Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout026L - RECmrvTim lttrtn$0tffirIfilY Bt$ Pleasant Harbor Master Phnned Resort Prescriptive Vegetation Management Plan ORMG" RESOURCE MANAGEMENT GROUP In Association With: Bucr Rocx, LLC Mennvurut Resouncr Mlxlermrnr, LLC STATESMAN CORPORATION C/O GARTH MANN 7370 SIERRA MORENA BOULEVARD SOUTHWEST CALGARY, ALBERTA T3H4H9 CANADA PREPARED FOR: 1.0 Purpose The Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort (MPR) proposa! was the subject of programmatic environmental review associated with a Jefferson County action to amend their Comprehensive Plan to designate the Pleasant Harbor and Black Point areas, south of the town of Brinnon, as a Master Planned Resort. The Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) imposed 30 conditions of approval on the Comprehensive Plan amendment, as set forth in Ordinance No. 01-0128-08. The current project-level environmental review effort requires demonstrating compliance with these 30 conditions, five of which relate to preparation of the Forestry Report. These conditions address general and specific forestry issues as they pertain to the existing forest health and the impact of the proposed development. The Forestry Report (Technical Appendix A) attached to this Prescriptive Vegetation Management Plan describes the current condition of the forest on the property. Our goal here is to present a prescription for a complete and comprehensive forest Vegetation Management Plan as it relates to current and future forest health and to the continued safety of those involved during development and future use of this site. 2.0 Introduction Vegetation in the form of trees and their surrounding eco-systems is a prime environmental feature in many recreational sites. Like al! organisms, trees develop weakness resulting from pathological and non-pathologica! influences. These natural and human-caused conditions may lead to varying degrees of structural failure. Often, these failures are responsible for personal injury, substantial damage to forest vegetation, and damage to man-made physical improvements. Failure, or potential to fail, which may lead to property damage as well as physica! injury to people, is a hazard that must be addressed. Disease and insect damages are of equal if not greater concern than physical damage, especially when hidden from sight. Human exposure to tree hazards further magnifies the risk. At Pleasant Harbor there is an amalgamation of various forested areas that have already been severely impacted. Within these impacted areas, smaller pockets of trees and vegetation have remained relatively unaffected by site history and development. The purpose of this report is to make available a template for development of a Tree Hazard Control Program that relies on historical methodology, combined with science- based research and literature, to support tree hazard identification and assessment. DRAFT 8120120091:45 PM Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort Prescriptive Vegetation Management Plan The program design would enable evaluation (grading) of the degree of risk and recommend mitigation treatments for individual circumstances. A Tree Hazard Control Plan would be designed to facilitate compliance with Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners Condition "U" to "retain evergreen trees and understory in a condition as undisturbed as possible" (to the extent that this is prudent and safe). 3.0 Tree Hazard Evulustion 3.7 Definition of a Hozord Tree A tree can be considered potentially hazardous if it is situated in an area frequented by people or is located adjacent to valuable facilities. A tree becomes more dangerous if it has defects in its roots, bole (trunk), or branches that may cause or accelerate failure resulting in property damage, personal injury or death.' Remember also that a tree without any identifiable defect may, by simple proximity, be dangerous in natural situations such as a severe wind event. The degree of hazard varies with size of the tree and type and location of the defect. Site managers must be aware of these issues, know how to recognize and evaluate them, and be diligent in correcting or mitigating potential damage. Conscientious assessment and abatement would make the site safer and more enjoyable.2 The Jefferson Counly Shoreline Master Program definition of a hazard tree reads as follows: "Hazard tree means anv tree with a hiqh probabilitv of fallinq due to a debilitatinq disease. a structural defect. a root ball more than fiftv percent exposed, or havino been exposed to wind throw within the past ten vears. To be considered hazardous. there must be a structure within a tree lenoth of the base of the trunk. Where not immediatelv apparent to the Administrator. the hazard tree determination shall be made after review of a report prepared bv an It is important to note that other regulatory jurisdictions sometimes vary in their requirement for maximum distance between tree base and structure. ln particular, in individual cases on steep hi!!s and in high wind exposure areas, it may be prudent to increase the setback distance from tree base to target to assure adequate protection ' G.W. Wallis, D. J. Morrison, D. W. Ross, Tree Hazards ln Recreational Sites In British Columbia, Monagement Guidelines, (B.C. Ministry of Environment and Parks, Canadian Forest Service, Joint Report No. 13, 1987), p6. 'Ibid, p6 3 Jefferson County SMP Update, Planning Commission Revised Draft SMP Update, June 3, 2009, Article 2 - Definitions, Chapter H, Section 4. p2.19 DRAFT 8/2O/2O091:45 PM from falling trees. ln areas heavily used by people, it may also be prudent to evaluate hazard exposure levels, irrespective of the presence or lack of structures. 