Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout104Michelle Farfan From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Hollinger, Kristy < khollinger@eaest.com> Thursday, November 05, 2015 L:45 PM Dadisman, Jennifer David W. Johnson (djohnson@cojefferson.wa.us); Schipanski, Rich; ' peckassoc@comcast.net' Pleasant Harbor - Alternative 3 3,4_Fish & Wildlife.doc; 3.7_Critical Areas.docx; 3.3_Plants.doc Hi Jennifer, Thanks for your call this morning. As per our discussion, attached are the sections of the Final SEIS that are related to reports by GeoEngineers. These sections show new information for Alternative 3 (9-hole golf course)ihiOeA in giit Can you let us know if a brief review of Alt. 3 site plan, data, and SEIS sections (including additional info if necessary) will be outside your current scope of work, and if so what additional level of effort this might entail? Also, we have the following GeoEngineers reports as appendices in the SEIS. o Golf Course Development and Operation Best Management Practices Plan - Jan. 6,2012 r Habitat Management Plan, Pleasant Harbor Master Planned Report - Jan.27,2012 o Wetland and Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan Report - Jan.26,2O!2 Thanks for your help Jennifer Best, Kristy Kristy M. Hollinger Planner @B EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, lnc., PBC 2200 Sixth Ave, Suite 707 | Seattle, WA 98121 (t) 206.452.5350 ext. 1726 | (f) 206.443.7646 khollinqer@eaest.com http://www,eaest.com 1 3.4 FISH AND WILDLIFE This section of the SEIS describes existing fish and wildlife resources on the site and in surrounding areas, and evaluates how development under each of the alternatives could affect these resources. This section is based on the 2012 Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resorf Habitat Management Plan (Appendix H). Shellfish resources are described and analyzed in a separate section, Section 3.5, Shellfish. 3.4-1 Affected Environment 2007 Ers A site analysis was done for the 2007 EIS for endangered species and listed species and the results were detailed in a site-specific Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment dated July 20, 2006, contained in 2007 DEIS Appendix 7. Fish Several intermittent or seasonal stream channels were identified on site (Type 5 under the County classification system). The streams are steep in gradient and blocked from fish passage due to structural barriers. Hood Canal is habitat for multiple fish species, including Chinook and Chum Salmon, Steelhead, and BullTrout. The southerly beach of the site is adjacent to important tidelands and the mouth of the Duckabush River, which is important not only for shellfish, but for all stages of salmon and fish life cycles. The Duckabush River delta is considered an important shrimp nursery area, and important habitat and nursery for juvenile stages of Dungeness crab. Wildlife The site was evaluated for terrestrial habitat. The site is cut off from the balance of the peninsula by US HWY 101, but is still used by a variety of species, including birds, deer, and coyote. Large animals, including elk, may occasionally visit the site, but there is no evidence of regular use due to the highway. The site was examined for use by threatened or endangered species, but no nesting sites were found. The riparian edge, wetlands, and buffers do provide good habitat. No evidence of eagle nesting or roosting was identified onsite. A potential osprey nest, if still active, could exist in the Pleasant Harbor area. Threatened and Endangered Species No threatened or endangered species were found onsite. Hood Canal is home to six federally- listed threatened or endangered species (Puget Sound Chinook Salmon, Hood Canal Summer Chum Salmon, Puget Sound Steelhead, Bull Trout (Coastal Puget Sound), Southern Orca Whales, and Stellar Sea Lions). Further, both the Duckabush and Dosewallips Rivers are considered important systems in the maintenance and rehabilitation of affected runs. Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS 2015 3.4-1 3.4 Fish & Wildlife sEls The 2012 Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resorf Habitat Management Plan (Appendix H) included a file review of available information on existing and historic sensitive fish, wildlife and plant species occurring in the vicinity of the site, and two site visits to gather direct observations of habitat features (snags, nests, burrows, trails, dens, streams, marine shoreline habitat, etc.) and visual observations of fish and wildlife. Two additional site visits were conducted to delineate the location of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OWHM) along the Hood Canal and Pleasant Harbor shorelines. Fish Consistent with the 2007 ElS, there are no streams containing ESA-listed fish species present on the site. There are two seasonal streams within the SEIS site, which are non-fish-bearing drainages that enter Pleasant Harbor along the northern shoreline near the marina and proposed maritime village. These small drainages are seasonal and primarily carry stormwater from US Highway 101 to Pleasant Harbor. Three additional seasonal, non-fish-bearing drainages enter Pleasant Harbor along the northern shoreline near the marina outside of the SEIS site. One seasonal, non-fish-bearing drainage is located within the WDFW-owned property north of Black Point Road. As noted in the 2007 ElS, Hood Canal, which connects to Pleasant Harbor and borders Black Point to the east, contains many fish species and serves as a migratory corridor for adult salmonids returning to spawning streams. Although there are no fish present on the site, fish presence is assumed to occur along the shoreline of the site, as well as where the Dosewallips and Duckabush Rivers enter Hood Canal, approximately one mile from the site, during certain times of the year. Forage fish presence has been documented along the shoreline of Black Point (WDFW, 2011). Pacific herring is the only species of forage fish with spawning areas along the southern shoreline of the site (WDFW,2011) The preferred habitat for Pacific herring spawning is in eelgrass beds. Eelgrass was identified on the WDFW PHS maps in the vicinity of the marina, but its presence was not verified during the field investigation (WDFW,2011). There is no expansion of the marina or hardening of the shoreline proposed within Pleasant Harbor; thus, an eelgrass survey was not conducted in this area. Sand lance spawning areas have been documented along the mouth of Pleasant Harbor and surf smelt spawning areas have been documented along the southeastern shoreline of Black Point (WDFW,2011). These species of forage fish are expected to use areas in the vicinity of the site for spawning due to the substrate size and composition present. Wildlife The seasonal, and often secretive, habits of many wildlife species make it difficult to confirm habitat use with just a few site surveys. Therefore, not all wildlife species that use the site could be verified by direct observations or signs (tracks, nests, etc). Species utilization of the area is estimated from the documented presence of species described in the literature including the USFWS endangered and threatened species list for Jefferson County and the WDFW Priority Habitat Species (PHS) maps of the site and the surrounding area. Vegetation is a major factor in the distribution of wildlife. Plants provide food and shelter against predators and weather, and sites for nesting, resting, perching and breeding. The field reconnaissance revealed the presence of numerous mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibian species as well as vegetation Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS 2015 3.4-2 3.4 Fish & Wildlife communities that are expected to support certain species. There is no documentation or evidence of terrestrial-listed ESA species utilizing the site. The WDFW PHS maps indicate the presence of two bald eagle nests on the eastern shoreline of Black Point approximately 0.5 mile east of the site. There are also two nests located