HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA E05-006 - CITY OF TUKWILA / PUBLIC WORKS - 2005 SMALL DRAINAGE PROJECTSE05 -006
CITY OF TUKWILA
2005 SMALL
DRAINAGE
PROGRAM
City of Tukwila
Department of Community Development
NOTICE OF DECISION
June 24, 2005
To: Ryan Larson, Applicant
Parties of Record
State Department of Ecology, SEPA Division
King County Assessor
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Steve Lancaster, Director
PROJECT: 2005 Small Drainage Projects.
FILE NUMBERS: E05 -006
APPLICANT: Ryan Larson, City of Tukwila, Public Works Department.
REQUEST: Three separate small drainage projects.
LOCATION: See attached map.
This notice is to confirm the decision reached by Tukwila's SEPA Official to issue a
Determination of Non - significance (DNS) for the above project based on the
environmental checklist and the underlying permit application.
Project materials including the application, any staff reports, and other studies related to
the permits are available for inspection at:
Tukwila Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100
Tukwila, WA 98188
Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
The project planner is Minnie Dhaliwal, who may be contacted at (206) 431 -3670 for
further information.
The decision is appealable to the Superior Court pursuant to the Judicial Review of Land
Use Decisions, Revised Code of Washington (RCW 36.70C).
Last saved 06/23/05
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 0 Tukwila, Washington 98188 0 Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 0 Fax: 206 - 431 -3665
Dept. Of Community Development
City of Tukwila
AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION
1,
_ Y Ai H E'EBY
DECLARE THAT:
Notice of Public Hearing
Determination of Non - Significance
Notice of Public Meeting
Mitigated Determination of Non -
Significance .
Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt
Project Name: 9 O O
Determination of Significance & Scoping
Notice
\(0)C`
Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt
Project Number: C:)
Notice of Action
Mailer's
Planning Commission Agenda Pkt
b,Z7144--c,K
Official Notice
Q
Short Subdivision Agenda
Person requesting mailing:
Notice of Application
Shoreline Mgmt Permit
Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt
Permit
_
FAX To Seattle Times
Classifieds
Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds
PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111
1
Other
AJL
r -
Was mailed to each of the addresses listed on this ,day o in the
year 20(:)
P:GINAWYNETTA/FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM
Project Name: 9 O O
0,01 C
\(0)C`
Project Number: C:)
0 CD Ce
Mailer's
�
1 r
b,Z7144--c,K
P U
Q
Signature:
Person requesting mailing:
P:GINAWYNETTA/FORMS /AFFIDAVIT -MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM
•
City of Tgskwg
•
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
FINAL STAFF EVALUATION
FOR
2005 SMALL DRAINAGE PROJECTS
File No: E05 -006
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION
This project consists of three separate small drainage projects. Project #1 on South 140th
Street is to fill and abandon existing storm drainpipe that is located beneath residence located
at 4318 S. 140th Street. A new storm drain system and an outfall within existing city right -of-
way is proposed. Project #2 on South 133rd Street is to replace an existing 36 -inch culvert
with a new passable culvert. Project #3 on South 126th Street is to replace an existing 24-
inch culvert with a new fish passable culvert.
II. GENERAL INFORMATION
Project Name: 2005 Small drainage projects.
Applicant:
City of Tukwila
Public Works Department, Ryan Larson
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188. Phone:(206) 431 -2456.
Location: There are three separate locations. See attached map.
Zoning /Comp Plan The current zoning and ;Comprehensive Plan designation for the adjacent
properties in the vicinity of the project #1 is Low Density Residential (LDR),
project #2 is Commercial /Light Industrial (C /LI) and LDR, project #3 is
Neighborhood Commercial Center (NCC), C /LI and LDR.
Notice: Notice of Application was mailed on May 31, 2005.
III. REVIEW PROCESS
The proposed action is subject to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review as the
project includes involves work in the stream buffer (over lands covered by water) and thus
it does not meet the exemptions listed under WAC 197 -11 -800
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 0 Tukwila, Washington 98188 0 Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 0 Fax: 206 - 431 -3665
IV. BACKGROUND /PROPOSAL
This proposal consists of three separate small drainage projects, which have been identified
by citizen complaints, and City of Tukwila Public Works and maintenance staff as highest
priority based on maintenance needs.
