HomeMy WebLinkAbout015Michelle Farfan
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
David W. Johnson < dwjoh nson@cojefferson.wa.us >
Thursday, February 27,20L3 3:00 PM
'Garth Mann'; peckassoc@comcast.net; Swenson, Karen; Schipanski, Rich
Carl Smith; Stacie Hoskins; David W. Johnson;John Austin
Pleasant Harbor Kick-off Meeting
2-25-L3 Agenda.doc; Pleasant Harbor Info Needs Memo - revised l-l7.doc; Attachment
A Tracking Schedule.doc; BoCC Compliance Matrix.doc; Final Scoping Memo.pdf
Attached is the Agenda and backup material for next Monday's meeting at Pleasant Harbor House.
David Wayne Johnson - LEED Green Associate
Associate Planner - Port Ludlow Lead Planner
Department of Community Development
Jefferson County
360.379.4465
Mission: To preserve and enhance the quality of lfe in Jffirson County by promoting a vibrant economy,
sound communities and a healthy environment.
5f, SaVf PAPER - Pleose do not print this e-moil unless obsolutely necessory
All e-mail may be considered subject to the Publr:c Records Ad and as such may be disclosed to a third-party requestor.
LEg$
SREEN
ASSGEIATE
1
Participants:
Purpose
2:00 David
Garth
Karen
David
Others
4:00 Group
Issues not on agenda
Tentative Adjournment
Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resort MPR
SEIS Team Meeting
Pleasant Harbor House
February 25,2013 - 2:00 PM
Jefferson Countv - John Austin, Carl Smith, Stacie Hoskins, David Wayne Johnson,
Applicant and Applicant's Representatives - Garth Mann, Craig Peck, P.E., Jeff
Holland
SEIS Consultant Team - Karen Swenson, Rich Shipanski
Cascadia Law Group - Jon Rehberger
o Get acquainted
o Overview of project to date.
o Identit what's needed, still outstanding and next steps
o Discuss community concems/public involvement process.
o Miscellaneoustopics.
Introductions and overview ofthe agenda
Project Presentation
Information Needs Memo
Where we are now - Attachment A
Project Management Objectives - Schedule
Conditions of Compliance - Matrix
Peer Review - Air Quality Report
Community concerns - Water, Energy, Broadband, Building Height, SEIS
Table of Contents
HTISTUMEN"
720 Sixth Street South, Suite 100
Kirkland, WA 98033
Telephone: 425.284.5401
Fax'. 425.284.5402
ffi
To:
GG:
From:
Date:
Subject:
JT Cooke, Perkins Coie; Craig Peck, P.E.
David Johnson and Stacie Hoskins, Jefferson County Planning Department
Rich Schipanski and Karen Swenson, EAlBlumen
January 10, 2013; Revrsed January 17, 2013
lnformation Needs for the Pleasant Harbor SEIS
The purpose of this memo is to provide a preliminary list of information needed to prepare the
Pleasant Harbor SEIS. The following table is considered a preliminary list, because it is possible
that additional information will be required as the SEPA alternatives are fully defined. We have
reviewed the information provided by the applicant to date and identified additional information
that will be required to commence with drafting the SEIS. Ultimately, all technical reports will
need to provide enough detail for adequate SEPA environmental analysis of development under
the Proposed Actions and EIS Alternatives.
We recognize that a considerable amount of existing information has been provided to date. We
have reviewed the information to determine the gaps in information, but not for the quality of the
technical reports. As we continue to review the technical reports in detail over the next week, we
may revise this table to reflect future information needs. To the extent that the information
provided is relevant to the Pleasant Harbor SEIS, it will be used to prepare, or will be referenced
in, the document. As appropriate, information from those documents will be used to prepare the
SEIS analyses. However, since new alternatives will be included in the SEIS (which exclude the
marina portion), certain information may need to be updated for the SEIS.