approximately 2.5 miles to the southwest along the shoreline of the Hood Canal and one inland nest located approximately one mile to the north (WDFW, 2011). The shoreline on the southern edge of Black Point and the Pleasant Harbor shoreline contain mature trees suitable for eagle perching. There are no nests, communal roosts, foraging areas or buffers located on the site. However, there is presence of bald eagles in the project vicinity, which indicates there is potential for bald eagles to utilize the site. Numerous snags that contained signs of use by woodpeckers and insects were observed throughout the site. lt is likely that the indicators of woodpecker use on the snags were caused by the Northern flicker. Visual observations of various birds were made during the investigation, including American robins, American crows, hummingbirds, and great blue heron. Although several bird species were observed at the site, no nests were observed during the site investigation. There is a documented osprey nest located offsite about 300 feet south of Pleasant Harbor. Ospreys were observed to be present in the nest during a field reconnaissance on April 3, 2008. Marbled murrelets are associated with marine environments and old-growth forests. There is no suitable nesting habitat present on or near the site. There is also no documented presence of marbled murrelets in the vicinity of the site (WDFW,2011). However, because the site is adjacent to nearshore marine environments, there is potential for foraging marbled murrelets to be present near the site during certain times of the year. Migratory water fowl, such as ducks, geese and swans, are expected to be present within the vicinity of the site. The Duckabush River enters Hood Canal about one mile southwest of the site. There is an extensive delta and shallow mudflat habitat at the mouth of the river. This area is prime habitat for waterfowl: thus, they can be expected to feed and migrate through the area during various times of the year. There is a documented waterfowl concentration of trumpeter swans along the southern shoreline of Black Point that is associated with the mouth of the Duckabush River and of hooded merganser along the east shoreline of Black Point (WDFW, 2011). There is also documented presence of hooded merganser as concentrations in a pond approximately 0.5 mile to the east of the site (WDFW,2011). The presence of marine mammals along the shorelines of the site was evaluated through a review of available literature (USFWS endangered and threatened species list for Jefferson County, NOAA ESA Listed Marine Mammals, and the WDFW PHS map) and a site investigation. ESA-Iisted marine mammals that may be found along the shoreline of the site include southern resident killer whales, humpback whales, and Steller sea lions. There are two documented harbor seal haulout sites at the mouth of the Duckabush River located about one mile south of the site (WDFW,2000a and 2011). 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 southern shoreline of the project site. Several signs of mammal presence were observed during the field reconnaissance. Blacktail deer scat and tracks were observed throughout the site from the shoreline to the upland in all areas of the site. Coyote scat and tracks were also observed on site. There is documented Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS2015 3.4-3 3.4 Fish & Wildlife presence of regular large concentrations of Roosevelt elk in the vicinity of the site (WDFW, 2011). Elk migrate on a seasonal pattern and can be expected to be in the site 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, U.S. Highway 101 separates the entire site from the elk range. Elk are not expected to cross over heavily traveled roads such as Highway 101. Approximately two miles northeast of the site there are "Elk Crossing" signs posted in Brinnon, so there is potential for elk to cross over Highway 101. A western fence lizard was observed sunbathing on a large log on the southern shoreline of the site during the field visit. These lizards are preyed upon by birds and snakes. Several different common garter snakes were observed at various locations on the site and were typically found in upland areas with low-lying grass and shrub layers. Pacific tree frogs were also heard calling during the site visits. 3.4-2 lmpacts 2007 Ers Fish Section 3.7.2 of the 2007 EIS noted that the marine/estuarine species of Hood Canal (shrimp, clams, geoducks, oysters, Dahl's porpoise, and orcas) would not expected to be impacted from the development, due to the protection of the southern bluffs from human intrusion and the treatment of water to avoid contaminated discharge from the site. The water quality in Pleasant Harbor, as it pertains to the proposed development, would be monitored and adaptive management programs would identify additional mitigation as required. The sensitivity of the Duckabush River delta area for shellfish and sea life of all kinds reinforces the importance of maintaining a riparian buffer along the southern shoreline, assuring retention and treatment of all water affected by construction or development to assure water quality of all waters and seeps on the peninsula affecting or affected by the development. The sensitivity of the area was also the rationale for the proposed closing of any efforts to access or use the southern beaches. Wildlife The construction of a Master Planned Resort would inhibit use of the site by larger mammals, but as noted particularly the elk are not noted in the Black Point area, but typically utilize land farther north in the river plains. Project-level review was directed to protection of riparian habitat on the south boundary, the vegetation buffer along US HWY 101, appropriate vegetation and tree buffers along the Pleasant Harbor shoreline, and the maintenance of functions and values of the wetland and stream critical areas in the appropriate sub basins. An adaptive management program to address water quality and upland issues was identified as being planned to be part of the marina water quality program to address issues as they may arise in the future. A potential osprey nest may exist in the Pleasant Harbor area. Plans to protect the nest, as appropriate, would be addressed during permitting if the nest is still active or capable of providing support to local populations. Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS2015 3.4-4 3.4 Fish & Wildlife Threatened and Endangered Species The endangered species potential was evaluated and determined that the project would not affect terrestrial species on the project site. No evidence of eagle nesting or roosting was identified onsite. The fringe riparian area along the south boundary would provide significant protection for wildlife using the bay and the forested edge, as well as snags that eagles and other raptors may use for perching and feeding and these areas would be protected in the plan. The retention of a significant riparian area on the south shore would retain existing snags for perching. sErs This section identifies and analyzes impacts to fish and wildlife on and in the vicinity of the Pleasant Harbor site with proposed development. lmpacts are expected to be generally similar for Alternatives 1, 2 and 3, except that development under Alternatives 2 and S would be consolidated into fewer buildings, thereby potentially providing additional wildlife habitat compared to Alternative 1 and the 2007 ElS. Additionally, more natural area would be left in an undisturbed condition under Alternative 3, potentially providing additional wildlife habitat as compared to Alternatives 1 and 2. Fish Proposed site development is not expected to increase pollutants into the harbor. As part of this development and as part of the water quality mitigation effort, the existing septic tanks, pumps, and drainfields would be replaced with a sewage treatment plant and water system. The treated water from the sewage treatment plant would then be used as irrigation for the golf course. Also, as part of the water quality mitigation