The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutHabitat Management Plan for BLD2021-00371 - HMP Habitat Managment Plan - 12/30/2020 4k i-- -L 2- I — 00 - --I 1 RECEIVED MAR 17 2021 Habitat Management PIan615 W. Alder Street Parcel# 32127-54-00110 180 E Peebles Ct Shelton, WA 98584 Mason County PLANNING Report prepared for: Patrick Smith 3444 SW Christmas Tree Ln Port Orchard, WA 98367 Prepared by: Rob Nagel 680 E Philura Ln Shelton, WA 98584 arctosaerial@gmail.com (425) 344-9315 (360) 229-3118 ARMS AFRIM Environmental Consultation I Drone Imagery Project: 2020-H M P-206 December 2020 ' Project: 2020-HMP-206 December 2020 ARMS AERI A S Table of Contents Overview................................................................................................................1 i PropertyDescription..............................................................................................2 Analysis of Potential Impacts.................................................................................3 Mitigation Measures..............................................................................................4 Monitoring .............................................................................................................8 Summary................................................................................................................8 References............................................................................................................10 List of Figures Figure1: Vicinity Map ............................................................................................2 Figure 2: Map depicting parcel & buffers...............................................................3 Figure3: Site Plan...................................................................................................9 i Project: 2020-HMP-206 December 2020 a RCTosAERIAL Habitat Management Plan 32127-54-00110 180 E Peebles Ct Shelton, WA 98584 Overview This report details a Habitat Management Plan (HMP) for the above referenced property in Mason County, Washington. The purpose of this report is to address the potential impacts of placing a mobile home within 150ft of a Type-F stream. The Mason County Resource Ordinance requires a 150ft buffer with an additional 15ft building setback for Type-F streams, which encompasses the entire lot. (see figure 1). However, the Resource Ordinance allows for a reduction in the buffer/setback if the lot was legally established prior to the effective date of the Resource Ordinance if it is the minimum necessary to allow reasonable use of the property. This report proposes a reduction in the stream buffer to 100ft with an additional 15ft structure setback. The mobile home is proposed approximately ±119ft from the ordinary high-water mark of the Type-F stream. The proposed site is currently cleared of vegetation. Mitigation measures have been designed to offset the potential impacts of this activity on the ecological functions of the stream buffer. The objectives of this report are as follows: • Identify potential impacts of the placement of the proposed structure within the stream buffer on the buffer's ecological functions and fish and wildlife habitat. • Determine mitigation measures that would offset those impacts and result in no net loss to ecological functions and fish and wildlife habitat within the remaining buffer. 1 Project: 2020-HMP-206 December 2020 ARMS r� 0 D Figure 1:Vicinity mop of project. Property Description The parcel is 0.60 acres in size and located in section 27, Township 21 North, Range 3 West. A fish-bearing tributary to Cranberry Creek flows through the lot from the northeast to the southwest. The proposed structure site is located adjacent to Peebles Court as far from the stream as feasible. The proposed structure site is currently clear of vegetation and no vegetation removal is proposed. The Mason County Resource Ordinance requires a 150ft buffer with an additional 15ft structure setback, which encompasses the entire subject property. This report proposes a reduction of the regulated buffer to 100ft with an additional 15ft structure setback. This buffer reduction is the minimum necessary to afford the property owner with a reasonable use of the lot. The proposed buffer reduction is also compatible with the character of surrounding permitted uses and would not adversely affect traffic circulation. 2 Project: 2020-H M P-206 December 2020 A RCTOSA R n l O r ,�� X. S: 41 :e , At .; . :. Figure 2:Map showing the tributary to Cranberry Creek,the regulated 150'buffer as the solid yellow line and the 165'structure setback as the dashed yellow line.The red polygon is the subject parcel. Analysis of Potential Impacts Vegetated buffers serve an important role in protecting critical public resources, as well as fish and wildlife habitat from adverse impacts associated with development. Below are the potential adverse impacts to ecological function associated with the construction of this proposed structure within the stream buffer. - Increased storm-water runoff and erosion Impervious surfaces such as roofs and driveways contribute to increased flow of runoff during storm events. This increased flow could contribute to erosion and increased sediment reaching the Hood Canal without a proper storm water management