The following table focuses on additional information that will be needed per our discussion on
January 9, 2013. It is assumed that the SEIS will address two development alternatives and
one No Action Alternative. The SEIS will recognize the limited redevelopment in the marina
portion of the site under the existing Binding Site Plan Permit, but that portion of the resort will
not be included in the SEIS analyses. Likewise, the potential environmental impacts from a
realigned WDFW access road to the boat ramp (as acknowledged under Alternative 2) will be
assessed under a separate permiUprocess.
The lnformation Needs table includes a column indicating our assumption about the
person/entity anticipated to be responsible for providing the requested information. Where more
than one name is provided in the responsibility column, the first name listed will have the
primary responsibility for coordinating the provision of the information. The table also indicates
the date by which the requested information will be needed (or has been provided), and the
EAIBLUMEN
Pleasant Harbor SEIS lnformation Needs
January 10,2013
1
status of receipt of the information (we will periodically update the status column as we receive
information). Refer to the updated schedule for deliverable dates.
Please contact us with any questions on the information needs below.
EAIBLUMEN
Pleasant Harbor SEIS lnformation Needs
January 10,2013
2
1) Existing Structureso Number of existing structures (all
structures on site)o Which structures are currently
occupied/utilizedo lf vacant, previous use (if
available)o Square footage (if available)
Craig Peck;
JT - Perkins
Coie
1/18
2) Current impervious surface area (if
available)
Craig Peck;
JT - Perkins
Coie
1/18
1) Earth: Final Geotechnical lnvestigation,
Subsurface Group, January 9, 2008
This report should address the following (as
detailed in the Pleasant Harbor Scoping
Notice):. Geology. Soils. Topography. Slopes. Erosiono Unique Physical Features
Craig Peck;
JT - Perkins
Coie
1/1 6
2l Water: Water Supply and Groundwater
lmpact Analysis,2007.
JT - Perkins
Coie
1/16 Rcv'd
(Appendix 5
of DEIS)
3) Fish and Wildlife: Habitat Management
Plan, GeoEngineers, 2012.
JT - Perkins
Coie
1/16
4) Transportation:
Correspondence/documentation of discussion
to construct an alternative WDFW boat ramp
access road
JT - Perkins
Coie
1/16
INFORMATION NEEDS SOURGE
DATE
NEEDED STATUS
Existing Gonditions
Elements of the Environment
5) Air Quality: ESA Review comments on
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Report by Failsafe
Canada (2012)
David -
County;
JT - Perkins
Coie
1/16
6) Plants: Narrative landscaping plan JT - Perkins
Coie
1/1 6
7) Plants: Confirmation with the County that
tree removal/retention can be addressed in
terms of acreage, not individual trees and their
diameter.
JT - Perkins
Coie
David
Johnson-
Countv
1/16
8) Fiscal Analysis: FiscalAnalysis Report JT - Perkins
Coie
1/16
JT - Perkins
Coie
1/169) Utilities: Electrical documentation
regarding electrical demand/load and PUD's
response when development causes PUD to
reach capacity.
10) Utilities: Telecommunications, Cable and
Solid Waste - contacts for providers
Don
Coleman
1/16 EA will
contact;
Craig to
provide
Coleman's
phone
number
1U Public Seruices - Medical: Confirmation
that a medical clinic will be included in the
project
JT - Perkins
Coie
1/16
Craig Peck 1/1612) Revised Alternatives Description (edits to
12-12-2011 version).
Craig Peck 1/1 613) Revised phasing maps to exclude marina
area under existing BSP
EAIBLUMEN
Pleasant Harbor SEIS lnformation Needs
January 10,2013
3
INFORMATION NEEDS SOURCE
DATE
NEEDED STATUS
Alternatives I nformation
Permits
DATE
INFORMATION NEEDS
29) Provide a list of existing permits that
would affect the site (i.e. regarding the Pleasant
Harbor Resort).
JT - Perkins
Coie
1/16
30) Provide a list of all Jefferson County
permits and approvals that would be required
as part of the Proposed Action and future
development.
