Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTheler Park Plan Hearings Comments 1979-1980 - SHR Permit / Conditions - 2/22/1980 u ll 'r o ; ° / 7 p O Roessel Road Co. Rd. 6966 / Tidal Marsh ppox. 50 Acresl ¢ r ■ 7 L 1• / n Existing / d}` Embankment 2 .� IN o�. a," r r✓ ' NLYNCH COVE to '/V-4 � ■ It 7 ® Northwest Environmental Project:Thaler Memorial Recreation Park Consultants, Inc. Phase 2 156 Thomas St., Seattle,WA 96109 Planning Study Designer: Douglas Canning Date: Jan.,1979 Sheet: 1 of Drawn: Joellyn Shea ,kale:0 50 loo 20 Site Characteristics Map 3 FN 'e 1\ t i Diked 1 Agricultural 1 1 Fields 1 1l \i ` Dike I n, r.d•N i'ZAP' 4fp � YE, y r'� 69 f}e Observation Tower //Tidal Month Mobil Home Park {�r ✓' �j Genera/ a lunder conetrudlonl `! Mud Flat. .// 01 rpose C � el'pe/o j Nature Trail Existing Dike / / `+ / North Entrance Observation Platforms✓ / - �/ i Roesssl Road Co.Rd.a9 // ',Baseball Field _ k` B = General Purpose "Held Community , ,1 Center Comdex D Tennis Court. Tidal Msrsh� Xrk RoWw ^+ 1 / Existing x�� trees to ioff remain LYNCH COVE Baseball - / ' Soccer Field Project: ® Northwest Environmental Thaler Memorial Recreation Park Consultants, Inc. Phase 2 158 Thomas St., Seattle,WA 98109 Planning Study Designer: Douglas Canning Data: Jan., 1979 Sheet: 2 of Drawn: Joellyn Shea Scale:L so�� Conceptual Site Plan 3 Fwt y i Existing Embankment Pee we* Flel� •"'•• aa� \Septic Ter.k• Phase 3 Tennis / a Leach Field / Area) Swimming Pool Courts / 10,000 sr 1 Community Park 1 Phase I Phase Phase 2B 2A ' I Gymnasium / Multipurpose Lockers ICommun. Future Expaslonogn " / etc. 1 Center $ 1 / .... 10,000 at 2500 el 2500 of IY_.;I �... ,� `''fit;• � � 10 Cars 10 Cars 10 Cars I �- 2-Lane Roadway / ✓tp\av\\e\a / _-' \ `�'>�,•� .�� � _>•._.. (l — V of<.''.�mD'o.��J 0 0 yr Project: pDr..n: 1.ollyn Northwest Environmental Thaler Memorial Recreation Park Consultants, Inc. Phase 2 15B Thomas St., Seettla,WA 96109 Planning Study as Canning Date:Jan.,1979 Sheet: 3 or Shea Scale:oL 5 Community Center Site Plan 3 re.i S PHONE 426-5593 JAMES E. CONNOLLY AREA CODE 206 DIRECTOR 4 J/. MASON REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL P.O. BOX 186 - 5TH AND BIRCH SHELTON, WASHINGTON 98584 December 6, 1979 Dear Recipient: Please find enclosed a draft environmental impact statement for the Theler Memorial Recreation Park Comprehensive Plan located in Belfair. Your review of the project would be appreciated since a shorelines permit has been applied for for the project as outlined. Please note that the date of issue is December 6, 1979 and that the deadline for comments is January 10, 1979. otySincy, er n Assistant Planning Director MKA:ve CC: Mr. Norm Sanders, North Mason School District Northwest Environmental Consultants PHONE 126-5593 JAMES E. CONNOLLY AREA CODE 206 DIRECTOR � � f9 �' �P�ifj+l�.• ' MASON REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL P.O. BOX 186 5TH AND BIRCH rLOCK� u SHELTON, WASHINGTON 98584 December 6, 1979 Dear Recipient: Please find enclosed a draft environmental impact statement for the Theler Memorial Recreation Park Comprehensive Plan located in Belfair. Your review of the project would be appreciated since a shorelines permit has been applied for for the project as outlined. Please note -that the date of issue is December 6, 1979 and that the deadline for comments is January 10, 1979. *cl Assistant Planning Director MKA:ve CC: Mr. Norm Sanders, North Mason School District Northwest Environmental Consultants CDWI 06- A-171) -) sHOOLD aE- G/ VEN TO l M PRO tIE" 7716- 114r"-ser-770-Ai Oo' TNt ,V vR771 6W 17Qh' NC E GJ 1TN 771E kOESStZ RaAA (co. AND 7We- jV1& aeSer77cAu 01C THE #eoEssFZ • ROAD w r-N $ R*.3, eie" ()NsPr-27aA, M A S 0 A) e o. DEPT. of- VI o� �� �STATF bR STATE OF WASHINGTON STATE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION s WASHINGTON 7150 Cleanwater Lane,Olympia,Washington 98504 M.S. KY-1 1 206/753-5755 w �y'L 1889 a�y� Dixy Lee Ray Gouernor December 10, 1979 35-2650-1820 DEIS - Theler Memorial Recreation Park Comprehensive Plan (E-1828) Mr. Monty K. Anderson Assistant Planning Director Mason Regional Planning Council P.O. Box 186 5th and Birch Shelton , Washington 98584 Dear Mr. Anderson : The staff of the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission has reviewed the above-noted document and does not wish to make any comment. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. Sincerely, David W. Heiser, E.P. , Chief Environmental Coordination DWH/PJP:jh 3 STATE OF PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION 2310 WASHINGTON G Dixy Lee Ray 7150 Cleanwater Lane,Thurston Airdustrial Center, KY-11. Governor Olympia, WA 98504 10, o I C 'r 1!. 3 � T (1 D �C Mr. Monty K. Anderson Assistant Planning Director Mason Regional Planning_ C,inuncil P.O. Box 106 5th and Birch Shelton , WA 98584 f PHONE 426-5593 DAMES E. CONNOLLY �xr �, �'°y�; AREA CODE 206 DIRECTOR MASON REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL P.O. BOX 186 5TH AND BIRCH SHELTON, WASHINGTON 98584 s ; {> ✓�{ :.,:'. December 11 9 197 MEMO TO: Walt Bergstrom, Dick Carter, Department of Ecology, S.W. Regional Office FROM: Monty Anderson, Mason Regional Planning SUBJECT: Sam Theler Community Park E.I.S. Attached is a copy of the draft of the Environmental Impact Statement for the Theler Community Park. Please review. MKA: Attachment �a�STATE OF STATE of OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION 4 _P" ' WASHINGTON 111 West Twenty-First Avenue,Olympia,Washington 98504 206/753-4011 eas aoy�a Dixy Lee Ray Governor i I December 19, 1979 James Connolly, Director In reply Mason Regional Planning Council refer to: 54-F-COE-S-04 P.O. Box 186 (5th & Birch) Shelton, WA 98584 Reg: Theler Memorial Recreational Park Comprehensive Plan Dear Mr. Connolly: A staff review has been completed of your draft environmental impact statement. The project was reviewed previously by this office with reference to 54-C-MS-04 (July 12, 1979) , at which time we recommended professional survey for cultural resources. We strongly recommend that project approval be so conditioned. Thank you for this opportunity to comment. Sincerely, JEANNE M. WELCH, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Sheila A. Stump, Archaeologist lre STATg 0 STATE OF b WASHINGTON a S Dixy Lee Ray rya 188g�� Governor DEPARTMENT OF GAME 600 North Capitol Way,GJ-11 Olympia,Washington%504 December 31, 1979 James Connolly, Director Mason Regional