the exact location and details of the developrnent have not been defined at the tirne of this
work. Therefore, rve have not evaluated potential impacts of the proposed multi-use development.
PROJECT SCOPE
GeoEngineers verified and delineated wetlands on the proposed Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
site. GeoEngineers scientists revierved previous reports for background infonnation and to focus our
verification and delineation efforts- However, this delineation report was based upon an independent
evaluation of the soils, ve-eetation, and hydrology of the wetland areas, as well as of the functions of the
'*'etland areas,
GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTION
The site is bordered to the south by Hood Canal. The eastern edge of the site is bordered by forested land
rvith few single-family residences. The norther:r poftion is bordered by light residential housing and rnost
of the u,estern edge is bordered by SR l0l (Figure 2). The project area is cornposed of four sections,
Sections l-4 (Figure l). Section l, the largest ofthe sections, is 220.1 +/- acres located on the southu,est
portion of Black Point, east of SR 101 and south of Black Point Road. Section 2 is a narrorv strip of land
Fi le .\' o. I 2 67 7 -00 l -0-1
Jult 2t).2006
Page I GeoENcrxrens/
I
(7.8 +l- acres) that runs along the east to southeastern side of SR l0l and imrnediately north of Black
Point lload. Section 3 encompasses the commercial marina and associated parking area (9.8 +i- acres)
south of SR 101 and Section 4 is the triangular shaped 11.9 +l- acres located to the north of Section 3
north of SR l0l .
METHODS
PnpeR lNventony
The Washington State Department of Elcology (Ecology) (1989) recommends a thorough review of
existing infomation regarding a particular site prior to conducting the fieldwork. GeoEngineers scientists
conducted a search for pertinent and applicable data and maps. We reviewed the United States
Geological Surrey map, topographic maps, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
National Wetlands lnventory (NWI) rnaps fiom 1988, and Soil Swtey of Jefferson Counfi;, IVoshingtort
(United States Departrnent of Agriculture IUSDA]) Natural Resources Conservation Service, fbnrrerly the
Soil Conseryation Service 1975 and USDA 2001), the Washington Departrnent of Fish and Wildlife
(WDFW) Priority Habitat and Species (PtlS) maps and database (WDFW 2006) and the Washington
Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Forest Practices Application Review Systern (FPARS) rnaps of
known or suspected Stream Types for Jeff'erson County.
Any listed rvetland, strearn or potential area of interest was labeled alphabetically according to order of
investigation.
Frelo Deurureloru
GeoEngineers scientists visited the site on April 26 and 2'7 ,2A06 to conduct field investigations and again
on June 19, 2006 for lbllow-up investigation. The weather was parlly cloudy to sunny each visit and the
temperature ranged from 60 to 70oF in the mid 60"F. Our wetland detemination methods fbllowed the
guidelines of the lVashington State Il/etlands Itlentificution oncl Delineettion Morurul (Ecology 1997) and
tlre U.S. Arnty Cor"ps of Engineers lVetland Delitteqtiotr Manual(Environmental Laboratory 1987).
GeoEngineers investigated the site and collected data at eight sample plots within potential wetlands and
surounding upland areas. We recorded data on vegetation, soil and hydrology to determine the presence
or absence of these tlu'ee wetland indicators and identify the wetland boundary. Wetland boundary l)ags
r'vere placed along the edge of identified rvetlands and along the ordinary high rvater rnark (OHWM) on
both sides of streams for future reference,. Global Positioning System (GPS) coordinates u,ere acquired
for streams and culverts to provide an approximate location. At the tirne of acquisition, the GPS unit
displayed an accuracy of plus or minus 20 feet in all directions.
A thorough field review of the project site and the sun'ounding hydrology rvas performed to identify
stream courses, runolT channels and wetland hydrology. Any evidence of the presence of positive
wetland indicators was fufiher investigated in order to complete the strearn and wetland delineation.
GeoEngineers biologists traversed the sutrject property. Upon discovery of a wetland indicator, the Iield
investigator examined the area lbr presence of all three wetland parameters: hydrophytic plant species,
hydric soils and positive hydrology. Based uporr positive confinnation of the three '"vetland parameters, a
sample plot rvas established. When changes \.vere noted in plant community cornposition, hydrology or
topographic position, additional sarnple p.lots rvere established to characterize the site. Upland plots were
established to characterize the upland conditions. In areas where a clear topographic break $/as not a
direct indicator of the wetland boundary, upland plots u,ere established to dctermine the location of the
u,etland boundary. Additional shovel probes were conducted in areas lvhere rvetland hydrology was no[
obvious; to determine lhe presence of hydric soil and/or indicators of rvetland hydrology. All sarnple plot
File .\'o. I 2677-00 I -03
,lul.r. l0. 20()b
Page 2 GroExerHrena/
I
locations u,ere flagged and numbered. The rvetland boundary was flagged using the above rnethods and
flag points were sequentially numbered. Strearn OIIWM rvas flagged with sequentially nurnbered oran-qe
flags.
Site photos for each sample plot are provided in Appendix A and detailed infotmation provided on data
forms in Appendices B and C. GeoEngineers prepared a sketch of the wetland boundary and subrnitted
the figure to W & H Pacific, a licensed professional land surveyor, who prepared a wetland site rnap
(Appendix D). A stream and culvert site map vi,as created from GPS coordinates and provided for -eeneral
reference as Figure 5. A general description of our findings is provided in the results section below.
SrReeu Classtncaroru
Jefferson County currently requir-es the DNR Interim Water Typing System established in Washington
Adrninistrative Code (WAC) Section 222-16-030 (the current typing systern) to classify streams. The
Jet'ferson County Department of Cornrnunity Development is currently reviewing an application,
subrnitted on May 11 ,2006, that proposes an amendment to this typing system so that streams would be
classified using the DNR Permanent Water Typing System established in WAC 222-16-030 and 222-16-
031 (the proposed water typing system), which was adopted stateu,ide on March 1,2006. DNR FPARS
maps of known or suspected Stream Types are available on the DNR website, but are typed by the
Jefferson County proposed rvater typing system. GeoEngineers categorized all streams according to the
Jefferson County current rvater typing system (the Interim Water Typing Systern, WAC 222-16-030), but
will include the proposed water typing and associated buffers to rernain consistent rvith statervide maps
indicating typing systems and for potential future permitting cornpliance if the proposed amendment is
adopted by Jelferson County. Below is a conversion table indicating the functionally equivalent \,ater
types betrveen the trvo typing systems. Buffer requirernents will remain the same for equivalent water
types.
Table 1. Water Type Conversion Table
Current Water Typing Proposed Water Typing
Type 1 Water Type "S"
f ype 2 and 3 Water
Type 4 Water
Type "F"
Type "Np"
Type 5 Water Type "Ns"
The cument interim water typing system categories are briefly described as following:
. Type 1: those strearns inventoried as "shorelines of the state".
. Type 2: those segments of strearns not classified as Type I with high fish, wildlife, or human use.
. Type 3: those segments of streams not classified as Type I or 2 with moderate to slight fish,
wildlife and human use and a bankfull width of 2 feet or greater.
. Type 4: those segments of streams within bankfull width of defined channels that are perennial
non-fi sh habitat streams.
. Type 5: all segrnents of natural w'aters u,ithin bankfull rryidth of defined channels that are not
Types I ,2,3 or 4, seasonal, non-fish habitat strean-ls.
File .\'o. I 2677-00l-t)3
Jnlr 2l). 2006
Page 3 GeoExeweeaslQ
The classification of strearns was based upon an evaluation of strearn structures and fbnction.
Specifically, the charactcristics identified for each stream included:
e Determination of flow regime (seasonal or perennial flow),
. Channel width at ordinary high water discharge,
. Streanl gradient, and
r Potential use as fish habitat.
Weruruo PanauerrRs
Wetlands are idcntified by the clear presence of three physical parameters. These are hydrophytic plant
species, hydric soils, and positive hydrology.
Hydrophytic Plants
Hydrophytic plants are species that generally prefer areas where the liequency and duration of inundation
or soil saturation produce permarrently rrr periodically saturated soils sufficient to exefi a controlling
influence on the plant species prcsent (Iicology 1997). The relative strength of an individual species'
preference for wetness detemines the indicator status for that species. The USFWS has determined
wetland plant indicator status; a list of the infomation for the Pacific Norlhwest Region is provided in
Reed 1988 and Reed et al. 1993. To meet the wetland criteria established in the l'Vaslrirtgton State
ll/etluntls ltlentificotion ond Delinetttion .Monuol (Ecology 1997) and the 1987 Federal Manuol, species
that are dominant must be noted for each stratum present (e.g., tree, shlub, herb) then the hydrophyic
dorninance of all vegetation is calculated based on individual indicator status of the dominant species.
When more than 50 percent of the dorrinant species in each sample have a wetland indicator status of
obligate rvet (OBL), facultative wet (FACW), or facultative (FAC), the sarnple plot meets the hydrophytic
vegetation criterion. Plant nomenclature generally follou,s The Flot'ct of the Pacific Northv,est (Hitchcock
and Cronquist l973).
Hydric Soils
Hydric soils are soils that are saturated or inundated long enough during the growing season to develop
anaerobic conditions in the upper layer (2001). Prolonged anaerobic soil conditions lead to a cherrically
reducing environrnent. The chemical reduction of some soil cornponents (e.g., iron and manganese
oxides) leads to the development of soil colors and other physical characteristics that are usually
indicative of hydric soils (Ecology 1997). Hydric soils can be identified by the use of a color comparison
chart. A commcrcial color chart of soils is produced by Kolhnorgen (1988) and commonly used by
wetland scientists. Soil color is typically identified by hue, chrorna and value. Hue describes the soil
based on its relation to the spectral colors (red, yellow, green, blue, purple or a mixture of lhese colors);
chrorna indicates the strength or purity of the color; and value describes the degree of lightness. These
terms reflect the variable amount of rnoisture, organics and overall composition of any given soil sample
providing critical inforrnation on soil wetness and degree of saturation and inundation (Kent 1994). In
general, the lor,ver the number tbr chroma and value, the more likely the soil sarnple is to be hydric. The
color chart is also used to cornpare mapped soil types in the Soil Sun'ey with field observations.
Hydrology
Hydrology is defined as the presence of watcr. lhc terrr "wetland hydrology" encompasses all
hydrologic characteristics of arcas that are periodically inundated or have soils saturated to thc surface at
File,\'o. I 2677-00 l -0-l
Jul.t 20. 2006
Page 4 GroENcrxrens/
some tilne during the grorving season. Numerous factors (e.g., precipitation, topography, soil
permeability, plant cover and hurnan disturbance) influence the hydrology of an area (Ecology 1997).
Hydrology is often the least exact of the paran.reters, and indicators of u,etland hydrology arr sometimes
difficult to find in the field. This is especially prevalent wlren rvetlands are delineated in the surnmer
rnonths rvhen springs or seeps may not be apparent. Under these conditions, indicators of hydrology are
used as positive identification. Indicators such as drainage pattems, sediment deposits, dried algae and
u,ater stained leaves or bark are examples of hydrology. The presence of these (or other) indicators,
hydric soils and hydrophytic vegetation confinn the presence of a wetland.
Weruruo Evatultrotr
Several standard methods for evaluating wetlands functions and values rvere used in conjunction with
professional experience to provide qualitative and quantitative characterization of the wetlands on site.
Additionally, rnany reference rnaterials were used to support these evaluations. These are cited where
appropriate throughout the text to justify and explain the results ofthese investigations.
Wetland Category
Ecology developed a four-tiered rating system presented in IYoshington Stete lf/etlaruls Rating S),stent.for'
IVestern lVushington, (Ecology 1993) that uses landscape setting, wetland and vegetation classes, physical
characteristics, and other value-based and function-based criteria to place wetlands into one of four
categories. This system svas developed to differentiate betrveen wetlands based on their sensitivity to
disturbance, rarity and the functions they provide. The rating categories that are used as management
standards were adopted by Jefferson County for the purpose of assigning buffer ividths and lirnitations on
activities that may impact the rvetlands. The rating system guidebook contains data forms to be
completed from infonnation gathered both in the office and in the field. These result in ,,vetlands being
rated as Category I, II, II or IV.
Jefferson County currently requires the IVashington State IVetlcrnds Rating S),stem .for ll/estent
IVashington 2nd Eclition, 1993, (Ecology 1993) to categorize wellands. The Jefferson County
Departrnent of Community Development is cunently reviewing an application, submitted on May 17,
2006, that proposes an arnendrnent to this rating system so that wetlands rvould be categorized using the
2004 lltushington Stote lletlands Roting Sltstem.for lVestern IVoshington Ecologt, Publiccttion #04-06-025
or as antended, (Hruby 2004). If this amendrnent is adopted additional fieldrvork and revisions to the
"wetland categories" deterrnined for the r,t'etlands described in this report rnay be necessary.
Wetl an d F u n ctio n a I Assessmenf
GeoEngineers scientists used Cooke Scientif,rc Services Serri-quantitative Assessment Methodology
(SAM) to determine horv 'uvell a wetland and its buffers function. This technique is designed to examine
the presence of discrete functions and to determine how well a discrete r.vetland performs a particular
function. The l'unctional attributes analyzed are:
o Flood/StormwaterControl,
. Erosion/ShorelineProtection,
r Natural Biological Support,
. Specific Habitat Functions,
o Base Flou,/Groundwater Support,
o Water QLrality Improvement, and
I:ile,\'o. I 2677-00 I -03
Julr 20. 2006
Puge 5 GroENcrxrtnsl
n
a General Habitat Functions.
Each function is divided into three groups based on obsened characteristics that, when totaled, deternine
thc relative quality of the function being exarnined. These groups are as follorvs: Group I (higher quality
characteristics), Group 2 (mediurn quality characteristics), and Group 3 (lor,ver quality characteristics).
'['he surn of these characteristics is then expressed as a percentage of rnaxilnum possible points and an
overall rating of High, Medium or Low applied to the function.
The purpose of SAM is to assist wetland professionals in identifying and quantifying a potential wetland
function in an individual u,ctland. The tenn "potential'' is important, because it is usually not possible to
verily the presence ofa function from a single sitc visit. A detennination ofthe potential for a function to
occur, based on the presence ofphysical characteristics that are conducive to that function, is all that can
be determined in a quick evaluation. For example, we can tell that a site has good amphibian habitat, but
it is not always possible, at every scason? to tell whether amphibians are using that habitat. SAM is based
on a systern developed by Reppert (Reppert et al. 1979) that has been modified fbr greater applicability to
Northwest wetland ecosystems.
RESULTS
Papen lruvrruroRv
NWI Map's identifies four wetlands within the study area (Figure 3). The subject rvetlands are identified
as a Palustrine, Scrub-Shrub (Covvardin et ol. 1979). However, NWI rnaps are produced from
interpretation of aerial photographs and topographic rnaps and are limited to the time they are produced.
Recent changes in the nature of the vegetation and hydrology, as well as recent developn.rent activities in
the surrounding area, are not reflected in the NWI map and rnust be considered when evaluating this
property. The Soil Survey of Jefferson County (USDA 1975 and 2001) identifies Hoodsport-Grove very
gravelly sandy fbarns with 0 to 30 percent slopes as the predorninant soil type with lesser amounts of
Hoodsport very gravelly sandy loam rvith 0 to l5 percent slopes and Swantown gravelly loam, 0 to 8
percent slopes (Figure 4). The Floodsport series is moderately well drained soils that have a very slowly
permeable cemented layer at a depth o[ 20 to 36 inches. This soil and its associated soils are not
described on the hydric soils list as having hydric properties (USDA 1975 and 2001). 'l'he Swantown
series consists of somewhat poorly drained gravelly soils that have a very slou,ly permeable cemented
layer at a depth of l8 to 24 inches. The Srvantown series is not listed as having hydric properties,
however, Belfast soil, included as an associated soiltype, is listed a hydric soil(USDA 1975 and 2001).
GrrueRal Srrr CoruornoNs
The site is composed of fbur sections (Sections l-4) consistin-e of approxirnately 250 acres (Figure l)-
Shorelines are associated u,ith this property and are discussed in GeoEn-eineers report "Pleosctnl Httrbor
Shoreline Churacterizotion Repofi." The vegetation structure on the proposed development site is
prirnarily cornprised of mature coniferous forest rvith a healthy understory of shrubs. GeoEngineers
report titled, "Pleuscut! Harbor WriWlife llubitctt Assessment" details the ve-qetation and habitat features
identified onsite. Monthly precipitation before sitc visits was average for the area.
'l'hroughout Section I are several deep kettle-hole depressions created from glaciers. Five areas, initially
labeled A through E, rverc investigated for rvetland occurrence. l'he results of the investigation indicated
that there are thrce lvetlands, herein referred to as Wetlands B, C and D, and two non-u,etland areas,
herein relerred to as Areas A and E. ,A.reas A and E rvere rnapped on the NWI rnaps as lvetlands;
however, rvetland indicators were not obsen,ed in this area at the tirne of the site investigation. NWI
Filc .\'o. 12677-0t) I-03
July 10. 2006
Page 6 GtoExew*nsiQ
rnaps are produced from interpretation of aerial photographs and topographic maps. While both areas had
topographic characteristics of a r,vetland (depressions), the three parameters of a wetland (hydrology,
hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soils) were absent. Instead, Area A had no source of rvetland
hydrology or hydric soils and was dominated by westem sword fern (Poly5risllrrrt nnmittun), bracken fem
(Ptericlium aquilirutnt), vine rnaple (Acet' cit'cittcttunr), trailing blackberry (Rubus ut'sinus), cut leaf
blackberry (Rubus laciniotus) and deer fe:rr:, (Blechnum spicctnt). Area E was mostly comprised of lady
fen (Athyrium .filix-fentira), rvestern sword ferr, deer fern, westem red cedar (Thuja pliccrta), red
huckleberry (l/accinium ponifolium) evergreen huckleberry (Voccinium otcttton) westem hernlock
(Turga lteterophvllct) r'ed elderberry (Sombucus rocemoso) and red alder (Alnus nbrct) with no source of
rvetland hydrology or hydric soils.
All three wetland pararneters (hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils and hydrology) rvere identified rvithin
Wetland B, C and D during the field investigation. Appendix D shows the wetland boundaries and the
soil and vegetation sample locations, Areas A and E did not exhibit rvetland parameters and are indicated
in Figure 5 as sarnple locations only. Conditions and ecological functions associated with each wetland
are described in greater detail below.
Field reconnaissance of Sections 2 through 4 resulted in no additional rvetlands, but fir,e unnamed
drainages were identified rvithin and adjacent to the investigated sections. The streams appear to receive
hydrology from groundwater seeps and surface run-off. Photographs of these streams can be found in
Appendix A. Additional culverts rvere located within these sections that facilitats stormwater runoff from
impervious surfaces associated with SR 101 but are not associated rvith a regulated drainage. GPS
coordinates taken during the site visit were used to create a stream and culvert site map located in Figure
5. Culvert locations were included for future project planning purposes and will not be specifically
addressed.