3.2 Hazord Trees ond Associated Liobilities Any tree could present some degree of hazard no matter how sound it might appear. Prudence should rule when public safety is potentially at risk. Wind, weather, gravity, time, disease, insects; all these threats are continuous in their attack on sound and secure trees. Another adversary of sound tree structure and safety is the natural process of maturation that all trees go through, some species being more long lived than others. These influences all interact to increase the likelihood of failure. The extent of liability depends in large part on the preventative actions of the management team. Negligent acts or omission are simply not acceptable. Managers must be proactive and responsible to actively minimize hazard and reduce danger. 3.3 Humon Safetv Hazards ln recreation resource management all standing trees present some level of hazard. This hazard increases with increasing defect, running from very low to high. Failure by itself does not constitute a hazard. The hazard exists when a tree is within striking distance of any object or structure. Hazard is most primary when individuals are subject to direct threat of injury or death from potential tree failure. Risk assessment addresses these types of consequences. 3.4 Rotino the Hozord: Potentiol for Failure Quantified The objective of a hazard rating system is to provide elevated levels of safety while retaining aesthetically pleasing surroundings. By careful inspection of developed areas, it should be possible to detect most hazards and rate the likelihood of tree failure during normal site usage and weather conditions. All aspects of forest evaluation are needed to determine if defects are present. As reported, specific areas within the Pleasant Harbor MPR project area have been identified as containing diseases and mechanical damage to the forest (see Forestry Report, Technical Appendix A). The Pleasant Harbor MPR area is, at times, the subject of more extreme weather events as well. Depending on the footprint of the final development, specific site assessments are recommended to identify and prescribe the necessary appropriate treatment. A rating system would be used for the assessment of:o Tree failure potential. Tree failure impact. Using common forestry standards for hazard tree rating found in U.S. Forest Service (USFS) publications, a scale of 1 to 4 can be used to identify the degree of hazard. Likewise, a scale of 1 to 4 may be used to evaluate the impacts or consequences arising from such a failure. The hazard rating for any particular tree is then derived by DRAFT 8120120091:45 PM adding the value obtained for failure potential to the value for failure impact. This information would be documented on a site inspection record. Following are tables displaying the various value ratings and their criteria: Tabte 1. Tree Failure Potential Rating Svstema Tabte 2. Tree Failure lmpact Ratins Svstems o Robert D Harvey, Jr. and Paul F. Hessburg, Sr., Long Range Planningfor Developed Sites in the Pacific Northwest, The Context of Hazard Tree Management, (USDA, Forest Service FMP-TP039-92,1992), p l7-18 5 tbid, p 17-18 Value 1 Verv low failure potential sound trees not likely exposed to weather extremes Value 2 @ failure potential minor defects may be present weather sheltered or unsheltered but sound Value 3 Medium failure potential . moderate defects. shallow soil, high water tablet exposure to weather extremes Value 4 Hiqh failure potential serious defects limited root anchorage dead trees or root disease multiple defects Value 1 $ damage . only small tree parts involvedo no chance failed parts will cause damage on impact Value 2 Minor damage . only small tree parts failo indirect impact in occupied areas, or failure will occur when area is unoccupied. if damage occurs target is low value Value 3 Medium damage o small trees or tree parts sufficient to cause moderate damageo moderate target value. target likely to sustain only moderate damage Value 4 Extensive damage . medium to large trees or tree partso high target value including high value property and damage likely to be severeo potential to injure or kill people DRAFT 8120/20091:45 PM RISK CLASS TREATMENT PRIORITY 8 Very hish 7 Hish 6 Moderate 2-5 Low 3.5 Gool The end goal of hazard tree evaluation and hazard management is to strike an appropriate balance between various priorities. o Protect public safetyo Maintain sustainability of the forest and recreation resourceo Comply with BoCC objective "u" to "retain evergreen trees and understory in a condition as undisturbed as possible" o Protect public and private property o Minimize cost. All hazard tree evaluation and treatment surveys and action strategies should be incorporated into the Vegetation Management Plan. 4.0 Assessing the Desired Future Condition, Long-Rsnge Plonning The Vegetation Management Plan would serve as a roadmap for achieving and maintaining a desired future condition. The current condition as presented in the Forestry Report (Technical Appendix A) provides the necessary information including the state of the current vegetation on the Pleasant Harbor MPR site. When current condition maps are overlain with the footprint of the proposed MPR development, site managers can begin work to craft the Vegetation Management Plan. Goals and objectives would be established following guidelines presented by the BoCC, and utilizing methods and treatments most appropriate to the site. The vegetation management team would vary in its makeup from time to time, depending on the planning and specific development activity best suited at each juncture of the project planning sequence. Appropriate professionals from such disciplines as Forestry, Arboriculture, Horticulture, and Landscape Architecture would be consulted as needed. 