Planning Council P. O. Box 186 Shelton, Washington 98584 ✓_i•i T 1v l.L"%J i1E1V 1YL 11a tsLT S 1t1T Lil•11:,1V 1 Theler Memorial Recreation Park Mr. Connolly: Your document was reviewed by our staff as requested; comments follow. As indicated (pp. 18 and 34) , this proposal would result in the filling of about six acres of "swamp" and five and one-half acres of "non-tidal marsh" . Such wetland alter- ation or destruction can result in substantial impacts on wildlife as these habitat types are extremely productive in terms of both animal diversity and populations. The greatest impacts would be expected to occur to small mammals , and waterfowl and other birds which depend on this area for nesting and rearing. We strongly recommend that alternative sites or design configurations be consi- dered which would exclude any wetland filling. On page 31, it does not appear that oil/water separators would be inclilded in surface water r>1_noff control. Th.acP facilities can provide additional mitigation and should at least be provided for the parking areas to reduce chances of contaminants entering wetlands and marine waters. We are very concerned with the discussion on page 37 con- cerning mosquito control and the application of diesel oil and/or pesticides to the marshes and pond. Such insect growth regulators would not only reduce mosquito popula- tions, which are important for young waterfowl, but other aquatic insects, many of which are important to fish and other wildlife. Non-target insects include dragonfly larvae, damsel fly larvae, water beetle, water boatmen, �> 3 Page 2 December 31, 1979 caddis fly, mayfly, crane fly, midge, stonefly, and others. Such insect control measures would more than kill just the target species (mosquitoes) . By non- selectively killing waterborn insects, many species of wildlife, especially birds and higher level consumers, would be adversely affected by diminished food supplies . We recommend that this type of mosquito abatement program be deleted from the proposal. Thank you for the opportunity to review your document. We hope that you find our comments helpful. Sincerely, THE DEPARTMENT OF GAME Fred H. Maybee, Assi ant Program Manager Environmental AffaiIV - Habitat Management Dision FHM:mjf cc : Regional Manager Agencies STA Tf pn a� STATE OF DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES WASHINGTON '2 115 General Administration Building,Olympia,Washington 98504 206/753-6600 a0 Dixy Lee Ray Governor January 2, 1980 Mr. James Connolly, Director Mason Regional Planning Council P.O. Box 186 5th And Birch Shelton, Washington 98584 Attention Mr. Monty K. Anderson Gentlemen: Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Theler Recreation Park Plan Mason County WRIA C-14 The Washington Department of Fisheries has reviewed the above-referenced document and offers the following comments. The description of existing fishery resources on and adjacent to the project site are generally accurate. Additionally, we find that anticipated direct impacts to these resources are described adequately, and appear to be negligible. We appreciate the opportunity to review this statement and hope you find our comments useful . Sincerely, Gordo San ison, Director mr 3 RBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT No. OFFICERS MASON COUNTY,WASHINGTON M.D. PARRETT - President THIRD and COTA STREET E.W. TAYLOR - Vice President POST OFFICE BOX 490 L.M. SUHR - Secretary SHELTON,WASH. 98584 R.D. HOLLAND- Manager TELEPHONE426-8255 COMMISSIONERS R.J. BAMFORD - Auditor M.D. PARRETT E.W. TAYLOR L.M. SUHR January 3, 1980 Mason Regional Planning Council P.O. Box 186 Shelton, Washington 98584 ATTENTION: Monty K. Anderson SUBJECT: Draft EIS, Theler Memorial Recreation Park Dear Mr. Anderson: The District has evaluated the above document and does have some concern on this project. Across the Easterly 1/2 of Soccer Field A, the District has, in service, a main feeder to serve the North Shore area and are concerned about it's disruption during the construction period. As designated on page 15, Mason County Public Utility District #3 does provide electrical service in this area, but on page 54, under Utilities, the existing conditions are designated as Puget Power and Light having service in this area. In this time of energy concern in the United States and the very real energy shortages predicted in the Pacific Northwest within the next 10 years, the addition of loads other than basic needs are becoming a concern to all of us. The National Department of Energy has taken a very dim view of the use of short energy supplies to heat swimming pools, as an example. Exterior lighting for night time recreational use will also be closely evaluated. It would appear then that the midigating measures on energy efficiency, should be more explicit and mandatory with the use of the word "shall" rather than "should", and that all portions of the complex be totally energy effecient and be designed with " PU D's — t _q"ite. 0� ...a aad man ice ��opQe 3 VU.IR :.�,�„Y.. DISTRICT-3 �wE RBLIC T I LITY DISTRICT N o. Public Power 0 0 Mason Regional Planning Council January 3, 1980 Page 2 the maximum of concervation in mind. The identification of impacts on the Utilities, where it states "the energy required will not cause a significant depletion in available energy", needs to be changed. This complex will use the equivalent of requirements for 5 to 6 new homes within Mason County and at the time of construction, energy shortages are a very real possibility. Yours truly, 4 e 644�/, 41mf Richard L. Thompson Environmental Officer Mason County P.U.D. #3 cc: Dennis Rohr " PU D's — t Svwtce % 8� amcC maneP"Qe STATEo STATE OF STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY WASHIw la x Mail Stop PV-11 206/753-2800 �2 Dixy Lee Ray Olympia,Washington 98504 yti�rHNs boy Governor January 4, 1980 Monty Anderson Mason Regional Planning Council P.O. Box 186 Shelton, Washington 98584 Dear Mr. Anderson: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft environmental impact statement for the Theler Memorial Recreation Park comprehensive plan. A septic tank/drainfield system of sewage disposal is planned for the community center and some soils information is included in the EIS. However, additional soil information is needed to judge the suitability of this area for septic tank/drainfield disposal of sewage. A swimming pool is planned as part of the project but the EIS does not discuss drainage of the pool. The final EIS should indicate where the water will drain and what impacts will result from the drainage. We are particularly concerned about impacts from chlorine. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Jim Krull of our Southwest Regional Office at 753-0145. Sincerely, Barbara J. Ritchie Environmental Review Section BJR:mgh cc: Jim Krull, DOE, Southwest Region PHONE 426-5593 JAMES E. CONNOLLY AREA CODE 206 DIRECTOR MASON ON AL PLANNING COUNCIL REGIONAL P.O. BOX 186 - 5TH AND BIRCH SHELTON, WASHINGTON 98584 January 8, 1980 MEMO TO: Norm Sanders, Superintendent of Schools, North Mason School District FROM: Monty Anderson, Mason Regional Planning SUBJECT: Hearing on Theler Recreation Park D.E.I.S. Norm: The Hearing on the Draft E.I.S. for the Sam Theler project has been set up for January 17, 1980 at 7:00 P.M. at the Belfair Fire Hall. I talked with Doug and he will be there, too. Also, I put a legal ad in the paper on the Public Hearing, which will be in the paper this Thursday. CC: Doug Canning January 8, 1980 Mr. Doug Canning Jorthwest Environmental Consultants 158 Thomas #32 Seattle, Washington 98109 Dear Doug: Enclosed are copies of the comments on the Theler Recreation Park Comprehensive Plan we have received to date. The most "critical" comments are those of Department of Game. Sincerely, Monty K. Anderson Assistant Planning Director MI;A:b c Enclosures YO 4. STATE OF DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION KF O1 WASHINGTON Highway Administration Building,Olympia,Washington 98504 206/753-600.5 rP z' yyt ,xa9 ate' Dixy Lee Ray Governor January 8, 1980 Mr. James Connolly, Director Mason Regional Planning Council P. 0. Box 186 Shelton, Washington 98584 Mason Regional Planning Council Theler Memorial Recreation Park Comprehensive Plan Draft Environmental Impact State- ment Dear Mr. Connolly: We have reviewed the subject document and have the following comments: It is the policy of the Department on state highways to provide facilities which allow a full and continuous flow of traffic. To do this requires control of the number of access points on a highway. Therefore, we request that the Recreational Park be redesigned with an internal roadway system so that all access to SR 3 will be via the existing county road (Roessel Road, #6966) . We believe the proposed direct access to SR 3 for the community center complex is not necessary and could create additional traffic hazards. Signs advertising tie proposal which are visible from the State highway must comply with the regulations contained in the State Scenic Vistas Act of 1971. Contact Don Hicks at (206) 753-7226 if there are any questions regarding the signing regulations. If you have any questions, please call me at 753-3811. Sincerely, ROBERT S. NIELSEN Assistant Secretary for Public Transportation and Planning /&/--01/4�e A-4/t t RSN:fih By: WILLIAM P. ALBOHN WPA/WBH Environmental Planner cc: A. R. Morrell R. Albert Environmental Section Yp , 3 r DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY »� SEATTLE DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS _ P.O. BOX C-3755 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98124 NPSEN-PL-ER 1 1 J A N 1980 James Connolly, Director Mason Regional Planning Council P.O. Box 186 Shelton, Washington 98584 Dear Mr. Connolly: We have reviewed the draft environmental impact statement for the Theler Memorial Recreation Park Comprehensive Plan, Belfair, Washington, with respect to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' areas of responsibility for flood control, navigation, and regula- tory functions. The Mason County Regional Planning Council should be advised that a Department of the Army permit is required for all work in navigable waters of the United States and the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States including adjacent wetlands. Thank you for the opportunity to review this statement. If you have any questions, please contact Dr. Steven F. Dice, telephone (206) 764-3624, of my staff. Sincerely, SIDNU KNUO^P.E. PHONE 426-5593 JAMES E. CONNOLLY ' AREA CODE 206 DIRECTOR / a MASON REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL P.O. BOX 186 5TH AND BIRCH SHELTON, WASHINGTON 98584 January 15, 1980 Mrs. Donna Simmons P. 0. Box 87 Hoodsport, Washington 98548 Dear Mrs. Simmons: Enclosed is a draft E.I.S. for the Sam Theler Park project. The deadline for comments is January 25, 1980. Your organization was not on the original mailing list unfortunately, but it would be more than helpful if you could review the document and particularly those parts which are of interest to your group. We will be looking forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Monty K. Anderson Assistant Planning Director MKA/b c Enclosure PHONE 426-5593 DAMES E. CONNOLLY AREA CODE 206 DIRECTOR a f �1QQilaCDR� :� y MASON REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL P.O. BOX 186 5TH AND BIRCH SHELTON, WASHINGTON 98584 January 16, 1980 Black Hills Audubon Society P. 0. Box 2524 Olympia, Washington 98507 Audubon Society Members; Enclosed is a draft E.I.S. for the Sam Theler Park project. The deadline for comments is January 25, 1980. Your organization was not on the original mailing list unfortunately, but it would be more than helpful if you could review the document and particularly those parts which are of interest to your group. Sincerely, Monty K. Anderson Assistant Planning Director MKA/b c Enclosure PHONE 426-5593 JAMES E.CONNOLLY AREA CODE 206 DIRECTOR �u F MASON REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL P.O. BOX 186 5TH AND BIRCH SHELTON, WASHINGTON 98584 a January 21, 1980 MEMO TO: Doug Canning, Northwest Environmental Consultants Norm Sanders, North Mason School District FROM: Monty Anderson, Mason Regional Planning SUBJECT: Comments on Theler Draft Environmental Impact Statement Attached is a copy of the comments for consideration in the draft environ- mental impact statement for the Theler project. The next step is to take the comments from the hearing and those received from the various agencies and go over them together and determine if changes in the plan are warranted based upon the comments and address the issues raised. After the final EIS is submitted, then we can hold a hearing on the shore- lines permit in February. MKA:ve Enclosure PUBLIC HEARING January 17, 1980 Belfair Firehall 7:00 P.M. Draft Environmental Impact Statement Theler Memorial Recreation Park Comprehensive Plan The following concerns were expressed by those who attended the Public Hearing on the Theler Memorial Recreation Park Comprehensive Plan. The comments which were recorded at the Public Hearing in writing are edited to reflect the major points made. 1. Senior Citizens The senior citizens program has a need for a meeting place with cooking facilities and this should be considered in the portion of the plan for the community center. 