The work associated with Project #1 includes construction of new utilities within the buffer
of a regulated watercourse and therefore is subject to administrative review pursuant to
Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) 18.45.110 AND 18.45.070(B). The work associated with
Project #2 and Project #3 is considered maintenance and repair of existing facilities and are
permitted subject to provisions of TMC 21.04 (State Environmental Policy Act) and of the
mitigation requirements of TMC 18.45.:
V. REVIEW OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
The following lists the elements contained within the Environmental Checklist submitted for
the proposed project. The numbers in the staff evaluation correspond to the numbers in the
Environmental Checklist. If staff concurs with the applicant's response, this is so stated. If
the response to a particular item in the checklist is found to be inadequate or clarification is
needed, there is additional staff comment and evaluation.
A. BACKGROUND:
1 -- Concur with checklist.
2 -- Applicant is
City of Tukwila, Public Works Department
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila WA 98188
Contact person is Ryan Larson, Senior Engineer, Phone 206 - 431 -2456
6- Construction shall begin after obtaining all local, state and federal permits.
7 -9 -- Concur with checklist.
10 -The project may require approval from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
11 -12- Concur with checklist.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS:
1. Earth:
a -h -- Concur with checklist.
2
2. Air:
a -c -- Concur with checklist.
3. Water:
a (1) - Concur with checklist.
a(2) — Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) addresses intrusions within stream buffers.
Pursuant to Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) 18.45.110 and 18.45.070(B),
construction of new utilities within the buffer of a regulated watercourse is subject
to administrative review in addition to meeting the provisions of TMC 21.04 (State
Environmental Policy Act) and the mitigation requirements of 18.45. Project #1 is
subject to obtaining Special Permission Director permit for work associated within
the watercourse buffer.
The work associated with Project #2 and Project #3 is considered maintenance and
repair of existing facilities and are permitted subject to provisions of TMC 21.04
(State Environmental Policy Act) and of the mitigation requirements of TMC 18.45.
a(3) -a(4) -- Concur with checklist.
a(5)- All three locations are outside the 100 -year flood plain.
a(6)- Concur with checklist.
b (1) and (2) -- Concur with checklist.
c (1) -- Concur with checklist.
c(2) -- The project will meet all erosion and sedimentation control requirements of
King County Surface Water Design Manual. Hazardous Materials Control Systems
and Best Management Practices will prevent oil spills from entering the surface or
ground water.
d -- Concur with checklist.
3
4. Plants:
a- Concur with checklist.
b- All three projects involve work in the buffer of the regulated watercourses, which
are tributaries to Salmon bearing streams.
c- The Puget Sound area is part of the Pacific Flyway. Birds that inhabit the area
vary seasonally due to migrations. However, the area is not part of a larger,
permanently preserved migratory bird habitat.
d- Concur.
5. Animals:
a -d -- Concur with checklist.
6. Energy and Natural Resources:
a -c -- Concur with checklist.
7. Environmental Health:
a -- Concur with checklist.
a (1) and (2) -- Concur with checklist.
b (1) -b(3) -- Concur with checklist.
8. Land and Shoreline Use:
a- The abandonment of the existing drainage pipe underneath the house involves
work on private property, which is a residential use.
b- Concur with checklist.
c- Project 1 site includes a residential structure.
d -- Concur with checklist.
e -f- The current zoning and Comprehensive Plan designation for the adjacent
properties in the vicinity of the project #1 is Low Density Residential (LDR),
project #2 is Commercial /Light Industrial (C /LI) and LDR, project #3 is
Neighborhood Commercial Center (NCC), C /LI and LDR.
g— Concur with checklist.
h —All three projects involve work within the buffers of regulated watercourses.
i-1 --Concur with checklist.
9. Housing:
a -c -- Concur with checklist.
10. Aesthetics:
a -c -- Concur with checklist.
11. Light and Glare:
a -d -- Concur with checklist.
12. Recreation:
a -c -- Concur with checklist.
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation:
a -c -- Concur with checklist.
14. Transportation:
a -g -- Concur with checklist.
15. Public Services:
a -b -- Concur with checklist.
16. Utilities:
a -b -- Concur with checklist.
5
VI. COMMENTS
In response to the notice of application; written comments were received from Ronald A.