effort, the resort would be required to collect water quality data in the surrounding area using existing state monitoring stations. Should changes in water quality be identified, the resort would be required to notify Jefferson County and participate in rectifying problems. Runoff from new pollution-generating impervious surfaces within the Maritime Village area is required by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) to be treated prior to discharge into the harbor. As a result of the stormwater management and the replacement of the septic tanks and drainfields, the net discharge to the harbor is anticipated to be cleaner than current conditions. Wildlife Wildlife use within the Black Point area is essentially isolated from the Olympic Peninsula by U.S. Highway 101. However, the wildlife described below may use the site through corridors that connectwith the Olympic Peninsula habitatwest of Highway 101. Figure 3.4-1 shows the wildlife corridors formed by areas of temperate coniferous forest that could connect the project site to the peninsula and additional undeveloped parcels in the vicinity. Various strategies would be implemented to help protect wildlife resources throughout the site from impacts caused from the development. These strategies include providing natural vegetated areas that would be protected from development and remain undisturbed. Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS2015 3.4-5 3.4 Fish & Wildlife Figure 3.4-1 Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS _ 2015 3.4-6 3.4 Fish & Wildlife A trail leading from the top of the bluff to the beach is located along the western portion of the shoreline buffer. This trail would be decommissioned and access to the shoreline from the site or access from the shoreline to the site would not be permitted. Disturbed areas that encroach into the 200-foot buffer would be restored and planted with native vegetation found within the project vicinity. As a result of this development, there would be no encroachment into the 200- foot buffer and any disturbance within the 200-foot buffer and top-of-slope buffer would be restored. The proposed development may temporarily displace the bald eagles during construction, but impacts should be temporary because the habitat they currently utilize would remain undisturbed. Some mature trees would be left on site and the southern shoreline of Black Point would have an undisturbed 200-foot buffer along Hood Canal. Birds, mammals, snakes, lizards and frogs on the site would be temporarily impacted or displaced during construction, but there should not be significant impacts as a result of the development because designated vegetated areas and corridors would remain undisturbed during and post-construction. These vegetated areas would provide sufficient habitat and food for survival. Undisturbed areas of natural vegetation and habitat corridors are important to wildlife currently using the site. Habitat corridors are important to allow movement and subsequent flow of genes between wildlife populations in habitats that othenruise would be isolated. The two primary users of corridors are corridor travelers and corridor dwellers. Corridor travelers include large herbivores such as deer; medium to large carnivores like foxes and coyotes; and various migratory animals. Corridor dwellers generally have limited dispersal ability and consist mostly of plants, insects, amphibians, reptiles, small mammals and birds. The designated vegetated areas would lessen impacts and allow wildlife that typically utilizes the site to continue to utilize the site. While Rainier elk do not currently utilize the site or may to a limited extent, elk would be discouraged from utilizing this site by the installation of an exclusion fence because there is no suitable foraging habitat on Black Point and elk have the potential to damage property. Threatened and Endangered Species Although listed species may occur along the shorelines of the project area, there are no currently listed species known to utilize the upland areas. There is no documentation of terrestrial-listed ESA species utilizing the site, but listed marine ESA species may be utilizing the adjacent shorelines of the site. These species include fish, mollusks, and marine animals such as: Chinook salmon, coho salmon, steelhead, bull trout, southern resident killer whale, humpback whales and Steller sea lion. These animals can be negatively impacted by pollution entering Hood Canal, reducing water quality. However, surface water runoff, a potential source of pollution, would be collected and treated on-site, and then discharged to an on-site infiltration area so that it would not enter Hood Canal. No Action Alternative Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS 2015 3.4-7 3.4 Fish & Wildlife Scenario A,the site would remain in its present condition, and there would be no to fish and wildlife, Scenario B assumes that the site would continue to develop as a single-family residential area based on the underlying rural residential zoning The ntial impacts to fish, wildlife and described in the 2007 Final ElS. 3.4-3 Mitigation Measures 2007 Ers The following mitigation measures identified in the 2007 EIS are applicable to Alternatives 1, 2 ?nd 3 M itigation Measures Completed A habitat management plan will be prepared at the project-permitting phase to identify and address mitigation for any potential impacts to streams and associated buffers. o The 2012 Pleasant Harbor Golf Course and Resorf Habitat Management Plan (Appendix H) fulfills this requirement. Mitigation Measures to be lmplemented Prior to and During Construction The three northerly streams shall be set aside in a natural area, and development shall be limited to that necessary to provide adequate access and road right-of-way. All culverts carrying streams shall be fish passable where the preconstruction reports identify that a stream has the potential for fish passage if obstructions can be removed. These three northerly streams are outside of the SEIS site boundary. This mitigation measure shall apply to the existing Binding Site Plan for the marina area. a The two southerly streams shall be protected during construction using best management practices, and road crossings shall comply with adopted standards. The site contains several intermittent or seasonal stream channels (Type "Np" or "Ns" under the County classification system). Some of these are steep in gradient and blocked from fish passage due to structural barriers. Per JCC 18.15.315, Type Np or Ns streams require a SO-foot buffer of native vegetation. The Proposal will comply with this requirement. Additionally, the creation of a complete and modern treatment system for stormwater on the developed portion of the marina site should result in an improvement in water quality discharge. o The last sentence of this mitigation measure no longer applies under this SEIS. Redevelopment within the marina area is addressed under an existing Binding a a a Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS 2015 3.4-8 3.4 Fish & Wildlife threatened and small 9-hole golf course would retain more open space as compared to the 1, 2 and 3. Because this scenario assumes that single family homes would be the southern site boundary, greater impacts to the natural habitat on the riparian edge could result. this scenario would be less than However, on an overall basis, the underAlternatives 1,2 and 3. for Site Plan Permit. As well, the JCC 18.15.315 code reference should be JCC 18.22.270, and streams require a 50 to 7S-foot buffer of native vegetation. Mitigation Measures to be lmplemented Concurrent with Operation The resort shall be required to annually collect water quality monitoring data from the state water quality sampling station at Pleasant Harbor and submit a summary water quality report to the County. ln the event that water quality shows any sign of deterioration, the County shall consult with the resort, the local residents, and the State (both WDOH and WDFW) concerning the source of the change. The resort permits shall require the resort to implement any mitigation measures determined necessary by the County to alleviate any water quality issues emanating from the resort properties. 