Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout025March 31, 2010 JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 621 Sheridan Street • Port Townsend • Washington 98368 360/379-4450 • 360/379-4451 Fax www.co.jefferson.wa.us/commdevelopment Garth Mann, President Statesman Group, Inc. 7370 Sierra Morena Blvd. Southwest Calgary, Alberta T3H 41-19 CANADA Re: Overview of the Scope of SEIS (MLA08-188), Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort Dear Garth, As you know, the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) conditioned approval of the Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort (BMPR) Comprehensive Plan amendment to require project -level environmental review of the BMPR proposal, as well as environmental review of the proposed Zoning Code amendments and draft Development Agreement required to implement the proposal. Accordingly, a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) is in the process of being prepared under Chapter 43.21C RCW. The SEIS will supplement the programmatic FEIS prepared in 2007 for the Comprehensive Plan amendment that approved the BMPR boundary, adopted by the County under Ordinance No. 01-0128-08, and satisfy the conditions enumerated therein. An important part of the SEIS process is Scoping, as identified under WAC 197-11-408(1), the purpose of which is to "narrow the scope of every EIS to the probable significant adverse impacts and reasonable alternatives, including mitigation measures." As lead agency for the SEIS, Jefferson County held an open public Scoping meeting on Wednesday, October 28, 2009 beginning at 5pm. The meeting included a presentation by the applicant, project status update and procedural explanations by Staff, a video and transcription records of oral testimony. The County solicited and received comments from residents, property owners, tribes, government agencies, private businesses and non-profit organizations to narrow the scope of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS), to identify the probable significant adverse impacts, reasonable alternatives and mitigation measures. An open public comment period on SEIS Scoping was effective until November 30, 2009. A matrix of comments received is attached. While the majority of the comments were specific to `Elements of the Environment' as outlined in WAC 197-11-444, many public comments were also received about the project's impact on income and wages in Brinnon and Jefferson County. In accordance with WAC 197-11-448, these latter elements, hereinafter referred to as `social policy analysis,' are expressly excluded from this SEIS, as the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) contemplates that these general welfare, social, economic, and other requirements will be taken into account in weighing and balancing alternatives. In making final decisions, the SEIS shall not be the sole decision making document. As a result of the Scoping process, the County has identified four alternatives for analysis under the SEIS as follows: (1) ALTERNATIVE #1: The developer's proposal as described in the 2007 FEIS. (2) ALTERNATIVE #2: Similar to the developer's proposal described in the 2007 FEIS, subsequently modified by the developer to comply with the conditions of approval under Ordinance 01-0128-08. (3) ALTERNATIVE #3: Similar to Alternative #2, except with additional modifications to the marina development to comply with the updated Jefferson County Shoreline Master Program, and rebalancing residential units on the golf resort side of the MPR. (4) NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE: Current MPR zoning with no new development. The 2007 FEIS identified and addressed nine (9) elements of the environment on the programmatic, non -project action level as follows: (1) Shellfish, (2) Water, (3) Transportation, (4) Public Services, (5) Shorelines, (6) Fish and Wildlife, (7) Rural Character/Population, (8) Archeological and Cultural Resources, and (9) Critical Areas. The SEIS shall include those elements addressed in the 2007 FEIS in addition to the following elements of the environment listed below. All of these elements will be included in order to evaluate potential impacts and to formulate mitigation measures, as well as to demonstrate compliance with the thirty conditions of Ordinance 01-0128-08: Earth: Geology, Soils, Topography, Slopes, Erosion, Unique Physical Features (to address ordinance condition 63h) Air Quality to include a Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis and to relate to compliance with the work of the Climate Action Committee (to address ordinance condition 63cc) Plants to include tree retention/tree removal, clearing and landscaping (to address ordinance conditions 63 s, u, v, and w) Energy and Natural Resources to include LEED "green -built" standards; could be some cross- over with the Utilities section (to address condition 63x) Housing and Employment (to address ordinance conditions 63 e, f, g, as and dd) Light and Glare to include the resort lighting proposal, and compliance with Dark Sky Association standards (to address ordinance condition 63z) Aesthetics to include the appearance of structures, landscaping plan, greenbelts, conservation easements and required amenities (to address ordinance condition 63d) Utilities: Water Supply/Water Service (to address ordinance conditions 63 m, n, o and p) Sewage Collection/Treatment/Reuse/Disposal Stormwater Management (to address ordinance condition 63q) Electrical Energy (to address ordinance condition 63bb) Alternative Energy Sources Telecommunications 2 Cable Television Solid Waste Collection, Transport and Disposal Fiscal Analysis to include draft Memorandums of Understanding (to address ordinance condition 63 c). MITIGATION Mitigation for impacts to `Elements of the Environment' in each area above shall outline measures that will reduce or eliminate the adverse environmental impacts of the alternatives. The mitigation measure shall include a discussion of the uncertainties if technical feasibility, economic practicality or the science is uncertain. Potential mitigation measures must be evaluated to address potential impacts to each element of the environment listed above. Ve truly yours, vi ane Johnson Proje94 Pla ner, Pleasant Harbor MPR Attachment: Scoping comments matrix Stacie Hoskins SEPA Responsible Official cc: Al Scalf, Director of Community Development Frank Gifford, Director of Public Works 3 X xx x x x X xx xx X O N 0 mmX X =s UU a� Y X XXX X N -m3 m �.. X m c O ox x X x N c T F- 0 0 O X x X w 0 O E2 X m (D c 'X x x x x x 0 s 0) a) rn E0 N a x xx x x xx LO N () c M a) X x N N a) � :3 O)xxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx x �Q� L~�-U O E N a N c8 0 3 3 d — W Y N coo += C N 0 L J cn (D 0 f° Y a� c o 2 �- U a) m1 O c `� c N c O E O L U =ma)`-a)cOo O L O p C a) �coc..�- .0 O t U �0 c•-3� Y U N` g O �Yx N E p 0 v(D O y V c �. mn a� o N 2 N O yv N O O 3a_m O - O� cu> aiS J �C9 T c O 3 O O a) a� d N �L ��cn moazmc� m �°� �•C �� r �� 0 E c o •- m0 c o w M N c ¢Yc7mwcn�mwIL lIS 0— o 0 3 0 0 0= -0¢�w�.j�mm��o-�Uw 0 L mp 0 O