Lamb and Nancy Sandine Lamb. Also, attached to their comments was a letter from their
Fisheries Biologist. (See attached). Their concerns with the project design were addressed
by an onsite meeting with the City's wetland biologist and City's Engineering consultant.
They also requested that comment period be longer than 14 -days and were informed that the
comment period is established by the city code, which is adopted by the City Council.
However we would address any comments and concerns they may have outside the 14 -day
comment period.
Another comment letter was received from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers stating that
these projects may require authorization from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The City's Public Works Department will contact them
and obtain all required permits prior to construction.
VII. CONCLUSION
The proposal can be found to not have a probable significant adverse impact on the
environment and pursuant to WAC 197 -11 -340, a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS)
is issued for this project
This DNS is based on impacts identified within the environmental checklist, attachments,
and the above "Final Staff Evaluation for Application No. E05- 006 ", and is supported by
plans, policies, and regulations formally adopted by city of Tukwila for the exercise of
substantive authority under SEPA to approve, condition, or deny proposed actions.
Prepared by: Minnie Dhaliwal
Date: June 22, 2005
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF
Regulatory Branch
City of Tukwila
Public Works Department
6300 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98188
Ladies and Gentlemen:
•
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
SEATTLE DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 3755
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98124 -3755
JUN 162005
c IL, t
JUN
171005
DBE OHryjEpT
Reference: City of Tukwila
E05 -006 (SEPA)
"2005 Small Drainage Program"
We recently received a copy of a Shoreline Permit Application from the City of Tukwila
Department of Community Development concerning your proposed project to replace stormwater
facilities at South 140`h Street, South 133`d Street, and South 126th Street, in tributaries to
Southgate and Riverton Creeks, at Tukwila, Washington.
Your project may require authorization from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Under Section 404, a permit is required for the discharge of
dredged or fill material (e.g., fill, excavation, or mechanized land clearing) into waters of the
U.S., including wetlands, streams and navigable waters of the U.S. Please read the enclosure
entitled Clean Water Act and Rivers and Harbors Act Extracts and Definitions which describes
the laws that may apply to the proposed work. More information about our regulatory program
and permit process, including permit application forms, can be found at our website:
http://www.nws.usace.army.mil/reg.html.
We recommend you contact our office to discuss specific permit requirements or complete
and submit a.permit application form. A copy of this letter will be furnished to the City of
Tukwila Department of Community Development. If you have any questions, please contact me
at (206) 764 -6984, or via email at Suzanne.A.Skadowski a "usace.arrny.mil.
Sincerely, .
Suzanhe Skadowski, Project Manager
Application'Review Section
Enclosure
US Army Corps
of Engineers r)
Seattle District
CLEAN WATER ACT
Extracts and Definitions
EXTRACTS from the Clean Water Act:
1. SECTION 404
(a) The Secretary of the Army, acting through the Chief of Engineers, may issue permits, after
notice and opportunity for public hearings for the discharge of dredged or fill material into the navigable
waters at specified disposal sites.
(b) Subject to subsection (c) of this section, each such disposal site shall be specified for each such
permit by the Secretary of the Army (1) through the application of guidelines developed by the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (Administrator), in conjunction with the Secretary
of the Army, which guidelines shall be based upon criteria comparable to the criteria applicable to the
territorial seas, the contiguous zone, and the ocean under section 403(c), and (2) in any case where such
guidelines under clause (1) alone would prohibit the specification of a site, through the application
additionally of the economic impacts of the site on navigation and anchorage.
(c) The Administrator is authorized to prohibit the specification (including the withdrawal of
specification) of any defined area as a disposal site, and he is authorized to deny or restrict the use of any
defined area for specification (including the withdrawal of specification) as a disposal site, whenever he
determines, after notice and opportunity for public hearings, that the discharge of such materials into such
area will have an unacceptable adverse effect on municipal water supplies, shellfish beds and fishery
areas (including spawning and breeding areas), wildlife, or recreational areas. Before making such
determination, the Administrator shall set forth in writing and make public his findings and his reasons
for making any determination under this subsection.
2. SECTION 301
This section prohibits the discharge of any pollutant including fill or dredged material except as in
compliance with various sections of the Clean Water Act, including Section 404.