63 (l) 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 tribal wildlife resources cited in the Brinnon Sub- Area Plan (e.9., deer, elk, cougar, waterfowl, osprey, eagles, and bear), to reduce the potential for vehicle collisions on U.S. Highway 101 , 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. U The 2012 Pleasant Harbor Golf Course and Resorf Habitat Management Plan (Appendix H) fulfills this condition. sErs ln addition to the implementation of the 2007 EIS mitigation measures and the BoCC conditions, the following fish and wildlife mitigation measures would also apply: Mitigation Measures to be lmplemented Prior to and During Construction Designated vegetated areas/corridors shall be left undisturbed and extend throughout areas of development. These undisturbed vegetated areas will consist of the typical forested habitat that currently exists on the site. The areas will be dominated by a coniferous and deciduous forest, with dense to moderately dense shrub and herbaceous layers. lnstead of the JCC 1S0-foot buffer, a 200-foot shoreline buffer is proposed and will not be disturbed or encroached upon. Disturbed portions of the buffer will be restored. The final wetland critical area buffers will be marked and left undisturbed for Wetlands C and D. a BOGC GONDITIONS The following fish and wildlife mitigation measures identified by the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) are applicable to Alternatives 1 , 2 and:3. Mitigation Measures Completed a a Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS 2015 3.4-9 3.4 Fish & Wildlife a a a a a Existing concrete and gravel roads within the buffers of Wetlands C and D will be removed and the areas will be re-planted with native vegetation that is found in the project vicinity. Vegetated corridors that lead to offsite areas and to other remaining vegetated areas will be left throughout the golf course and housing areas. These corridors will lead to more than 200 acres of relatively undisturbed vegetation on and off site in addition to existing and created wetland features on site. These corridors will be dominated by native vegetation that will provide food and habitat to animals that may use the site. An effort will be made to retain trees that have a 1O-inch DBH throughout the site in these corridors. These trees are important because they are used as perch trees and nesting trees for birds such as bald eagles and osprey. An active osprey nest was identified near the west shoreline of Pleasant Harbor and the nest and tree will be protected during construction. An exclusion fence will be installed to prevent elk from entering the Black Point property if they cross U.S. Hwy 101. lmplement the best management practices within the Pleasant Harbor Golf Course BMP Plan (GeoEngineers, 2012) as applied to wildlife management and construction management. 3.4-4 Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Development of the site would result in the loss of some existing upland wildlife habitat. However the development would retain areas of habitat onsite (approxim of the site would be undisturbed under Alternatives 1, respectively). With implementation of identified mitigation measures, no significant unavoidable adverse impacts to fish and wildlife would be anticipated. ately 31 2 and 3, Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS2015 3.4-10 3.4 Fish & Wildlife proposed 80 acres and 103 3.7 GRITIGAL AREAS This section of the SEIS describes existing critical areas on the site, and evaluates how development under each of the alternatives could affect these areas. The critical areas that are evaluated include the five listed under the Jefferson County Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO): wetlands, aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife, frequently flooded areas, and geologically hazardous areas. The wetland subsection is based on the 2012 Wetlands Mitigation Repoft (see Appendix J). 3.7-1 Affected Environment 2007 Ers Each of the critical areas listed above were addressed in Section 3.10 of the 2007 DEIS. Each of these critical areas exists on the site, with the exception of frequently flooded areas. Wetlands The 2007 EIS included a detailed wetland assessment (2007 DEIS Appendix 9). The site has three wetlands within the golf course area and none north of Black Point Road within the site. The confirmed wetlands in the golf course area are identified as Wetlands B, C, and D and are rated as Category ll. The onsite wetlands were delineated using the 2004 wetland rating manual as required by JCC 18.15.325(1X2).' Standard wetland buffer widths are 100 feet from a Class ll wetland and 50 feet from a Class lll wetland (JCC 18.50.340(5)).2 The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USCOE) made a determination on March 27, 2007 that the wetlands are not jurisdictionalfor purposes of USCOE permit review. Wetlands C and D have well established native buffers. Wetland B has seasonal ponding in a large glacial depression known as a kettle and does have some vegetation, but is also affected by vestiges of logging, roads, and infrastructure and as such has disturbed, marginal habitat in places, and was identified as a candidate for modification and restoration to improve both function and value. Aquifer Recharqe Areas As noted in Section 3.10 of the 2007 ElS, portions of the Black Point area of the site are mapped as an aquifer protection district. Fish and Wildlife Gonservation Areas A site-specific Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment dated July 20, 2006 was contained in the 2007 DEIS (Appendix 7), and existing fish and wildlife habitat on and around the site is summarized in Section 3.4, Fish and Wildlife, of this SEIS. 1 Note: the correct code reference is JCC 18.22.300 2 Note: the correct code reference is JCC 18.22.330. Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS 2015 3.7-1 3.7 Critical Areas The site has no flood plains or frequently flooded areas and these provisions do not apply to the Pleasant Harbor site. Geoloqically Hazardous Areas The 2007 EIS included a geologic hazard analysis (see 2007 DEIS Appendix 4). The principal geologic hazard feature on the site is the steep bluffs along the southern shore. See Section 3.1.1, Earth, of this SEIS for a summary of this steep bluff described in Appendix 4 of the 2OQ7 DEIS. SEIS Wetlands Wetland B is approximately 0.475 acres in size and is located at the bottom of the largest kettle in the center of the Black Point area of the site (see Figure 2-6). The kettle, Kettle B, is approximately 140 feet deep with moderately steep slopes that were formed in glacial till. The catchment basin for Wetland B is approximately 30 times the size of the wetland and the main source of hydrology comes from precipitation and localized surface run-off within the catchment basin. There are two other wetlands (Wetland C and D) located within the site boundary in the Black Point area. All of the identified on-site wetlands were determined to be isolated wetlands and not federally jurisdictional as outlined in the jurisdictional determination from the Corps of Engineers dated March 27,2007 Seasonal precipitation and localized run-off is the primary source of hydrology for Wetland B. The moderately steep slopes of Kettle B capture water as it falls into the basin and directs it into bottom of the kettle. Signs of inundation in Wetland B include marks of ponded water up to two feet on vegetation, water stained leaves, adventitious roots and buttressed tree trunks. Hydrology appears to be present on a seasonal basis likely starting in the late fall and ending in the spring. Wetland B is classified as a Palustrine scrub-shrub wetland and is currently undeveloped. Wetland B contains seasonal open-water and is densely occupied by native scrub-shrub and emergent wetland vegetation and that provide food, hiding cover and shelter currently supporting a variety of wildlife species including mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians. Wetland B is not directly connected to streams, tributaries or other wetlands that could provide habitat for fish species. Wetland B is positioned at the bottom of the watershed and collects precipitation runoff from the slopes surrounding the kettle. Precipitation runoff enters the wetland but does not directly discharge back into surface features of the watershed due to its depressional and isolated nature. Wetland B is rated as a Category lll wetland in accordance with the Jefferson County Code with a high score for habitat value. ln general Wetland B scores moderate to high for water quality functions due to it being a closed depressional system that holds back water to allow sediments to settle out and emergent plants to remove pollutants such as nutrients, heavy metals and toxic organics. Because Wetland B has no outlet, it was not evaluated for reducing peak flows or decreasing downstream erosion. Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS2015 3.7-2 3.7 Critical Areas Frequentlv Flooded Areas However Wetland B is considered to function highly for groundwater recharge because there is no surface water outlet and water is only released from the system by groundwater recharge and evapotranspiration. Wetland B provides a relatively high general wildlife habitat function, especially for smaller species such as invertebrate, amphibians and birds because there are relatively large surrounding areas of forested habitat, which provide a large upland buffer necessary for wildlife mobility. Native plant richness provides moderate function and the overall size of the wetland results in a moderate score in functional capacity for mammals, birds, amphibians and other invertebrates. Aquifer Recharqe Areas A description of the aquifer recharge areas within the site is included in Section 3.2.1, Water Resources, of this SEIS. Fish and Wildlife Conservation Areas A description of the wildlife and associated habitat within the site as well as fish within waters adjacent to the site is included in Section 3.4.1, Fish and Wildlife, of this SEIS. Frequentlv Flooded Areas As noted in the 2007 ElS, there are no frequently flooded areas on the site. Geologicallv Hazardous Areas A description of the steep slope within the site on the southern site boundary is included in Section 3.1.1, Earth, of this SEIS. 3.7-2 lmpacts 2007 Ers Wetlands Wetlands are regulated as a critical area under the state's Growth Management Act, RCW 36.70A.060, and local regulations are to assure that functions and values of the wetland system are maintained. Court and Growth Board cases make it clear that wetlands may be altered or moved to accommodate a specific project, so long as the actions are reasonably necessary and the overall sub-basin functions and values are retained. The criteria for wetland protection and mitigation are set forth in the County Code for critical areas which governs replacement ratios and buffer management. Wetland B, which is approximately 0.475 acres in size, would be converted from a wetland to a control pond for treated process water from the wastewater treatment system and irrigation return flow to provide a source of water reuse and golf course irrigation to reduce the overall water consumption of the site. Wetlands "C" and "D" would remain unaltered and would be retained. Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS 2015 3.7-3 3.7 CriticalAreas Wetland B would be modified to provide adequate storage on site for the processed water from the wastewater treatment system. The wetland at the bottom of this kettle would be filled, and an appropriate mitigation plan would be developed per the compensatory mitigation requirements of JCC 18.15.350(2). Although Wetlands C and D would remain unaltered, impacts to retained wetlands C and D could occur both during construction and during operation of the resort. During construction the hydraulic and structural integrity of the wetlands and associated buffers to be saved would be marked and protected. Water quality entering wetlands and buffers would be protected to avoid turbidity. Water quantity entering wetlands and buffers would be assured to avoid a change in function and value for wetlands being preserved. The 2007 EIS outlines several alternative strategies for wetland mitigation. A wetland mitigation plan would be developed in conjunction with the detailed design phase of the project and would be required at the outset of the grading plan in advance of final plat approval and project development when details of the construction would be available. Aquifer Recharge Areas The County critical area regulations impose specific limits on projects that are designated (mapped) as critical area aquifer recharge areas. Potable water to the Black Point area is provided by ground water, and prohibited uses in significant aquifer recharge areas are detailed as JCC 18.22.120. None of the prohibited uses are to be included in the development of the golf course area, and the Master Plan approval requires the project to meet best management practices for use, treatment, and discharge of all waters used on the golf course. The Master Planned Resort best management practices are taken from aquifer protection guidelines in the County to assure any potential impact to the aquifer is eliminated or minimized. County rules do have special provisions for golf courses, which would be followed, and the Class A recycling regulations also have rules concerning existing potable water sites that would be incorporated into the reuse/recycling treatment and discharge plan for the site to be approved by WDOE as part of the water rightsiwastewater discharge permit approval process. Fish and Wildlife Conservation Areas Section 3.4 of this SEIS summarizes the impacts to Fish and Wildlife within the 2007 ElS. The impacts were also detailed in a site-specific Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment dated July 20, 2006, contained in 2007 DEIS Appendix 7. Geologicallv Hazardous Areas The Jefferson County Critical Areas Ordinance (JCC 18.22.170) requires a 30-foot setback from geologically hazardous areas, which may be modified by a geotechnical report. The project is - retaining a 200-foot vegetated edge along the steep slopes and eliminating potential road and trail traffic down or along the bluffs. The plan fully complies with all requirements and provides an extra margin of safety. The stormwater management plan shall require that all water from developed areas be captured in areas sufficiently removed from the bluff edge and are sized sufficiently to avoid discharge to or destabilization of the bluff in the event of wet seasons or upset. Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS2015 3.7-4 3.7 Critical Areas SEIS ln general, the potential for impacts to critical areas from SEIS Alternatives 1,2 or 3 would be similar to the potential impacts described in the 2007 ElS. Wetland B would be filled and the steep slope area at the south end of the property would be preserved under either Alternative 1, 2 or 3, as under the 2007 ElS. lmpacts to aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife conservation areas, and geologically hazardous areas under Alternative 1 would generally remain the same as under the 2007 ElS. Alternatives 2 and 3 consolidate development into fewer buildings, thus retaining more existing habitat, reducing impervious surface area and increasing aquifer recharge compared to the 2007 ElS. Wetlands Development under either Alternative 1,2 o,ii would result in the loss of approximately 20,700 square feet of wetland area associated with Wetland B. The soils within Wetland B would be covered with approximately 100 feet of earth and an impermeable layer and then the kettle would be filled with water to the desired level. The water level in Kettle B would be maintained for use in the water recycling system and the golf course driving range. Due to proposed site grading, the kettle