SrReanlts
Jefferson County classifies strearns according to the WAC 222-16-031 interim water typing system. The
Washington Departrnent of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) PHS maps and database (WDFW 2006), the
WDFW online SalmonScape interactive map viewer and database system (SalmonScape 2000) and DNR
FPARS rvas referenced for infonnation on anadromous and resident fish presence. The PHS database and
SalmonScape rrap did not list any priority fish resources specifically for streams located on the ploject
site. FPARS lists Stream A as a fish bearing Type F strealr for a short distance and then transitions it to a
non-fish bearing Type Ns. A discussion of fish species is included in GeoEngineers report "Pleasant
Harbor Wildlife Habitat Assessment" and will only be included here for stream classification and
characterization purposes. Table 2 indicates the current and proposed classification and associated buffer
requirements for each stream- Figure 5 is the map identifying the general location of streanrs on the site.
Stream Characterization and Classification
Stream A is a seasonal stleam with a bankfull width greater than 2 feet wide that does not support fish use
or habitat (Appendix A; Photographs I and 2). It florvs east under SR l0l south of Madrona Ridge Road,
through Section 2 rvhere it flows through a culverl under an unnamed gravel road that provides access to
the WDFW boat ramp, and discharges through a hung culr.eLt at the southwestem end of Pleasant Harbor.
During the April site visit, water was not flowing through lhe lou,er section of strearn A at the lowermost
culvert to Pleasant Harbor. Standing water was observed rvithin the lou,er section of the stream and was
infiltrating rvith no surface connection to the Harbor. During the June site visit, the entire strealn bed was
d.y. Watennarks and drift lines suggests that at cerlain times of tl.re year this stream has a surface
connection directly into the harbor. Access to potential fish habitat is blocked by a natural gradient break
l' ile .\o. I 2677-00 l-01
Jul.t 20. 2006
Page 7 GeoExeweeaslQ
of greater than 20 perccnt as well as a hung culvert located outside of the property boundary that has
created an irnpassable barrier to fish passage. In addition, an irnpassable escarpment (approximately 20
percent slope) bet,iveen the unnarned gravel road and SR 101 also impedes fish passage and coincides
r.r,ith the Type F to Type N transitioning on the FPARS database. Stream A is classified as a Type 5
strean.r according to Jefl'erson County \MAC 222-16-03 I interim water typing system. This typing
requires a 50-lbot buffer.
Stlearn B is a seasonal stream with a bankfull width of less than 2 feet wide throughout most of its
occumence on the property and does not support fish use or habitat. It flou,s east under SR 101 south of
Madrona Ridge Road and north of Stream A. Tlre strearn flows llu'ough Section 2 under a private
driveu,ay whelc it is directed thtough a hung culvert. Before discharging at tlre southrvestem end of
Pleasant Harbor, the stream flows along a ditch next to the north edge of the unnamed gravel road during
periods of high rvater flow. During the April site visit, the strcam seeped into the ground above the
discharge point and did not have a surface connection to the Harbor. During the June site visit, the strearn
was dry but the presence of sediment deposits and drift lincs indicated the stream bed is less than 1-foot
rvide. Strearn B (Appendix A; Photographs 3 and 4) is classified as a Type 5 stream according to
Jefferson County W AC 222-16-031 interim rvater typing system. This typing requires a 50-foot buffer.
Stream C is a seasonal stream with a bankfull width less than 2 f'eet wide throughout the occurrence on
the property and does not support fish use or habitat. It flows in a soutlreast direction from the northeast
end of Section 4 under SR l0l through a hung culverl into a nearly vertical drop to the northem end of
Section 3, through another hung culvert and verlical drop under the marina parking area, and discharges
into Pleasant Harbor. During the April site visit, surface florv was observed but less than l-foot rvide
within the channel. Dudrrg the June site visit the strearn u,as dry. Stream C (Appendix A; Photographs 5
and 6) is classified as a Type 5 strearn according to JelTerson County WAC 222-16-03 I interim water
typing systcm. This typing requires a 50-tbot buffer.
Strearn D is a seasonal stream rvith a bankfull rvidth less lhan 2leet u,ide throughout the property and
does not support fish use or habitat. It flows in a southeast direction under SR 101 through a hung culvert
and nearly vertical drop to the northcrl end of Section 3, through another hung culvert just norlh of the
marina parking area, and discharges into Pleasant Harbor. During the June site visit the stream was dry,
but bankfull width and water malks indicated that the average stream flow is less than 2 feet rvide. Stream
D (Appendix A; Photo-eraph 7) is classified as a Type 5 stream according to Jefferson County WAC 222-
l6-03 I interim water typing systern. This typing requires a 50-foot buffer.
Stream E is a seasonal stream with a bankfull width less than 2 feet rvide throughout it's occurrence on
the property and does not supporl fish use or habitat. lt florvs in a southeast direction under SR 101
through a hung cuh,ert continues through the northem end of Section 3 and discharges into Pleasant
Harbor. During the June site visit the stream was dry but bankfull width and water marks indicated that
the average stream rvidth is less than 2 feet rvide. Stream D (Appendix A; Photograph 8) is classified as a
Type 5 strearn according to Jefferson County WAC 222-16-03 I interim water typing system. This typing
requires a 50-foot buffer.
I:ile,\'o. I 267740 I -t)-l
.lub 20. 2006
Page I GeoExcrxrrns/
Stream Surface Flow
Current
Classification
Proposed
Classification
Buffer
Requirements
(feet)
A
B
c
D
E
Seasonal
Seasonal
Seasonal
9"j'91?l
Seasonal
Type 5
Type 5
Type 5
Type 5
Type 5
Type Ns
Type Ns
Type Ns
TYPCI:
Type Ns
50
50
50
50
50
Table 2. Classification and Buffer Requirements of Streams
Weruruos
GeoEngineers confirmed and delineated three wetlands (Wetlands B, C and D) located within Section 1
by collecting eight sample plots throughout the property. Five of the sample plots exhibited upland
characteristics typical of the Hoodsporl soil series. Two of these upland plots were in Areas A and E that
were rnapped as rvetlands on the NWI map (Figure 3) but were not found to have rvetland characteristics
(Appendix A; Photographs 9-ll and l7-l8). The upper layers'nere typically a reddish brorvn very
gravelly sandy loam. Three sarnple plots rnet wetland criteria for vegetation, hydrology and soils with
hydric characteristics such as low chroma colors and oxidized root channels. The data forrns for all
sample plots are found in Appendix B. The wetland exhibit and topographic survey (Appendix D) shows
the location of the sample plots and the extenl of the flagged wetland boundaries. The wetlands appear to
be fed prirnarily by surface runoff from surrounding landscape. Wetland D continues off site to the east
and is part of a larger wetland.
Wetl a n d Ch a racterizatio n
Wetland B, largest of the three u,etlands, is a 20,693 square feet (0.475 acres) Palustrine scrub-sluub
kettle-hole wetland located in the middle to north section of Area I immediately to the east of the main
gravel road leading south from the RV park infonnation center (Appendix A; Photographs l2 and l3).
This site corresponds with the location of a vvetland on the NWI map. Vegetation, on the steep slopes of
the kettle-hole, is dominated by upland species; Douglas fir (Pseutlotsuga menziesii), rvestern hemlock,
u,esterrr su,ord fem, salal (Guulthetia sltallon), red hucklebeny and evergreen huckleberry. While no
standing water was visible at the time of the field visit, hydrological indicators (lvater marks, drift lines,
sedirnent deposits, and rvater-stained leaves) rvere evident in the bottom of the depression indicating that
the area is seasonally flooded by lvater runoff frorn the sun'ounding surface. A clear transition in the
vegetation from upland species to hydrophytic vegetation coincides with the hydrologic indicators. False
lily-of-the-valley (Maiunthemunr dilatotunt), slough sedge (Care.t obnuptct), hardhack (Spiruett douglusii)
and red alder comprise the dominant vegetation at the bottom of the kettle-hole. The soils in the wetland
had oxidized root channels in the upper 6 to 8 inches. The area in which all three wetland parameters are
expressed .*'as delineated.
Wetland C is a palustrine scrub-shrub pond located in the rniddle eastelx half of Area I irnmediately
southeast of Wetland B (Appendix A; Photograph 1a). This site does not con'espond to any wetland
listed on the NWI map, but because wetland paramelers are present, it rvas delineated as Wetland C. The
west side of the pond supports Pacific ninebark (Pl1,sos11rrt,s cupitotu-s) that has developed adventitious
roots indicating pennanent n ater deptlr and duration. The north and east sides are abundant rvith dorvned
trees (less than 6-inch diameter) just vvithin the open rvater. Vegetation found in the shrub layer includes
hardhack, slough sedge and Pacific ninebark. The pond edges are sloped and support dense overhanging
File,\'o. I 2677-0t) I -03
Jul.r 20. 2006
Page 9 GeoENew*esiQ
!
upland vegetation around the rim, especially salal on the north side and Himalayan blackbery (Rubus
di.scolot') and Nootka rose (Rosa r,utkono) on the southu,est edgc. Soils were inundated with l to 2 inches
of surface rvater and were observed at a matrix of l0YR 2/l (Kollmorgen 1988) with no rnottles.
Wetland C occupies approxirnately 12,148 square feet (0.279 acres).
Wetland D is a palustrine scrub-sluub pond that occupies approximatcly I1,955 square feet (0.274 acres)
in the eastern portion of Area I (Appendix A; Photographs l5 and l6). The rvetland extends off-site to
the cast and occupies a total area of approximately 0.5 to I acre. l'he off-site portion of Wetland D
appears to be dominated by lrardhack. The entire wetland was not delineated due to property boundaries
and a lack of permission to access the area from the landowner. During the site investigation, soils were
inundated with 1 to 2 inches of surthce water and wcre observed at a matrix of lOYR 2/1 (Kollmorgen
1988) with no mottles. Wetland D contains three vegetation classes dominated by an herbaceous layer of
slou-eh sedge, a shrub layer of hardhack and r.vestem red cedar in the tree layer.
Wetland Evaluation
Wetland Categorization and Classification
The wetlands delineated onsite rvere classified by the Cowardin System and then rvere rated using the
Ecology four-tiered rating system to place them into the appropriate category. Datasheets used for rating
the u,etlands can be found in Appendix C. Table 3 contains lhe wetland classes and category tbr all
wetlands. Iror delineated Category II u,etlands, the buffer zone is set at 100 feet with an additional
l5-foot setback for building structures.
Table 3. Categorization and Area of Wetlands Delineated
Wetland
Area
in square feet
(acres)
Cowardin Rating System
Water Regime
Jefferson
County Rating
D 20,693 (0.475)
12,148 (0.279)
Palustrine Scrub-Shrub Seasonally
Flooded
Permanently
Flooded
Permanently
Flooded
Category ll
Category ll
Category ll
C
D
Palustrine Scrub-Shrub
Scrub-Shrub11,955 (0.274)Palustrine
Wetland Functional Assessment
GeoEngineers used SAM to determine the functions of the Wetlands B, C and D
Wetland B was assessed as a depressional isolated wetland for the purpose of functions analysis. The
lollowing functional ratings were detennined based on existing site conditions.
. Flood/StormwaterControl
. Base Flow/Groundrvater Support
. Hrosior/ShorelineProtection
r Water Quality hnprovernent
o Natural Biological Support
o General Habitat Functions
High
Medium
N/A
Mediunr
Medium
Medium
File \o. I2677-0t)I-03
.lulr )0. 2006
Puge l0 GeoEHcrxrtns/
System Class
u
T
RepoRr
PLEASANT HENEOR MARIruE NHO
Golr Resonr
Werlauo DettNelrton
J erreRsott CouNTY, Wasxtttctott
Julv 20, 2006
Fon
Sraresrueru CoRpoReloru
GroErqarNEERI]/.
APPENDIX 9
File No. 12677-001-03
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
,f
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
t
I
t
I
Wetland Delineation
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Prepared for:
Statesman Corporation
7370 Sierra Morena Boulevard Southwest
Calgary, Alberta Canada T3H 4Hg
Attention: Garth Mann
Prepared by:
GeoEngineers, lnc.
1550 Woodridge Drive SE
Port Orchard, Washington 98366
(360) 769-8400
GeoEngineers, Inc.
Kelly A. Brock
Environmental Scientist
,z?
pa
KAB \\'S\\';I
ORCH :r I l\ I 157700 I 03' Finals\ I 167700 I 0iR doc
Disclarmer .An1 elecuonrc form. facsrmile or hard copl of the origrnal document (email. te\L table. and/or figurel. rf prorrded. and any
attachments are onll a copy of the original documcnt. The original document is stored b1 GeoEngrnecrs. lnc and * rll sen e as the otlicial
document ofrecord.
(
Coplrrghtti 1006 br (ieoEngrnr:ers. Inc ,.\ll rr-lhs rescned
E
T
n
r
?
I
I
l
;
I
I
I
t
T
I
l
t
I
t
I
I
I
t
I
Tleue or Gorurerurs
INTRODUCTION..,..
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PROJECT SCOPE
GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTI ON
METHODS
PAPER INVENTORY
FIELD DELINEATION ..........
STREAM CLASSIFICATION
WETLAND PARAMETERS..
Hydrophytic Plants......
Hydric Soi|s.................
Hydrology...
WETLAND EVALUATION ....
Wetland Category.......
Wetland Functional Assessment ...
RESULTS...
PAPER INVENTORY
GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS
STREAMS...
Stream Characterization and Classification ..
WETLANDS
Wetland Characterization .............
Wetland Evaluation
CONCLUSIONS
LIMITATIONS
REFERENCES..
..1
..1
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Page i
GeoEHcrxeens/
Paqe No.
PROJECT LOCATION
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
6
6
6
7
7
9
9
10
11
12
12
TABLE
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
TagLe oF CoNrENrs (CoNTTNUED)
Water Type Conversion Table
Classificat on and Buffer Requirements of Streams
Categorization and Area of Wetlands Delineated....
Paqe No.
^.3
..9
10
FIGURES
Figure '1. Vicinity Map
Figure 2. Aerial Photo
Figure 3. NationalWetland lnventory Map
Figure 4. Soils Survey Map
Figure 5. Approximate Locations of Streams A through E Based on Field Observations and GPS Data
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A _ SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
APPENDIX B - WETLAND DATA FORMS
APPENDIX C - WETLAND RATING FORMS
APPENDIX D - WETLAND SITE MAP
FileNo. I2677-00l-03
July 20, 2006
Page ii
GroEncrnuens;/
Puelsanr HnneoR MeRrne eno Gorr Rrsonr
Werlnuo Deurearon
JerrensoN Gouttw, WesutHcrou
Fon
Sreresuen CoRpomtton
!NTRODUCTION
GeoEngineers, Inc (GeoEngineers) was contracted by Statesman Corporation to perform a wetland
delineation for the proposed Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort located on Black Point south of
Brinnon, Washington. GeoEngineers evaluated the potential presence of wetlands and streams on the site
in general accordance with Title l8 of the Jefferson County Code Chapter 18.15.325.
PROJECT LOCATION
The proposed development is located on the Olympic Peninsula adjacent to Hood Canal in Sections 15
and 22 of Township 25 North, Range 2 West of the Willamette Meridian in Jefferson County (Figure l).
The subject property, herein referred to as the site, consists of approximately 250 acres and is partially
developed. It is located in the Skokomish-Dosewallips Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA l6) and is
part of the East Olympic and Hood Canal River Basins.
The proposed project site is located on Black Point, which extends east approximately I mile into Hood
Canal, and the southwestern shoreline of Pleasant Harbor, a shallow cove located north of Black Point.
The peninsula consists ofhills, ravines and deep kettles shaped by glacial processes. The surface geology
consists of Vashon-age till, outwash and ice-contact sediments underlain by pre-Vashon non-glacial
stratified deposits (Subsurface Group, Inc. draft Site Geology map 2006). A portion of the project area is
currently being used as an RV Resort (Pleasant Harbor RV Resort) with developed roads, RV pads with
water and electricity and restrooms located through out the developed area of the site. A commercial
marina and store are located along the Pleasant Harbor shoreline. State Route (SR) l0l transects the site.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Statesman Corporation intends to develop a mixed-use resort development on the subject property.
However, the exact location and details of the development have not been defined at the time of this
work. Therefore, we have not evaluated potential impacts of the proposed multi-use development.
PROJECT SCOPE
GeoEngineers verified and delineated wetlands on the proposed Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
site. GeoEngineers scientists reviewed previous reports for background information and to focus our
verification and delineation efforts. However, this delineation report was based upon an independent
evaluation of the soils, vegetation, and hydrology of the wetland areas, as well as of the functions of the
wetland areas.
GENERAL SITE DESCR!PTION
The site is bordered to the south by Hood Canal. The eastern edge of the site is bordered by forested land
with few single-family residences. The northern portion is bordered by light residential housing and most
of the western edge is bordered by SR 101 (Figure 2). The project area is composed of four sections,
Sections 1-4 (Figure l). Section 1, the largest of the sections, is 220.1 */- acres located on the southwest
portion of Black Point, east of SR l0l and south of Black Point Road. Section 2 is a narrow strip of land
Page I GeoExetnezaslQFile No. 12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
(7.8 +l- acres) that runs along the east to southeastem side of SR l0l and immediately north of Black
Point Road. Section 3 cncompasses the commercial marina and associated parking area (9.8 +/- acres)
south of SR l0l and Section 4 is the triangular shaped ll.9 +l- acres located to the north of Section 3
north of SR 101.
METHODS
Pepen lNveruroRy
The Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) (1989) recommends a thorough review of
existing information regarding a particular site prior to conducting the fieldwork, GeoEngineers scientists
conducted a search for pertinent and applicable data and maps. We reviewed the United States
Geological Survey map, topographic maps, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
National Wetlands Inventory NWI) maps from 1988, and Soil Survey of Jffirson County, ll'ashington
(United States Department of Agriculture [USDA]) Natural Resources Conservation Service, formerly the
Soil Conservation Service 1975 and USDA 2001), the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
(WDFW) Priority Habitat and Species (PHS) maps and database (WDFW 2006) and the Washington
Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Forest Practiccs Application Rcview System (FPARS) maps of
known or suspected Stream Types for Jefferson County.
Any listed wetland, strcam or potential area of interest was labeled alphabetically according to order of
investigation.
Flelo Deuueeroru
GeoEngineers scientists visited the site on April 26 and 27 , 2006 to conduct field investigations and again
on June 19,2006 for follow-up investigation. The weather was partly cloudy to sunny each visit and the
temperature ranged from 60 to 70oF in the mid 60oF. Our wetland determination methods followed the
guidelines of the l[/ashington State Wetlands ldentification and Delineation Marutal (Ecology 1997) and
thc U.S. Army Corps o.f Engineers lletland Delineation Marutol (Environmental Laboratory 1987).
GeoEngineers investigated the site and collected data at eight sample plots within potential wctlands and
surrounding upland areas. We recorded data on vegetation, soil and hydrology to determine the presence
or absence of these thrce wctland indicators and identiff thc wctland boundary. Wetland boundary flags
were placed along the edge of identified wetlands and along the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) on
both sides of streams for futurc reference. Global Positioning Systcm (GPS) coordinates were acquired
for streams and culverts to provide an approximate location. At the time of acquisition, the GPS unit
displayed an accuracy of plus or minus 20 feet in all dircctions.