6 Op. cit., Harvey, pl7-18 DRAFT 8/2o/2oo91:45 PM 5.0 Analysis Phase 5.7 Tvoes of Failure !n establishing a base line for a Vegetation Management Plan, analysis of the types of failures that are currently observed would help define the overall condition as well as the past history of the site. The generalized context of tree structure can be described as: Roots: Area of the tree found below ground level and/or root crown Butt (base): Stump area between root and stem at 8 feet above ground Stem (bole): Main tree stem or trunk from butt to tree top Crown (top): Uppermost portion of the stem including foliage and limbs Failure potential from various root and butt defects accounts for a major portion of hazard trees present in recreation areas. Most stem failure from breakage is caused by heart rot or large fungus or cankers Tops and branches on large conifers frequently break and fa!! Deciduous species, because of their open, wide-spreading branch pattern, are more likely to have branch failure than conifers. Disease as well as snow and wind frequently contribute to this type of failure. 5.2 Couses of Foilure 'oatholooicol ond Non-Patholooicol Many defects of a pathological nature cause failure potential. Detection of these tree defects requires careful examination, not only to identify the external clues some diseases exhibit, but internal as well. A number of these have been identified in the attached Forestry Report (Technical Appendix A). Following is a brief list of non-pathological causes of tree failure: . Tree form and specieso Lightning and frost crackso Forked stems. Wounds from mechanical damageo Leaning treeso Undermined roots. Snow and wind. DRAFT 8/2o/2o091:45 PM 6.0 Documentution Phsse Based on information received during the analysis phase, a specific management plan document can be created. Hazard tree evaluation results and recommendations would be part of the Vegetation Management Plan as they relate to the Site Development Plan, the Transportation Plan, and other resource management plans and criteria as established by Jefferson County. Vegetation Management Prescriptions become a key component of the plan. They would address with not only the overstory (i.e., tree canopy), but the understory and its assorted vegetation as well. Record keeping and identification of specific danger or hazard in individual trees is vital to the plan. Trees in the higher risk categories would be marked and/or mapped for revisit for periodic monitoring. Evaluation intervals would depend on the "Risk Class Allocation" for an individual tree (see Table 3). The repetitious nature of the assessment phase would form a key part of the foundation for management of the site and its resources. 7,0 I mplementdtion Phdse Assemble the project plan to verify that all aspects and phases of development fully reflect the desired direction and goals of the project. The Vegetation Management Plan at this stage would identify specific tasks. The plan would lay out suitable timing and schedules, responsible team members and the appropriate communication Ioop. Accountability for the Vegetation Management Plan and its success would be evaluated periodically and at the completion of each major task. Progress would be documented. 8.0 Hazord Tree Treatment With the Vegetation Management Plan in place, the hazardous tree mitigation components of the plan would become proactive as compared to reactive. ln these situations, creativity is important in treating hazardous trees and selecting the treatment options from those available. Removal of danger trees is the least desirable option, particularly under Jefferson County stipulations. Although some values of a standing tree are difficult or impossible to retain when treatment to reduce hazard is necessary, it may be possible to retain some of the component value of a standing tree by the use of alternative treatments. Live tree height may be reduced to decrease potential striking distance and prevent identified high risk hazard trees from hitting valuable targets. Although challenging to accomplish without adverse effect on visual DRAFT 8l2O/2O091:45 PM o o o O o characteristics, it may be possible to reduce a hazard rating while retaining a portion of a tree's previous appearance by use of creative pruning techniques. Dead tree height may be reduced to a safe height outside of target striking range. This treatment would enable retention of the remaining stem portion for wildlife habitat. Limbs may be removed to reduce damage potential and to reduce wind loading potential. Using acceptable pruning strategies to remove a percentage of the limbs throughout the height of the tree opens the tree crown and results in less resistance to wind and reduced chance of blow- down. Tree crowns may be selectively pruned to reduce overall height and weight. This can serve to bring the center of gravity of the tree to a more acceptable location providing more stability over its anchoring root mass. Tree structure weakness may be amended with the use of artificial bracing such as cables and other types of support. This treatment may allow for retention of certain trees with higher than normal visual value. These methods and many others may prevent tree-caused damage and postpone hazard tree removal. At the same time, allowing young trees planted during site development, and trees planted or naturally seeded in years following, the time they need to grow and assume stature as potentia! replacements for trees lost due to failure. Potential to mitigate tree removal perceptions may be found in treatments that enhance the visual appearance of remaining vegetation. This may be done through carefully executed removal of selected trees. New openings in the timber canopy at the upper level increase sunlight penetration to the forest floor. This provides