2. Capacity for Parking The concern for adequate parking was expressed for the community center and the recreation activities which would draw spectators. It was felt that there may not be enough space allocated for off- street parking. 3. Drainage and Septic Tank Effluent. Concern was raised regarding surface water runoff and the potential for failing septic tanks since the land is marginal in accepting effluent because of the high water table and clay soils. 4. Filling Concern for filling of the tidelands and marshland was expressed and what the effect would be in the long term on the ecology of the tidal marsh. Other related comments were that the wetlands had already sustained modification through diking and maybe they should be restored. Also, the filling of the marshlands for ballfields would be very expensive and that other upland sites would be preferable for that type of development. Also, that filling of the marshlands might create a precedent to do more filling in Lynch Cove and that the wetlands are being used for their best value, which means that they are important to the food chain. 5. Financing Discussion on financing of the project ensued and it was concluded that the facilities should be developed which can be financed by the Theler Estate now and not what a bond issue could raise. The hearing was attended by seven citizens and adjourned at 9:15 P.M. a February 22, 1980 To: Mason County Planning Commission and Shorelines Advisory Board From: Mason Regional Planning Council Staff Re : Sam Theler Memorial Rcreation Park Comprehensive Plan. STAFF REPORT Introduction: This report evaluates the proposal to develop the Sam Theler property deeded to the community of Belfair in the name of the North Mason School District for recreational use. Much of the 70 acres are tidal wetlands which abutt Lynch Cove, therefore the project comes under the jurisdiction of the Mason County Shoreline Management Plan. The project is also evaluated for its compliance to the Mason County Comprehensive Plan, the Proposed Comprehensive Plan and the Mason County Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan. This report then, reviews the project in light of county policies and guidelines. Project Sponsor: North Mason School District No. 403 P. 0. Box 167 Belfair, Washington 98528 Project Location: Belfair, Mason County. Sections 31 and 32, Township 23N, Range 1 W. Project Proposal: Comprehensive plan for development of community recreational facilities (playfields, community center building, tennis courts, and nature trails. ) Individual facilities will be subject to subsequent detailed engineering and/or architectural design. Staff Evaluation: Environmental Impact Statement. The primary concern, as noted in the environmental review process, is the filling of non-tidal wetland and swamp, and, whether this is of necessity to the overall development of this property as a county recreational area. The alternative of not filling any wetlands on the site would leave only 3 or 4 of the 70 acre Theler estate available for playfields. (Baseball Soccer Field A) This option is comparable to the alternative of no action. The application of the trust funds to the development of an alternative site would require breaking the Theler will by court decree. Other comments concern upgrading the existing access off of Roessel County Road onto the Site at the east end, and whether this is necessarily the best traffic route. A less impacting alternative in respect to filling in a swamp would be to limit traffic access to the west end of the estate, directly off SR-3, and to make the existent 8 foot wide road at the east end accessible only to pedestrian traffic. The office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation has recommended that a professional survey for cultural resources be done and that the shorelines permit be so conditioned. Planning Considerations A. Mason County 1970 Comprehensive Plan. The Plan designates the westerly portion of the property as Flood Plain and the easterly portion as urban. The plan sets forth policy statements which guide development based on such criteria as land suitability, proximity to public services, and surrounding land use. Due to its generally accepted obsolescence the Theler Recreation proposal should be viewed in relation to the proposed Comprehensive Plan which has yet to be adopted, rather than the old plan. B. Proposed Mason County. Comprehensive Plan: The plan designates the land west side of SR 3 including the Theler Estate as a Rural Mixed Use Area with a recommended density of 1 residential unit per 2 1/2 acres. (See Land Use Plan map and page 55 of the text. ) Criteria: 1) Land capability is generally poor to moderate for residential development above low density. 2) Area is presently in, or has high potential for, commer- cial resource management in forestry, agriculture, aqua- culture, and minerals. 3) Area is immediately upland from active aquaculture sites. 4) Area has high recreation or wildlife habitat potential. 5) Area is providing or being managed for valuable natural resources which form the basis of the local economy. 6) The overall quality and level of public services would become lower if extensive new development occurs. 7) Existing land use is forestry, agriculture, open space, or low density residential. 8) Preservation of area will enhance the rural character of the county. 9) New development will not reduce or detract from the county's rural character. 