HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998.10.24 - CT Pipeline ESA Permit 98-24DATE: October 24, 1998
TO: Judy Surber, Senior Planner
FROM: Robert LaCroix, Project Manager
RE: CT Pipeline, ESA Permit 98 -24
City of Pori Townswid
RECEIVED
ur 2 6 1998
We have met the guidelines ofESA Permit #98 -24, with the following modifications:
Section 11.
b. Upland forest areas require bare root plantings. Nursery stock will not be available until early
November. All disturbed areas have been stabilized with approved matting and hydroseeding until this
work can take place.
c. We propose not removing siltation fencing until next spring to allow all vegetation time to fully
reestablish.
Section 12.
c. Ecology block was used in place of bollards due to cost considerations. Our construction plans did not
call for any fencing around reconstructed wetland A We propose placing a wire fence not less than 50'
from the edge ofthis wetland, on the west side, to discourage pedestrian and vehicular traffic through this
wetland.
li. Field measurements indicate errors on buffer map. After BCD staff performs field review of staked
buffer areas, City staffwill properly notify the Jefferson County auditor for recordation procedures.
The SEPA requirements stated that as a part of this project, the contractor was to leave standing one alder
tree as marked by BCD staff. The contractor, IMCO, met this requirement during the construction of CT
Pipeline improvements. Subsequent road widening construction by the Port Townsend Business Park
caused the invert of the existing culvert to be lowered. The CT Pipeline project, by change order, had to
remove this tree, stabilize the bank, and regrade the swale to allow drainage from the culvert under Sims
Way. The city also has agreed to plant two replacement trees in this area, which will be paid for by the CTPipelineProject.
In addition, the gabion wall, which was proposed by permitting staff; was substituted with an Ultra Block
wall. This resulted in a saving to taxpayers of over $40,000.00, yet meets the intention ofthe proposed
gabion wall. Public Works staff will plant willow shoots at the base of this wall to provide additional
vegetation in the wetland buffer area.
The property owners adjacent to Wetland "A" voiced strong objections to the planned "Upland Forest"
plantings directly up to the existing paved driveway. They requested a ten- foot -wide gravel strip to allow
for emergency access, and to keep planned vegetation from impacting the integrity oftheir pavement.
When field measurements were taken, it was apparent that buffer areas would not be impacted by this
request. Due to the mapping error, there has been more buffer provided, even with the ten -foot gravel strip,
than was originally called for in the mitigation plan. If planning staff believes that additional mitigation
should take place, Public Works proposes that pedestrian enhancements, outside ofthe buffer, would be an
appropriate solution.
Please let me know when you would like to review field staking ofbuffer areas.