3. SECTION 307
The Administrator shall publish a list of toxic pollutants. Each toxic pollutant shall be subject to
effluent standards (which may include a prohibition). Under this section it is unlawful to violate any such
effluent standards or prohibition.
4. SECTION 309
This section provides that any person who willfully or negligently violates the provisions of this Act
may be punished by a fine of not less than $2,500 or more than $25,000 per day of violation or by
imprisonment for not more than one year or by both. In addition, any person violating this Act may be
subject to a civil penalty of not more than $25,000 per day of violation.
DEFINITIONS regarding the Clean Water Act:
The term "wetlands" means those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water
at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a
prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. The Corps of Engineers
has the responsibility for determining whether a specific wetland area is within Section 404 jurisdiction.
•
The term "adjacent" means bordering, contiguous, or neighboring. Wetlands separated from other
waters of the United States by manmade dikes or barriers, natural river berms, beach dunes, and the like
are "adjacent wetlands."
The term "discharge of dredged material" means the addition, including redeposition, of dredged
material, runoff from a contained land or water disposal area, and any addition, including redeposition, of
excavated material. These activities include mechanized landclearing, grading, filling in low areas,
sidecasting of excavated material from new ditching work, and other placement of excavated material into
waters of the United States, including wetlands.
The term "discharge of fill material" means the addition of fill material used for the primary effect
of replacing any portion of a water of the U.S. with dry land or of changing the bottom elevation of a
water of the U.S., including wetlands. The placement of pilings constitutes a discharge of fill material
when such placement has or would have the effect of a discharge of fill material.
The term "ordinary high water mark" means that line on the shore established by the fluctuations
of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as a clear, natural line impressed on the bank,
shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and
debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding area.
EXTRACTS from the Rivers and Harbors Act of March 3, 1899:
1. SECTION 10
The creation of any obstruction not affirmatively authorized by Congress, to the navigable capacity
of any of the waters of the United States is hereby prohibited; and it shall not be lawful to build or
commence the building of any wharf, pier, dolphin, boom, weir, breakwater, bulkhead, jetty, or other
structures in any port, roadstead, haven, harbor, canal, navigable river, or other water of the United States,
outside established harbor lines, or where no harbor lines have been established, except on plans
recommended by the chief of Engineers and authorized by the Secretary of War; and it shall not be lawful
to excavate fill, or in any manner to alter or modify the course, location, condition, or capacity of, any
port roadstead, haven, harbor, canal, lake, harbor of refuge, or inclosure within the limits of any
breakwater, or of the channel of any navigable water of the United States, unless the work has been
recommended by the Chief of Engineers and authorized by the Secretary of War prior to beginning the
same. (30 Stat. 1151; 33 U.S.C. 403)
2
Minnie Dhaliwal
Department of Community Development
City of Tukwila
6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100
Tukwila, WA 98188
Dear Ms. Dhaliwal:
sEcENED
cm( oF Tth("If1/4
U 1 ""
PERMIT CENTER
•
June 12, 2005
Regarding Project No. 1 of three small drainage projects (file E05 -006) proposed by the
city Public Works Department, please accept this letter and the attached letter as our
comments on the SEPA application.
We received notification of the project by mail on June 1. The project would directly
impact our property at 4251 South 139th as well as our properties along 44th Avenue
South (lots 8, 9, 10, 11, 23, 24 and 25 of Riverton Macadam Road Tracts, 13736 through
13758 of 44th Avenue South), due to the diversion of storm water that currently feeds
through a ravine on our 139th Street property. The proposed project would instead divert
water onto our other properties, into an existing creek bed.
We initially had the following questions about the project:
• Would the project adversely impact our property on 139th Street by drying up the
existing watercourse, threatening a number of old established trees and other
vegetation in the ravine on our property and surrounding properties ?.
• Would the project increase the storm water flow across our properties on 44th
Avenue, causing erosion of the creek bank?
• Would a fence be advisable near the proposed new outfall of a proposed new storm
drain for security and for prevention of additional illegal dumping?
• Should the public comment period for this and similar applications be longer?
Because of these questions, we contacted Michael McDowell of MCS Environmental to
assess the project with our questions in mind. His letter is attached.