A thorough ficld review of the project site and thc surrounding hydrology was performed to identify
stream courses, runoff channels and wetland hydrology. Any evidence of the prcscnce of positive
wetland indicators was further investigated in ordcr to complete the stream and wetland delineation.
GeoEngineers biologists traversed the subject property. Upon discovery of a wetland indicator, the field
investigator examined the area for prcscncc of all three wetland parametcrs: hydrophytic plant species,
hydric soils and positive hydrology. Based upon positive confirmation of the three wetland parametcrs, a
sample plot was establishcd. Whcn changes were noted in plant community composition, hydrology or
topographic position, additional sample plots were establishcd to characterize the site. Upland plots were
established to characterize the upland conditions. In areas where a clear topographic break was not a
direct indicator of the wetland boundary, upland plots wcre cstablished to determine the location of the
wetland boundary. Additional shovel probes were conducted in areas where wetland hydrology was not
obvious; to determine the presence of hydric soil and/or indicators of wetland hydrology. All sample plot
File No 12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Page 2 GeoExeneeaslQ
locations were flagged and numbered. The wetland boundary was flagged using the above methods and
flag points were sequentially numbered. Stream OHWM was flagged with sequentially numbered orange
flags.
Site photos for each sample plot are provided in Appendix A and detailed information provided on data
forms in Appendices B and C. GeoEngineers prepared a sketch of the wetland boundary and submitted
the figure to W & H Pacific, a licensed professional land surveyor, who prepared a wetland site map
(Appendix D). A stream and culvert site map was created from GPS coordinates and provided for general
reference as Figure 5. A general description of our findings is provided in the results section below.
SrRenu CrRssrrrcanou
Jefferson County currently requires the DNR Interim Water Typing System established in Washington
Administrative Code (WAC) Section 222-16-030 (the current typing system) to classifu streams. The
Jefferson County Department of Community Development is currently reviewing an application,
submitted on May 17,2006, that proposes an amendment to this typing system so that streams would be
classified using the DNR Permanent Water Typing System established in WAC 222-16-030 and 222-16-
031 (the proposed water typing system), which was adopted statewide on March 1,2006. DNR FPARS
maps of known or suspected Sheam Types are available on the DNR website, but are typed by the
Jefferson County proposed water typing system. GeoEngineers categorized all streams according to the
Jefferson County current water typing system (the Interim Water Typing System, W AC 222-16-030), but
will include the proposed water Wping and associated buffers to remain consistent with statewide maps
indicating typing systems and for potential future permitting compliance if the proposed amendment is
adopted by Jefferson County. Below is a conversion table indicating the functionally equivalent water
types between the two typing systems, Buffer requirements will remain the same for equivalent water
types.
Table 1. Water Type Conversion Table
Current Water Typing Proposed Water Typing
Type 1 Water Type "S"
Type2and3Water Type "F"
Type 4 Water Type "Np"
Type 5 Water Type "Ns"
The current interim water typing system categories are briefly described as following
. Type 1: those streams inventoried as "shorelines of the state".
. Type 2: those segments of streams not classified as Type I with high fish, wildlife, or human use.
o Type 3: those segments of streams not classified as Type I or 2 with moderate to slight fish,
wildlife and human use and a bankfull width of 2 feet or greater.
r Type 4: those segments of streams within bankfull width of defined channels that are perennial
non-fi sh habitat streams.
. Type 5: all segments of natural waters within bankfull width of defined channels that are not
Types 1,2,3 or 4, seasonal, non-fish habitat streams.
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20.2006
Page 3 GeoExetxezeslQ
The classification of streams was based upon an evaluation of stream structures and function.
Specifically, the characteristics identified for each stream included:
o Determination of flow regime (seasonal or perennial flow),
r Channel width at ordinary high water discharge,
r Stream gradient, and
o Potential use as fish habitat.
Werueuo PaRauereRs
Wetlands are identified by the clear presence of three physical parameters. These are hydrophytic plant
species, hydric soils, and positive hydrology.
Hydrophytic Plants
Hydrophytic plants are species that generally prefer areas where the frequency and duration of inundation
or soil saturation produce permanently or periodically saturated soils sufficient to exert a controlling
influence on the plant species present (Ecology 1997). The relative strength of an individual species'
preference for wetness determines the indicator status for that species. The USFWS has determined
wetland plant indicator status; a list of the information for the Pacific Northwest Region is provided in
Reed 1988 and Reed et al. 1993. To meet the wetland criteria cstablished in the Washington State
Wetlands ldentification and Delineation Manual (Ecology 1997) and the 1987 Federal Manual, species
that are dominant must be noted for each stratum present (c.g., hee, shrub, herb) then the hydrophytic
dominance of all vegetation is calculated based on individual indicator status of the dominant species.
When morc than 50 percent of the dominant species in each sample have a wetland indicator status of
obligate wet (OBL), facultativc wet (FACW), or facultative (FAC), the sample plot meets the hydrophytic
vegetation criterion. Plant nomenclature generally follows The Flora of the Pacific North'yvest (Hitchcock
and Cronquist 1973).
Hydric Soils
Hydric soils are soils that are saturated or inundated long enough during the growing season to develop
anaerobic conditions in the upper layer (2001). Prolonged anaerobic soil conditions lead to a chemically
reducing environment. The chemical reduction of some soil components (e.g., iron and manganese
oxides) leads to the development of soil colors and other physical characteristics that are usually
indicativc of hydric soils (Ecology 1997). Hydric soils can be identified by the use of a color comparison
chart. A commercial color chart of soils is produced by Kollmorgen (1988) and commonly used by
wetland scientists. Soil color is typically identified by hue, chroma and value. Hue describes the soil
based on its relation to the spectral colors (red, yellow, grecn, blue, purplc or a mixture of these colors);
chroma indicates the strength or purity of the color; and value describes the degree of lightness. These
terms reflect thc variable amount of moisture, organics and overall composition of any given soil sample
providing critical information on soil wctncss and degree of saturation and inundation (Kent 1994). In
general, the lowcr the number for chroma and value, the more likely the soil sample is to be hydric. The
color chart is also used to compare mapped soil types in the Soil Survey with field observations.
Hydrology
Hydrology is defined as the presence of water. The term "wetland hydrology" encompasses all
hydrologic characteristics ofarcas that are periodically inundated or havc soils saturated to the surface at
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Page 4 GeoEneweeaslQ
some time during the growing season. Numerous factors (e.g., precipitation, topography, soil
permeability, plant cover and human disturbance) influence the hydrology of an area (Ecology 1997).
Hydrology is often the least exact of the parameters, and indicators of wetland hydrology are sometimes
difficult to find in the field. This is especially prevalent when wetlands are delineated in the summer
months when springs or seeps may not be apparent. Under these conditions, indicators of hydrology are
used as positive identification. Indicators such as drainage patterns, sediment deposits, dried algae and
water stained leaves or bark are examples of hydrology. The presence of these (or other) indicators,
hydric soils and hydrophytic vegetation confirm the presence of a wetland.
Wermno EvllunrroN
Several standard methods for evaluating wetlands functions and values were used in conjunction with
professional experience to provide qualitative and quantitative characterization of the wetlands on site.
Additionally, many reference materials were used to support these evaluations. These are cited where
appropriate throughout the text to justifu and explain the results of these investigations.
Wetland Category
Ecology developed a four-tiered rating system presented in Washington State Wetlands Rating Systemfor
lVestern Washington, (Ecology 1993) that uses landscape setting, wetland and vegetation classes, physical
characteristics, and other value-based and function-based criteria to place wetlands into one of four
categories. This system was developed to differentiate between wetlands based on their sensitivity to
disturbance, rarity and the functions they provide. The rating categories that are used as management
standards were adopted by Jefferson County for the pwpose of assigning buffer widths and limitations on
activities that may impact the wetlands. The rating system guidebook contains data forms to be
completed from information gathered both in the offrce and in the field. These result in wetlands being
rated as Category I, [I, [I or IV.
Jefferson County currently requires the Washington State l{etlands Rating System for Western
l{ashington 2nd Edition, 1993, (Ecology 1993) to categorize wetlands. The Jeffcrson
Department of Community Development is currently reviewing an application, submitted on
2006,that proposes an amendment to this rating system so that wetlands would be categoi4ed using the
2004 Washington State lletlands Rating Systemfor Western Washington Ecologt Publicatidn #04-06-025
or as amended, (Hruby 2004). If this amendment is adopted additional fieldwork and revisions to the
"wetland categories" determined for the wetlands described in this report may be necessary.
Wetl and F u nctional Assessmenf
GeoEngineers scientists used Cooke Scientific Services Semi-quantitative Assessment Methodology
(SAM) to determine how well a wetland and its buffers function, This technique is designed to examine
the presence of discrete functions and to determine how well a discrete wetland performs a particular
function. The functional attributes analy zed ar e:
r Flood/StormwaterConhol,
o Erosion/ShorelineProtection,
o Natural Biological Support,
. Specific Habitat Functions,
o Base FlodGroundwater Support,
o Water Quality Improvement, and
Coul!1..
lu)ai 17, :\r
!
FileNo.12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Page 5 GsoExe rneens/
o GeneralHabitatFunctions
Each function is divided into three groups based on observed characteristics that, when totaled, dcterminc
the relative quality of the function being examined. These groups arc as follows: Group I (higher quality
charactcristics), Group 2 (medium quality characteristics), and Group 3 (lower quality characteristics).
The sum of these characteristics is then expressed as a percentage of maximum possible points and an
ovcrall rating of High, Medium or Low applied to the function.
The purpose of SAM is to assist wetland professionals in identifying and quantifring a potential wetland
function in an individual wetland. The term "potcntial" is important, because it is usually not possible to
veriff the presence of a function from a single site visit. A determination of the potential for a function to
occur, based on the presence of physical characteristics that are conducivc to that function, is all that can
be determined in a quick evaluation. For example, we can tell that a site has good amphibian habitat, but
it is not always possible, at every season, to tell whether amphibians are using that habitat. SAM is based
on a system developed by Reppert (Reppert et al.1979) that has been modified for greater applicability to
Northwest wetland ecosystems.
RESULTS
Plpen lruvexronY
NWI Map's identifics four wctlands within the study arca (Figurc 3). The subject wetlands are identificd
as a Palustrine, Scrub-Shrub (Cowardin et al. 1979). However, NWI maps are produced from
interpretation of aerial photographs and topographic maps and arc limited to the time they arc produccd.
Recent changes in the nature of the vegetation and hydrology, as well as recent dcvclopment activities in
the surrounding area, are not rcflcctcd in thc NWI map and must bc considered when evaluating this
property. The Soil Survey of Jefferson County (USDA 1975 and 2001) identifies Hoodsport-Grove very
gravelly sandy foams with 0 to 30 percent slopes as the predominant soil type with lesser amounts of
Hoodsport very gravelly sandy loam with 0 to 15 percent slopes and Swantown gravclly loam,0 to 8
percent slopcs (Figure 4). The Hoodsport series is moderately well draincd soils that have a very slowly
permeable cemented layer at a depth of 20 to 36 inches. This soil and its associated soils arc not
described on the hydric soils list as having hydric properties (USDA 1975 and 2001). The Swantown
series consists of somewhat poorly drained gravelly soils that have a very slowly permeablc ccmcntcd
laycr at a depth of l8 to 24 inches. The Swantown series is not listed as having hydric properties,
however, Belfast soil, includcd as an associated soil typc, is listcd a hydric soil (USDA 1975 and 2001).
Gereneu Srre GonornoNs
Thc site is composed of four sections (Sections l-4) consisting of approximately 250 acres (Figure l).
Shorelines are associated with this property and arc discussed in GeoEngineers report "Pleasant Harbor
Shoreline Charocterization Report." The vegetation structure on the proposcd dcvelopment site is
primarily comprised of maturc conifcrous forcst with a healthy understory of shrubs. GeoEngineers
report titled, "Pleasctnl Harbor Wildlqfe Habitat Assessment" details the vegetation and habitat featurcs
identified onsitc. Monthly precipitation beforc site visits was average for the area.
Throughout Section I are several deep kettle-hole depressions created from glacicrs. Five areas, initially
labeled A through E, were investigated for wetland occurrencc. Thc results of the invcstigation indicatcd
that thcrc are three wetlands, herein referred to as Wetlands B. C and D, and two non-wetland areas,
herein referred to as Areas A and E. Areas A and E wcrc mappcd on the NWI maps as wctlands;
howcvcr, wctland indicators wcrc not obscrved in this area at the time of thc sitc investigation. NWI
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Page 6 GroEne rxeensl
maps are produced from interpretation of aerialphotographs and topographic maps. While both areas had
topographic characteristics of a wetland (depressions), the three parameters of a wetland (hydrology,
hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soils) were absent. Instead, Area A had no source of wetland
hydrology or hydric soils and was dominated by westem sword fern (Polystichum munitum), bracken fem
(Pteridium aquilirutm), vine maple (Acer circinatum), trailing blackberry (Rubus ursinus), cut leaf
blackberry (Rubus laciniatus) and deer fen (Blechnum spicont). Area E was mostly comprised of lady
fem (Athyrium filix-femlra), western sword fern, deer fem, western red cedar (Thuja plicata), red
huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifulium) evergreen huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum) western hemlock
(Tsuga heterophylla) red elderberry (Sambtrcus racemosa) and red alder (Alruts ntbra) with no source of
wetland hydrology or hydric soils.
All three wetland parameters (hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils and hydrology) were identified within
Wetland B, C and D during the field investigation. Appendix D shows the wetland boundaries and the
soil and vegetation sample locations. Areas A and E did not exhibit wetland parameters and are indicated
in Figure 5 as sample locations only. Conditions and ecological functions associated with each wetland
are described in greater detail below.
SrReems
Jefferson County classifies streams according to the WAC 222-16-031 interim water typing system. The
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) PHS maps and database (WDFW 2006), thc
WDFW online SalmonScape interactive map viewer and database system (SalmonScape 2000) and DNR
FPARS was referenced for information on anadromous and resident fish presence. The PHS database and
SalmonScape map did not list any priority fish resources specifically for streams located on the project
site. FPARS lists Stream A as a fish bearing Type F stream for a short distance and then transitions it to a
non-fish bearing Type Ns. A discussion of fish species is included in GeoEngineers report "Pleasant
Harbor Wildlife Habitat Assessment" and will only be included here for stream classification and
characterization purposes. Table 2 indicates the current and proposed classification and associated buffer
requirements for each stream. Figure 5 is the map identif,iing the general location of streams on the site.
Stream Characterization and Classification
Stream A is a seasonal stream with a bankfull width greater than2 feet wide that does not support fish usc
or habitat (Appendix A; Photographs I and 2). It flows east under SR l0l south of Madrona Ridge Road,
through Section 2 where it flows through a culvert under an unnamed gravel road that provides access to
the WDFW boat ramp, and discharges through a hung culvert at the southwestern end of Pleasant Harbor.
During the April site visit, water was not flowing through the lowcr scction of stream A at the lowermost
culvert to Pleasant Harbor. Standing water was observed within the lower section of the sheam and was
infiltrating with no surface connection to the Harbor. During thc June site visit, the cntire stream bed was
dry. Watermarks and drift lines suggests that at certain times of the year this stream has a surface
connection directly into the harbor. Access to potcntial fish habitat is blocked by a natural gradient brcak
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20. 2006
Page 7 GeoEnetxeeeslQ
Field reconnaissance of Sections 2 through 4 resulted in no additional wetlands, but five unnamed
drainages were identified within and adjacent to the investigated sections. The streams appear to receive
hydrology from groundwater seeps and surface run-off. Photographs of these sheams can be found in
Appendix A. Additional culverts were located within these sections that facilitate stormwater runoff from
impervious surfaces associated with SR 101 but are not associated with a regulated drainage. GPS
coordinates taken during the site visit were used to create a stream and culvert site map located in Figure
5. Culvert locations were included for future project planning purposes and will not be specifically
addressed.
of greater than 20 percent as well as a hung culvert located outside of the property boundary that has
created an impassablc barrier to fish passage. [n addition, an impassable escarpment (approximately 20
percent slope) between the unnamed gravel road and SR l0l also impedes fish passage and coincides
with the Type F to Type N transitioning on the FPARS database. Stream A is classified as a Type 5
stream according to Jefferson County WAC 222-16-031 interim watcr typing system. This typing
requires a 50-foot buffer.
Stream B is a seasonal stream with a bankfull width of less than 2 feet wide throughout most of its
occurrence on the property and does not support fish use or habitat. It flows east under SR 101 south of
Madrona fudge Road and north of Stream A. The stream flows through Section 2 under a private
driveway where it is directed through a hung culvert. Before discharging at the southwestern end of
Pleasant Harbor, the stream flows along a ditch next to the north edge of the unnamed gravel road during
periods of high water flow. During the April site visit, the stream secped into the ground above the
discharge point and did not have a surface connection to the Harbor. During the June site visit, the stream
was dry but the presence of sediment deposits and drift lines indicated the stream bed is less than l-foot
wide. Sheam B (Appendix A; Photographs 3 and 4) is classified as a Type 5 stream according to
Jefferson County W AC 222-16-031 interim water typing system. This typing requires a 50-foot buffer.
Stream C is a seasonal stream with a bankfull width lcss than 2 fcet wide throughout the occurrence on
the property and does not support fish use or habitat. It flows in a southeast direction from the northeast
end of Section 4 under SR l0l through a hung culvert into a nearly vertical drop to the northern end of
Section 3, through another hung culvert and vertical drop under the marina parking area, and discharges
into Pleasant Harbor. During the April site visit, surface flow was observcd but less than l-foot wide
within the channel. During the June site visit the stream was dry. Stream C (Appendix A; Photographs 5
and 6) is classified as a Type 5 stream according to Jefferson County WAC222-16-031 interim water
typing system. This typing requires a 50-foot buffer.
Stream D is a seasonal stream with a bankfull width less than 2 feet wide throughout the property and
does not support fish use or habitat. It flows in a southeast direction under SR l0l through a hung culvert
and nearly vertical drop to the northern end of Section 3, through another hung culvert just north of the
marina parking area, and discharges into Pleasant Harbor. During the June site visit the stream was dry,
but bankfull width and water marks indicatcd that the average sheam flow is less than 2 feet wide. Stream
D (Appendix A; Photograph 7) is classified as a Type 5 stream according to Jefferson County W AC 222-
l6-031 interim water typing system. This ryping requires a 50-foot buffer.
Stream E is a seasonal strcam with a bankfull width less than 2 feet wide throughout it's occurrence on
the property and does not support fish use or habitat. It flows in a southeast direction under SR 101
through a hung culvert continues through the northern end of Section 3 and discharges into Pleasant
Harbor. During the June site visit the stream was dry but bankfull width and water marks indicated that
the average stream width is less than 2 feet wide. Stream D (Appendix A; Photograph 8) is classified as a
Type 5 sheam according to Jefferson County W AC 222-16-031 interim water typing system. This typing
requires a 50-foot buffer.