plan. 3 i Project:2020-HMP-206 December 2020 - Stream bank de-stabilization Removing of buffer vegetation and increasing storm water run-off can speed erosion of shorelines and make them unstable. This project site is located in an area already cleared. No vegetation removal is proposed, and no increased risk of erosion is anticipated. - Loss of wildlife habitat The development footprint of this structure within the buffer is limited to 1,248ft2 and no native vegetation will be removed in the placement of the structure since the project site is already cleared of vegetation. Mitigation measures including native plantings will actually increase the amount of wildlife habitat and have a net ecological benefit to the stream buffer. - Increased disturbance from noise pollution A temporary increase in noise from construction activities is likely to occur. but activities will be limited to daylight hours, and the project is located in a development area where human noises are a common occurrence. Also, no known nesting sites or priority habitats and species have been identified near the project site. - Increased Solar input The proposed structure is sited on the north side of the stream channel and no native vegetation will be removed in the process of construction. No increase in solar input is anticipated. Mitigation Measures To avoid, minimize, and mitigate for the potential adverse impacts identified above, the following have been identified as appropriate measures for this project: Minimizing/avoiding impact The proposed project minimizes the impact to the stream buffer by minimizing the square footage of the proposed structure within the buffer to approximately 1,248ft2. The structure will also be placed as far 4 Project: 2020-HMP-206 December 2020 A RCTOS AERIAL as feasible from the stream channel in an area already cleared of vegetation. - Best Management Practices for construction Construction activities related to this project will be restricted to favorable weather conditions and best management practices for reducing disturbance and erosion will be followed, including placing straw over exposed areas, and erecting silt fencing below the project area. Equipment will be checked daily for leaks and all fuel, lubricant, and chemicals will be stored outside the shoreline buffer. - Clustering of development All activities related to this project will be clustered to the extent possible without impacting more of the stream buffer than necessary. Equipment and materials will be parked/stored outside the stream buffer when possible. - Removal of invasive species All occurrences of invasive species in the vicinity of the project site and mitigation area will be mechanically removed without the use of chemical herbicides. - Landscaping with native plant species Any landscaping within the lot area will be limited to native plant species typically found in undisturbed riparian areas. Species selected will include common riparian vegetation not currently on the property which will result in a net increase in species richness and biodiversity within the buffer. An estimated total area of ±600ft2 will be restored to native vegetation through scattered landscaping around the structure. 5 i ' Project: 2020-HMP-206 December 2020 �RCTOSAEnIAL Plantings Guidelines (per Appendix C of the Mason County Resource Ordinance) Earthwork Machinery earthwork will be limited to the minimum necessary in order to implement this restoration plan; planting holes for specified vegetation installation will be hand dug. Native Plantings It is recommended that native plantings be installed within 10 foot wide restoration zones in linear strips extending across the site parallel to the edge of the buffer to achieve the following densities: Trees— 10' on center Shrubs — 5' on center Ferns—4' on center The general plan calls for installing single trees, or clusters of three shrubs, on approximate 10-foot centers. Each row will alternate between 5 trees + 3 shrub clusters or 4 trees + 4 shrub clusters starting from the edge closest to the identified critical area proceeding to the edge of the buffer. Specifically for stream ravine replanting, cedar will be the first type of tree installed within the first row at the top of the ravine, and then incrementally changing one cedar tree to a fir through the first six rows, with all fir trees thereafter or to the edge of the buffer whichever comes first. Exact placement of installed materials will be up to the landscape installer, following the basic 10-foot spacing pattern prescribed. Finally, a native ground cover planting or sword fern will be randomly installed throughout the planting row on average four-foot centers. These densities have been selected to provide a moderately dense, structurally diverse plant community within the restoration area. Volunteer native vegetation can be counted towards the target densities of restoration plants. Typical native plant species that may be used with the restoration zone include: Trees: Western red cedar (Thuja plicata) — 2 or 3 gallon Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) — 2 or 3 gallon Western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) - 2 or 3 gallon Grand fir (Abies grandis) — 2 or 3 gallon Cascara (Rhamnus purshiana) — 2 or 3 gallon 6 ' Project:2020-H M P-206 December 2020 A RCTOS AERIAL