On Friday, June 10, representatives of the city, Mr. McDowell, and Ron Lamb inspected
the ravine area on our 139th Street property and the proposed new outfall. Representing
the city were Ryan Larson of the Public Works Department and city wetland expert
Sharon Whiting, as well as Nelson Davis of KPG, the city's consultant on the project.
Ron had previously spoken with Mr. Larson and you, Ms. Dhaliwal, on June 3 at the
counter of the Department of Community Development and the Public Works
Department at city hall.
As a result of the inspection and the advice of Mr. McDowell, we are satisfied with the
answer to the first question. As a result of conversations with Mr. Larson and Mr. Davis,
we are satisfied that storm water flow across our 44th Avenue properties will not increase.
1
We will be satisfied with the answer to the third question if the city installs an adequate
fence, which Mr. Larson said would be a good idea (June 3 and 10 conversations).
The last question remains a concern. Such a short public comment period discourages
public input at the point in a project where comment would be most useful. We had
barely enough time to find and retain the services of Mr. McDowell, who was kind
enough to make the site visit and letter his top priority. Had we been out of town when
the letter arrived, as we were a week before, we would not have had time to apply due
diligence to the impact on our property and submit our comments before the deadline.
Such a short comment period could, in the future, find the city facing more costly
measures in dealing with public concerns about a project because an impacted party was
not allowed adequate time to prepare comments during a short comment period. We
realize that this issue is not one that you personally can rectify, so we hope that you will
pass this concern along to those who write the rules.
Thank you for your time and effort on this matter. Please convey our thanks as well to
Mr. Larson, Ms. Whiting and Mr. Davis.
Sincerely,
aQM\1
Ronald A. Lamb and Nancy Sandine Lamb
4251 South 139th Street
Tukwila, WA 98168
206 - 243 -3716
LambtownWest(a,,comcast.net
Encl.
2
•
MaEnvironmental, Inc.
6505 — 216th Street SW, Suite 100
Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043
425- 697 -4340 (voice) • 425- 697 -4370 (fax)
June 10, 2005
Mr. Ron Lamb
4251 South 139th Street
Tukwila, WA 98168
Re: Proposed Stormwater Rerouting by the City of Tukwila
MCS # 340973.001
Dear Mr. Lamb:
•
At your request I met you, two City of Tukwila (City) staff members and the City's consulting
engineer at your property this morning to review the City's proposed re- routing of stormwater
around a portion of your property. You had expressed to me concerns that this action by the City
may affect water availability in the ravine adjacent to your house. In particular, you expressed
concerns that the reduction in flows may adversely affect the water available to trees that currently
exist in the ravine and that this could affect the health of these trees. You requested that I review
the proposed project and express an opinion regarding the potential effects. I believe that we
discussed much of this in the field today at your residence but you requested that I document my
thoughts in a letter.
In addition to the site visit I have reviewed the documents you provided to me from the City. These
documents include:
• Notice of Application with aerial photo showing the elements of the proposed project,
• City of Tukwila Endangered Species checklist, and
• City of Tukwila SEPA Checklist.
As I noted in the field there is evidence in the channel at the bottom of the ravine of the negative
effects of stormwater flows to the drainage. The channel is incised, which is likely caused by
increased water discharge volumes during storm events. In essence the pre- existing channel was
under sized for the increased discharge and the response of the channel has been to cut down into
the substrate, removing the finer grained materials, leaving behind the incised channel with an
armored bed composed of large substrate elements (gravel and cobble). While the channel in its
current form may be stable, it is also possible that incision of the channel could continue. It is
Missoula, Montana • Spokane, Washington • Seattle, Washington
Mr. Ron Lamb
June 10, 2005
Page 2
possible that in the future if this occurred it could undercut roots of existing vegetation, including
trees and cause them to fall.
With this perspective the bypass of stormwater as proposed by the City may represent an
improvement to conditions in the ravine adjacent to your house. This action by the City would
reduce discharge volumes during storm events in this portion of the ravine, reducing the likelihood
of further down cutting and incision of the channel. Re- routing the stormwater would also reduce
the volume of debris introduced into the ravine from the surrounding area. Both of these actions
would tend to stabilize the existing physical characteristics of the ravine and would therefore likely
be a net positive influence on the habitat values of the area.