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20. 2006
Page I GeoExenezesiQ
Stream Surface Flow
Current
Classification
Proposed
Classification
Buffer
Requirements
(feet)
A Seasonal
Seasonal
Seasonal
Seasonal
Seasonal
Type 5 Type Ns
Type Ns
Type Ns
Type Ns
Type Ns
50
c
Type 5 50
Type 5 50
D
E
Type 5
Type 5
50
50
Table 2. Classification and Buffer Requirements of Streams
Werlanos
GeoEngineers confirmed and delineated three wetlands (Wetlands B, C and D) located within Section I
by collecting eight sample plots throughout the property. Five of the sample plots exhibited upland
characteristics typical of the Hoodsport soil series. Two of these upland plots were in Areas A and E that
were mapped as wetlands on the NWI map (Figure 3) but were not found to have wetland characteristics
(Appendix A; Photographs 9-ll and 17-18). The upper layers were typically a reddish brown very
gravelly sandy loam. Three sample plots met wetland criteria for vegetation, hydrology and soils with
hydric characteristics such as low chroma colors and oxidized root channels. The data forms for all
sample plots are found in Appendix B. The wetland exhibit and topographic survey (Appendix D) shows
the location of the sample plots and the extent of the flagged wetland boundaries. The wetlands appear to
be fed primarily by surface runoff from surrounding landscape. Wetland D continues off site to the east
and is part of a larger wetland.
Wetl an d C h aracterizatio n
Wetland B, largest of the three wetlands, is a 20,693 square feet (0.475 acres) Palustrine scrub-shrub
kettle-hole wetland located in the middle to north section of Area I immediately to the east of the main
gravel road leading south from the RV park information center (Appendix A; Photographs 12 and l3).
This site corresponds with the location of a wetland on the NWI map. Vegetation, on the steep slopes of
the kettle-hole, is dominated by upland species; Douglas fr (Pseudotsuga menziesll), western hemlock,
western sword fern, salal (Gaultheria shallon), red huckleberry and evergreen huckleberry. While no
standing water was visible at the time of the field visit, hydrological indicators (water marks, drift lines,
sediment deposits, and water-stained leaves) were evident in the bottom of the depression indicating that
the area is seasonally flooded by water runoff from the surrounding surface. A clear transition in the
vegetation from upland species to hydrophytic vegetation coincides with the hydrologic indicators. False
lily-of-the-valley (Maianthemunt dilatatum), slough sedge (Carex obrupta), hardhack (Spiraea douglasii)
and red alder comprise the dominant vegetation at the bottom of the kettle-hole. The soils in the wetland
had oxidized root channels in the upper 6 to 8 inches. The area in which all three wetland parameters are
cxpressed was delineated.
Wetland C is a palustrine scrub-shrub pond located in the middle eastern half of Arca I immcdiately
southcast of Wetland B (Appcndix A; Photograph l4). This site does not corrcspond to any wetland
listcd on the NWI map, but bccause wetland parameters are present, it was delineated as Wetland C. The
west side of the pond supports Pacific ninebark (Physocarpus capitatus) that has dcveloped adventitious
roots indicating permanent water depth and duration. The north and east sides are abundant with downed
hees (less than 6-inch diameter) just within the open water. Vegetation found in the shrub layer includes
hardhack, slough sedge and Pacific ninebark. The pond edges are sloped and support dense ovcrhanging
File No 12677-001-03 Page 9 GeoEsteweeasiQJuly 20, 2006
B
upland vegetation around the rim, cspecially salal on the north side and Himalayan blackberry (Rubus
discolor) and Nootka rose (Rosa nutkana) on the southwest edge. Soils were inundated with I to 2 inches
of surface watcr and were observed at a matrix of l0YR 2/l (Kollmorgen 1988) with no mottles.
Wetland C occupies approximately 12,148 square feet (0.279 acres).
Wetland D is a palustrine scrub-shrub pond that occupies approximately I1,955 square feet (0.274 acres)
in the eastern portion of Area I (Appendix A; Photographs l5 and l6). The wctland extends off-site to
the east and occupies a total area of approximately 0.5 to I acre. Thc off-site portion of Wetland D
appears to be dominated by hardhack. The entire wetland was not delineated due to property boundaries
and a lack of permission to access the area from the landowner. During the site investigation, soils were
inundated with 1 to 2 inches of surface water and were observed at a matrix of l0YR 2/l (Kollmorgcn
1988) with no mottles. Wetland D contains three vegetation classes dominated by an herbaceous layer of
slough scdge, a shrub layer of hardhack and western red cedar in the tree laycr.
Wetland Evaluation
Wetland Categorization and Classification
The wetlands delineated onsite were classified by the Cowardin Systcm and then were ratcd using thc
Ecology four-tiered rating system to place them into the appropriate category. Datashcets used for rating
the wetlands can be found in Appendix C. Table 3 contains the wetland classes and category for all
wetlands. For delineated Category II wctlands, thc buffer zone is set at 100 fect with an additional
lS-foot sctback for building structures.
Table 3. Categorization and Area of Wetlands Delineated
Area
in square feet
(acres)Wetland
Cowardin Rating System
Water Regime
Jefferson
County Rating
B
C
20,693 (0.47s)
12,148 (0.279)
Palustrine
Palustrine
Scrub-Shrub
Scrub-Shrub
D 1 1,95s (0.274)Palustrine Scrub-Shrub
Seasonally
Flooded
Permanently
Flooded
Permanently
Flooded
Category ll
Category ll
Category ll
Wetland Functional Assessment
GeoEngineers used SAM to determinc the functions of the Wetlands B, C and D
Wetland B was assesscd as a depressional isolated wetland for the purpose of functions anatysis. The
following functional ratings were determined based on existing site conditions.
o Flood/StormwaterControl
o Base Flow/Groundwater Support
o Erosion/ShorelineProtection
o Water Quality Improvcmcnt
o Natural Biological Support
o Gencral Habitat Functions
High
Medium
N/A
Mcdium
Medium
Mcdium
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20. 2006
Page I0 GeoEHcrxrens/
System Class
Specific Habitat Functions High
These ratings reflect the size, depressional shape, herbaceous u'etland class corxponent and divcrsity
rvithin ernergent \regetation and buffer quality and quantity. Wetland rnitigation on-site is capable of
replacing lost [unctions as part of project specific development.
Wetland C rvas assessed as a depressional isolated rvetland for the purposc of fiunctions analysis. 'I'he
follou,ing functional ratings were deternined based on existing site conditions.
. Flood/StonnlvaterControl
. Base Flou,/Groundr.r,ater Supporl
. Erosion/SholelineProtection
. Water Quality Improvernent
o Natural Biological Support
. General Habitat Functions
. Specific Habitat Functions
High
High
N/A
High
High
Medium
High
These ratings reflect the size, depressional shape, herbaceous rvetland class component and diversity
rvithin emergent vegetation and buffer quality and quantity.
Wetland D rvas assessed as a depressional isolated rvetland for the purpose of functions analysis- The
following functional ratings were determined based on existing site conditions,
. Flood/Stormrvater Control High
o Base FlorviGroundwater Support High
. Er-osioniShoreline Protection NiA
o Water Quality Improvement High
. Natural Biological Support High
o General Habitat Functions Medium
. Specitic Habitat Functions High
These ratings leflect the size, depressional shape, herbaceous u,etland class colnponent and div'ersity
s,ithin emergenl vegetation and buffer quality and quantity
CONCLUSIONS
Three r.vetlands and fir'e streams rvere identified on site (Wetland B, C and D, Strearns A, B, C, D and E)
AII strearns (Strearns A through E) are Type 5 streanrs rvith required butfers ol 50 feet. Wetland B is a
large kettle-hole, seasonally flooded depressional rvetland that is 20,693 square feet (0.475 acres) in size
and is classified as a Category II ivetland. Wetlands C and D ale permanently flooded Catcgory II
wetlands occupying 12,148 square t'eet (0.279 acres) and I1,955 square l'eet (0.274 acres) respectively.
The required bulfer tbr a delineatecl Category II ,'r,etland is 100 feet vvith a l5-foot setback for building
File .\'o. I 2677-t)t) I -(ll
Jul.t 20. 2(l)6
Page I I GroENeweeallQ
a
structurcs. I'his report and associaled maps sen'e to fonnally describc thcse rvetlands, docunrent thc
welland botrndaries and establish thc requirecl n'etland buffers.
The Jelferson County Departrnent of Clornmur.rity Developrnent is currently revierving an application,
subrnitted on May 17,2006, that proposes aurendrnents to scctions of the Jefl'erson County Codc Chapter
18.15 Land Use Districts. If this arnendment or portions of this amendment are adopted additional
fieldu'ork and revisions to the "rvetland catcgorics" detennined for the rvetlands described in this report
rnay be necessaD/.
LIMITATIONS
GeoEngineers has performed this rvetland delineation of the property in general accordance u,ith the
scope and lirnitations of our proposal- Within the limitations of scopc, schedule and budget, our serl ices
have been executed in accordance rvith thc generally accepted practices lor Wetland Delincation in this
area at the time this report lvas prepared. No ',varranty or other con<litions cxpress or irnplicd should be
understood.
This report has been prcpared for tlre exclusive use of Slatesman Corporation, and authorized agents and
rcgulatory agencics follolving the described methods and inlonrralion availablc at the time of the rvork.
No other party may rely on the product of our sen,ices unless we agree in advance to sucl'r reliance in
rvriting- 'l'lre inibnnation contained hereirr should not be applied lor any purpose or project excepl tlte one
originally conternplated.
The applicant is advised to contact all appropriate regulatory agcncics (local, state, and fedcral) prior to
design or construction of any developlnent to obtain necessary pennits and approvals. Wetland
boundaries, classifications and discussions are bascd on our undcrstanding of the local, state, alld federal
regulations, and sitc conditions at the tirne of our rvork. The frnal u,etland boundary detenninations and
vu'etland classiilcation is to be made or verified by the appropriate jurisdictional agency.
REFERENCES
Corvardin, L-M., V. Carter, , F.C. Golet, and E.T. [-aRoe, 1979, Classification of l'etlarrds and deepu,ater
habitats of the United Statcs, U.S. F-ish and Wildlife Scrvice, Office of Riological Services,
FWS/OBS-79/l l.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. "U.S. Arrny Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,''
Technical Report Y-87-l, U.S. Anny linginccr Watenvays Experirnent Station, Viksbtrrg.
I{itclrcock, I-. C. and A. Cronquist.1973" Flora of thc Pacific Northwest an Illustrated IVIanual. University
of Washington Press, Seattle.
Hruby, T- 2004. Washington State Wetland Rating Systern tbr Western Washington Revised
Washington State Department oIEcology Publication #04-06-025 Olympia, Washin-eton.
Jeflferson County Codc. 'l'itle l8 Unificd Dcvcloprnent Code
Kent, D.M. (ed.). 1994. Applied Wetlands Science and Technology. Lervis Publishels, Boca Raton.
Kollmorgen Corporation. 1988. lvlunsell soil color charts.
Kollnrorgen Corporation. Baltin-rore.
Munsell Color. Macbctlr Dir.'ision of
Fi le .\'o- I 2677-(tt) I -0-l
Julv 20. 20t)6
Puge 12 GeoExeir.rceslQ
Reed, P.8., Jr. 1988. National list of plant species that occur in u,etlands: Northu'esl (Region 9). U-S
Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88 (26.9). Washington. D.C
Reed, P.ts., Jr., D. Peters,, J. Goudzrvaard,,l. Lines, and F. Weinmann. 1993, Supplement to List of
Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northrvest (Region 9). Decernber 199i. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Sen,ice Supplement to Biological Report 88 (26.9), May 1988, Washington, D.C.
Reppert, R-T., W. Sigleo, E.. Stackhiv, L. Messrnan, and C. Meyers. I979. Wetland values: concepts and
rnethods of rvetland evaluation- IWR Res. Rep. 79-R-I, U.S. Anny Engineers. For Belvoir, VA
United States Departrnent of Agriculture. National Resource Conservation Service flonnerly Soil
Conservation Service. Je fferson County Soil Survey. 1975. Jeft'erson County.
United States Department of Agriculture. 20.01. Hydric Soils List Jeflerson County, Washington: Detailed
Soil Map Legend. < http://wwrv"rva.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/soils/hydric_lists/hydsoil-rva-
63l.pdf>. (Accessed April 25, 2006).
United States Geological Survey. 198 l. Brinnon, Washington; l:24000, 7-5-minute quadrangle.
United Stated Fish and Wildlit-e Sen'ice. 1988. National Wetlands Inventor Map. Bdnnon Quadrangle
l:24,000.
Washington Adrninistrative Code (WAC). 22-16-031 Interim Water Typing System, Olynrpia,
Washington.
Washington Administrative Code (WAC). 22-16-031 Permanent Water Typing System, Olympia,
Washington.
Washington State Departrnent of Ecology. 1989. A guide to conducting rvetland inventories. Olympia
Washington State Depatlment of Ecology. 1993. Washir.rgton State Wetlands Rating System, Westem
Washington. Publication #93-74. Olympia.
Washington State Departrnent of Ecology- 1991 . Washington State Wetlands Identification and
Delineation Manual. Publication #96-94. Olympia.
Washington State Departrnent of Natural Resources. 2006. Forcst Practices Application Revierv System
[On l ine] httplAr_rr-ry3lyadrg.gqy&srapp5[yebuld_fpa$/-dclatl!.t-htn
Washington Department of Irish and Wildlife . 2006. SalmonScape. [Online]
h[piTrvd frv. u,a.got,/mapp ing/salmonscape/htrn.
Washington State Department oI Fish and Wildlife. 2006. Washington Departrnent of Fish and Wildlife
Priority habitat and Species Iv{ap-Habitats and Species Map in the Vicinity of T25R02W Sections
l5 &22. May 19,2006.
File \o. I267t-0(tI4-l
Julv 20. 2006
Page 13 GtoENcwr;r.ns1Q
t
I
T
I
I
T
T
I
I
I
T
T
I
T
T
I
T
I
I
ItrIII'II-II-IIIIIII
Office: ORCH Path: P:\12\1267700'l 1.mxd
Cana,
i
o
I
ag
ld
cnoof.o
N
aoo3.o
5
(Jl
-)U'oo*o
(.,
U,oof.o
=J I
o3
,...:,:,'i?:';
oc-{ao
To,
*iia;EE$,q o hi< ae @ 9.dEaPESqs
H; - $aH aE..;; eSrjq
=;i * Q @ D oJt Hi3qa
l! _<oioEid :e,ET
=^, :'20!Jt= o=F9pq; 1BalEE 6AH:g> -<oE*3r [51atsg 6 i.or
- \, 6 -€ !a=o oe tg9a
= o'Q.go _ lf -.I g il8 == 3.iio (!t
-@ Q
6tmomz
oz
rrl
rTl
7t
S
tl
6-
0)a
o)f
@I
=. 0)
xo
=E(I)='g-d
='0).o* d-3oo
noaoa
sL
=
=q,?
l!
GItr
o
@
=rn
N-o
oo
No
a-+--noo
-P c)oJ 99q i0izsf o=- co
= aBo_o'
q g.a
< -frf.3s3 sL'6 dgr {or *E6 AA! o6
H frBq a3f <o--d
Z Oao o-+P6> f J
tri -m, 9,F mrg
5 9E
E 'r.'
/_/
I:
1:
(
+e
Notes:
1. The locations of all features shown are approximate.
2. This drawing is for information purposes. lt is intended to assist in
showing features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, lnc.
can not guarantee the accuracy and content of electronic files. The master
file is stored by GeoEngineers, lnc. and will serve as the official record of
this communication.
3. lt is unlawful to copy or reproduce all or any pan thereof, whether for
personal use or resale, without permission.
Data Sources: lnterstates, state routes, and roads from TIGER 2000.
County boundaries, cities, and waterbodies from Department of Ecology.
Lamberl Conrormal Conic, Washington State Plane Norlh, Norlh Ameri€n Oatum 1983
Aerial Photo
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Brinnon, Washington
GroEncrNEE RS12 Figure 2
- -I I
SITE
1,000 1,000
"+.
0
Feet
t'/q_.-I U
A
ILyIII
a I
-- 111--I
-t ?t Iil ",.il.a
Irle
J
I
*Y
.a
I
--
t
it
1
,'t f I
I
(
Y
?z --'t
fi \tr
,I I I a -t'-I
a t "T{q I
a I :TIa
a
i
Y ,
tr -l II
a.\I.
,-t',a
I
/I
?TIIL
\,Jl
I
I
T
I
T
I
t
T
T
I
T
T
T
T
I
I
T
T
t
I
T
@o
N
0)c
=:
0)
.9.
0)u
0-
bi
Eo
1
\tz
I
/!{r 7 {
t!I .,
\
t1 a
I \I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(oooN
o)cf-ijo
.g
ot
(E
o
ooNF-(oN
a
ooo
ooF.F.(o
N
c{
I
Ou
USN
Notes:
1. The locations of all features shown are approximate.
2. This drawing is for information purposes. lt is intended to assist in
showing features discussed in an attached doolment. GeoEngineers, lnc.
can not guarantee the accuracy and content of electronic files. The master
lile is stored by GeoEngineers, lnc. and will serve as the ofiicial record of
this communication.
3. lt is unlaMul to copy or reproduce all or any part thereof, whether for
personal use or rcsale, without permission.
Nationa! Wetlands lnventory map
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Brinnon, Washington
GeoEr.rcrNEE RsO Figure 3
1,000 't,0000
"+.
Feet
Lambe( Conformal Conic,State Plane North, North Ameri€n Dalum 1983
SITE
NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY DATA
This side is located Section 15 and 22
of Township 25 North, Range 2 West,
Jefferson County, Brinnon, Washington
Data Sources: lnterstates, state routes, and roads from TIGER 2000.
County boundaries, cities, and waterbodies from Department of Ecology
-{
\
r
I
I
al'\
.l
/!
v JI
.l
D
-)
Ir @d r-
-,-lFs?t..-.r!,
I
)\F."A
\t
#.)
*@ri
a -l)l
t
f.i
\v
I
\
T
t
I
I
I
T
T
I
t
t
T
T
I
t
T
I
I
I
T
!x
E
o
ooF.F-(o
N
a
o
COo
ooF-F.(oN
N
o-
;=
(EL
TOto
bio
o
i
,5lF
A &
opD *,
t
a
I
t
t
l
*
t
i
{f
FF
!I
3
rl
HoC
a|t
\
I
Is
,$ir
I
,^-g-==;-
-a
Notes:
1. The locations of all features shown are approximate.
2. This drawing is for information purposes. lt is intended to assist in
showing features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, lnc.
can not guarantee the accuracy and content of electronic files. The master
llle is stored by GeoEngineers, lnc. and will serve as the official record of
this communication.
3. lt is unlawful to copy or reproduce all or any part thereof, whether for
personal use or resale, without permission.
Soils Survey Map
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Brinnon, Washington
GeoErucrNEE RsJ/Figure 4
'1,0001,000
C3
Feet
SITE
SOILS BOUNDARY
This sdo i3 lo€t6d Stlion 15 and 22
oa Townlhip 25 Nodh, Range 2 W6t
,relfeaon Conly, Brinnon, Washinglon
GoE - Grove very Gravelly loamy sand, 30-50% slopes
HrD - Hoodsport-Grove very gravelly sandy loam, 0-30% slopes
HoC - Hoodsport very gravelly sandy loam, 0-15% slopes
GoD - Grove very gravelly loamy sand, 15-30% slopes
Data Sources: lnterstates, state routes, and roads from TIGER 2000.