for increased shrub and herbaceous species growth as well as additional tree groMh in previously shaded areas.T ln some areas of the Pleasant Harbor MPR project, where preservation of the natural appearance of the site is a high priority, lower level visual screening would be of particular help to accomplish that objective. lncreased vigor and height in the growth of forest shrubs in the understory would be an effective visual screening option and can be provided by a delicate overstory thinning (for hazard removal) that allows additional light to penetrate to existing plants like Evergreen Huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum) and Salal (Gaultheria shallon). An additional option available to enhance the density and vigor of understory shrubs would be timely pruning using supervised "brush pickers". Although plant material would be removed with this method for sale to the wholesale brush market, the remaining parent plants would be healthy and encouraged by the pruning activity to respond with additiona! vigorous groMh in the same way that nursery plants respond to pruning. 7 Op. cit., Harvey, p3 DRAFT 8l2O/2O091:45 PM An important part of the Vegetation Management Plan would be ongoing monitoring of known hazard trees and their defects. Since a tree's resistance to failure is in many cases related to the amount of sound wood remaining in the buft and stem, many trees with defects do not require immediate treatment but instead can be monitored while retained pending later removal if the hazard were to increase beyond acceptable levels. Removal would be the last option. Hazards may often be mitigated in some other manner besides simply removing the tree while at the same time, minimizing the effect on other values such as visual landscape, impression of age, or maintaining the forested nature of a site. 9.0 Site Specific Actions by Area 9.1 MARINA VILLAGE Site-specific development in the Marina Village area of the MPR project will dea! with three unique portions within the total Marina Village acreage. The Vegetation Management Plan must speak to specific functions, values, and risks associated with each of these portions: Shoreline Buffer Maritime Commercial and Maritime Residential development Highway 101 Buffer Each portion would require specific treatments prior to construction and development to enable preservation of as much vegetation as possible. Each of these areas would be evaluated prior to construction and development to identify specific treatment options and recommend protection methods that would maintain and enhance the existing forested character. 9.2 BLACK PO!NT GOLF RESORT Site-specific Vegetation Management Plan provisions for the Black Point Golf Resort area of the MPR must deal with Black Point's unique character as a golf resort and its unique location above the shoreline of Hood Canal. Areas dedicated to specific development will have different requirements, treatments, and maintenance than those retained to assume a designated role as a preservation area andlor buffer along and between golf course fainrays. The Vegetation Management Plan must address unique function, value and risks associated with each of the following Black Point development segments: Golf Course support areas, and other facilities Golf Course and associated buffers and natural areas Shorel ine Conservation area DRAFT 8/20/20091:45 PM Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners Condition "s" requires that the Pleasant Harbor MPR developer record a conservation easement to permanently protect a 200-foot riparian buffer along the steep bluff of the south Hood Canal Shoreline. The proposal includes executing a Memorandum of Understanding with the Skokomish Tribe for management of this conservancy area. The above listed areas each will have distinct contrasts in levels and amounts of human activity. Appropriate assessment would need to address these differences. 7O.O SUMMARY A Vegetation Management Plan unique to the Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort development site would help to enable achievement of Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners conditions of approval as set forth in Ordinance No. 01-0128- 08, five of which relate to issues addressed in the Forestry Report (Technical Appendix A). These conditions address general and specific forestry issues as they pertain to the existing forest health and the impact of the proposed development. Accurate site evaluation of the existing or current conditions in conjunction with the proposed development would create viable plans, including the Vegetation Management Plan that would provide for safe and functional use of this Jefferson County environment. 77,0 REFERENCES Allen, E. A., D. J. Morrison, G. W. Wallis, L996. Common Tree Diseoses of British Columbia, Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Catalog No. Fo42-257 /1996E Harvey, Jr., Robert D. and Paul F. Hessburg, Sr., 1992. Long Range Plonning for Developed Sites in the Pocific Northwest, The Context of Hozord Tree Monagement, (USDA, Forest Service FMP-TP039-92, L992), p 17-18 Jefferson County SMP Update, Planning Commission Revised Draft SMP Update, June 3, 2009, Article 2 Definitions, Chapter H, Section 4. p2.t9 Thies, Walter G. and Rona N. Sturrock 1995. Laminoted Root Rot in Western North Americo, USDA, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, Oregon, General Technical Report, PNW-GTR-349 Wallis, G. W., D. J. Morrison, D. W. Ross, L987. Tree Hozords in Recreotionol Sites in British Columbio, Monogement Guidelines,1987. B.C. Ministry of Environment and Parks, Canadian Forest Service, Joint Report No. 13, p 6. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Forest Pest Management, Forest Diseose Monogement Notes DRAFT 8120120091:45 PM