Based on my observations of the vegetation around your home and in the ravine it would appear
the City's proposed project is unlikely to have an adverse impact to existing vegetation, including
trees. There are numerous apparently healthy western red cedar (Thuja plicata) trees at various
locations on the top and slopes of the ravine, including several mature second growth trees. These
are likely supported by groundwater existing at a fairly shallow depth below the ground surface
throughout the area. These trees prefer moist to wet environments and are often found growing on
seeps. This shallow groundwater is likely caused by the underlying geology of the area that is
likely dominated by relatively impermeable glacial till that remains following the last glacial
period. This impermeable layer would tend to keep groundwater near the surface. This geology
combined with the location of your property near the ravine and the slope leading off the top of the
hill to the west of your location means that shallow groundwater is apparently sufficient to support
the vegetation around your home. These conditions are unlikely to be affected by the City's
proposed project. Therefore, I would not expect adverse impacts to the vegetation in the ravine or
elsewhere on your property from the City's proposed project.
I have been involved with projects conducted under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)
since 1979. I have prepared dozens of SEPA checklists and participated in the preparation of more
than 100 Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) in the years since. I have also been involved with
projects needing to comply with the Endangered Species Act (ESA) for more than 20 years. For
example, I have prepared and/or reviewed more than 60 Biological Evaluations /Assessments since
the listing of Puget Sound chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) under the ESA in 1999.
My review of the City's checklists under SEPA and ESA did not reveal any obvious errors or short
comings based on my current knowledge and understanding of the scope of the proposed project.
In my opinion, the documents appear to be adequate and appropriate to support decision makers at
the City regarding the probable effects of the proposed project under these laws.
Mr. Ron Lamb
June 10, 2005
Page 3
I hope this information and evaluation of the City's proposed stormwater project helps you to
understand the potential effects to your property. I do not expect there to be adverse effects to the
trees on your property. If anything, the reduction in stormwater discharges through your ravine will
likely be beneficial to the physical condition of the channel and therefore the habitat in the ravine.
Thank you for the opportunity to assist you in evaluating this project.
Sincerely,
MCS Environmental, Inc.
K. Michael McDowell, FP -C
Principal Fisheries Biologist
m .mcdowell @mcs- environmental.com
cc:
(Click HERE and type path)
CITY OF TUKWILA
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA
98188
Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665
E -mail: tukplan@ci.tukwila.wa.us
AFFIDAVIT OF INSTALLATION AND POSTING
OF PUBLIC INFORMATION SIGN(S)
State of Washington
County of King
City of Tukwila
iR).'9 J LoW -.50 ✓ (PRINT NAME) understand that Section 18.104.110 of the
Tukwila Municipal Code requires me to post the property no later than fourteen (14) days
following the issuance of the Notice of Completeness.
I certify that on 53//05 the Public Notice Board(s) in accordance with Section
18.104.110 and the other applicable guidelines were posted on the property located at
S /3VdJs133‘21 310 6 i� 9 5. �vf so as to be clearly seen from each right -of -way primary
vehicular access to the property erty for application file number fC$S-Cr&
I herewith authorize the City of Tukwila or its representative to remove and immediately
dispose of the sign at the property owner's expense, if not removed in'a v., ely m ' er or within
fourteen (14) days of a Notice letter.
Applic. or Project Manager's Signature
On this day personally appeared before me to me
known to be the individual who executed the foreoing instrument and acknowledged that
he /sue signed the same as his/ker voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned
therein.
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this I day of —c c.."4--
SEPA_APP-VU 1/13/03
NOTA R' PUBLIC in for the State of Washington
residing at 6Pr L / king ✓6 6
My commission expires
C11 —46
•
City of Tukwila
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Department of Community. Development Steve Lancaster, Director
NOTICE OF APPLICATION
DATED MAY 31, 2005
The following applications have been submitted to the City of Tukwila Department of Community
Development for review and decision.
APPLICANT: City of Tukwila, Public Works Department
LOCATION: This project consists of three separate small drainage projects. Project No. 1
is along South 140`h Street, Project No. 2 is South 133`d Street culvert
replacement, Project No. 3 is South 126th Street culvert replacement.
Location map is attached to this notice.