JT - Perkins
Coie
1/16
31) Provide a list of Federal and/or State
permits and approvals that would be required
as part of the Proposed Action and future
development.
JT - Perkins
Coie
1/16
Digital Copies of all documents provided in
paper form (MS Word preferred; Adobe pdf
documents acceptable)
JT - Perkins
Coie
1/1 6
JT - Perkins
Coie
1/16Draft Zoning Regulations for Pleasant
Harbor MPR
Draft Development Agreement for Pleasant
Harbor
JT - Perkins
Coie
1/16
Project Objectives (required by SEPA)JT - Perkins
Coie
1/16
EAIBLUMEN
Pleasant Harbor SEIS lnformation Needs
January 10,2013
4
SOURGE STATUS
Additional lnformation
Attachment A - Schedule
Schedule
As shown by this timeline below, we anticipate completing the SEIS process in approximately 9 months.
However, the actualschedule willdepend upon the level and substance of comments that we receive on
the Preliminary Draft and Final SElSs, and on the Draft SEIS. EAlBlumen has the capacity and resources
available to meet the schedule indicated below.
Tasks EA Budgeted
time
Peer/County
Review time
Tentative
Date
Phase 1:
1. Coordinate/meet with Jefferson County and the
peer review team regarding work performed in
support of the SEIS to date.
2 weeks t/Lt/13
(2l2slt3l
2. Complete a review of the revised technical
studies prepared by the applicant's technical
team to confirm their completeness and
adequacy for inclusion in the SEIS.
3. ldentify additional project information/analysis
needed to prepare the SEIS (we will prepare an
lnformotion Needs Memo that lists this
additiona I information/analysis).
l week ut8lt3
4. Compare final round of peer review/county
comments on technical studies to final draft of
all technical studies. Draft memo to County
regarding adequacy of revisions.
1-2 days t/22/13
5. ldentify critical procedural steps required by
SEPA, including WAC references, and how this
project will meet these requirements (this will
be incorporated into the SEIS).
2 days 1.12411.3
Phase 2:
1. Complete lhe Description of the Proposed
Actions and Alternatives chapter of the Draft
SEIS (based on the draft project description
prepared by the previous SEPA consultant and
additional information provided by the
applicant). We will circulate this chapter to
Jefferson County and the applicant early on for
concu rrence.
2 weeks 217 /L3
2. Jefferson County and applicant review
Description of the Proposed Actions ond
l week 2/t4lL3
3, Summarize all technical analyses prepared in
support of the SEIS.
2 weeks 2l28lL3
4. Serve as the principal author of the Preliminary
Draft SEIS; directly prepare the Foct Sheet and
Summory chapters, directly prepare certain
sections of the Affected Environment/lmpacts
chapter, and incorporate the technical analyses
prepared by the applicant's team into the
Affe cte d E nvi ro n m e nt/l m po cts cha pte r (see the
Overall Assumptions above for our assumptions
regarding responsibilities for the various sections
of the SEIS).
3l2t/t3
5. Produce the Preliminary Draft SEIS for review by
Jefferson County and the applicant.
2-3 days
3/26173
6. Jefferson County and applicant review
Preliminary Draft SEIS and provide comments
2 weeks 4ls/13
Phase 3:
3 weeks 4/301L3
2. Attend and facilitate a regularly scheduled
Planning Commission (PC) meeting and BoCC
afternoon briefing to introduce the Preliminary
Draft EIS and receive verbal feedback.
1 day s/tl1.3
3. Revise document based on verbal comments
from PC and BoCC. Submit to Jefferson County
for final approval.
3 days s13l1.3
4. Jefferson County reviews revised Preliminary
Draft SEIS for final approval.
L week s/7olt3
5. Finalize document and coordinate production of
the Draft SEIS for issuance and public comment.
l week slt7l13
6. 30-day public comment period 4 weeks 6/t4lL3
7. Prepare for and help conduct the Draft SEIS
public hearing (if held) during the 30-day
comment period to obtain oralcomments.