County boundaries, cities, and waterbodies from Department ol Ecology.
Lambert Conformal Conic, Washinglon State Plane Norlh. Norlh Ameri€n Oatum '1983
G
a
a
=--^
*+,
0
(o
oN
l'-o
Y
co
o-
=-
or3I|r)
LLt)o
ooF-N(o
N
o
O
r.)o
oor..l--(o
N
1
o_
IOE.o
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Approximate Locations of Streams A Through
E Based on Field Observations and GPS Data
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort
Brinnon, Washington
GToENGTN EERO Figure 5
?r,
/,.
3
o o
t::(L-/
_t
It
l-
i
on (
\5 !
(I
l \!+t
rl otl
a
F J
1 4|t
C
*-
I
I
I
a#
1ii:i'.'..
Ar'
SITE
STREAM AND ID
B * Brcrod s6 lt il ll
dTomtt9:5il(o nq:H
fu Cady. 8.m6 Wahnts
Nots:
I Tho loelbns o, all ledu,6 slroym aro apporimla
2. Thit drming is lor inidmtion purpos. ll rs inl6ndcd lo asist in
sh@/in0 leahrG di$usd rn a[ allached doormol GmEnoiners. lilc
eo nol gu6iqnt@ lho adracy and contsnl of oloclmic lilos. Tho maslor
nle rs slorql by Geo€ngi[eeE, ltro. ald vrll sNe s lhe ollicial recorr, ol
this communbatbn.
3 lt is rrrl$'.{ul Io opy q rsprodtr@ allu aDy lFrl lhersa, u/helher for
peroml us or rffile. wlhoul pernrissio.
Oala SourG. lnleEtat6. slalo roules, and .orJs frm TIGER 2000
Counlv bouodaries. dlies, .nd !'€tErbod6 l m Ooptl|rHl o[ Ecology
Lr*rba{ lldrlqriul C6r. ,A,n${robn Sl}ia P'ona llom No(h &r'E1n Dnlum 1eB3
N-@'
600 0 600
Feet
I
t
\-
t
I
J
I
!
\I
a
\a
a
l.t I
t
T
I
I
I
I
t
T
I
I
t
T
T
I
t
T
I
t
t
T
GroEnrc weeaylfi
ApperuDx A
Srre PuotooRAPHs
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
T
T
t
t
T
T
APPENDIX A
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
Photograph I
Stream A: Dry stream bed, water discharged
through seeps at time of site visit
Photograph 2
Stream A: Hung culvert, downstream of property
boundary, creates impassible fish banier
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Poge A-l GeoExene*s1Q
l
I
-'
tIr.rll
;<r.
Photograph 3
Stream B: Hung culvert under gravel drive
Photograph 4
Stream B: Discharge through seep indicated by algal growth
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Page A-2 GeoEnetxeeaslQ
ri
{? 1\\\\.\
a
.:! -.r. ts .r
t
.f.^A
Photograph 5
Stream C: Northeast end of Area 4 offsite
Photograph 6
Stream C: Culvert discharge less than one foot wide
July 20. 2006
Page A-3 GeoExewetnslQFile No. 12677-001-03
T,
!L-
k7
*7,t
-/
I
t
rf
?I
Photograph 7
Stream D: Section 3 northeast of marina parking area
Photograph 8
Stream E: Scction 3 northeast of marina parking area
File No. 12677-001-03
Jullt 20, 2006
Page A-4 GeoEneueenslQ
r'lt
t, ,1
t
f
a-
Y.[4-
77 J
,
^t E\
Photograph 9
Area A: Sample plot I
Photograph l0
Area A: Sample plot I, no hydric vegctation present
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20. 2006
Page A-5 GeoEaeweeaslQ
;!_
!
Photograph I I
Area A: Sample plot I soil pit, no hydric soils present
Photograph l2
Wetland B: Northwcst cnd
File No. 12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Page A-6 GeoEneweeaslQ
ll
Photograph l3
Wetland B: Looking west
Photograph l4
Wetland C: Sample plot 2
File No 12677-001-03
July 20. 2006
Page A-7 GeoExeneeasiQ
Photograph 15
Wetland D: Looking north
Photograph l6
Wetland D: South edgc
File No 12677-001-03
July 20. 2006
Poge A-8 GeoEnetweaslQ
n*
(
I
I
I.
t/
il
l_:
E!r'l
{
l!-
dr -I -l
Photograph l8
Area E: Sample plot l, no hydric soils present
I
I
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I File No. 12677-001-03
July 20, 2006
Page A-9 GeoExeneeesiQ
t;
-fl
I
I
E
Photograph 17
Area E: Sample plot l, no hydric vegetation present
a
,. ,.t;t:- 2a
)
;EL.-,
,J J
q
.r'
TF
I
I
I
t
T
I
t
t
I
t
I
I
I
I
t
I
T
I
t
GroEr.ra weea21fi
Apperuox B
Wettetto Dnre Fonms
T
I
t
t
I
I
T
I
t
t
t
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
;
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Sample Point 1
Yes Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
No ls the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)?
No ls the site a potential Problem Area?
VEGETATION
Total Number of Species: 8
Percent of Dominants that are Wetland Species:
Prevalence lndex: 3.74
HYDROLOGY
Pleasant Harbor Area A
Total Dominants:
50120: 50.00 FAC(minus)- applied:
FAC Neutral:
Page 1
Datum: NAD83
50.00
North:
West:
2
No
Date: 04/26/2006
County: Jefferson
Roll No:
Time;
State: WA
Photo No:
1 EPILOBIUM ANGUSTIFOLIUM Herb FACU+1o.oo I No
Shrub 10.00FACI No2HOLCUS LANATUS
Shrub FACU 50.003POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM Yes
FACU 20.004PTERIDIUM AQUILINUM Shrub
5 BLECHNUM SPICANT Shrub FAC+25.00
No
Yes
b ACER CIRCINATUM Shrub FAC-0.00I
I No
7 RUBUS LACINIATUS Shrub FACU+10.00 No
RUBUS URSINUS Shrub 10.00FACU No
I
i
Strata
8
No. Scientific Name lndicator
Status
Percent
Cover
Dominant
Species
Recorded Data:
_ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
_. Aerial Photographs
__ Other
X No Recorded Data Available
Wetland Hydrology lndicators:
Primary lndicators:
_ lnundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 inches
_ Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
_ Sediment Deposits
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary lndicators (2 or more required):
_ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
_ Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
_ FAc-NeutralTest
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water in Pit:
Depth to Saturated Soil:
(in-)
(in.)
(in.)
Project Name: Pleasant Harbor Area A
Sample Point Number: 1
lnvestioators: J. Callaohan and K. Brock
Sample Point I
SOILS
Hydric Soil lndicators
Histosol
Pleasant Harbor Area A
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
___ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
_ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_Organic Pan
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Page 2
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
WETLAND DETERMINATION
No _ Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
No _ Wetland Hydrology Present?
No Hydric Soils Present?
|\!g_ ls this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
\lo - ls this Sampling Point a Waters of the US?
No Have the determination results been overridden by the user?
REMARKS
Matrix Color
(Munsell Moist)
Depth f l
(inches) Hz
Redox Color
(MunsellMoist)
o-2
2-8
o
A
8+A
I
Loamy sand
HrD
Profile Description
10YR2-2.5t2
5YR3/4
Texture, Concretions,
Structure
Redox Feature
Abundance/Contrast
Drainage Class: moderately well drained
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? No
Map Unit Name: Hoodsport-Grove
(Series and Phase): Hoodsport
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Wetland
Yes
XNo
WoUS
Yes 8 Species Richness
Prevalence lndexXNo3.74
I
I
t
I
t
I
t
I
I
T
I
I
t
I
1
I
T
t
t
Sample Point 1
Project Name: Pleasant Harbor Area E
Sample Point Number: 1
KAB
VEGETATION
Total Number of Species: 0
Percent of Dominants that are Wetland Species
Prevalence lndex: 0.00
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data:
_ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
X_ Aerial Photographs
_ Other
No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water in Pit:
Depth to Saturated Soil:
KH
Pleasant Harbor Area E
Total Dominants:
50120: 0.00
Date: Q412612006
County: Jefferson
Roll No:
Page 1
Time:
State; WA
0
(in.
(in.
(in.
FAC(minus)- applied:
FAC Neutral:
0.00
Wetland Hydrology lndicators:
Primary lndicators:
_ lnundated
__ Saturated in Upper 12 inches
_ Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
_ Sediment Deposits
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary lndicators (2 or more required):
_ Oxidized Root Channels in Upperl2 inches
_ Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
_ FAc-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Yes Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
No _. ls the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)?
No ls the site a potential Problem Area?
Datum: NAD83
North
West:
Dominant
I
+
I
0
2
I
3
8
4
7
5
6
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
FAC
Shrub
Strata
FACU
FACU
FAC+
FACU-
FAC+
FAC
UPL
UPL
FAC
40.00
15.00
20.00
5.00
20.00
5.00
5.00
30.00
35.00
25.00
ATHYRIUM FILIX-FEMINA
THUJA PLICATA
SAMBUCUS RACEMOSA
VACCINIUM OVATUM
POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM
VACCINIUM PARVIFOLIUM
ALNUS RUBRA
TSUGA HETEROPHYLLA
RUBUS SPECTABILIS
Herb
Shrub
Herb
Herb
Tree
Tree
Shrub
Shrub
Tree
Percent
CoverNo. Scientific Name lndicator
Status
BLECHNUM SPICANT
Sample Point 1
SOILS
Map Unit Name: Hoodsport very gravelly sandy loam an
(Series and Phase): Hoodsport
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Profile
Pleasant Harbor Area E
HoC a Drainage Class: moderately well drained
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes
Texture, Concretions,
Structure
i R"do, Feature
Abundance/Contrast
Page 2
Redox Color
(MunsellMoist)
Depth
(inches)
Matrix Color
(MunsellMoist)Hz
10YR2-2.5t2
Hydric Soil lndicators:
Histosol
-Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
_Rquic Moisture Regime
_Reducing Conditions
__Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
NRCS Field lndicators:
7.5YR3/4
Sandy loam/Gravely
Sandy loam/Cobbley
WETLAND DETERMINATION
No HydrophyticVegetation Present?
No Wetland Hydrology Present?
No Hydric Soils Present?
No ls this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
No ls this Sampling Point a Waters of the US?
No Have the determination results been overridden by the user?
REMARKS
Wetland
Yes Yes 0 Species Richness
Prevalence lndexXXNoNo0.00
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
. tisteO on National Hydric Soils List
__-_Organic Pan
Other (Explain in Remarks)
0-6
6+
l
WoUS
t
I
t
I
t
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
t
I
T
Sample Point 1
VEGETATION
Total Number of Species: 7
Percent of Dominants that are Wetland Species:
Prevalence lndex: 2.34
Pleasant Harbor Wetland B
Total Dominants: 4
50120: 100.00
Page 1
FAC(minus)- applied
FAC Neutral:
100.00
Yes
Project Name: Pleasant Harbor Wetland B
Sample Point Number: 1
lnvestiqators: K. Kearnes and G. Allinqton
Date: 04/2612006
County: Jefferson
Roll No:
Time;
State: WA
Photo No:
Yes Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
No ls the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)?
No ls the site a potential Problem Area?
Datum: NAD83
North:
West:
lndicator
Status
Percent
Cover
Dominant
SpeciesStrataNo. Scientific Name
Yes
Yes
Yes
MAIANTHEMUM DILATATUM
CAREX OBNUPTA
ATHYRIUM FILIX-FEMINA
Herb
Herb
Shrub
FAC
OBL
FAC
40.00
45.00
15.00
ALNUS RUBRA Tree
5 THUJA PLICATA Tree
FAC
FAC
30.00
5.00
Yes
No
6 ROSA NUTKANA Herb FAC 5.00 No
7 SPIRAEA DOUGLASII FACW 5.00 NoHerb
I
I
I
1
4
2
3
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data:
_ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
X Aerial Photographs
_ Other
No Recorded Data Available
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary lndicators:
_ lnundatedX Saturated in Upper 12 inches
X Water Marks
X Drift Lines
X Sediment Deposits
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary lndicators (2 or more required):
_ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
X Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Test
Other (in Remarks
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water in Pit:
Depth to Saturated Soil:
(in.
(in.
(in.6<8
I
I
Depth
(inches)
6-4
Sample Point 1
SOILS
Map Unit Name: Hoodsport-Grove
(Series and Phase): hoodsport
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Prolile
Matrix Color
(Munsell Moist)
Hydric Soil lndicators:
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
_Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
_ Reducing Conditions
- Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
NRCS Field lndicators:
Plee sant Harbor Wetland B Page 2
HrD Drainage Class: moderately well drained
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? No
Hz
CtaV toim--
Redox Feature
Abundance/Contrast
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Organic Pan
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Loam
Redox Color
(Munsell Moist)
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Yes HydrophyticVegetation Present?
Yes Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes Hydric Soils Present?
REMARKS
Yes ls this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
No ls this Sampling Point a Waters of the US?
J!-q- Have the determination results been overridden by the user?
Wetland
X Yes
No
WoUS
X Yes 7 Species Richness
Prevalence lndexNo2.34
I
Textu'e, Concretions,
Structure
I
I
t
I
I
I
;
I
I
I
I
T
t
t
t
I
t
I
I
Sample Point 2
VEGETATION
Pleasant Harbor Wetland B Page 1
Total Number of Species: 6
Percent of Dominants that are Wetland Species:
Prevalence lndex: 4.08
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data:
_ - __ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
_ Other
X No Recorded Data Available
Total Dominants:
5Ql2O: 0.00
2
FAC(minus)- applied:
FAC Neutral:
Wetland Hydrology lndicators:
Primary lndicators:
_ lnundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 inches
__ Water Marks
Drift Lines
_- Sediment Deposits
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary lndicators (2 or more required):
__,,-_ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
,__. Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
_ FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
0.00
No
Project Name: Pleasant Harbor Wetland B
Sample Point Number: 2
lnvestioators: K. Kearnes and G. Allinoton
Date: 0412612006
County: Jefferson
Roll No:
Time:
State: WA
Photo No:
Yes Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
No ls the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)?
No ls the site a potential Problem Area?
Datum: NAD83
North
West:
lndicator
Status
Percent
Cover
Dominant
SpeciesNo. Scientific Name
GAULTHERIA SHALLON Shrub FACU 55.00 Yes1
2 TSUGA HETEROPHYLLA Tree FACU- 5.OO No
Tree FACU 45.00PSEUDOTSUGA MENZIESII Yes
Shrub FACU 10.00
Shrub UPL 10.00
No
No
Shrub FACU 5.00 No
I
I
I I
3
6
4 POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM
PTERIDIUM AQUILINUM
VACCINIUM OVATUM
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water in Pit:
Depth to Saturated Soil:
(in
(in
(in
Strata
5
Sample Point 2
SOILS
Map Unit Name: Hoodsport-grove
(Series and Phase): Hoodsport
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Profile
Pleesant Harbor Wetland B
HrD
Matrix Color
Hz (MunsellMoist)
Textu'e, Concretions,
Structure
Redox Feature
Abundance/Contrast
Page 2
Redox Golor
(Munsell Moist)
Drainage Class: moderately well drained
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes
TDepth
(inches)
Sanrly loam/Gravely
Hydric Soil lndicators:
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
_Sulfidic Odor
_Aquic Moisture Regime
_Reducing Conditions
_Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
NRCS Field lndicators:
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_ _ _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_ ___ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
_ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_Organic Pan
Other (Explain in Remarks)
0-3
3+5YR4/6
o
A
WETLAND DETERMINATION
ll9 HydrophyticVegetationPresent?
_!o Wetland Hydrology Present?
No Hydric Soils Present?
No ls this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
No ls this Sampling Point a Waters of the US?
.Ng- .- Have the determination results been overridden by the user?
REMARKS
Wetland
Yes
WoUS
Yes 6 Species Richness
Prevalence lndexXXNoNo4.08
n
l
I
I
I
I
t
I
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
T
t
Sample Point 1
VEGETAT!ON
Pleasant Harbor Wetland C Page I
Project Name: Pleasant Harbor Wetland C
Sample Point Number: 1
lnvestioators: J. Callaohan and K. Brock
Date: 04/26/2006
County: Jefferson
Roll No:
Time:
State: WA
Photo No:
Yes Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
No ls the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)?
No ls the site a potential Problem Area?
Datum: NAD83
North
West:
Shrub FACU 40.00 Yes1GAULTHERIA SHALLON
UPL 70.00Shrub Yes
J Shrub UPL 10.00 No
4 Tree FACU.20.00
RHODODENDRON MACROPHYLLUM
TSUGA HETEROPHYLLA
l
l
l
DominantStrata
Yes
No. Scientific Name lndicator
Status
Percent
Cover
Total Number of Species: 4
Percent of Dominants that are Wetland Species:
Prevalence lndex: 4.57
HYDROLOGY
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water in Pit:
Depth to Saturated Soil:
Total Dominants:
50120: 0.00 FAC(minus)- applied
FAC Neutral:
3
0.00
No
(in.)
(in.)
(in.)
Wetland Hydrology lndicators:
Primary lndicators:
_ lnundated
_ _ Saturated in Upper 12 inches
__ Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
__- Sediment Deposits
_ _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary lndicators (2 or more required):
__ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
____ Water-Stained Leaves
_, Local Soil Survey Data
_ FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in I
Recorded Data:
_ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
_ Aerial Photographs
_ Other
X No Recorded Data Available
2 VACCINIUM OVATUM
Sample Point 1
SOILS
Map Unit Name: Hoodsport-Grove
(Series and Phase): Hoodsport
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Profile
Depth
(inches)
Hydric Soil lndicators:
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
_Sulfldic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
_Reducing Conditions
_Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
NRCS Field lndicators:
Pleasant Harbor Wetland C
HrD
Textu e, Concretions,
Structure
S rnd/Gravely
Drainage Class: moderately well drained
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? No
Hz
Page 2
Redox Color
(Munsell Moist)
Redox Feature
Abundance/Contrast
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Organic Pan
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Matrix Color
(Munsell Moist)
A 5YR4/63+
I
WETLAND DETERMINATION
_ No- Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
!g Wetland Hydrology Present?
No Hydric Soils Present?
!!o, ls this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
No ls this Sampling Point a Waters of the US?
No Have the determination results been overridden by the user?
REMARKS
Wetland
Yes
WoUS
Yes 4 Species Richness
Prevalence lndexXXNoNo4.57
I
I
t
I
I
I
t
I
I
T
I
I
t
I
t
T
I
I
I
I
(in.)
(in.)
(in.)
Sample Point 2
Project Name: Pleasant Harbor Wetland C
Sample Point Number: 2
J. Calla han and K.
VEGETATION
Total Number of Species: 4
Percent of Dominants that are Wetland Species
Prevalence lndex:1.83
HYDROLOGY
Total Dominants: 4
50120: 100.00
Pleasant HarborWetland C
Date: 04/26/2006
County: Jefferson
Roll No:
Page I
100.00
Yes
FAC(minus)- applied:
FAC Neutral:
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water in Pit:
Depth to Saturated Soil:
0<1
0<1
0<1
Wetland Hydrology lndicators
Primary lndicators:
X lnundated
X S"trr"ted in Upper 12 inches
X Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
_ Sediment Deposits
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary lndicators (2 or more required):
_ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
_ Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Testx Otn",nrn
Yes Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
No ls the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)?