10) Citizen preference is for low density rural lifestyle mixed with resource-oriented uses in the area. The proposed Theler Memorial Recreation Park Plan appears to be in conformance with the proposed criteria set forth for Rural Mixed Use Areas. The Recreational Park and facilities set forth in the Theler Park Plan naturalltly limit the intensity or density of development which may take place in the future thus serving to enhance the rural character of the area. C. Shoreline Master Plan for Mason County: The Plan designates the Theler Estate as a conservancy shoreline and as the Environmental Impact Statement acknowledges, it meets the intent of this environment and regulations guiding recreational development. The Shoreline Master Plan also sets forth use activity guidelines for landfill projects in the conservancy environment. "Landfills are not permitted in a conservancy environment." (Page 44 of the Plan. ) However, because the proposed filling for the future development of Playfield C and Baseball Field B are to occur on already diked and filled non-tidal wetland, the contemplated action does not constitute the type of landfill regulated by the Shoreline Plan. Instead, the intent of the Plan is to regulate the filling of land in its natural state, to prevent loss of habitat and ecologically significant resources. The proposed location for the fill will not substantially alter an already modified site, and therefore this site will not benefit from preventing the action. D. Mason County Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Plan: The Environmental Impact Statement correctly notes that the conceptual Theler Plan proposes certain needed and desired recreational facilities that have been identified by Mason County Citizens in a public opinion survey taken in 1979. Along with this survey, a separate opinion poll was conducted in 1978, so that Belfair community citizens could state their interests and goals for the Theler estate. The proposal meets the general goal and objectives of the County Parks Plan which include the following: Park and recreation programming should be coordinated as much as possible with that of other agencies and citizen groups. Donated land in most cases should be put in a high priority category. Private enterprise should be encouraged to develop recreational facilities. Decisions concerning park property acquisition should consider the effect on the general neighboring area. Parks should be designed to enhance their surroundings. Whenever possible, parks should be multi-uise facilities, providing several types of recreation in one area. The county's responsibility is to meet the recreational needs of county residents. t Conclusion The Theler Memorial Recreation Park Plan meets the intent of Mason County plans and policies . The proposal will greatly enhance the recreational opportunities of the Belfair Community, North Mason School District, and citizens of Mason County. The internal road access to the site on the westerly end should be considered as being limited to pedestrian access only, and should not be upgraded and widened from 8 to 20 feet. Instead, traffic should enter the site from SR 3, thereby minimizing the need for swamp filling. The shoreline substantial development permit should be conditioned to require a professional survey for cultural resources prior to earth moving operations. Recommendations: The Shoreline Advisory Board should consider approval of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit with the following conditions: 1. The existing westerly access onto the site be limited to pedestrian uses only, and not widened from 8 to 20 feet. 2. A professional cultural survey be accomplished prior to any earth moving operations to identify and retain any historical resources on the Theler Estate. Board Action: The next step is for the Shorelines Advisory Board to consider the record before it and comments on the proposal, and: 1 . Approve the proposal. 2. Conditionally approve the proposal. 3. Reject the proposal. 4. Postpone for further information. 1, �r January 23 , 1960 eson Regional Planning Council P . 0. Box 186 Shelton , 'WA 98584 Subject : E.I .S . fcr Theler School Trust LRnOs Recreation Plan . Friends : I have read the Draft EIS and am offering the following comrents # Preservation of Salt Yarsh: The Plan provides that all the salt marsh be preserved, with very little develc;rment, and that is a plus for the Flan . This salt marsh is cart of the Lynch Cove Estuary, also called the Union River Estuary. It is a very special sensitive natural area at Belfair . It is the last remaining large estuary in the east aril cf Hooc' Canal. The decline of fish and shellfish in Lynch Cave has taken place over the years at the same time salt marsh was reduced by the construction of -Belfair State Park, Lynch Cove Develox:Yrient, Beard 's Cove Recreation Area , and other fills . As for the absence of oysters on the Theler tidelands , they were removed by dredging not too long ago, and were not rerlanted . There is reason_ to believe oysters would do well now, as in the past , with proper management . ialkwa : In my opinion, the proposed walkway across the salt marsh is not neeced Pt present . It might be desirable at some future time If the dikes and salt marsh are ever-used by the public . The dikes and marsh are not greatly, used b nature walkers at this time . This may be because many potential bird watchers do not know this is a public access . Bird watchers have no trouble observing birds from the existing dikes and from the state game land upriver. I do not believe a nature 1 area should be developed at all if it is to be kept natural . Risk of Fellution in Hood Canal . The 13 acres of swamp and fresh water wet en :s are nova acting as a catch-basin for runoff .veter from the playgrounds , parking areas , and highway uphill from the site . Several homes on the upland tract directly east of the Theler wetlands r.:aT be draining septic tank effluent into the swamp below the hill . A. proposed mobile home park to the north of the site could add more effluent to the swamp. There is also a question Of proper seiaage (,isrosal from the proposed gymnasium complex, including the swimming pool's chlorinated grater. 