3 days 6/4113
8. Attend public hearing of the Planning
Commission's review and recommendation of
the SEIS.
1 day 616173
Alte rnotives cha pter for concu rrence.
3 weeks
1. Revise the Preliminary Draft SEIS based on
comments received. Submit to Jefferson County
for briefing of the Planning Commission and
Board of County Commissioners (BoCC)...
L. Review allwritten (and oral) comments received
on the Draft SEIS.
l week 6127/73
2. Coordinate with Jefferson County to determine
whether any of the comments require further
analysis and the approach to responding to key
comments.
2-3 days 612611.3
3. Assemble responses to comments and
summaries of any additional analysis in the form
of a Preliminary Final SEIS for review and
comment by Jefferson County and the applicant.
5 weeks 7 /31/13
4. Jefferson County and applicant review
Preliminary Final SEIS and provide comments.
2 weeks 8lt4/73
5. Revise the Preliminary Final SEIS based on
pertinent comments received. Submit to
Jefferson County for final approval.
2 weeks 8128h3
6. Jefferson County reviews Preliminary Draft SEIS
for final approval.
l week e/41L3
7. Finalize document and coordinate production of
the Final SEIS for issuance.
l week s/17/13
Budgeted Time Subtota!24 weeks
(EA)
ll weeks
(County/
applicant/public)
Total Budgeted Time for SEIS 35 weeks
Phase 4:
PHMPR BoCC Conditions of Compliance
BoCC #Description Date Notes
a Any analysis of environmental impacts
is to be based on science and data
pertinent to the Brinnon site. This
includes rainfall projections, runoff
projections, and potential impacts on
Hood Canal.
Brinnon site specific data. (SEIS)
b All applications will be given an
automatic SEPA threshold
determination of Determination of
Significance (DS) at the project level
except where the SEPA-responsible
official determines that the application
results in only minor construction.
Project level DS = SEIS
c The project developer will be required to
negotiate memoranda of understanding
(MOU) or memoranda of agreement
(MOA) to provide needed support for the
Brinnon school, fire district, Emergency
Medical Services (EMS), housing,
police, public health, parks and
recreation, and transit prior to approval
of the development agreement. Such
agreements will be encouraged
specifically between the developer
and the Pleasant Tides Yacht Club, and
with the Slip owner's Association
regarding marina use, costs, dock
access, loading and unloading, and
parkinq.
MOUs.
Rec'd: Sheriff, housing, parks, transit,
health care, fire, school district
d A list of required amenities shall be in
the development agreement along with
conditions for public access.
Amenities - complete tlt5lz0lt
public access
Statesman shalladvertise and give
written notice at libraries and post
offices in East Jefferson County and
recruit locally to fill opportunities for
contracting and employment, and will
prefer local applicants provided they are
qualified, available, and competitive in
terms of pricinq.
Localemployment. (DA)
f Statesman will prioritize the sourcing of
construction materials from within
JeffersonCounty.
Local construction materials. (DA)
ob The developer shall commission a study
of the number of jobs expected to be
created as a direct or indirect result of
the MPR that earn 80% or less of the
Brinnon area average median income
(AMl). The developer shall provide
affordable housing (e.9., no more than
30% of household income) for the
Brinnon MPR workers roughly
proportional to the number of iobs
Affordable housing for jobs created.
Rec'd 5/11 # ofjobs
t
e
PHMPR BoCC Conditions of Compliance
created that earn 80% or less of the
Brinnon area AMl. The developer may
satisfy this condition through dedication
of land, payment of in lieu fee, or onsite
housing development.
h The possible ecological impact of the
development's water plan that alters
kettles for use as water storage must be
examined, and possibly one kettle
preserved.
Kettle use and preservation.