and pond would collect a significantly larger quantity of runoff from precipitation from the larger drainage basin than existing conditions. The water in the filled kettle would be incorporated into the irrigation system for use on the golf course. Filling Wetland B with water would create a larger, deepwater hydrologic feature that can be used as habitat for waterfowl and amphibians. The construction of the pond in the kettle would require the removal of vegetation on the slopes and within Wetland B; therefore, vegetation in Wetland B and its corresponding buffer would be removed. The filling of Wetland B and corresponding buffer would result in the loss of habitat primarily used by birds, mammals and reptiles, but, in return, would create additional habitat for waterfowl and amphibians. The Jefferson County designated wetland buffer for a Category lll wetland with high impact land use and a high habitat function score is 150 feet from the edge of the wetland. The buffer surrounding Wetland B is occupied by a multi-layer second-growth forest with relatively little invasive species. This buffer is undisturbed and serves as a wildlife corridor and also as habitat for numerous bird, mammal, and reptilian species. The 1S0{oot buffer surrounding Wetland B would be cleared of vegetation to accommodate the proposed water recycling system and driving range. To offset the fill of Wetland B, compensatory mitigation is proposed to be provided in another large kettle south of Wetland B (Kettle C). Jefferson County replacement ratios, based on Ecology's (2006a) document, were used to identify the amount of wetland creation required, and form the basis of the preparation of the plan. lt is the overall mitigation goal of this project to provide no net loss of wetland functions, values or acreage as a result of development. Mitigation would be on-site and in kind through wetland creation in Kettle C. See Appendix J for a full description of the Wetland Mitigation Plan. Development under either Alternative 1, 2 or 3 would retain Wetlands C and D, and the proposed development would maintain hydrologic input to these areas. However, development Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS 2015 3.7-5 3.7 Critical Areas under either Alternative 1, 2 or 3 would encroach on wetland buffer areas. Buffer averaging consistent with Jefferson County Code is proposed to minimize impacts to wetland buffers. Aquifer Recharge Areas An analysis of the potential impacts to the aquifer recharge areas within the site is included in Section 3.2-2, Water Resources, of this SEIS. Fish and Wildlife Conservation Areas An analysis of the potential impacts to fish and wildlife and associated habitat within the site is included in Section 3.4-2, Fish and Wildlife, of this SEIS. Geolooicallv Hazardous Areas Potential impacts to the steep slope on the southern site boundary are detailed in Section 3.1- 2, Earth, of this SEIS. No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, it is presumed that the site would continue to develop as a single-family residential area based on the underlying rural residential zoning The 3.7-3 Mitigation Measures 2007 Ets The following mitigation measures identified in the 2007 EIS are applicable to Alternatives 1,2 end# Mitiqation Measures Completed The stormwater management plan for the golf course shall demonstrate compliance with the County requirement for golf courses and stormwater management on aquifer a Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS2015 3.7-6 3.7 Critical Areas Scenario A - Continuation of Existing Conditions Scenario A, it is assumed that no redevelopment of the site would occur and including wetlands, aquifer recharge areas, fish and conservation areas hazardous would remain protection districts. An approved preconstruction aquifer protection plan shall demonstrate retention of sheet flow water and ground wells onsite. See Section 3.2, Water Resources, and Appendix F of this SEIS for the stormwater management plan and aquifer protection plan. Wetlands shall be protected from development (except the central kettle used for reuse and recycling) and a wetland buffer and mitigation plan shall be developed which demonstrates, under best available science principles, that the wetland functions and values of the resort area have been maintained through a combination of retained, enhanced, and constructed wetlands and buffers. The plan shall demonstrate no net loss to overallwetland area function and value. o The 2012 Wetland Mitigation Plan (Appendix J)fulfills this mitigation measure. An approved preconstruction wetland mitigation plan must demonstrate how loss of wetland habitat is offset, protection measures for water quality and quantity maintenance, and buffer protection. Such protections must be in place prior to commencement of any grading onsite. The wetland mitigation report for the central kettle shall be approved and demonstrate how the overall system will operate, both during construction and operation to assure overall no net loss of function and value for the resort area wetland system. o The 2012\Nelland Mitigation Plan fulfills this mitigation measure (Appendix J). Mitigation Measures to be lmplemented Prior tq and During Construction The stormwater management plan for construction shall require all wetland areas (existing and new) meet the no net loss test and are in place prior to the removal of the central kettle wetland. The three northerly streams shall be set aside in a natural area, and development shall be limited to that necessary to provide adequate access and road right-of-way. All culverts carrying streams shall be fish passable where the preconstruction reports identify that a stream has the potential for fish passage if obstructions can be removed. o These three northerly streams are outside of the SEIS site boundary. This mitigation measure shall apply to the existing Binding Site Plan for the marina area. The two southerly streams shall be protected during construction using best management practices, and road crossings shall comply with adopted standards. o a a a a A site specific geotechnical evaluation of any structure, utility, or roadway located within 100 feet of the landslide hazard area at the southern portion of the site will be required. Mitiqation Measures to be lmplemented Concurrent with Operation The resort shall be required to annually collect water quality monitoring data from the state water quality sampling station at Pleasant Harbor and submit a summary water quality report to the County. ln the event that water quality shows any sign of deterioration, the County shall consult with the resort, the local residents, and the State Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS2015 3.7-7 3.7 Critical Areas a a a (both WDOH and WDFW) concerning the source of the change. The resort permits shall require the resort to implement any mitigation measures determined necessary by the County to alleviate any water quality issues emanating from the resort properties. BoGG Gonditions No mitigation measures were identified by the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) specifically applicable to critical areas that are not addressed in other sections (e.9., Section 3.1, Earth; Section 3.2, Water Resources; and Section 3.4, Fish and Wildlife). SEIS ln addition to the implementation of the 2007 EIS mitigation measures and the BoCC conditions, the following critical areas mitigation measures would also apply: Mitiqation Measures to be lmplemented Prior to and During Construction The mitigation of Wetland B shall be implemented in accordance with the 2012 Wetland Mitigation Report (Appendix J). The buffer reduction/averaging for Wetlands C and D shall be mitigated in accordance with the 2012 Wetland Mitigation Report (Appendix J). Mitiqation Measures to be lmplemented Goncurrent with Operation Post-construction monitoring of the created wetland will occur on an annual basis for a minimum of 5 years and up to 10 years based on the success of the project, in accordance with the 2012\Netland Mitigation Report (Appendix J). Maintenance of the wetland creation areas will be conducted throughout the monitoring years and will be the responsibility of Statesman to ensure completion. Maintenance during the first two years will include periodic watering (irrigation) and control of undesirable species. Maintenance during the subsequent years will be focused on invasive plant removal. 