1/23/80 Page 2 Filling for a 20-fo -)t wide road , perking area , and ballfields B, C , and D woulc remove 12 of the 13 acres of wetland . The water has nowhere to go except into the L-shaped pond snr4 ditches into Lynch Cove . If there is septic tank failure , this pond would more or less act as a sewage collection lagoon . Financial Feasibility of Project ; The questionnaire to the public mpli_ed that a complete recreation building for all eves , a swimming pool, tennis courts , ane a variety of ballfielcas were all possible . The proposed development needs at least 25 acres of good, flat , well-drained land, and t ;e site has less than 10 acres of land with a low enough water table . The Theler Fund cannot supp-rt either construction or maintenance of this proposal . Ballftelds in the wet areas will have lots of mosquitoes , and will be expensive to build and maintain . If public or private funds other than Theler Trust Tnonies are used , the community would more likely get their money 's worth by purchasing suitable land for ballfields elsewhere in the Eelfeir area . An accessible, well- drained area , free of mosquitoes, is not too :such to expect , and no real effort has been made to pursue this alternative . If the Shorelines Application is approved , knowing most of the projects co-.,ld not be built for 10 years or more , it would be a disservice to the community. It woulc mean cemmunit' pressure on the Theler Citizen 's Committee and the North Meson School Board to seek substantial funds for the work before the Permits expire . These few dedicated people will be faulted if they fail to produce the dream. No effort will be made to develop a pore comprehensive community recreation plan, using ether sites . Alterratives ; The EIS suggests so reel alternatives except A, ido cevelopment at all . There should be another alternative , Build a modest gymnasium, as had been proposed by the Citizens Committee two years ago, retaining one pleyfield where it exists at present . Build Flaffield A, the corbinati_on soccer and baseball field on the south end of the tract, with access road from Hio'rway Three . The s,..?.rplus fill material from levelling this site can be used to fill for ;he picnic area and o0 ja.cent parking. This plan would lesve the swamp anc non-tidal metlands untouched . Such an alterne to plan might be accomplished in large part with Theler Trust funds . Setting Precedent; If the swamp area is filled in for ballfields , owners of similar wetland along Lynch Cove will expect to be al lcred to develop in the same way for l,omesites . Sever&l such fills is bound to have an adverse impact on Lynch Cove . Respectfully submitted , Route 3.0 Box 60 E e l f a i r, 'N"A 90528 Star Route 2 , Box 310 Belfair , Washington 98528 To: Mason Regional Flannine Council Shelton, V9A Re: Theler Memorial Recreation Park Comprehensive Plan I feel that the Draft Environmental Impact Statement contains sufficient reasons to modify the complete development of the Theler site. The associated wetlands development with three playfields, roads, parking, necessary rest rooms, etc. , would contribute definitely to the degradation of the Union River estuary salt marsh. These wetlands, left in what remains of their natural state, maintain an invaluable buffer against upoand development and would preserve rapidly dwindling wildlife habitats. A natural landscape to be looked at and used sparingly is a recreational resource of great value to a developing community. The land is admirable suited for what it is -- an associated wetland with adjoining salt marshes. The location for playfields B and C would easily return to salt marsh were the dikes not maintained. The second reason for not developing the wetland portion is the economic cost. Filling, road building, drains, etc. , and maintenance costs would be much beyond the income from the Theler fund. If money is to be raised by bond or otherwise from the community, better locations could be found for playfields. It is probable that the lower playfields would be unusable a great part of the fall anc winter months and would he plagued by mosquitoes in the summer. In the light of energy shortages and rising costs, it is questionable that a swimming pool and large gymnasium, lighted tennis courts, etc. , will ever be feasible here. I believe that the questionaire sent out by the Theler committee did not fully address the questions of probable costs to taxpayers. People replying in- dicated what they would like to have under the supposition that the ultimate costs would be covered by the Theler bequest. It seems that this is not assured. I would urge that playfields, which are needed now, be built on the upland portion of the property with one or two small buildings which would satisfy the needs of playfield users. Respectfully submi ted, Ma gar t Livingston PHONE 426-5593 JAMES E. CONNOLLY AREA CODE 206 DIRECTOR MASON REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL P.O. BOX 186 5TH AND BIRCH SHELTON, WASHINGTON 98584 January 28, 1980 Ms. Donna Simmons Hood Canal Environmental Council P. 0. Box 126 Hoodsport, Washington 98548 Dear Donna: I got your note today admonishing me for not putting the HCEC on the distribution list for the E.I.S. on the Theler project. I stand corrected as noted in an earlier letter enclosed with the E.I.S. we sent you. It certainly is our intention to always send you and the HCEC all the info we can. By the way, we have a new reference document you might be interested in. It's a booklet of maps of the canal showing various habitats, littoral drift sectors, etc. It may be helpful to you. Thanks for the comments. Sincerely, Monty K. Anderson Assistant Planning Director MKA:ve P.O. Box 126 ::oodsport, lashington 9,3548 January 25, 1940 F,onty K. Anderson Assistant Planning Director Mason Regional Planning Council P.O. Box 196 5th and ?birch Shelton, Washington 99584 Re: Theler Memorial Recreation Park Comprehensive Plan Dear Monty: I received a copy of the above-named Draft Environmental Statement on January 22nd. At the meeting of the Hood Canal Environmental Council' s Board of Directors that evening, it was decided that since we had not been given sufficient time to review the document, we cannot take an official position on It. However, we would like the Planning Council to be aware that: (a) given the fact that our organization has previously taken a great interest in all matters relating to potential adverse environmental impacts to the food Canal area, we are very dis- turbed over the fact that we were not on your distribution list, and (b) since a good part of the proposal involves potential im- pacts to tidal wetlands and related bird species from the development of adjacent lands, we would. have serious reserva- tions about a project of this type. We will be monitoring the progress of this proposal with much interest, particularly with regard to the acquisition of the required permits . ','e would ap-,;reciate the addition of HCEC' s name to your distribution list for any future informa- tion. Sincerely, Donna M.T. Siiamons, President, Hood Canal Environmental Council