Any study done at the project level
pursuant to SEPA (RCW 43.21C) shall
include a distinct report by a mutually
chosen environmental scientist on the
impacts to the hydrology and
hydrogeology of the MPR location of the
developer's intention to use one of the
existing kettles for water storage. Said
report shall be peer-reviewed by a
second scientist mutually chosen by the
developer and the county. The
developer will bear the financial cost of
these reports.
Kettle study for water storage.
j Tribes should be consulted regarding
cultural resources, and possibly one
kettle preserved as a cultural resource.
Tribal cultural resources.
k As a condition of development approval,
prior to the issuance of any shoreline
permit or approval of any preliminary
plat, there shall be executed or recorded
with the County Auditor a document
reflecting the developer's written
understanding with and among the
following: Jefferson County, local tribes,
and the Department of Archaeology and
Historical Preservation, that includes a
cultural resources management plan to
assure archaeological investigations
and systematic monitoring of the subject
property prior to issuing permits; and
during construction to maintain site
integrity, provide procedures regarding
future ground-disturbing activity, assure
traditional tribal access to cultural
properties and activities, and to provide
for community ed ucation opportunities.
TribalMOU.
Rec'dLlL4llt
A wildlife management plan focused on
non-lethal strategies shall be developed
in the public interest in consultation with
the Department of Fish and Wildlife and
local tribes, to prevent diminishment of
tribalwildlife resources cited in the
Brinnon Sub- Area Plan (e.9., deer, elk,
cougar, waterfowl, osprey, eaqles, and
Habitat Management Plan. (SEIS)
2
PHMPR BoCC Conditions of Compliance
bear), to reduce the potential for vehicle
collisions on U.S. Highway 1Ql, to
reduce the conflicts resulting from
wildlife foraging on high-value
landscaping and attraction to fresh
water sources, to reduce the dangers to
predators attracted to the area by prey
or habitat, and to reduce any danger to
humans.
m No deforestation or grading will be
permitted prior to establishing adequate
water rights and an adequate water
supply.
6/16/70 Water supply & rights. Water rights
rec'd - see below.
n Approval of a Class A Water System by
the Washington Department of Health,
and approval of a Water Rights
Certificate by the Department of Ecology
shall be required prior to applying for
any Jefferson County permits for plats
or any new development.
Water System - DOH.
Water rights - DOE. Water rights permit
G2-30436 granted for (3) wells - (1) year
round domestic & commercial, (2)
summer irrigation - total of 300 gallons
per minute.
o Detailed review is needed at the project
level SEPA analysis to ensure that
water quantity and water quality issues
are addressed. The estimated potable
water use is based on a daily residential
demand used to establish the
Equivalent Residential Units (ERU) for
the development using a standard of
175 gallons per-day (gpd). The goalof
the development is 70 gpd. All
calculations for water use at any stage
shall be based on the standard of 175
qpd.
Adequate water quality and quantity.
ls water rights approval based on 175
gallons per day/ERU? (Yes, see page 8 of
DOE report)
p An NWP shall be established that
requires Statesman to provide access to
the water system by any neighboring
parcels if saltwater intrusion becomes
an issue for neighboring wells on Black
Point, and reserve areas for additional
recharge
wells will be included in case wells fail,
are periodically inoperable, or cause
mounding.
Neighborhood Water Policy.
To Scott Bender for review of Porto
comments. Back to Susan to review
Scott's response to comments - t/ZOtt
Susan may comment at time of Draft
sEts.
q Stormwater discharge from the golf
course shall meet requirements of zero
discharge into Hood Canal. To the
extent necessary to achieve the goal of
designing and installing stormwater
management infrastructures and
techniques that allow no
stormwater run-off into Hood Canal,
Statesman shall prepare a soilstudy of
the soils present at the MPR location.
Zero discharge to Hood Canal - Soils
Study. (SEIS)
3
6/1.6/10
PHMPR BoCC Conditions of Compliance
Soils must be proven to be conducive to
the intended infiltration either in their
natural condition or after amendment.