No ls the site a potential Problem Area?
Datum: NAD83
PHYSOCARPUS CAPITATUS Tree
Yes
20.00OBL Yes
I
I
DominantStrataNo. Scientific Name
1
4
2
Yes
YesSPIRAEA DOUGLASII
CAREX OBNUPTA
Shrub
Shrub
Shrub
FACW.
FACW.
FACW
30.00
40.00
30.00
lndicator
Status
Percent
Cover
3 PHYSOCARPUSCAPITATUS
Recorded Data:
_ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
_ Aerial Photographs
_ Other
__4_ No Recorded Data Available
Time:
State: WA
North:
West:
I
Sample Point 2
SOILS
Map Unit Name: Hoodsport-Grove
(Series and Phase): Hoodsport
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Profile
Matrix Color
(Munsell Moist)
Plea sant Harbor Wetland G
HrD
Page 2
Drainage Class: moderately well drained
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? No
Redox Feature
Abundance/Contrast
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Organic Pan
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Textu.e, Concretions,Redox Color
(Munsell Moist)Hz Structure
--Muck
Hydric Soil lndicators:
Histosol
_Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
X Aquic Moisture Regime
_Reducing Conditions
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
NRCS Field lndicators:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
_YSf Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Ies Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes Hydric Soils Present?
Yes ls this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
No ls this Sampling Point a Waters of the US?
No Have the determination results been overridden by the user?L
A0-3
Depth
(inches)
10YR2-2.5/1
REMARKS
Old growth Pacific ninebark (P, CAPITATUS) had adv:ntitious roots. Area mostly open water with 2-3 inches of
inundation at soil pit.
Wetland
X Yes
WoUS
X Yes Species Richness
Prevalence lndexNoNo
1
--F-
4
1.83
I
t
I
I
I
t
I
I
T
t
I
I
t
I
l
I
t
I
t
Sample Point 1
VEGETATION
Total Number of Species: 4
Percent of Dominants that are Wetland Species:
Prevalence lndex: 2.43
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data:
_ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
_ Aerial Photographs
_ Other
X No Recorded Data Available
Pleasant HarborWetland D
Total Dominants:
50120: 75.00
4
Page 1
FAC(minus)- applied:
FAC Neutral:
75.00
Yes
Project Name: Pleasant Harbor Wetland D
Sample Point Number: 1
lnvestiqators: GJA. KHK. JOC. JP. KAB
Date: 04/2612006
County: Jefferson
Roll No:
Time:
State: WA
Photo No:
Yes Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
No ls the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)?
No ls the site a potential Problem Area?
Datum: NAD83
North
West:
20.00
20.00
UPLShrub Yes20.004
2
3
FACW
Strata
OBL
FAC
80.00
Yes
Yes
Yes
Shrub
Tree
Herb
SPIRAEA DOUGLASII
VACCINIUM PARVIFOLIUM
CAREX OBNUPTA
THUJA PLICATA
No. Scientific Name lndicator
Status
Percent
Cover
Dominant
Species
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water in Pit:
Depth to Saturated Soil:
j <2 (in.)
_ (in.)
(in.)
Wetland Hydrology lndicators:
Primary lndicators:
X lnundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 inches
_ Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary lndicators (2 or more required):
_ _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
_ Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-NeutralTest
Other ain in Remarks)
I
Sample Point 1
SOILS
Map Unit Name: Swantown gravelly loam
(Series and Phase): Swantown
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Plee sant Harbor Wetland D
SUB
Matrix Color
(Munsell Moist)
Textu'e, Concretions,
Structure
Redox Feature
Abundance/Contrast
Page 2
Redox Color
(MunsellMoist)
Drainage Class: somewhat poorly drained
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? No
Profile
Hz
A
It-
tr
Hydric Soil lndicators:
Histosol
-Histic
Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
_Aquic Moisture Regime
_Reducing Conditions
_X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
NRCS Field lndicators:
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Organic Pan
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depth
(inches)
--G _-
Yes HydrophyticVegetation Present?
Yes Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes Hydric Soils Present?
Yes ls this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
No ls this Sampling Point a Waters of the US?
No Have the determination results been overridden by the user?
REMARKS
__.1
Wetland
X Yes
WoUSX Yes
No
4 Species Richness
Prevalence lndexNo2.43
t
I
WETLAND DETERMINATION
I
il
i
E
Sample Point 2 Pleasant Harbor Wetland D Page 1
t
t
I
I
I
;
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
3
I
I
I
I
Sample Point Number: 2
VEGETATION
County: Jefferson
Roll No:
State; WA
Photo No:
Yes Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
No ls the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)?
No ls the site a potential Problem Area?
Datum: NAD83
North
West:
1
6
2
5
3
4
Strata
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
FACU
FACU
FACU
FACU
FACU
FAC
80.00
20.00
20.00
30.00
20.00
30.00
GAULTHERIA SHALLON
POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM
RUBUS DISCOLOR
PSEUDOTSUGA MENZIESII
PTERIDIUM AQUILINUM
THUJA PLICATA
Shrub
Shrub
Herb
Tree
Tree
Herb
lndicator
Status
Percent
CoverNo. Scientific Name Dominant
Species
Total Number of Species: 6
Percent of Dominants that are Wetland Species:
Prevalence lndex: 3.85
HYOROLOGY
Total Dominants:
50120: 17.00 FAC(minus)- applied:
FAC Neutral:
6
Wetland Hydrology lndicators:
Primary lndicators:
_ lnundated
Saturated in Upper 12 inches
_ Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
_ ._ Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary lndicators (2 or more required):
__ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
_ Water-Stained Leaves
__ _ Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Recorded Data:
_ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
_ Aerial Photographs
_ Other
X No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water in Pit:
Depth to Saturated Soil:
(in.
(in.
(in.
)
)
)
Other Explain in Remarks)
17.00
No
Sample Point 2
SOILS
Map Unit Name: Swantown gravelly loam
(Series and Phase): Swantown
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Profile
Pleirsant Harbor Wetland D
SUB
Page 2
Drainage Class: somewhat poorly drained
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? No
Depth
(inches)
Matrix Color
(Munsell Moist)Hz
Textr re, Concretions,
Structure
-oamy sand
rOifterUaceoui-
-oa-my sina -
Redox Feature
Abundance/Contrast
10YR3i3
10YR3i6
Hydric Soil lndicators:
Histosol
-Histic
Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
_Rquic Moisture Regime
__Reducing Conditions
__ _- Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
NRCS Field lndicators:
o
A
A
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Organic Pan
Other (Explain in Remarks)
o-2
2-5
5-7
7+A
+
I
Redox Color
(Munsell Moist)
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
No
No-
No ls this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
No ls this Sampling Point a Waters of the US?
llq Have the determination results been overridden by the user?No
REMARKS
Wetland
Yes
No
WoUS
Yes 6 Species Richness
Prevalence lndexXXNo3.85
I
u
[JESI
I
I
r
GeoEnrc wrr*r1f,
AppeNox C
WerteNo Rentta Fonms
I
T
T
t
T
I
I
T
I
I
T
T
T
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
Wetland Rating System for Western Washington
Field lYotes
HGM Class: Date: 1-L: - 1) '-i
Cosardin
Classes
Types of Structure (7o area) Hydroperiods (%oarea)
Hus to be at least l0%o or tii acre. *,hicheyer is smuller, to counl.
Aquatic Bed Saturated Only
Emergent X Occasionally flooded (< 2months) X
Scrub/shrub Seasonally tlooded (>: 2months)
Permanently flooded
Permanently flowing stream
Seasonally fl owing stream
Forest x
Open Water _
ilIajor sources of rvater (estimate at least 10%o of rvater budget)
Surface runoff tiom surrounding landscape X
Groundrvater
Precipitation _
Sketch of wetland Show location of vegetation classes and hydroperiods
V?nji._)v
-,t 1
, i-.r'l;
11 ..
X
ri '-i -Estimated distance betu'een grid marks
\\'\\:_.\Fieldnotes doc
. '-)Site:.'-r.; ,]
Wetlands Rating Field Data Form
Background lnformation:
l, . ,r. l, * Affiliarion /l-a Darc:4-2b-.:Name of Rater:
Name of rvetland (if knorvn):.r-t.,v Jt
Government i urisdiction of wetland
Location: l,r4 Section:_ of li4 S:_ Section:_ Township:_ Range:_
Sources of lnformatlon: (Check all sources that apply)
Site visit: X USGS Topo Map: X NWI map: .\ Aerial Photo: ..\ Soils su*-ey: \.
Other:__ Describe:
When The Field Data form is complete enter Categor_r' here:
Q.1. High Quality Natural Wetland Circle Answers
Ansrver this question if y'ou have adequate information or experience to do so. Il
not flnd someone rvith the expertise to answer the questions. Then, if the ansu'er
to questions 1a. Ib and lc are all NO. contact the Natural Heritage program of
DNR.
la. Human caused disturbances.
Is there significant evidence ofhuman-caused changes to topograph!'or
hydrology of the wetland as indicated by' an1, olthe tbllou,ing conditions?
Consider onl.v" changes that ma1, have taken place in the last -i decades. The
impacts ofchanges done earlier have probably been stabilized and the rvetland
ecos)'stem will be close to reaching some new equilibrium that ma)' represent a
high quality,uvelland.
la. I Upstream watershed > l2o,'o impervious.
lal. Wetland is ditched and rvater t'lorv is not obstructed.
la3. Wetland has been graded. filled. logged.
la4. Water in rvetland is controlled b1,' dikes. u'eirs. etc.
Ia-i. Wetland is grazed.
la6. Other indicators of distr.rrbance (list belorv)
Yes: go to Q.2
Yes: go to Q.2
to Q.3
lb.
+_
-4'1:-
_v-
Y
es: go to
I b Are there populations of non-native plants rvhich are currently present, cover
more than l0% of the wetland. and appear to be invading native populations?
Briefly describe any non-native plant populations and
lc. ls there evidence of human-caused disturbances which have visibl,v-'
degraded rvater qualify. Evidence ofthe degradation ofrvater qualiry include:
direct (untreated) runoff from roads or parking lots; presence, or historic
evidence. of waste dumps; oily sheens; the smell of organic chemicals; or
livestock use. Briefly describe:
lntbrmation source(s):
Q.2. lrreplaceable Ecological Functions:
Does the wetland:
have aI least li4 acre oforganic soils deeper than l6 inches
and the wetland is relatively undisturbed; OR
[f the ansrver is NO because the rvetland is disturbed briefly
describe:
lndicators of disturbance ma1,' include:
- Wetland has been graded, filled, logged;
- Organic soils on the surface are dried-out for more than half
ofthe year;
- Wetland receives direct stormrvater runoff from urban or
agricultural areas.];
have a tbrested class greater than I acre:
OR
have characteristics of an estuarine system:
OR
have eel grass floating or non-floating kelp beds?
OR
YES: so to O.l
,i<@o to r..
2a. Bogs and Fens
Are any'of the three follorving conditions met for the area of organic soil'?
2a. l. Are Sphagnum. mosses a common ground cover (>30026) and the cover of
invasive species (see Table 3) is less than l0%?
Is the area of sphagrrum mosses and deep organic soils > I /2 acre?
Is the area of sphagnum mosses and deep organic soils '.,.- I 2 acre?
1a.2. Is there an area of organic soil rvhich has an emergent class u'ith at least
one species from Table 2. and cover of invasive species is < lOo,ir (see Table l)?
Is the area of herbaceous plants and deep organic soils > l.'2 acre?
ls the area of herbaceous plants and deep organic soils l''J-l 2acre'l
go to Q.2
le Cat. I
DNR
all: go to Q.3)
go to la
YES: Go to 2b
Yes: Go to lc
Yes: Go to 2d
YES: Category I
YES: Category II
Go to ra.3
YES: Category I
YES: Category II
r'r\O: Go to la.i
2a.3. Is the vegetation a mixhJre of only herbaceous plants and Sphagnum
mosses with no scrublshrub or forested classes?
Is the area ofherbaceous plants, Sphagnum. and deep organic
soils > ll2 acre?
Is the area ofherbaceous plants, Sphagnum. and deep organic
soils %-1,'2 acre?
YES: Category I
YES: Category II
Go to Q.3
YES: Category I
NO: Go to Q.3
YESG]
Go to lb.3
Category I
Go to 2b.2
to Q.3
lb. I . Does 50% of the cover of upper lorest canopy consist of evergreen
trees older than 80 )'ears or deciduous trees older than 50 y'ears?
Ab/e.'The size of trees is often not a measure of age, and size cannot
be used as a surrogate for age (see guidance).
fb.2. Does 50% ofthe cover of forest canopy consist ofevergreen trees older
than 50 years, AND is the structural diversitv of the forest high as
clraracterized by an additional layer of trees 20'49'tall, shrubs 6'- 20'.
tall, and a herbaceous groundcover?
?b.i. Does < 25o/o ofthe areal cover in the herbaceousigroundcover or
the shrub layer consist of invasive'exotic plant species from the list on p. l9?
Q.2b. !!Iature forested rvetland.
Q.2c. Estuarine rvetlands.
2c.1. Is the rvetland listed as National Wildlit'e Refuge, National Park.
National Estuary Reserv'e. Natural Area Preserv'e. State Park. or
Educational. Environmental or Scientific Reserves designated under
wAc 332-30-r5t?
3c.2. ls the wetland > 5 acres:
Note: lf an area contains patches olsalt tolerant vegetation that are
l) less than 600 t'eet apart and that are separated b1,' mudtlats that go
drv on a lVlean Lorv Tide. or
2) separated by tidal channels that are less than 100 feet wide;
all the vegetated areas are to be considered together in calculating the
wetland area.
or is the rvetland I -5 acres:
or is the rvetland < I acre?
YES: Category l
NO: Go to lc.2
YES: Category I
YES: Go to lc.3
YES: Go to lc.4
2c.J. Does the wetland meet at least 3 of the follorving 4 criteria:
- minimum existing evidence of human related disturbance such as
diking, ditching. filling, cultivation. grazing or the presence of non-
native plant species (see guidance for definition):
- surface water connection ivith tidal salnvater or tidal flreshwater:
- at least 75% ofthe wetland has a 100 buffer ofungrazed pasture.
open water. shrub or forest;
- has at least i ol the following fleatures: lorv marsh; high marsh: tidal
channels; lagoon(s)lvoody debris; or contiguous freshrvater rvetland.
1c.4. Does the lvetland meet all of the four criteria under lcl? (above)?
Q.3. Category lV wetlands.
3a. ls the rvetland: less than I acre and,
hydrological ly isolated and,
comprised of one vegetated class that is dominated (> 809.i, areal cover)
by one species from Table 3 (page I9) or Table 4 (page 20)
3b. Is the vvetland: less than t$'o acres
and, h,v'drological ly isolated.
with one vegetated class. and > 90% of areal cover in any combination ol
species from Table 3 (page l9)
f c. ls the rvetland excavated from upland and a pond smaller than I acre
rvithout a surface rvater connection to streams. lakes. rivers. or other
rvetland. and has < 0. I acre of
Category IV
ro lb
Category IV
to lc
IE\Category IV
,N9;Co to Q.-t
YES: Category I
NO Category II
YES:Category II
j.,-O III
2d.2. Are their floating or non-floating kelp bed(s) present rvith greater than
5096 macro algal cover in the month of August or September?...............
Q.2d. Eel Grass and Kelp Beds.
2d. l. Are eelgrass beds present? .YES: Category I
NO: go to 2d.2
YES: Category I
NO:Category II
Q.4. Significant habitat value.
Ansrver all questions and enter data requested.
4a. Total wetland area
Estimate area- select from choices in the near-right column. and score in the
far column:
Enteracreage ofrvetland here: i -i acres, and source: l:*<* ,i,i' <'
Circle scores that qualifl
ACTCS
>200
,10-100
1040
5-103
l-)_l
0.1- I
<0.10
6
4
points
/'t ).,.?
I
.lb. Wetland classes: Circle the wetland classes below that qualily:
Open Water: if the area of open lvater is > I r.l acre
Aquatic Beds: if the area of aquatic beds > l,'4 acre,
€-r".rt;;Dthe area of emergent class is > l4 acre.
----ts
Scrub-Shrub: ifthe area ofscrub-shrub class is > l'4 acre.
or.tt.Iiif urea of tbrested class is > l14 acre.---/'
Add the number of rvetland classes. above. that qualify. and then
Score according to the columns at right.
e.g. lfthere are 4 classes (aquatic beds, open rvater, ernergent &
Scrub-'shrub), -"*ou rvould circle 8 points in the far ri.-sht column.
F
#of classes Points
... 0
... 3
.,(6s
4c. Plant species diversit_v.
For each uetland class (at right) that qualities in
4b above. count the number of difterent plant specic.s
you can find that cover more than 5o,ir of the ground.
You do not have to name them.
Score in column at tar right:
e.g. Ifa rvetland has an aquatic bed class rvith 3 species. an
emergent class rvith 4 species and a scrub-shrub
class with ? species you rvould circle 2. 2, and I in the
far column.
i\bre.' Any plant species rvith a cover of > 59ro
qualifies for points rvithin a class. even those
that are not ofthat class.
Class
Aquatic
Emergent
Scrub-Scrub
+ species in class
I
--J
I
2
J
>3
>5
1
j--l
>-l
Points
0
I
2
J
0
I
iti\+J
3
i5
orestedF
,qi
I
2
J
i
0.
I
2j-l
.>-l
5............ l0
I
1
J
4
4d. Structural diversity.
lf the rvetland has a forested class, add I point if each of the following
Classes is present within the forested class and is larser than l,'4 acre:
-trees > 50'tall..
-trees 20'- 49' tall......
-shrubs.
-herbaceous ground cover..
Also add I point if there is any'"open rvater" or "aquatic bed" class
Immediately' next to the forested area (i.e. there is no scrubishrub or
ion betrveen them YES- I
YES-I
-YES - I
-5
None - 0
H
YES "_
4e. Decide from the diagrams belorv whether interspersion betlveen
rvetland classes is high, moderate. lorv or none? If you think the
amount of interspersion falls in between the diagrams score accordingly
(i.e. a moderately' high amount of interspersion rvould score a 4.
rvhile a moderatel.v lorv amount would score a 3)
llr,:,1 lf
r r h rd< r-:i Ir
{f Habitat features.
Ansrver questions belorv. circle features that appl,,*. and score to right:
ls there evidence that the open or standing water rvas caused by beavers
Is a heron rookery located rvithin 300'?
Are raptor nest's located rvithin 300'?
Are there at lea$ 3 standing dead trees (snags) per acre greater than
10" in diameter at "breast heieht" (DBH)?
Are there at least 3 dorvned logs per acre rvith a diameter
> 6" lor at least l0'in length?
Are there areas (vesetated or unvegetated) rvithin the rvetland that are
ponded for at least -l months out of the year. and the rvetland has not
qualified as having an open rvater class in Question 4b. ?
YES=2
YES=I
YES=I
YES=I
SYE ')
lit*-
tr i(It: t: tt rl itr,:i',
.lg. Connection to streams. (Score one answer onlv.)
-lg.l. Does the rvetland provide habitat for fish at any time ol the year AND
does it have a perennial surtace water connection to a fish-bearing stream.