FILE NUMBERS: E05 -006 (SEPA)
PROPOSAL: This project consists of three separate small drainage projects.
Project No. 1- South 140t Street: Fill and abandon existing storm drain
pipe that is located beneath residence located at 4318 S. 140`h St and install
new storm drain system and outfall within existing city right -of -way.
Project No. 2- S. 133`d Street culvert replacement: Replace an existing 36-
inch culvert with a new fish passage culvert.
Project No. 3- S. 126`h Street culvert replacement: Replace an existing 24-
inch with a new fish passage culvert.
OTHER REQUIRED PERMITS: Special Permission Permit for work within Sensitive Areas buffers.
Hydraulic Project Approval from Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife.
These files can be reviewed at the Department of Community Development, 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100,
Tukwila, WA. Please call (206) 431 -3670 to ensure that the file(s) will be available.
OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT
You can submit comments on the SEPA application. You must submit your comments in writing to the
Department of Community Development by 5:00 p.m. on June 14, 2005. If you have questions about this
proposal contact Minnie Dhaliwal, Planner -in- charge of this file at 206 - 431 -3685. Anyone who submits
written comments will become parties of record and will be notified of any decision on this project.
APPEALS
You may request a copy of any decision on a project or obtain information on your appeal rights by
contacting the Department of Community Development at 206 -431 -3670. The Department will provide you
with information on appeal if you are interested.
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665
•
PUBLIC WORKS DEPT.
• ENGINEERING•STREETS •wATER•SE11ER•BUILBING•
1910 11,61 ws`A
• Architecture •
Landscape Architecture
• Civil Endn..rlog •
2005 SMALL DRAINAGE PROGRAM
SEPA SUBMITTAL
VICINITY MAP
Dept. Of Community Development ..,
City of Tukwila
• :.::?'.4i.„ . ,
AFFIDAVIT OF .DISTRIBUTION1. .....,.,. 1,-
-,-4i
' w :', :;7■1
-'
1. HEREBY HEREBY DECLARE THAT: —,,,, •
Notice of Public Hearing
Determination of NOn..SignifiCa'nce
.,..
.•=,.....=,..
..„..
Notice of Public Meeting.
Mitigated Determination of:A0:7:-.
Significance -.:;:2- ;,...:• m
Board of Adjustment Agenda Pkt
Determination ofISAgnificanC0:4 Scoping
Notice .._•,.„ ..=v
Board of Appeals Agenda Pkt
Notice of Action
Planning Commission Agenda Pkt
Official Notice
Short Subdivision Agenda
Notice of Application
•:,VP::- ..;:t:::r-.,,
..,--
Shoreline Mgmt Permit
__.
Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt ij
Permit .,:::/.1• .,... ,
„
__
—
FAX To Seattle Times
Classifieds
Mail: Gail Muller Classifieds
PO Box 70 - Seattle WA 98111
Other '''•=-- -
• ,„.,
..„,.. „ .„1 23.1,;
,,.. :Y
.-, .,..-
:,-,-,:i.,
,,
Was mailed to each of the addresses listed on this 3
year 20
Project Name:
TjC144,04C? /Pk_
Project Number: /1"7.05-001)(j
Mailer's Signature:
Person requesting mailing:
P:G1NAWYNETTA/FORMS/AFFIDAVIT-MAIL 08/29/003:31 PM
--A
Minnie Dhaliwal - Re: 2005 Small Draina ojects
From: Minnie Dhaliwal
To: Ryan Larson
Date: 5/3/05 4:24PM
Subject: Re: 2005 Small Drainage Projects
Ryan,
The application is complete. Do you have any plans besides the aerials? Also, the mailing labels seem to
be for the residents only. We need mailing labels for property owners as well. You will need to get three
notice boards for the three locations. Let me know when you can have the rest of the mailing labels and
the boards so I will date the notice accordingly.
I also have a question on the S 140th Street project. Does the proposal include creating a new portion of
the stream beyond the new outfall or is it existing? Also, I am checking with Carol to see if you will need a
Sensitive Areas permit. I
Minnie
»> Ryan Larson 05/03/05 01:18PM »>
Minnie,
Can you give me a brief update of where the SEPA is on this project. I have not placed the sign yet and
have not heard if the application was complete.
Thanks - Ryan
»> Nora Gierloff 05/03/05 12:53PM »>
Minnie.