3.7-4 Significant Unavoidable Adverse lmpacts Site development under either Alternative 1, 2 or 3 would result in the loss of approximately 20,700 square feet of wetland area (Kettle B) and a portion of the wetland buffers associated with Wetlands C and D. However, new wetland creation and wetland buffer averaging consistent with Jefferson County regulations is proposed. With implementation of identified mitigation measures, no significant unavoidable adverse impacts to critical areas would be anticipated. a a a a Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS 2015 3.7-8 3.7 Critical Areas 3.3 PLANTS 3.3-i Affected Environment This section of the SEIS describes existing plant and vegetation conditions on the site, including trees, and evaluates how each of the alternatives would affect these conditions. This section is based on the 2009 Pleasant Harbor Marina and Golf Resorf Forest Report, the 2012 Prescriptive Vegetation Management Plan (Appendix G), and the 2012 Habitat Management Plan (Appendix H). 2007 Ers Existing plants and vegetation were not evaluated in the 2007 EIS SEIS This section is based on field reconnaissance conducted by GeoEngineers in 2006 as part of lhe 2006 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment (2007 DEIS Appendix 7). Currently, the Pleasant Harbor site is largely undeveloped with development limited to scattered vacant buildings within the Black Point area from the historic campground use, and two single- family residences and a real estate office north of Black Point Road. Vegetation presently found on the overall site consists primarily of an overstory of Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesz) with occurrences of Red Alder (Alnus rubra), Black Cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), Bitter Cherry (Prunus emarginata), Bigleaf Maple (Acer macrophyllum), and Pacific Madrone (Arbutus menziesii). Broadleaf shrubs and other plants found in the understory include: Red-Flowering Currant (Rrbes sanguineum), Scotch Broom (Cyfrsus scoparius), Vine Maple (Acer circinatum), Salal (Gaultheria shallon), and Evergreen Huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum). Throughout the site, there is an amalgamation of various forested areas that have already been severely impacted by logging prior to 1970 and construction of the Black Point campground. Within these impacted areas, smaller pockets of trees and vegetation have remained relatively unaffected by site history and development. Within the boundaries of the site, there are no endangered or threatened plants currently listed under the ESA that are identified on the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Natural Heritage Program (NHP) rare plants list. However, according to the Washington NHP, the presence of current sensitive species occurring within 1.5 miles of the project area was documented. A small patch of chain-fern exists about one mile northeast of the site along U.S. Highway 101. A large patch of sensitive plants is present at the mouth of the Duckabush River approximately 0.5 miles southwest of site. This community includes saltgrass, pickleweed, sea- milkwort, Pacific silvenryeed, Baltic rush, Lyngby sedge and seaside arrowgrass. Golden paintbrush is noted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to occur within the limits of Jefferson County. However, there is no documented on-site occurrence of this species in the DNR NHP rare plants list, nor was suitable habitat or individual plants observed during the site investigation. Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS2015 3.3-1 3.3 Plants Maritime Village Area The Maritime Village as a whole demonstrates a heavily impacted previously forest area. From past log dumping and rafting along the harbor shore, to the extent of the clearing and grading that has occurred adjacent to Highway 101, a very large percentage of this area is now converted in use from forest growth to other purposes and activities. The northern portion of the Maritime Village area is comprised of a fairly uniform stand of Douglas fir beginning at or just above the ordinary high water line of the harbor and extending up to the edge of Highway 101, with a small portion comprised of mixed conifer and hardwood. This area has been selectively logged in the area of the two existing homes, yards, and parking areas. Significant mass grading activity has occurred in creation of the building sites and also in creation of the access to the waterfront and to the existing dock and floats that serve the two houses. Trees in this area have been impacted by environmental and mechanical influences. The southern portion of the Maritime Village area is predominately a gravel parking area and also includes a small building currently being used as a real estate office. Expanding areas of scotch broom and blackberries and other invasive species compose the remaining landscape of this area. The WDFW-owned property north of Black Point Road generally contains a mature, second groMh coniferous forest with somewhat recent clearing at the eastern end of the proposed new roadway alignment. This area is dominated by a dense thicket of Scots broom intermixed with Himalayan blackberry, evergreen blackberry, and sapling red alder. Black Point Area Under existing conditions, the Black Point Campground area of the project site is currently primarily comprised of existing vegetation with several scattered vacant buildings. The Black Point area is divided into subareas based on the health of the forest: BP-1, BP-2, BP- 3, and BP-200' (see Figure 3.3-1). The BP-1 subarea encompasses approximately 21 percent of the total Black Point area and is characterized by relatively low impact within steeper terrain, with larger trees than other Black Point timber stands, perhaps 50 to 70 years old. The BP-2 subarea encompasses more than half of the Black Point area and is comprised of a moderate level of impact caused by campground roads, trails, and utilities, causing poor stand development, insufficient reestablishment of tree cover and invasion of scotch broom and other non-native species. Some regrowth of vegetation and young tree growth is evident due to cessation of campground use in recent years. The glacial kettles are also within this subarea, which have been logged in the past with skid trail evidence and timber stand regeneration. The BP-3 subarea encompasses almost one-fifth of the Black Point area and is heavily impacted by camp site, roads, buildings, recreational areas, and maintenance facilities. The 200 foot Hood Canal Shoreline buffer area (BP-200') is designated as Conservancy and the trees and vegetation have experienced light impact through human activity. 