4g.2 Does the vtetland provide flsh habitat seasonally AND does it have
a seasonal surface lvater connection to a fish-bearing stream.
4g.3 Does the rvetland fi.rnction to export organic matter through a surfhce
lvater connection at all times of the year to a perennial stream.
4g..1 Does the rvetland function to export organic matter through a surface
lvater connection to a stream on a seasonal basis?
{h. Buffers.
Score the existing buffers on a scale of l-5 based on the follorving four descriptions
tf the condition of the bufters do not exactll,'match the description. score either a
point higher or lorver depending on rvhether the buffers are less or more degraded.
Forest. scrub, native grassland or open water buffers are present for
more than 1O0'around 95% of the circumf'erence.
Forest. scrub. native grassland. or open rvater bulfers rvider than 100'
tbr more than l,/? of the wetland circumference. or a forest. scrub.
grasslands. or open water buffers tbr more than 50'around 95 o/o of the
circurnt'erence.
Forest. scrub. native grassland. or open rvater buffers rvider than 100'
tbr more than 1,14 of the rvetland circumference. or a foresl. scrub. native
grassland. or open water buffers wider than 50' tbr more than ll2 olthe
rvetland circumt'erence.
No roads. buildings or paved areas withirr I00'of the rvetland for more than
95o,/o of the rvetland circumt'erence.
No roads. buildings or paved areas rvithin 25'olthe rvetland tbr nrore
than 95% of the circumference, or
No roads buildings or paved areas rvithin 50'of the rvetland for more than
1,3 of the rvetland circumference.
Paved areas. indrstrial areas or residential construction (rvith less than 50'
behveen houses) are less than 15 [eet from the rvetland lbr more than 95 0,o
of the circumlbrence of the rvetland.
Score = j
Score - l
1
Score = 0
Score
reSco
YES=6
YES=1
YES =.I
YES::
Score
I
T
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-li. Connection to other habitat areas:
Select the description. rvhich best matches the site being evaluated.
-ls the rvetland connected to, or part of. a riparian corridor at least 100'wide
connecting nvo or more rvetlands; or, is there an upland connection present >100'
wide with good forest or shrub cover (>259,i cover) connecting it rvith a
Signi fi cant Habitat Area?
-ls the wetland connected to any other Habitat Area rvith either l) a forestedlshrub
corridor < 100' wide, or 2) a corridor that is > 100' rvide. but has a low vegetative
cover less than 6 feet in height?
-ls the wetland connected to. or a part of. a riparian corridor betrveen 50 - 100' wide
rvith scrub/shrub or fbrest cover connection to other wetlands?
- ls the rvelland connected to an;- other Habitat Area rvith narrolv corridor (< 100')
of lorv vegetation (< 6'in height)?
- Is the rvetland and its buffer (if the buffer is less than 50'wide) completely'isolated
by development (urban. residential with a density greater than 2,'acre. or industrial)?
YES=5
Yes=3
Yes=l
Yes=l
Yes=0
Category II
Category III
Now add the scores circled (for Q.5a - Q.si above) to get a total
ls the Total greater than or equal to 22 points? -i YES
\Yetland Rating System for lVestern Washington
Field Notes
Site:,ti1,,,.i ','1 HGNI Class:Date: 4
Types of Structu re ('/o area) Hylroperiods (Toarea)
Has to be ar leasr 1096 or ti dcre. whiclever is smaller, to count.
Aquatic Bed Saturated Only
Occasionally tlooded (< 2months)
Seasonally' tlooded (>: 2months)
Permanentl.v- tlooded
Permanently tlow'ing stream
Seasonall-v tlowing stream
Corvardin
Classes
Emergent
ScrubJshrub >
Forest v
Open Water >(
llajor sources of w'ater (estimate at least 107o of water budget)
Surt-ace runoff tiom surrounding landscape _
Groundrvater
Precipitation
Sketch of wetland Show location of vegetation classes and hydroperiods
+-{
i r\ )
i{&
-- i"ti .----- '
; Frq
a'
:-
i';l
*l
!. . .t
i.
Estinlated distance bet"reen ,Jrid inrrks !
a ,,''r-r,-
I
I
i
Location: l,'4 Section:_ of l/4 S:_ Section:-- Torvnship:_ Range:_
Sources ot lnlormation: (Check all sources that apply)
Sire visir:VUSCS Topo ll'lap:- Nwlmap: \r'lAerialPhoto ,j*Ursurvey:
Other: Describe:
When The Field Data form is complete enter Category here
Date
tt\
Name of Rater:
Govemment Jurisdiction oI rvetland:
Name olrvetland (if knorvn):
Wetlands Rating Field Data Form
Background lnformation :
Affiliation:
Q.l. High Quality NaturalWetland
Ansrverthis question if -v"ou have adequate information or experience to do so. If
not t'ind someone rvith the expertise to anslver the questions. Then. if the ans"ver
to questions la. lb and Ic are all NO. contact the Natural Heritage program of
DNR.
la. Human caused disturbances.
Is there sisnificant evidence ofhuman-caused changes to topographv or
hy'drologry of the rvetland as indicated b."" any'of the lollowing conditions?
Consider onlv chanses that ma,y have taken place in the last 5 decades. The
impacts of changes done earlier have probably been stabilized and the wetland
ecos)stem rvill be close to reaching some new equilibriurn that may represent a
h i gh q ual ir"v' rvet land.
la. I Upstream rvatershed > 129'o impervious.
lal. Wetland is ditched and rvater florv is not obstructed.
lal. Wetland has been -eraded. filled. logged.
la.l. Water in ,,vetland is controlled bi' dikes, rveirs. etc.
la5. \Yetland is _eTazed.
I a6. Other indicators of disturbance (list belorv)
Circle Answers
Yes: go to Q.2
Yes: go to Q.3
Y toQ.i
es: go to Q.3
Ql
rPq-
I
lc. Is there evidence of human-caused disturbances rvhich have visibl,v-
degraded water qualitv. Evidence of the degradation of rvater qualitv include:
direct (untreated) runotT from roads or parking lots; presence, or historic
evidence. of rvaste dumps: oily'sheens; the smell of organic chemicals, or
livestock use. Brielll' describe:
Q.2. lrreplaceabte Ecological Functions:
Does the rvetland:
have at least l/4 acre oforganic soils deeper than I 6 inches
and the rvetland is relatively undisturbed: OR
[lf the answer is NO because the wetland is disturbed brieflr
describe:
lndicators of disturbance ma,"" include:
- Wetland has been graded, filled, logged;
- Organic soils on the surface are dried-out for more than half
ofthe year;
- Wetland receives direct stormrvaler runoff from urban or
agricultural areas.l:
OR
have a tbrested class greater than I acre;
OR
have characteristics of an estuarine s)-stem:
OR
have eel tloati or non-f'loat ke beds'l
2a, Bogs and Fens
Are any olthe tkee follorving conditions met tbr the area of organic soil?
2a. l. Are Sphagnum. mosses a common ground cover (>309..o) and the cover of
invasive species (see Table 3) is less than l0%'7
Is the area of sphagnum mosses and deep organic soils > l'3 acrel
ls the area of sphagnum mosses and deep organic soils 't-l'2 acre?
1a.2. Is there an area of organic soil rvhich has an emergent class u,ith at least
onespr'ciestiomTable2.andcoverof invasivespeciesis< l0o,i:(see'I'able31?
ls the area of herbaceous plants and deep organic soils > I I acre'l
Is the area ofherbaceous plants and deep orqanic soils I -l-l lacre?
(NO to all: _eo to Q,3)
YES go to 2a
YES: Go to 2b
Yes: Co to 2c
Yes: Go to ld
YES: Category I
YES: Category II
rr*O: Co to:a.i
YES: Category I
YES: Categor-r Il
\iO: Co to la.i
lb Are there populations of non-native plants which are currentl,v- present. cover
more than l0o,'o of the rvetland, and appear to be invading native populations? )
Briefly describe any' non-native plant populations and .t
Information source(s): \
f!-s:g4gf; 1.ffi{-tc.
YES: go t_o Q.2
SIUP6ssiurc€Ii,T.;
_Cor4acLDNRl*--a"-'._-- _-
2a.3. Is the vegetation a mixture of only herbaceous plants and Sphagnum
mosses lr,ith no scrubishrub or forested classes?
Is the area ofherbaceous plants. Sphagnum. and deep organic
soils > liZ acre'?
Is the area ofherbaceous plants. Sphagnum, and deep organic
soils %-l/2 acre?
YES: Category I
YES: Category II
NO: Go to Q.3.
2b. L Does 509i0 of the cover of upper tbrest canopy consist of evergreen
trees older than 80 years or deciduous trees older than 50 years?
Abfe; The size oftrees is often not a measure ofage. and size cannot
be used as a surrogate for age (see guidance).
2b.2. Does 50% of the cover of fbrest canopy consist of eversreen trees older
than 50 years, AND is the structural diversit,v- of the tbrest high as
characterized b1, an additional la1,er of trees 20'-49'tall. shrubs 6'- 20',
tall. and a herbaceous groundcover?
3b.3. Does <25.91o of the areal cover in the herbaceousigroundcover or
the shrub layer consist of invasiveiexotic plant species frorn the list on p. l9?
Q.2b. Nlature forested wetland
YES: Category I
NO: Co to 2b.2
YES: Go to 2b.3
NO: Go to Q.i
YES: Category I
NO: Go to Q.3
Q.2c. Estuarine rvetlands.
2c.1. Is the u,etland listed as National Wildlif-e Refuge. National Park.
National Estuary Reserve. Natural Area Preserve. State Park, or
Educational. Environmental or Scientitrc Reserves designated under
wAc 332-30-l5r?
2c.2. Is the wetland > 5 acres: .....
Note: lf an area contains patches ofsalt tolerant vesetation that are
l ) less than 600 feet apart and that are separated bl, mudflats that go
dry on a iVlean Low Tide, or
3,) separated by tidal channels that are less than 100 t'eet rvide:
all the vegetated areas are to be considered together in calculating the
rvetland area.
or is the rvetland I -5 acres;
or is the wetland < I acre?
YES: Categor-r I
NO: Go to 2c.2
YES: Category I
YES: Go to lc.3
YES: Co to 2c.{
2c.3. Does the,vvetland meet at least 3 of the tbllo,'ving.l criteria:
- minimum existing evidence of human related disturbance such as
diking. ditching. filling, cultivation. grazing or the presence of non-
native plant species (see guidance for definition):
- surtace water connection with tidal salfwater or tidal freshrvater:
- at least 75% ofthe rvetland has a 100 buffer ofungrazed pasture
open lvater. shrub or forest;
- has at least 3 of the following features: low marsh: high marsh: tidal
channels; lagoon(s):rvoody debris; or contiguous freshrvater rvetland.
2c.4. Does the rvetland meet all of the four criteria under Jci? (above)?
YES; Category I
NO Category ll
YES: Category ll
NO: Catesorv'III
Q.2d. Eel Grass and Kelp Beds.
2d. l. Are eelgrass beds present? .
2d.2. Are their floating or non-floating kelp bed(s) present rvith greater than
509.6 macro algal cover in tlre month of August or September?...... -.. . ... .
Y,-ES-l.Category l-- --_
NO:go to 2d.2
YES:Category I
NO:Categon ll
Q.3. Category lV wetlands.
3a. Is the rvetland: less than I acre and.
hydrologically isolated and.
comprised of one vegetated class that is dominated (> 809ir areal cover)
b1,one species from Table 3 (page l9) or Table 4 (page 30)
3b. ls the wetland: less than two acres
and. h,v-drological11, isolated.
rvith one vegetated class. and > 909'o of areal cover in any combination of
species from Table 3 (page l9)
3c- Is the rvetland excavated lrom upland and a pond snraller than I acre
rvithout a surface water connection to streanrs. lakes. rivers. or other
rvetland. and has < 0.1 acre ofv
YES: Category IV
NO: go to 3b
YES: Category IV
NO: go to 3c
YES: Category IV
NO: go to Q.4
t
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
I
I
I
I
I
Q.4. Significant habitat value.
Ansrver all questions and enter data requested.
.la. Total wetland area
Estimate area, select from choices in the near-right column, and score in the
f,ar column:
Enter acreage of wetland here: ; acres. and 5su1gs; (. .--1. . i t -:Ll
--7-
-
Circle scores that qualih
acres
>200
40-200
l0-.t0
5-103
l-5
0.t-l
<0.10
points
I
6
5
4
2
Open Wateri
crub-Shrub:'if the area of scrub-shrub class is > l.'4 acre,
--</Forested: if,area offorested class is > l/4 acre,
-=--:-/)
Add the number of rvetland classes. above. that quality, and then
Score according to the columns at right.
e.g. If there are -l classes (aquatic beds, open water. emergent &
I
2
5............ r0
#of classes
6
would circle 8 nts in the tar
Emergent: if the area of emergent class is > l/4 acre,
Scrub-shrub column.
classes: Circle the rvetland classes belorv that quali$
if the area of aqualic beds > l,r4 acre,
the area ofopen rvaler is > l/4 acre
Points
...... 0
{c. Plant species diversity.
For each uetland class (at right) thal qualities in
4b above. count the number of different plant species
.vou can t'ind that cover more than 5ozt, of the ground.
You do not have to name them.
Score in column at far right:
e.g. Ifa rvetland has an aquatic bed class rvith 3 species. an
emergent class rvith 4 species and a scrub-shrub
class rvith 2 species you rvould circle 2, 2. and I in the
tar column.
/vare.' Any plant species with a cover of > 5%
qualifies for points rvithin a class. even those
that are not ofthat class.
/+-w'
;:
# species in class PointsClass
Aquatic
Emergent
Scrub-Scruba
Forested
0
I
2
)
0
I
2
3
0
I
?5,
)
I
L
3
I
2-3
4-5
>5
I
2
3-4
>4
I
2
3-4
.>-l
0
I
€
J
\
.ld. Structu ral diversity.
If the rvetland has a forested class, add I point if each of the following
rvithin the tbrested class and is larger than l,'-l acre:
-trees > 50'tall....
-trees 20'- 49' tall..
-shrubs.....
-herbaceous ground cover....
Also add I point if there is any "open rvater" or "aquatic bed" class
Immediately nexl to the forested area (i.e. there is no scrub,'shrub or
emergent vegetation between them).
Classes is present __--- -a.,fES^l 'EYES- I
Y-S:T
ISYE
lvlodr'rate - j
Lorv - I
None - 0
{e. Decide from the diagrams belorv rvhether interspersion bet*,een
wetland classes is high. moderate. lorv or none? If you think the
amount of inlerspersion talls in benveen the diagrams score accordingh
(i.e. a moderately high amount of interspersion would score a 4.
while a moderately' lorv amount rvould score a 2)
nr-rIttj
rl, rrllcr:tl(
Itu l:r..'.
h r':irtIr'r |1'r iJ,li
{f Habitat features.
Ansrver questions belorv. circle t-eatures that appl1,'. and score to right:
Is there evidence that the open or standing lvater \uas caused br beavers
Is a heron rookery located rvithin i00'?
Are raptor nesl's located rvithin 300'?
Are there at least 3 standing dead trees (snags) per acre greater than
10" in diameter at "breast height" (DBH)?
Are there at least 3 dou,ned logs per acre with a diameter
> 6" fbr at least l0'in length?
Are there areas (r'egetated or unvegetated) within the rvetland that are
ponded tbr at least.l months out of the 1,ear. and the rretland has not
qualitied as having an open u'ater class in Question -lb. ?
YES=2
YES=l
YES=l
YES=I
YES=I
4,X
')\ES
/)
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
T
t
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
49. Connection to streams. (Score one answer only,)
49.1. Does the wetland provide habitat for t'ish at any'time of the year AND
does it have a perennial surface water connection to a fish-bearing stream.
4g.2 Does the rvetland provide fish habitat seasonally AND does it have
a seasonal surface water connection to a fish-bearing stream.
49.3 Does the rvetland function to export organic matter through a surt'ace
water connection at all times of the year to a perennial stream.
49.4 Does the rvetland function to export organic matter through a surlace
water connection to a stream on a seasonal basis?
YES=6
YES =-I
YES :4
YES=2
Score = 5
Score = l
-
4h. Buffers.
Score the existing buifers on a scale of l-5 based on the lollowing four descriptions.
If tlre condition of the buffers do not exactly match the description. score either a
point higher or lorver depending on rvhether the buffers are less or more degraded.
Forest, scrub, native grassland or open water buffers are present for
more than 100'around 95o,'o of the circumference.
Forest, scrub. native grassland. or open water buffers wider than 100'
for more than li2 of the rvetland circumference, or a forest. scrub.
grasslands, or open water bufTers for more than 50' around 95 % of the
circumference.
Forest. scrub, native grassland. or open rvater bulfers rvider than 100'
tbr more than li4 of the rvetland circumference. or a forest, scrub. native
grassland, or open rvater buffers rvider than 50' for more than I,'l of the
wetland ci rcum ference.
No roads. buildings or paved areas rvithin 100'of the rvetland fbr more than
959.2o of the \ryetland circumference.
No roads, buildings or paved areas within 25'of the ',vetland for more
than 95% of the circumference, or
No roads buildings or paved areas within 50'of the rvetland for more than
li2 of the lvetland circumference.
Paved areas. industrial areas or residential construction (with less than 50'
betrveen houses) are less than l5 t-eet from the rvetland for more than 95 c.i)
of the circumference of the wetland,
Score : 2
Score = I
Score = 0
I(
CA\
YES=5
Yes=3
Yes= I
Yes-0
.{i. Connection to other habitat areas:
Select the description. rvhich best matches the site being evaluated
-ls the wetland connected to. or part of. a riparian corridor at least I 00' rvide
connecting two or more rvetlands: or. is there an upland connection present > 100'
wide with good tbrest or shrub cover (>25o;ir cover) connecting it nith a
Significant Habitat Area?
-ls the rvetland connected to any other Habitat Area with either l) a forested'shrub
corridor < I 00' rvide. or 3) a corridor that is > I 00' rvide, but has a lorv vegetative
cover less than 6 feet in height?
-ls the wetland connected to. or a part ofl, a riparian corridor betrveen 50 - I 00' rvide
rvilh scrub/shrub or fbrest cover connection to other rvetlands?
- ls the rvetland connected to any other Habitat Area rvith narrow corridor (<100')
of lorv vegetation (< 6' in height)?
- Is the rvetland and its buffer (if the buffer is less than 50'rvide) completely isolated
b;" development (urban. residential with a densit-l' greater than 2,'acre. or industrial)l'
Now add the scores circled (for Q.Sa - Q.si above) to get a total
Is the Total greater than or equal to 22 points?YES -Categon II
I
t
t
I
I
T
T
I
{)
I
I
T
I
t
I
I
t
I
t
lr,'-.)-':'+-.'
Wetland Rating System for \Yestern Washington
Field Notes
site: irr+ I HGNI crass:Date: L{- ZG -ctq
Ty'pes of Structure (7o area) . llydroperiods (7,area)
Has to be at least 1A9.6 ort/s dcr€, whichever is smaller, to counL
fAquatic Bed Saturated Only
Corvardin
Classes
Emergent
Scrub/shrub
Forest
Occasionall,v tlooded (< 2months)
Seasonally tlooded (>= 2months)
Permanently tlooded
Permanently tlolving stream
Seasonally flolving stream
x ,(
open Water (.