Marina discharge shall be treated by a
system that reduces contamination to
the greatest possible extent.
r A County-based comprehensive water
quality monitoring plan specific to
Pleasant Harbor requiring at least
monthly water collection and testing will
be developed and approved in concert
with an adaptive management program
prior to any. site-specific action, utilizing
best available science and appropriate
state agencies. The monitoring plan
shall be funded by a yearly reserve, paid
for by Statesman, that will include
regular offsite sampling of pollution,
discharge, and/or contaminant loading,
in addition
to any onsite monitoring regime.
Water quality monitoring.
Rec'd618l1-1-
s The developer must ensure that natural
greenbelts will be maintained on U.S.
Highway 101 and as appropriate on the
shoreline. Statesman shall record a
conservation easement protecting
greenbelts and buffers to include, but
not be limited to, a 200-foot riparian
buffer along the steep bluff along the
South Canalshoreline, the strip of
mature
trees between U.S. Highway 101 and
the Maritime Village, wetlands, and
wetland
buffers. Easements shall be perpetual
and irrevocable recordings dedicating
the property as naturalforest land
buffers. Statesman, at its expense, shall
manage these easements to include
removing, when appropriate, naturally
fallen trees, and replanting to retain a
natural visual separation of the
development from Hiqhwav 101.
Greenbelts, 200 ft riparian buffers.
t The marina operations shall conduct
ongoing monitoring and maintain an
inventory regarding Tunicates and other
invasive species, and shall be required
to participate with the County and state
agencies in an adaptive management
program to eliminate, minimize, and fully
mitigate any changes arising from the
resort, and related to Pleasant Harbor or
the Maritime Village.
Tunicates.
Rec'd LOI2LILO
U ln keeping with the MPR designation as Screening, natural vegetation. (SEIS &
4
PHMPR BoCC Conditions of Compliance
located in a setting of natural amenities,
and in order to satisfy the requirements
of the Shoreline Master Program (JCC
18.15.135(1),(2),(6), the greenbelts of
the shoreline should be retained and
maintained as they currently exist in
order to provide for "the screening of
facilities and amenities so that all uses
within the MPR are harmonious with
each other, and in order to incorporate
and retain, as much as feasible, the
preservation of natural features, historic
sites, and public views." ln keeping with
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Policy
24.9,hhe site plan for the MPR shall "be
designed to blend with the natural
setting and, to the maximum extent
possible, screen the development and
its impacts from the adjacent rural
areas." Evergreen trees and understory
should remain as undisturbed as
possible.
Statesman shall infill plants where
appropriate with indigenous trees and
shrubs.
DA)
ln keeping with an approved
landscaping and grading plan, and in
order to satisfy the intent of JCC
18.1 5.1 35(6), and with special emphasis
at the Maritime Village, the buildings
should be constructed and placed in
such a way that they will blend into the
terrain and landscape with park-like
greenbelts between the buildings.
Landscaping, Park-like greenbelts
between buildings. (SEIS)
Construction of the MPR buildings will
be completed in a manner that strives to
preserve trees that have a diameter of
10 inches or greater at breast height
(dbh). An arborist will be consulted and
the ground staked and flagged to ensure
the roots and surrounding soils of
significant trees are protected during
construction. To the extent possible,
trees of significant size (i.e., '10 inches
or more in diameter at breast height
(dbh)) that are removed during
construction shall be made available
with their root wads intact for possible
use in salmon recovery prolects.
Protect trees > 10 dbh.
x Statesman shall use the LEED
(Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design) and
"Green Built" green building rating
system standards. These standards,
LEED - complete Llz0lz01-1-
5
PHMPR BoCC Conditions of Compliance
applicable to commercial and residential
dwellings respectively, "promote design
and construction practices that increase
profitability while reducing the negative
environmental impacts of buildings, and
improving occupant health and well-
beinq."
v There shall be included as a best
management practice for the operation
and maintenance of a golf course within
the MPR that requires the developer to
maintain a log of fertilizers, pesticides,
and herbicides used on the MPR site,
and this information will be made
available to the public.