January 31, 1980 Mr. Doug Canning Northwest Environmental Consultants 153 Thomas Street #32 Seattle, 4ashington 98109 Dear Doug: Attached are the comments we most recently received on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Sam Theler project. Sincerely, Monty K. Anderson, Assistant Planning Director ILWbc BLA CK HILLS A UD UBON SOCIETY A Washington State Chapter of the National Audubon Society Office: Suite 12, 108 W. 22nd Ave., Olympia, WA. • Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2524, Olympia, WA. 98507 Phone(206) 357.4664 2 February 1980 Monty K . Anderson Assistant Planning Director Mason Regional Planning Council P.O . Box 186 Shelton, Washington 98584 Mr. Anderson: I have reviewed the Draft EIS for the Sam Theler Park project . Restricting development to the uplands should help preserve the Union River estuary, which we feel is quite important . The boardwalk through the salt marsh is a good idea , it could be an excellent facility for the North Mason School District for environmental education. Thank you for this opportunity to comment on this proposal. Sincerly , VU1A Bill Harrington-Tweit President PHONE 426-5593 JAMES E. CONNOLLY AREA CODE 206 DIRECTOR �i i ,. 0-4a, , MASON REG IONAL ONAL PLANNING COUNCIL P.O. BOX 186 • 5TH AND BIRCH SHELTON, WASHINGTON 98584 February 8, 1980 Mr. Doug Canning Northwest Environmental Consultants 158 Thomas Street, #32 Seattle, Washington 98109 Dear Doug: Attached is a letter from the Black Hills Audubon Society and a Health Department letter on the Theler project. Sincerely, Monty K. Anderson Assistant Planning Director MKA:ve Enclosures (2) Mason County Health Department MEDICAL-NURSING SECTION B.M.Pederson,M.D. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SECTION 1 10 West"K"Street County Health Officer 428 West Birch Street Shelton,Washington 98584 Shelton,Washington 98584 Phone 426-4407 February 7, 1980 Phone 426-5561 James E. Connolly, Director Mason Regional Planning Council P.O. Box 186 Shelton, Washington 98584 Re: Comment on Theler Memorial Recreation Park Comprehensive Plan E.I.S. Dear Mr. Connolly: This department has some concern over this project. There has been no soils work done to determine the suitability of the proposed drainfield area. Until this has been done - more specifically, a Site Inspection Approval made - this department cannot give assurances that the sewage to be generated on-site will be properly disposed on-site. The soils in the area referred to as the septic tank leach field area are anticipated to be sandy and gravelly, though they may be overlain in part by a shallow layer of peat. SCS soils map shows Everett Gravelly Sandy Loam (Eh) in the several hundred feet next to the highway, with a small intrusion of Mukilteo Peat (Mh) at the north border about 2/3 of the way down the property, and Koch Gravelly Loam (Kf) covering the lower areas. The proposed drainfield area will be in an area mapped with Everett Gravelly Sandy Loam, which is generally a suitable soil for that use. Please contact us if we may be of further assistance regarding this matter. (� Sincerely, Bruce Pederson, M. D. County Health Officer FE B 8 1980 :� -- Ac__' REGIONAL PLANNING. Je se T. Wilkins, III, R. S. En 'ronmental Health Specialist JTW:vl cc: Mr. Norm Sanders, North Mason School District Northwest Environmental Consultants Equal Opportunity Employer PHONE 426-5593 JAMES E. CONNOLLY AREA CODE 206 DIRECTOR N. MASON REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL P.O. BOX 186 5TH AND BIRCH � � SHELTON, WASHINGTON 98584 SttF`LTtaty � ry` - February 19, 1980 I want to thank you for your comments on the draft EIS for the Sam Theler Memorial Park Project in Belfair. Please find attached the final environmental impact state- ment on the project. The Mason County Planning Commission and Shorelines Advisory Board will be considering the project at a joint meeting on February 27, 1980 at 7:00 p.m. in the Mason County Courthouse, Shelton Washington for issuance of a shore- lines permit. S a ineere , o t de so� - - MKA/bc Assist Planning Director PHONE 426-5593 JAMES E. CONNOLLY AREA CODE 206 DIRECTOR MASON REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL u P.O. BOX 186 5TH AND BIRCH SHELTON, WASHINGTON 98584 February 19 1980 Memorandum To: Chairman Cole Commissioner McGee Commissioner Taylor From: Planning Staff Subject: Final EIS for the Sam Theler Memorial Park project. Attached is the Final EIS for the Sam Theler Memorial Park project. The Mason County Shorelines Advisory Board and the Mason County Planning Commission will be holding a joint meet- ing on the project February 26, 1980 at 7 :00 p .m. in the Courthouse to consider the EIS and the Shorelines Permit for the project. MKA/bc February 22, 1980 To: Mason County Planning Commission and Shorelines Advisory Board From: Mason Regional Planning Council Staff Re: Sam Theler Memorial Rcreation Park Comprehensive Plan. STAFF REPORT Introduction: This report evaluates the proposal to develop the Sam Theler property deeded to the community of Belfair in the name of the North Mason School District for recreational use. Much of the 70 acres are tidal wetlands which abutt Lynch Cove, therefore the project comes under the jurisdiction of the Mason County Shoreline Management Plan. The project is also evaluated for its compliance to the Mason County Comprehensive Plan, the Proposed Comprehensive Plan and the Mason County Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan. This report then, reviews the project in light of county policies and guidelines. Project Sponsor: North Mason School District No. 403 P. 0. Box 167 Belfair, Washington 98528 Project Location: Belfair, Mason County. Sections 31 and 321, Township 23N, Range 1 W. Project Proposal: Comprehensive plan for development of community recreational facilities (playfields, community center building, tennis courts, and nature trails. ) Individual facilities will be subject to subsequent detailed engineering and/or architectural design. Staff Evaluation: Environmental Impact Statement. The primary concern, as noted in the environmental review process, is the filling of non-tidal wetland and swamp, and whether this is of necessity to the overall development of this property as a county recreational area. The alternative of not filling any wetlands on the site would leave only 3 or 4 of the 70 acre Theler estate available for playfields. (Baseball Soccer Field A) This option