HomeMy WebLinkAbout074PLEASANT HARBOR MARINA AND GOLF RESORT
RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS
The Planning Commission Subcommittee has been holding workshops in Brinnon.on the
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort. During the meetings a number of questions
were asked and this paper is designed to provide a response to the public concerns. Items
1-4 were raised during the public proceedings, items covered in 5 were raised in
subsequent written comments to the County.
1. Golf Course Management
a. The concern is how the project would manage the potential for contamination to
Hood Canal from fertilizers and particularly nitrogen compounds that could
adversely impact Hood Canal via groundwater pathways. Specifically,
a. Where do we find the King County Management Standards mentioned in the
EIS?
b. Don't you need to have the complete golf course management program
available for the County review of the Comprehensive PIan Proposal?
c. Where do you deal with specific issues such as red thread, a common fungus
and other golf course management issues?
d. Is there already a 9-hole golf course?
A. The King County Standards Manual is available for review in the County
Department of Community Development and we will append the manual to the
final EIS. The Manual is an older document and the project is also exploring
other, more modern recommendations to minimize impacts to aquifers and the
environment from golf course management. The final design and solutions are
not provided in this EIS for the Comprehensive Plan amendment as that level of
detail is to be provided in the project-specific environmental supplement that
accompanies the golf course development permit. The Comprehensive Plan sets
the condition to avoid discharge and potential contamination to Hood Canal for
any project-specific approval. The final project application and supplemental
environmental review will look at design, storm water management, pond liners,
treatment systems, and fertilizer/pesticide management programs to determine
which combination is best suited to the Black Point geology and geography. This
phased approach to envirorunental review is approved under SEPA, with the
Comprehensive Plan approval identifying the issues and standards to be achieved
by any specific project proposal. Ifthe proposal is approved at the
Comprehensive Plan level, the specific engineering and management programs
are then detailed and reviewed again at the permit level to assure that the
Comprehensive Plan criteria can be met. There is presently no developed golf
course on the site. Bayshore Golf Course near Shelton is an example of a small
course serving a local population.
57 57 7 -000 1 I LEGAL 1 3590254. 1 Page 1
2. WaterAilaste Water Concerns
Q. Water quality and quantity are major concerns in the community. Specific
questions included:
a. What is the plan for drought years?
b. The Quilcene rainfall records understate rainfall-have they been
corrected.
c. Are residents limited in water use?
d. Are many communities using zero discharge systems?
e. How is water recharged?
f. What about water rights-they do take a long time to process?
g. What happens if Statesman cannot get to 70 gallons per day?
h. Is it the intent to integrate with adjacent water systems?
i. Is the water cleaned up before it goes into the aquifer?
A. The water system is an integrated water supply, water use, water treatment, water
reuse and infiltration system. Statesman is applying for a full water right to serve
the needs of the project from the aquifer if necessary. Water rights are approved
by WDOE and for the water right to be approved Statesman must demonstrate no
harm to senior (existing) water users and no risk of salt water intrusion or other
harm to the aquifer. Preliminary studies indicate adequate water is available (see
EIS appendix). Applications for water rights are being processed and review is
expected to take about a year. Statesman has been working with WDOE and
WDOH on water rights and water supply issues, so the agencies are familiar with
the proposals.
The Pleasant Harbor program is a three-tiered system depending on a combination of
existing water rights, rainwater harvesting, and reuse recycling. In normal years this
is projected to have azero net draw on the aquifer (that is recharge over the course of
the year through infiltration equals withdrawals). In lean water years, the project
would have net draws on the aquifer, but only to the limit established in the water
rights approval, which avoids impact due to salt water intrusion or affect on existing
wells and systems.
All waste and other water in the treatment system is treated to Class "A'' standards,
which may be infiltrated to ground water under State guidelines. (The water will be
infiltrated, not injected into the aquifer as suggested in previous materials.) Resorl
residents are not restricted per se in their water use, but a combination of efficient
fixtures and water management by the resort in laundry, restaurant, irrigation, and
other activities serves to substantially reduce the projected flows. The 70 GPD per
resident is a target or goal, not a mandate. Actual efficiencies will be identified as the
project is developed in phases and the water supply system tied to actual use within
the limits of the water rights approved for the project. Statesman has been asked to
inquire about integrating with adjoining systems. Any integration would require the
approval of the adjoining system owners and such integration is not a condition of the
project.
57 57 7 -O00 1 I LEGAL 1 3590254. 1 Page 2
3. Traffic
Q. Traffic on US HWY l0l is a concern and questions have been asked about
a. Compare 4000 vehicles with other resorts.
b. Where did the 4000 vehicles come from?
c. The speed limit is 50-55; can speed limits be changed, particularly to
protect older drivers?
d. How far south will traffic be affected?
e. US 101 has very narrow shoulders; how does the resort address non
motorized transportation, including bicycles?
f. How does the project address traffic noise?