Cottonwood (Populus balsamifera) — 2 or 3 gallon Shrubs: nootka rose (Rosa nutkana) — 1 gallon salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis) — 1 gallon salal (Gaultheria shallon) — 1 gallon evergreen huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum) — 1 gallon twinberry (Lonicera involucrate) — 1 gallon snowberry (Symphorocarpus albus) — 1 gallon elderberry (Sambucus racemosa) — 1 gallon red osier dogwood (Corpus stolonifera) — 1 gallon Ferns: sword fern (Polystichum munitum) — 1 gallon All planting should occur during winter dormancy. The optimum time for planting is from February to March. Installation Installation of the prescribed vegetation will be performed by qualified landscapers familiar with planting of native vegetation in natural settings. Installation will be performed only after home construction on the property is completed to avoid damage to the plantings from construction activities. All installed vegetation shall be marked with colored flagging to facilitate monitoring inspections. A separate "as-built" plan will be provided by the landscaper if the planting pattern or schedule deviates from that listed within this document. Fertilizing Artificial fertilizer may be applied to each planting hole in the form of"slow- release" tablets or some other similar material. However, general broadcast fertilization MAY Not be used within the landscape planting area. Maintenance Maintenance of the installations will be the responsibility of the landscape installer. Maintenance is to include and weeding or watering necessary to ensure plant survival for up to three years after the date of installation. i Project: 2020-HMP-206 December 2020 ARCTosAERtAL Monitoring; Following the implementation of the mitigation measures, an annual report will be submitted to the county for 3 years post construction. The report will detail the presence of new, or the reoccurrence of any invasive species. Invasive species found on site will again be removed mechanically, using hand tools only to reduce disturbance to the shoreline buffer. The annual report will also document the planting success of any native species and the success of the biofiltration swales at controlling storm-water runoff. If any failures of mitigation measures are identified during the annual inspection, corrective actions will be recommended in the report and will be taken by the property owner to restore them to working order as soon as possible. Summary This report Identifies potential impacts of the placement of a proposed manufactured home, ±1,248ft2, within the regulated buffer of a Type-F stream. The proposed building site, approximately 119ft from the stream channel at its closest point, is currently cleared of vegetation and provides little benefit to the stream and its buffer. Mitigation measures have been proposed to avoid, minimize, and mitigate for those impacts on the stream buffer's ecological functions and fish and wildlife habitat. Successful implementation of the proposed mitigation measures will result in a net benefit to the stream and its buffer's ecological functions, structural diversity, and species richness. Mitigation measures include re-establishing ±600ft2 of native vegetation and construction BMPs. 8 Project:2020-HMP-205 December 2020 X ARCTOS AERIAL 3. ARCTOS n AERIAL Environmental Consulting I Drone Imagery Q¢¢`0 t e, �' a * Yt PO Box 2466 ` Vs, `"Parcel Boundary Shelton,WA96584 �a . *�• `�e �e `� (425)344-9315 ar Type-F Stream t www.arctosaerial.com Qto 0 0 ` n s Proposed "+ + { 15ft Setback co Ln r cn 0 N 3 ~ Proposed 100ft , > M w o r Stream Buffer ` ,�' C t 00 r Septic ` Tanks i. ..y' It y , +_', a i S ep rev ` �d �,• '" Map created by:Rob Nagel c u, ' December 17th,2020 Revison: WLi At.. h X. Scale: 1' = 30' 9 t - I Project:2020-HMP-205 December 2020 . References Environmental Laboratory.(1987). "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,"Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S.Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station,Vicksburg, Miss. Guard,J.(1995).Wetland Plants of Oregon&Washington. Lone Pine Publishing.240 pp. Edmonton, Alberta,Canada. Hruby,T. (2014).Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington:2014 Update. (Publication#14-06-029).Olympia,WA:Washington Department of Ecology. Munsell Color(Firm).(2009). Munsell soil color charts:with genuine Munsell color chips.Grand Rapids, MI Pojar,J.and A. MacKinnon. 1994.Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast(Revised Edition 2014).Lone Pine Publishing.528 pp.Vancouver, British Columbia,Canada. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.2010. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States,Version 7.0. L.M.Vasilas,G.W. Hurt,and C.V.Noble(eds.). USDA, NRCS,in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. U.S.Army Corps of Engineers 2018. National Wetland Plant List,version 3.4, http://wetland- plants.usace.army.mil/U.S.Army Corps of Engineers,Engineer Research and Development Center Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, NH U.S.Army Corps of Engineers.2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual:Western Mountains,Valleys,and Coast Region (Version 2.0),ed.J.S. Wakeley, R.W.Lichvar,and C.V. Noble.ERDC/EL TR-10-3.Vicksburg,MS:U.S.Army Engineer Research and Development Center. 10