Nlajor sourees of water (estimate at least 107o of water budget)
Surlace runoff from surrounding landscape X
Groundwater
Precipitation
Sketch of wetland Show locatron of vegetation classes and hydroperiods
,tl XSTP'.lt;, t, tor6l /. ,: :, 1
;
+,V
a,
o
iI
1 .\*tL-:l-
,\ - -
t
i
-i ,i*,1j
Estimated distance betrveen grid marks
Wetlands Rating Field Data Form
Background lnformation :
Name ofrvetland (if knou'n):
| ,.-/ 1- i..;,.t, t D
i
Government Jurisdiction of rvetland: J I L-s
Location: l/4 Section:_ of l/4 S:_ Section:_ To',vnship:_, __ Range:__
Sources of lnformation: {Check all sources that apply)
Site visit: X USGS Topo lv{ap:_X NWI map:_-)(- Aerial Photo: ><--Soils survey': .\ -
Other:_ Describe
When The Field Data form is complete enter Category here: T
-Q.1. High Quality Natural Wetland Circle Answers
Ansrver this question if you have adequate inlbrmation or experience to do so. If
not find someone rvith the expertise to ans\\,erthe questions. Then, if the ansrver
to questions la, lb and lc are all NO. contact the Natural Heritage program of
DNR.
la. Human caused disturbances.
Is there significant evidence of human-caused changes to topo$aphy or
hydrologv of the wetland as indicated by an1'of the lollorving conditions?
Consider only changes that may have taken place in the last 5 decades. The
impacts of changes done earlier have probabl,"- been stabilized and the rvetland
ecos)stem rvill be close to reaching some ne\!'equilibrium that ma),represent a
high q ual ir-'" n etland.
la.'i Upstream rvatershed > l2oo imperv'ious.
la?
Yes: go to ,
Yes: go to
Yes: gq 1_o_
[Yet, go to
Yei: go to
o,
Q.2
Q.:
Q.l l
o.r
Wetland is ditched and rvater florv is not obstructed.
Wetland has been graded. tilled. logged.
Water in rr,etland is controlled b1' dikes. weirs. etc.
Wetland is grazed.
Other indicators of disturbance (list belorv)
Yes: go to Q.2
No: go to lb.
lb Are there populations of non-native plants rvhich are currentl,v present. cover
more than l0% of the rvetland. and appear to be invadins native populationsl)
Briefly describe anv non-native plant populations and
lc. Is there evidence of human-caused disturbances which have visibly
degraded rvater qualify. Evidence of the degradation of water quality include
direct (untreated) runofffrom roads or parking lots: presence. or historic
evidence, of rvaste dumps; oily sheens: the smell of organic chemicals: or
livestock use. Briefly describe:
Information source(s)
YES: go to Q.3
No: go to lc.
YES: go to Q.?
NO: Possible Cat. I
Contact DNR
o
2a. Bogs and Fens
Are any of the three tbllorving conditions met tbr the area of organic soil?
2a. l. Are Sphagnum. mosses a common ground cover (>30o,"o) and the cover of
invasive species (see Table l) is less than l0%?
Is the area of sphagnum mosses and deep organic soils > l,'J acre?
Is the area of sphagnum mosses and deep organic soils 1,.-l 2 acre?
2a.2. Is tlrere an area of organic soil uhich has an emergent class rvith at least
one species from Table 2. and cover of invasive species is < I0o,o (see Table 3)?
ls the area olherbaceoLn plants and deep organic soils > l'l acre'J
ls the area olherbaceous plants and deep organic soils I -l-l lacre?
NO: Go to la.i
I
YE
YE
NO: Co to la.i
YES: Categor;* I
YES: Category ll
S: Category I
S: Category I
Q.2. lrreplaceable Ecological Functions:
Does the wetland;
have at least l/4 acre oforganic soils deeper than l6 inches
and the rvetland is relatively undisrurbed; OR
[f the ansrver is NO because the wetland is disturbed briefl-v
describe:
Indicators of disrurbance may include:
- Wetland has been graded, filled, logged;
- Organic soils on the surface are dried-out tbr more than half
ofthe year;
- Wetland receives direct stormwater runoff from urban or
agricultural areas.]:
OR
have a lorested class greater than I acre;
OR
have characteristics ofan estuarine svstem
OR
have eel or non-tloati kel beds?
all: go to Q.3)
go to 2a
YES: Go to 2b
Yes: Go to 3c
Yes: Go to 2d
il
2a.3. ls the vegetation a mixture of onll' herbaceous plants and Sphagnum
mosses rvith no scrubishrub or tbrested classes?
ls the area ofherbaceous plants, Sphagnum. and deep organic
soils > l,i2 acre?
Is the area ofherbaceous plants. Sphagnum. and deep organic
soils l,i-1.i2 acre?
NO Go to J
YES: Category I
YES: Category II
2b. I . Does 50% of the cover of upper forest canopy consist of evergreen
trees older than 80 )-ears or deciduous trees older than 50 ,v-ears?
Nore.'The size of trees is often not a measure of age. and size cannot
be used as a surrogate for age (see guidance).
2b.2. Does 50% ofthe cover of forest canopy consist ofevergreen trees older
than 50 ;.,ears, AND is the structural diversity of the tbrest high as
characterized by an additional la,ver of trees 20'-.t9'tall, shrubs 6'- 20'.
tall, and a herbaceous groundcor,er?
2b.3. Does <25o/o of the areal cover in the herbaceous,'groundcover or
t9?the shrub consist of invasive.'exotic
Q.2b. Nlature forested rvetland
ies lrom the list on
Q.2c. Estuarine rvetlands.
2c.1. Is the wetland Iisted as National Wildlife Refuge. National Park.
National Esruary Reserv.e. Natural Area Preserve. State Park. or
Edr-rcational, Environmental or Scientific Reserv'es designated under
wAc 332-30- r5 I?
3c.1. ls the rvetland > 5 acres:
IYole: lf an area contains patches of salt tolerant vegetation that are
l ) less than 600 teet apart and that are separated b" mudtlats that go
dry on a lvlean Lorv Tidc. or
2) separated b1'tidal clrannels that are less than 100 feet ivide;
all the vegetated areas are to be considered together in calculating the
u'etland area.
or is the u'etland l-5 acres:
or is the rvetland < I acre?
YES: Category I
NO: Go to 2b.2
YES: Go to 2b.3
NO: Co to Q.3
YES: Category I
NO: Go to J
YES: Category I
NO: Go to 2c.2
YES: Category I
YES: Co to 2c.3
YES: Go to 2c.+
E
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
t
2c.3. Does the wetland meet at least 3 of the following 4 criteria:
- minimum existing evidence of human related disturbance such as
diking, ditching. tilling, cultivation. grazing or the presence of non-
native plant species (see guidance for definition);
- surface water connection with tidal salnvater or tidal tieshwater:
- at least 75% ofthe rvetland has a 100 bufttr ofungrazed pasture.
open water, shrub or forestl
- has at least I of the following f-eatures: Iou,marsh: high marsh; tidal
channe [s ; lagoon( s) }vood-v debris ; or conti-quous freshrvater wetl and.
2c.4. Does the wetland meet all of the four criteria under 2ci? (above)?
YES:Category I
NO Category II
YES:Category II
NO: Category III
Q.2d. EelGrass and Kelp Beds.
2d. l. Are eelgrass beds present? .
1d.2. Are their floating or non-floating kelp bed(s) present with greater than
50-c6 macro algal cover in the month olAugust or September?. ..............
YES: Category I
NO: go to 2d.l
YES:Category I
NO: Category il
Q.3. Category lV wetlands.
ia. Is the wetland: less than I acre and.
h.v-drologi cal ly' i solated and,
comprised of one vegetated class that is dorninated (> 809i, areal cover)
by one species from Table 3 (page l9) or Table 4 (pa-ee 20)
ib. Is the wetland: less than two acres
and, h,v-dro logical ly i solated.
rvith one vegetated class. and > 90o,b of areal cover in any combination of
species from Table 3 (page I9)
3c. ls the wetland excavated ltom upland and a pond smaller than I acre
rvithout a surface water connection to streams. lakes, rivers. or other
wetland. and has < 0. I acre of veqetation.
(
YES Category IV
to lc
YEQ: Category lV
JNo*o to tu
ffi :Category lV
go to Q.rl
Circle scores thal qualifi-
ACTCS
>200
40-200
r0J0
5-103
r-5
0.r-l
<0.1 0
6
5
4
pornts
Q.4. Significant habitat value.
Ansrver all questions and enter data requested.
4a. Total wetland area
Estimate area select tiom choices in the near-right column. and score in the
far column:
Enter acreage of wetland here: 'l ' acres. and source: i' -i{- V: S , }
d classes: Circle the wetland classes below that
if the area of emer-9ent class is > l1-l acre.
if the area of scrub-sluub class is > 1,.[ acre.
6[tt.hif area of forested class is > l,i4 acre.
Add the number of rvetland classes. above, that qualily, and then
Score according to the columns at right.
e.-e. lf there are -l classes (aquatic beds. open rvater. emergent &
Scrub-sluub). you rvould circle 8 points in the far ri.qht column.
@@
qualil;"
if the area olopen rvater is > li-l acre
s: ifthe area ofaquatic beds > l14 acre,
#of classes
I
2
)
8
ICI-
Points
.... 0
.... 3
.lc. Plant species diversity.
For each rvetland class (at right) that qualifies in
4b above. count the number of ditlerent plant species
). ou can find that cover more than 596 olthe ground.
You do not have to name them.
Score in column at far right:
e.g. If a rvetland has an aquatic bed class with 3 species. an
emergent class rvith 4 species and a scrub-shrub
class rvith 2 species you rvould circle 2. 2, and I in the
far column.
iVale.' An.v- plant species rvith a cover of > 5o,o
qualifies for points rvithin a class, even thosi-'
that are not ofthat class.
Class
Emergent.
Scrub-Scrub
Forested
; species in class
I
,)
Points
0
I
)
>j
.\( 0i
I
2
I
a
ll:
J
0
.' ')
-l-5
>5
./,\
j-4
>4
I
2
64>{
I
J
/1\
l
.ld. Structural diversity.
If the wetland has a forested class, add I point if each of the following
Classes is present within the forested class and is larger than l/4 acre:
-trees > 50'tall....
+rees 20'- 49' tall.
-shrubs.......
-herbaceous ground cover....
Also add I point if there is an1,"open water" or "aquatic bed" class
lmmediately next to the forested area (i.e. there is no scrub/shrub or
emergent vegetation betryeen them).
I
YES_I
-le. Decide from the diagrams below rvhether interspersion betrveen
wetland classes is high. moderate, lorv or none? If you think the
amount of interspersion falls in berween the diagams score accordingly
(i.e. a moderately high amount of interspersion rvould score a 4.
while a moderately low amount would score a 2)
i:,'.
lii:i',
I l(rIIC
ilrr x['r:tl(llt{.rLFnl
YES =
4f Habitat features.
Ansrver questions belorv. circle t-eatures that apply. and score to right
Is there evidence that the open or standing water was caused by beavers
ls a heron rookery located rvithin 300'?
Are raptor nestts located rvithin 300'?
Are there at least 3 standing dead trees (snags) per acre greater than
10" in diameter at "breast height" (DBH)?
Are there at least 3 dormed logs per acre rvith a diameter
> 6" for at least l0'in lengh?
,{re there areas (vegetated or unvegetated) rvithin the rvetland that are
ponded lor at least 4 months out of the vear. and the u'etland has not
qualilied as having an open lvater class in Question -lb- ?
YES=2
YES=I
YES=I
}'ES = :
4g. Connection to streams. (Score one ansrver only.)
49.1. Does the rvetland provide habitat for fish at an]- time of the year AND
does it have a perennial surface ]vater connection to a fish-bearing stream.
.l-e.2 Does the rvetland provide fish habitat seasonalll AND does it have
a seasonal surface rvater connection to a fish-bearing slream.
4g.3 Does the rvetland function to export organic mafter through a surface
water connection at all times of the year to a perennial stream.
4g..1 Does the wetland function to export organic mafter through a surface
water connection to a stream on a seasonal basis?
{h. Buffers.
Score the existing buffers on a scale ol l-5 based on the follorving four descriptions.
lf the condition of the buffers do not exactly match the description. score either a
point higher or lorver depending on whether the buffers are less or more degraded.
Forest. scrub, native grassland or open water bul-fers are present for
more than 1O0'around 95% of the circumt'erence.
Forest, scrub. native grassland, or open rvater buffers rvider than 100'
for more than l12 of the rvetland circumference, or a forest. scrub.
grasslands. or open rvater buffers tbr more than 50'around 95 9.zo of the
circumt'erence.
Forest. scrub. native grassland. or open rvater buft'ers rvider than 100'
lor more than l14 of the wetland circumftrence. or a torest. scrub. native
grassland, or open rvater buffers wider than 50'fbr more than I 2 of the
rvetland circumference.
No roads, buildings or paved areas rvithin 100'of the rvetland fbr more than
95% oithe wetland circumference.
No roads, buildings or paved areas rvithin 25'of the rvetland lor more
than 95% of the circumference. or
No roads buildings or paved areas rvithin 50'of the u,etland tbr more than
l,'2 of the rvetland circumference.
Paved areas, industrial areas or residential construction (vr,itlr less than 50'
betrveen houses) are less than 25 teet fiom the rvetland tbr more than 9-5 ozt,
of the circumt-erence of the rvetland.
YES=6
YES =,1
YES=4
YES=]
Score = 5
Score = j
Score = l
Score - l
Score:0 i
I
Score =
-li. Connection to other habitat areas:
Select the dr--scriptiLrn. rrhich t'e st matches the site being evaluared
-ls the *etland connected to. or part oi. a riparian conidor ai least 100'rridc
connecting t\\'o or more rvetlands: or. is there an upland connection F,resent )100'
$ide uith good fbrest or shnrb co\er {r,a-ioo cor.er} connL.ctine it rrith a
Signitlcant l labitat Area'l
-ls the rretland connected to anl other Habitat Area rvith either I t a lorested shrut,
corridor'< 100'uide.or3)acorridorthatis> 100'uide.buthasalorvregetatire
cover less than 6 lecr in heipht'l
-ls the rl etland connecled to. or a pan ol, a riparian corridor betrr een 50 - I 00' rvide
'"vith scrut shrub or lbrest corer connection Io other rretlands?
- ls the rretland connected to anl other Habitat Area rtirh narro\\ conidor (.- lL)0')
of Io* \'egeration (< 6'in heightt'?
-lstherl'cllandanditsbulTer(ifthebulterislessthan50'u'ide)ccrmplerel-r i-solated
by development (urban. residential rrith a densin'sreaterthan I acre. or industriall.'
Now add the scores circled (for Q.Sa - Q.Si above) to get a total
Is the Total greater thao or equal to 22 points?
l?__ ,
YES = -i
Yes=j
0
Yes
CS
Ycs
,1
I
l ES = {ategorl l}
\o = catEEE Til
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
T
I
I
I
I
T
I
t
GroENGrN rr*yQ
AppettDtx D
Wertetto Sre Map
t
t
I
T
I
I
I
T
I
I
T
T
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
t
T
stnEtr'tot
PARCEL A
NE1 /4 OF SW1 /4
snEtot t
ROt
PARCEL C
GL7
s15 & 522
725N, R2W
E'LA'ffi ?'
PARCEL D
NWl /4 OF SE1 /4
tfi
PROPERIY LINE
FOR PLEASANT
HARBOR RESORT
lr'
T'
t@'
sndEn,/l'Al'
V
J
UJOt
o_
PROPERTY LINE
FOR PLEASANT
HARBOR RESORT
DRAWN BY:
LASI EDII:
sa/
CHECKEO 8Y:
APPROWD BY:
6/16/200o PLoT DATE: o6n6/06
OAIE AY REVI REYIS/ON
L
ngt
E'II'US ,C,
a-FFER I@,
swl /4
PARCEL C
15
J
LJOt
o_
OF 1/4
-Jl-.Lloq
o_
GL3
EITG P'E,. I'C E?'B
22
P ARCEL C
ns at
offi
t,t*[?tE.Et0,JL(
7U
IHESIATESMAN GROUP
PTEASANT HARBOR RESORT
EXHIBIT:
WETLANDS DELINEATION
WA8R'NNON
SCALE:
300
PROJECT NO.
o33099
DRAWING FILE NAME:
33099-SURV-WL01
, SHEET,1
---t ..1
J
I
I
I
(
w,u-l
t'\( lll(
I
1
T
T
I
I
t
t
I
I
t
t
I
I
t
I
I
t
I
I
Departnent of the Navy Dabob Bay OMP EA
SouE M,wC &fot 57208, 1903
i
t
Environmcnul Ascssrncnt for thc
Dabob Bry Oparations rnd. Menagemcnt Plan
NUWC Dirision Kcypon
Eremplc of Tlpicrl Notice
lo lllrriners
Flgurc2,l{,
ATTENTION BOAT OPERATORS IN
- DABOB BAY -
ffi
- RANGE WARNING LIGHTS -
.*SnOPASHPCXI,IT *aogOr.|pe.ttXsuUFel
*putru porur *zEtATcltED PotNr
*wHrTNEy potffi
RASHING AMBER
ffiru&re9rxffi&ffi.MlgffiDre brffiE'
FLASHING RED
_HraetbEta&..m'ffixlHlrGletmRrffilEliMY|WtOqE
Acnqu
F*gEilimDffiMa rrcffiutE lroFr.*df,Ch€qJctorc€BnmlrE'i8ffi. o*t#Emr*@fr ht*.lEtu|E HruElr&EJo tqBrrGB'
MEtrcL rSlrHtlrEmgmuHEump4I mE:ffid
a srqlo{ru$kcsuttralo[rttllEfl ?ffilK BtlrilG&xmlEffiotomntxlME qE tBs&rr6 Mnfi.m
WABI,IING LIGHT LOCATIONS
[rffiflrtrG
E.!l'4ffi ewmqilBEr*e&EBi eM lsYsffirc q&r ffi@aErf ui
mwlutFlcrmBmm. Idffillsnro
c=:=
APPENDIX 10
2-8
,I
:l
-l
I
,l
I
[::J conncctins watcrs
[:-:::: Proposed Rangc Extcroion
f-$ffij.iig,*i Miliury tnstallatlo n
LEGEND
DBRC
,3
..0$
t-i"'
:P
o
-d
FJh Vlcw
Leland
o\),.
aal
Quilcenc*._-_r,rgrgo
\u.t'r
I
I
Ii
Rord
F
Polnt
Ssbeck
Wrrrenvllle
Tncyton
NUWC
Keyport
Errt
Rivrr
Duckrburh
Hnrrmo
Ho,nnln
Ri!.r
Camo
Unloh
Figwe2-2a
Proposed DBRC Site Extensions: Alternative I (Southern Only)
and Alternative 2 (Southern and Northern)ffiKilorneters
0 4.8
o Nautical Miles 2'6
I
I
I
T
I
I
T
I
I
t
T
I
T
I
T
I
t
I
I