A. The traffic analysis in the DEIS and appendix used Washington State DOT
figures for existing traffic on US HWY 101 and figures from comparable resorts
(from Port Ludlow to Skamania Landing in Stevenson) to obtain a range of traffic
from resorts. The Institute of Traffic Engineers Manual (lTE) also provides
projections for the different elements of a resort, including the marina,
commercial, resort, and residential components.
The speed on US HWY 101 is set by the Washington state Department of
Transportation. Speed limits may be adjusted by them depending on traffic
conditions. Final design of any roadway section, including sight distance, stopping
distance, and queuing requirements, must all conform to the speed limits agreed to by
WSDOT for the area. Traffic does flow south to Mason County. The preliminary
traffic analysis shows traffic to be within accepted levels of service on all southbound
areas. A project-specific supplemental traffic report will be done for each phase of
the project to address any changes or specific issues that may arise given the tirning
of any specific phase and the cumulative traffic, including both project and
background increases.
Statesman and the County have recognized the limitations of the highway in the
vicinity of the project site for non motorized transportation. At the resort, the intemal
network system invites the bicyclist to get off the highway and ride through the
marina and resort. Any intersection designs for US HWY 101 and Black Point Road
and the exit from the Marina will have to examine the issue of pedestrian and bicycle
access and use at the permit review stage to assure adequate safety is provided.
Traffic noise is generated principally by the high speed traffic on US HWY 101. The
Statesman project has no plans to address that issue directly. During the project
phase, supplemental environmental review would examine project-specific issues to
assure that the project will remain within state guidelines for noise.
57 57 7 -000 1 TLEGAL 1 3590254. 1 Page 3
4. Other Issues
Q. How do you handle garbage and recycling?
A. The project will contract with the local garbage service provider on a commercial
basis to serve the entire resort. Recycling is part of the green program
emphasized by the resort.
Q. How do you address impacts to recreational shellfish and access on the Pleasant
Harbor property?
A. There is no direct access to shellfish grounds abutting the resort property. The
south beach is closed to public or resort access. The resort provides shoreline
access to the marina for recreational activities as one of many recreational
opportunities in the area. No specific mitigation is proposed for the access to
public facilities such as public shellfish beds which are promoted by the State of
Washington. Use of public facilities is governed by state laws.
Q. How will the functions and values of the kettles be maintained-where are the
mitigation wetlands to be located?
A. Three kettles on site have definable wetlands; two will be protected with no
construction in the wetland or regulated buffer, and the regulated buffers will be
restored where appropriate. A specific wetland management plan is required at
the project level. The Central Kettle has a small wetland that will be removed
through the development of the central water facilities. The functions and values
of this central wetland will be replaced on site under a specific management plan
to be approved through the plat permit process. The specific location of the
mitigation wetland will be part of the overall golf course design to assure
adequate areas and buffers are provided to assure no net loss of function and value
and that storm water treatment and wetland recharge are kept separate.
a. Is the community center open to the public?
A. The community center is a facility that may be used by the public for community
purposes. There would be a charge for facility use to cover costs of operations.
Q. Why is the resort not self contained for fire and emergency services?
A. The resort is located in the local fire district and the provision of fire and
emergency services are the responsibility of the district. The EIS provides that
prior to any permitting the Resort and the District must enter into agreements as to
the level of service to be provided and the funding mechanisms to assure the
funds are available for that service.
Q. How do you handle proposed changes?
57 57 7 -O00 1 TLEGAL I 3590254. I Page 4
A. The MPR ordinance that governs a Master Planned Resort provides for both
minor and major changes. Major changes require amendments to the master plan
through a process similar to this initial approval. Minor changes in orientation
and use within the overall framework may be approved administratively. For an
example of how this works, see JCC Chapter 17 -50-070,080, addressing major
and minor changes in the Port Ludlow Master Plan.
Q. Who reviews the EIS, as it was paid for by the Developer?
A. The EIS is the County document and it is not released or approved until it has
been reviewed by the County staff and the County has determined that all issues
are adequately addressed.
Q. Does the County have a program that the project will be cancelled if 50 people
express objection?
A. No. The applicant has expressed a desire to proceed with the project. Numerous
meetings have been held to address the concems of the community and detailed
project-specific conditions have been identified to be addressed at the pennit
stage to address those concerns. A public hearing on the EIS is scheduled for
October 3,2007 , eliminating the need for a specific public request for such a
hearing.
Q. Can we comment on the FEIS before it goes to the County?
A. Under SEPA the County determines when the FEIS is ready for publication.
Public comments are taken into consideration and addressed through the Draft
and Final EIS process, but there is no provision for a post FEIS public review per
se. The public is still welcome to comment on the project and any specific
concerns, environmental or project related, when the matter is before the Board of
County Commissioners for final review and possible approval.
Q. How can tax and mitigation dollars be allocated to Brinnon?
A. The EIS calls for the resort to enter into agreements with the service providers to
assure adequate facilities and services are available to meet the increased needs of
the community by reason of the resort. Such mitigation dollars flow directly to
the service providers, which typically are in Brinnon. Allocation of property tax
dollars, hotel/motel tax dollars and other funds paid to the County are a function
of the County budget process controlled by the Board of County Commissioners.