is comparable to the alternative of no action. The application of the trust funds to the development of an alternative site would require breaking the Theler will by court decree. Other comments concern upgrading the existing access off of Roessel County Road onto the Site at the east end, and whether this is necessarily the best traffic route. A less impacting alternative in respect to filling in a swamp would be to limit traffic access to the west end of the estate, directly off SR-3, and to make the existent 8 foot wide road at the east end accessible only to pedestrian traffic. The office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation has recommended that a professional survey for cultural resources be done and that the shorelines permit be so conditioned. Planning Considerations A. Mason County 1970 Comprehensive Plan. The Plan designates the westerly portion of the property as Flood Plain and the easterly portion as urban. The plan sets forth policy statements which guide development based on such criteria as land suitability, proximity to public services, and surrounding land use. Due to its generally accepted obsolescence the Theler Recreation proposal should be viewed in relation to the proposed Comprehensive Plan which has yet to be adopted, rather than the old plan. B. Proposed Mason County. Comprehensive Plan: The plan designates the land west side of SR 3 including the Theler Estate as a Rural Mixed Use Area with a recommended density of 1 residential unit per 2 1/2 acres. (See Land Use Plan map and page 55 of the text.) Criteria: 1) Land capability is generally poor to moderate for residential development above low density. 2) Area is presently in, or has high potential for, commer- cial resource management in forestry, agriculture; aqua- culture, and minerals. 3) Area is immediately upland from active aquaculture sites. 4) Area has high recreation or wildlife habitat potential. 5) Area is providing or being managed for valuable natural resources which form the basis of the local economy. 6) The overall quality and level of public services would become lower if extensive new development occurs. 7) Existing land use is forestry, agriculture, open space, or low density residential. 8) Preservation of area will enhance the rural character of the county. 9) New development will not reduce or detract from the county's rural character. 10) Citizen preference is for low density rural lifestyle mixed with resource-oriented uses in the area. The proposed Theler Memorial Recreation Park Plan appears to be in conformance with the proposed criteria set forth for Rural Mixed Use Areas. The Wecreational Park and facilities set forth in the Theler Park Plan naturally limit the intensity or density of development which may take place in the future thus serving to enhance the rural character of the area. C. Shoreline Master Plan for Mason County: The Plan designates the Theler Estate as a conservancy shoreline and as the Environmental Impact Statement acknowledges, it meets the intent of this environment and regulations guiding recreational development. The Shoreline Master Plan also sets forth use activity guidelines for landfill projects in the conservancy environment. "Landfills are not permitted in it conservancy environment." (Page 44 of the Plan. ) However, because the proposed filling for the future development of Playfield C and Baseball Field B are to occur on already diked and filled non-tidal wetland, the contemplated action does not constitute the type of landfill regulated by the Shoreline Plan. Instead, the intent of the Plan is to regulate the filling of land in its natural state, to prevent loss of habitat and ecologically significant resources. The proposed location for the fill will not substantially alter an already modified site, and therefore this site will not benefit from preventing the action. D. Mason County Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Plan: The Environmental Impact Statement correctly notes that the conceptual Theler Plan proposes certain needed and desired recreational facilities that have been identified by Mason County Citizens in a public opinion survey taken in 1979. Along with this survey, a separate opinion poll was conducted in 1978, so that Belfair community citizens could state their interests and goals for the Theler estate. The proposal meets the general goal and objectives of the County Parks Plan which include the following: Park and recreation programming should be coordinated as much as possible with that of other agencies and citizen groups. Donated land in most cases should be put in a high priority category. Private enterprise should be encouraged to develop recreational facilities. Decisions concerning park property acquisition should consider the effect on the general neighboring area. Parks should be designed to enhance their surroundings. Whenever possible, parks should be multi-uise facilities, providing several types of recreation in one area. The county's responsibility is to meet the recreational needs of county residents. Z Conclusion The Theler Memorial Recreation Park Plan meets the intent of Mason County plans and policies . The proposal will greatly enhance the recreational opportunities of the Belfair Community, North Mason School District, and citizens of Mason County. The internal road access to the site on the westerly end should be considered as being limited to pedestrian access only, and should not be upgraded and widened from 8 to 20 feet. Instead, traffic should enter the site from SR 3, thereby minimizing the need for swamp filling. The shoreline substantial development permit should be conditioned to require a professional survey for cultural resources prior to earth moving operations. Recommendations: The Shoreline Advisory Board should consider approval of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit with the following conditions: 1. The existing westerly access onto the site be limited to pedestrian uses only, and not widened from 8 to 20 feet. 2. A professional cultural survey be accomplished prior to any earth moving operations to identify and retain any historical resources on the Theler Estate. Board Action: The next step is for the Shorelines Advisory Board to consider the record before it and comments on the proposal, and: 1 . Approve the proposal. 2. Conditionally approve the proposal. 3. Reject the proposal. 4. Postpone for further information.