Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Marian Meadows Rezone and Subdivision Final Environmental Impact Statement 3-33 <br />Under Alternative 4, the number of <br />residential lots in the immediate <br />vicinity would almost double but the <br />increase would be about half that of <br />Alternatives 1 and 2. <br /> The smaller lots on the west side of the BPA easement, together with mini-storage use proposed <br />along the east side of BPA easement would result in a substantial barrier to movement of elk across <br />the site from summer habitat areas to the north to winter habitats to the south. Impacts would be <br />similar to Alternative 1. <br />Alternative 3A, No Action with Uniform 3-acre Lots over the entire property, and Alternative 3B: No <br />Action with 3-Acre Lots with Exclusions would have similar impacts. The difference between the two <br />is the exclusion in 3B of 40 acres from residential development that could be devoted to mini-storage. <br />The major difference would be about 12 fewer lots in 3B. These alternatives would increase the total <br />residential lots in the immediate vicinity from approximately 200 to about 350, a little more than half of <br />the total proposed by Alternatives 1 and 2, but a substantial increase over the existing amount. <br />The large lots located immediately adjacent to the site would be bounded by lots similar in size to the <br />existing. Residences would likely be set farther from the boundaries of the plat than Alternatives 1 and 2 <br />resulting in less clearing apparent to the adjacent lots and less impact of noise and lights nearby. <br />Other residents in the area likely would experience the following: <br /> The landscape in the area would no longer be characterized primarily by natural features and open <br />space. Native forest vegetation would no longer predominate on the site. The size of lots and <br />typical associated clearing would be typical of existing large lots in the area. Elements of the built <br />environment such as buildings and ornamental landscaping would be more prominent, but more <br />native vegetation would be retained than Alternatives 1 and 2. <br /> The observed visual character of the community would change due to a larger component of <br />residences and associated permanent clearing of forest cover, but to a less extent than Alternatives 1 <br />and 2. Clearing and grading for roads and residences on the upper eastern portion of the site would <br />be readily visible to residents in the area. Road clearing would be similar, but the number of <br />residents would be less than Alternatives 1 and 2. This development would substantially change one <br />of the visual elements that provides natural forest as the dominant visual character of this portion of <br />the Yakima River Valley (see Section 3.6). <br /> It is unlikely that forestry use would occur on residential parcels, except cutting of trees for <br />firewood. <br /> As with other alternatives, residents would likely be <br />predominantly commuters to urban areas or recreational <br />users. The amenities of large lots may attract more persons <br />desiring a community with a rural character. The similarity <br />with the value of existing community members may result in <br />more social interactions among members of the community.