3.3-2lmpacts 2007 Ers The 2007 EIS did not evaluate impacts to plants and vegetation Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS2015 3.3-2 3.3 Plants Figure 3.3-1 Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS2015 3.3-3 3.3 Plants SEIS Through clearing and grading of the project site, the proposed development would disturb existing plant communities. Under Alternative 1, approximately 73 percent of the site would be disturbed com red to percent under Alternative 2, These areas would be cleared of existing n and new maintained lands caping would be provided in s areas.roximate would be retained under SEIS Alternative 1 Maritime Village Area As noted in Chapter 2, redevelopment for maintenance, repair and renovation is now proposed to be limited to occur within existing building footprints in the Marina Center (marina upland) area, under a separate existing Binding Site Plan permit, which does not require additional environmental review. Marina rowhouses, townhouses and stepped/stacked townhouses, illustrated in the 2007 ElS, are eliminated from the proposed site plan within the shoreline buffer. No new development other than a storage building approved on the Binding Site Plan would occur outside of existing building footprints in the marina area under the SEIS Alternatives. The commercial development and a portion of the residential development proposed in the 2007 EIS site plan for the marina area would be relocated to a new 3-story building proposed atthe intersection of Black Point Road with U.S. Highway 101, and two new single-family homes. This new configuration would reduce the vegetative impact and retain the viable forest in the Maritime Village area. Approximately 1.2 acres of the forested hillside within the WDFW-owned property would be cleared for the new boat access roadway alignment. The eastern portion of this new roadway alignment was somewhat recently cleared which reduces the impact on the forest plant community. Black Point Area Within the Black Point area, designated vegetated areas would be left undisturbed and extend throughout areas of the proposed development. These undisturbed vegetated areas would consist of the typical forested habitat that currently exists on the site. The areas would continue to be dominated by the coniferous and deciduous forest, with dense to moderately dense shrub and herbaceous layers. Vegetated corridors that lead to offsite areas and to other remaining vegetated areas would be retained throughout the golf course and housing areas. These corridors would lead to more than 200 acres of relatively undisturbed vegetation on and off site in addition to existing and created wetland features on site. These corridors would be dominated by native vegetation. The 200-foot riparian buffer of trees and native vegetation along the southern shoreline edge of the site would be retained under the SEIS Alternatives, similar to the 2007 EIS Alternatives. Public access to this area would be restricted to maintain the natural condition of the bluff. This buffer area would be restored to a more natural state where needed and protected as part of the proposed project. During construction, viable trees within proposed development areas that can be transplanted would be relocated on a temporary basis to an on-site nursery located in the western edge of Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS2015 3.3-4 3.3 Plants 1 of acres would be retained under acres would be retained under Alternative 3. the development. These trees would be irrigated and cultivated until replanting is possible within designated areas of the development. A typical area of non-golf course disturbance would be re-connected to the natural environment through transplanting healthy vegetation from the site, as well as using native and low water consumption plants such as junipers and on-site bark mulch and non-invasive ground cover. Certain areas would be attractively planted with annuals and perennials for color. No Action Alternative Under $Cehario rB, it is assumed that the site would continue to develo asasi le-fami residential area based on the und n rural residential zonin 3.3-3 Mitigation Measures 2007 Ers The 2007 EIS did not evaluate impacts to plants and vegetation. BoGG Gonditions The following plant mitigation measures identified by the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) are applicable to Alternatives 1,2 ehd,$ M itigation Measures Completed 63 (a) [The SEIS shall include] an analysis of environmental impacts to be based on science and data pertinent to the Brinnon site. a o The 2012 Prescriptive Vegetation Management Plan is 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. The program design would enable evaluation (grading) of the degree of risk and recommend mitigation treatments for individual circumstances. nts and etation Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS2015 3.3-5 3.3 Plants nd€r Scenaiio A; the site would remsi6,1n..j3 existing:condition, and there would::,be no or permanent impacts to existihg plant habitats and species. at a lower level than under Alternatives 1, 2 and 3, inbe would be retained the site under SEIS that a 9-hole golf under this scenario would result is assumed that removal Mitigation Measures to be lmplemented Prior to and During Construction 63 (s) The developer will 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 Canal shoreline, the strip of mature trees between U.S 101 and the Maritime Village wetlands and wetland buffers. Easements shall be perpetual and irrevocable recordings dedicating the property as natural forest land buffers. Statesman at its expense shall manage these easements including removing, when appropriate, naturally fallen trees and replanting to retain a natural visual separation of the development from Highway 101 . Note that redevelopment for maintenance, repair and renovation in the Marina Center (marina upland) area is now limited to occur within existing building footprints or where shown, under a separate existing Binding Site Plan permit. Also, the SEIS Alternatives relocate the Maritime Village from within the shoreline buffer to north of the intersection of Black Point Road and U.S. Hwy 101. Therefore, the strip of mature trees between U.S. Hwy 101 and the Maritime Village noted in this condition do not exist under the SEIS Alternatives due to the new proposed location of the Maritime Village outside of the shoreline buffer. Appropriate conservation easements still need to be recorded by the Applicant. a 63 (u) ln keeping with the MPR designation as 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 screening of facilities and amenities so that all the 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 the Comprehensive Plan Land Use policy 24.9, the 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. o Note that the code citation in this condition should be for Master Planned Resorts (JCC 18.25), and not the SMP. a 63 (v) ln keeping with an approved landscaping and grading plan, and in order to satisfy the intent of JCC 18.15.135(6) and with special emphasis at the Maritime Village, the buildings will be constructed and placed in such a way that they will blend into the terrain and landscape with park-like greenbelts between the buildings. o The landscape plan for the single Marina Village Building will provide native vegetation planting islands in the parking area and along the U.S. Hwy 101 and Black Point Road rights-of-way while providing adequate visual access from the highway needed for the retail/commercial structure. The building will be placed near the rear property line and adjacent to the stream buffer to take advantage of the sloped area of the site. The stream buffer vegetation will be enhanced after removing invasive plant species. The building architecture will share similar features to those at the marina and within the golf resort. a Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS 2015 3.3-6 3.3 Plants a 63 (w) Construction of the MPR buildings will be completed in a manner that strives to preserve trees that have a diameter of 10 inches or more at breast height. An arborist will be consulted and the ground staked and flagged to ensure roots and surrounding soil of significant trees are protected during construction. To the extent possible, trees of significant size (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. SEIS ln addition to the implementation of the BoCC conditions, the following mitigation measure for plants would also apply: a A Vegetation Management Plan based on the 2012 Prescriptive Vegetation Management Plan template shall be developed to address BoCC Conditions 63 (s), (u), (v), and (w). 3.3-4 Significant Unavoidable Adverse lmpacts areas of exi Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental EIS 2015 3.3-7 3.3 Plants With proposed development under either Alternative 1, 2 ot 3, would be removed'.201 acres under Alternative 1 , 152 acres under Alternative 2, and 128 Areas of retained natural and new in the form of landscaping would be