Q. Why were the property tax assumptions from the assessor different from that of
the EIS?
A. The EIS projected the totality of the taxes paid and not just the County share. The
Economic Impact Study presented on September l Stl' also addressed a more
complete discussion of the potential revenues. A copy of that presentation is
available on disc from the County.
57 57 7 -0001 I LEGAL 1 3590254. 1 Page 5
Q. Is storm water a major contributor to Hood Canal? And do you use Hood Canal
or Puget Sound as your reference?
A. Storm water is a concern to water quality in Hood Canal as it is a source of
potential contamination, both turbidity and solids, and nitrates, oils and other
chemicals which can cause harm. The County requires a detailed storm water
protection plan at the project level to address potential avenues ofdischarge and
the treatment or other management techniques required to assure water quality.
The County uses the "Puget Sound" water quality manual as a WDOE approved
standard for storm water treatment. The guiding water quality is that of Hood
Canal.
5. Supplemental Questions Not Answered in the Comments Above
Q. Will recovered biosolids be used as fertilizer at the MPR?
A. The golf course management program and the biosolids management program
from the waste treatment system will be reviewed in supplemental environmental
review. It is not known at this time which specific alternatives for each will be
chosen.
Q. What constitutes modernization of the Pleasant Tides system and will it have an
affect on the aquifers?
A. Any links to the Pleasant Tides system would be the topic of negotiation and
mutual agreement, to and including steps to assure that no negative impacts occur
to the aquifer. Preliminary investigations suggest the water delivery system could
be made more efficient. Details would have to be addressed specifically by the
Board and members of the Pleasant Tides system to see if any such program
would be mutually beneficial. There is no requirement to link the systems, only
to investigate the benefits and see if a mutual agreement may be reached. To the
extent transport loss is mitigated, the additional water may be available for
domestic use.
Q. Golf course management questions including pesticides fertilizers and water
quality management programs.
A. Specitic details about golf course management programs are to be the subject of a
project-specific manual submitted for approval with the course so it may take into
account the specifics of the course. The EIS recognized the King County program
is dated and as such addressed altemative approaches possibly better suited to
reach the objective standard of no discharge or contamination to Hood Canal
(including groundwater pathways). The USGA Environmental Management
System referenced in one question is one altemative to be considered, as is the
Audubon certification program. The precise golf management program most
suitable to the Black Point conditions is reserved for the project-specific EIS.
57 57 7 -0001 I LEGAL 1 3590254. 1 Page 6
I
Q. Will there be a net water draw and have you accounted for a potential lack of rain
water and could that have an adverse affect on existing wells?
A. The water rights program is based on a three-tier program addressed above.
Balance may be achieved with any of the phases, as the recycle waste water
system and the rainwater water harvest system are required of the first phases.
The possibility exists in any year that a draw on the aquifer could occur, but the
water right to be issued will look closely at avoiding impacts to other water
supplies and to the risk of salt water intrusion. Only when the potential impacts
have been satisfactorily addressed will a water right be issued.
Q. What is the provision for full time residents?
A. The project envisions up to l0% of the units may be occupied fuIl time. The
Master Planned Resort program recognizes that some small portion of the units
may be occupied full time. This may accommodate staff living in the residential
units, rather than the apartments and a minimum number of full+ime owners. The
full+ime residency is capped and final project approval will identify a mechanism
to enforce the provision.
Q. How will the resort handle buffers and visibility issues?
A. Resort buildings and particularly the community center will be visible from US
HWY 101 at the intersection with Black Point Road. The apartments and utility
infrastructure is located further inland and may be screened by topography
depending on the viewer's location. The facilities would be visible from Black
Point Road at the current campground entrance. Most of the rest of the facility is
screened from public roads by other properties, topography, and trees, particularly
the buffer along the southem property line adjacent to Hood Canal. Intemally the
plan is to limit most grading and improvements to at least 50 feet from property
lines. This may not be possible in all locations and specific grading plans and
mitigation for noise, dust, and storm water during construction and project noise
and activity during operation which may affect adjoining residences will be
specifically addressed during the design permit phase. (Some residents may want
views of the gold course, others may prefer a screen. Depending on design and
topography the project design will attempt to accommodate these requests at the
project level where practical.)
Detailed presentations on water, water rights, waste water treatment system, and golf
course management techniques will be presented at Brinnon at the Planning Commission
Subcommittee meeting on September 25,2007 . Copies of those presentations will be
included as additional information in response to questions.
57 57 7 -000 1 I LEGAL 1 3590254. I Page 7
5 |ftry7 3r'- T., hree
l.ty dro[,o ,Fro^ c*-,t + i,-Ct
/
9\
T*P"f +rr&-,6u.-- t,^c-*t'-.{ a R**f a,YJL.*--
CJve(b 6t" R,t L" ?v))oJle ?
j