Golf course management. (SEIS)
z Statesman shall use the lnternational
Dark Sky Association (lDA) Zone E-1
standards for the MPR. These
standards are recommended for "areas
with intrinsically dark landscapes" such
as national parks, areas of outstanding
natural beauty, or residential areas
where inhabitants have expressed a
desire that all light trespass be limited.
Dark skys. (SEIS)
aa ln fostering the economy of South
Jefferson County by promoting tourism,
the housing units at the Maritime Village
should be limited to rentals and time-
shares; or, at the very least, it should be
mandated that each section be required
to keep the ratio ol 65% to 35% of rental
and time-shares to permanent
residences per JCC 1 8. 1 5. 123.(2).
Time-share limitations. (DA)
bb Verification of the ability to provide
adequate electrical power shall be
obtained from the Mason County Public
Utility District.
Mason County PUD. (SEIS)
cc Statesman Corporation shall collaborate
with the Climate Action Committee
(CAC) to calculate greenhouse gas
emissions (GHGs) associated with the
MPR, and identify techniques to mitigate
such emissions through sequestration
and/or other acceptable methods.
Greenhouse gas emissions. (SEIS)
dd Statesman Corporation is encouraged to
work with community apprentice groups
to identify and advertise job
opportunities for local students.
Jobs for students. (DA)
6
JETTERTION CCII.'NTY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVEI,OPMENT
621 Sheridan Steet. PorlTownsend . Washinglon 98368
3601379-4450 . 3601379445 I Fax
www.co jefferson. wa. uVcommdevelopment
October l2,20ll
Garth Mann, President
Statesman Group, Inc.
7370 Siena Morena Blvd. Southwest
Calgary, Alberta T3H 4H9
CANADA
Re Revised Overview of the Scope of Supplemental Environment Impacl Statement
Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort (MLA08-188)
(Memo rsvised to amend Scoping Memo dated March 23,2010)
Dear Garth,
As you know, the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) c.onditionsd
approval of the Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Resort (PHMPR) Comprehensive Plan
amendment to require project-level onvironmental review of the PHMPR proposal, as well as
environmental review of the propcsed ?-oaing Code amendments and draft Development
Agreement required to implement the proposal. Accordihgly, I Supplemental Environmentat
Impact Statement (SEIS) is in the proc€ss of being prepared under Chapter 43.21C RCW. The
SEIS will supplement the programmatic FEIS prepared in 2007 for the Comprehensive Plan
amendment that approvcd the PHMPR boundary, adoptod by the County under Ordinance No.
0l-0128-08, and satisff the conditions enumerated therein.
An important part of the SEIS process is Scoping, as identified under WAC 197-11408(l), the
purpose of which is to "nanow the scope of cvery 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 solisited and received comments from residents, property owners, tribes, government
agencies, private businesses and non-profit organizations to narrow the scope of the Supplemental
Environmontal Impact Stalement (SEIS), to identiff the probable significant adverse impaots,
reasonable altematives and mitigation measures. An open public comment period on SEIS
Scoping was effiEctive until November 30, 2009. A matrix of comments rcceived is on record.
While thc majority of the comments were specific to 'Elements of the Environment' as outlined
in WAC 197-11444, many public comments were also received about the project's impaot on
income and wages in Brinnon and Jefferson County. In accordance with WAC 197-l l-44E, these
latter elements, hereinafter referred to as 'social policy analysis,' are expressly excluded from this
SEIS, as the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) oontemplates that these general welfare,
social, economic, and other requirements will be taken into acoount 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 had identified four proposed alternatives for
analysis under the SEIS as follows:
(l) ALTERNATM #l: The developor's proposalas described in the 2007 FEIS
(2) ALTERNATII{E #2: The developer's proposal as described in the 2007 FEIS and
subsequently modified by the developer to cornply with the conditions of approval under
Ordinance 0l-0128-08
(3) ALTERNATIVE #3: Same as Altemative #2, except witlr additional modifications to the
marina developrnent to comply with the new Shorcline Master Plan.
(4) NO-ACTION ALTERNATI\{E: Current MPR zoning with no new development.
During our project meeting of May 18, 201 l, we determined that the above alternatives
#l & #2 were not "feasible" and therefore could not be included in the SEIS per WAC
197-11440(5)0) because they were out of compliance with Jefferson County's Locally
Approved Shoreline Master Program (development within the 150 foot buffer from
Ordinary High Water Mark). It was decided at that time that a new alternative would be
developcd to comply with that section of SEPA. Subsequently, the following altematives
have been identified:
(l) ALTERNATIYE #l: The developer's proposal as described in the 2007 FEIS and
subsequently modified by the developer to comply with the conditions of approval undor
Ordinance 0l-0128-08, except with additional modifications to the Marina Village
development to comply with the new Shorpline Master Plan.
(2) ALTERNATIYE #2: Same as Alternative #l but with redesigrred Golf Course/Resort site
layout to reduoe environmental impacts.
(3) NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVf,: A oombination of &e No-action Altemative from the 2007
FEIS and Cunent MPR zoning with no new development.
The 2007 FEIS identified and addresses nine (9) elements of the environment on the
programmatic, non-aotion level as follows: (l) Shellfish, (2) Water, (3) Transportation, (4) Public
Services, (5) Shorelines, (6) Fish and Wildlifc, (7) Rural Character/Population, (8) Archeological
and Cultural Resources, and (9) Critical Area. The SEIS shall include those elements addressed in
the 2007 FEIS in addition to the following elements of the environment. All of these elements
will be included in order to evaluate potential impacts and to formulate mitigation measures, as
well as to satisfi the thirry conditions of Ordinanoe 0l-0128-08:
Earth: Geotory, Soils, Topography, Slopes, Erosion, Uniquo Physical Featuros (addrcsses
ordinance condition 63h)
Alr Quatity to include a Grcenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis and to relate to compliance with
the work of the Climate Action Comminee (addresses ordinance condition 63cc)
Plants to include re€ retontion/tree removal, clearing and landscaping (addresses ordinancc
conditions 63 s, u, v, and w)
EnergX rnd Natural Resources to include LEED "green-built" slandards; could be some cross-
over with the Utilities section (addresses condition 63x)
2
Houring and Employment (addresses ordinance conditions 63 e, f, g, aa and dd)
Light and Ghrc to include the resort tighting proposal, and compliance with Dark Sky
Association sundards (addrcsses ordinance condition 632)
Aestheticg to include the appearance of structurcs, landscaping plan, greenbelts, conservation
easements and required amenities (addresses ordinance eondition 63d)
Utillties:
Water Supply/Water Service (addresses ordinance conditions 63 m, n, o and p)
Sewage Col lection/Treatment/Reuse/Disposal
Stormwater Management (addresses ordinance condition 63 q)
Electrical Energy (addresses ordinance condition 53bb)
Alternative Enerry Sources
Teleoommunications
Cable Television
Solid Waste Collection, Transport and Disposal
Flscal Analysis to include draft Memorandums of Understanding (addresses ordinanse condition
63 c)
MITIGATION
Mitigation for impacts to 'Elcments of the Environment' in each area above shall outlino
m€asures that will reduce or eliminate the adverse environmenkl impacts of the alternatives. The
mitigation measurc shall include a discussion of the uncertainties, if technical feasibility,
economic prooticality or tle science is uncertain. Potential mitigation measurp{i must be evaluatcd
to address impacts to atl of the areas identified.
Wayne ns
Project Pl Harbor MPR SEPA Responsible OIfi cial
cc Al Scalf, Dirsctor of Community Development
Frank Gifford, Director of Public Works
3