»> Ryan Larson 05/03/05 11:39AM »>
Nora,
I submitted a SEPA application about 3 weeks ago but I never heard anything back. Can you tell me
which planner was assigned to this project?
Thanks - Ryan
•
City of Tukwila
•
Department of Community Development / 6300 Southcenter BI, Suite 100 / Tukwila, WA 98188 / (206)431 -3670
DETERMINATION OF NON - SIGNIFICANCE (DNS)
File Number: E05 -006
Applied: 04/11/2005
Issue Date: 06/24/2005
Status: ISSUED
Applicant: RYAN LARSON
Lead Agency: City of Tukwila
Description of Proposal:
THE PROPOSAL CONSISTS OF THREE SEPARATE SMALL DRAINAGE PROJECTS.
Location of Proposal:
Address:
Parcel Number:
Section/Township /Range: City Wide
The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental
impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21 c.030(2) (c). This decision was made after review of a completed
environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request.
This DNS is issued under WAC 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by 01-0g 2-4)0S-
The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date below.
Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official
City of Tukwila
6300 Southcenter Blvd
Tukwila, WA 98188
(206)431 -3670
06 — 24- zoos
Date
Any appeal shall be linked to a specific governmental action. The State Environmental Policy Act is not intended to create a cause of
action unrelated to a specific governmental action. Appeals of environmental determinations shall be commenced within the time
period to appeal the governmental action that is subject to environmental review. (RCW 43.21 C.075)
doc: DNS E05 -006 Printed: 06-23 -2005
•
CITY OF TUKWILA
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188
Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665
E -mail: tukplan@ci.tukwila.wa.us
•
SEPA
ENVIRONMENTAL
REW %// W
qp p
�sJ
0 o 1
APPLICATION
1,_
NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT:
20o r3- 14c, E
roKwt L-t4
P'ROC,2A-14A, rroK 11E Ctry oK
LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and
subdivision, access stret, and nearest intersection. LIST ALL -10 DIGIT PARCEL NUMBERS.
�< S tL /n'rH ST c 4I- ZNTERSEcr /o&)'
2, 5 133R0 sr NEAR .T N7ESr. T$ )
o�
es I= L(L/TN 4.1/ S 4.)b g tyo rt-i ST;
S I�H -14 pL.
g, S IUJ T R ST NEAR TNTERS'EcTiOr.i of EPST MARGINAL. LOky
Quarter: Section: Township:. Range:
(This information may be found on your tax statement.)
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR :
The individual who:
• has decision making authority on behalf of the applicant in meetings with City staff,
• has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, an
• is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent.
Name:
Address:
R.1 Lay-son
(,306 3Iv(41 TLI'Ll 60 cip5i88
Phone: @6(0) x'133- 011 °l FAX:
E -mail:
Signature: Date:
G: WPPHAN\LANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 09/11/03
FOR STAFF USE ONLY SIERRA TYPE P-SEPA
Planner:
File Number:
Application Complete
(Date:
)
Project File Number:
Application Incomplete
(Date:
)
Other File Numbers:
NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT:
20o r3- 14c, E
roKwt L-t4
P'ROC,2A-14A, rroK 11E Ctry oK
LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and
subdivision, access stret, and nearest intersection. LIST ALL -10 DIGIT PARCEL NUMBERS.
�< S tL /n'rH ST c 4I- ZNTERSEcr /o&)'
2, 5 133R0 sr NEAR .T N7ESr. T$ )
o�
es I= L(L/TN 4.1/ S 4.)b g tyo rt-i ST;
S I�H -14 pL.
g, S IUJ T R ST NEAR TNTERS'EcTiOr.i of EPST MARGINAL. LOky
Quarter: Section: Township:. Range:
(This information may be found on your tax statement.)
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR :
The individual who:
• has decision making authority on behalf of the applicant in meetings with City staff,
• has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, an
• is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent.
Name:
Address:
R.1 Lay-son
(,306 3Iv(41 TLI'Ll 60 cip5i88
Phone: @6(0) x'133- 011 °l FAX:
E -mail:
Signature: Date:
G: WPPHAN\LANDUSE.APP\SEPAAPP.DOC, 09/11/03
uty of 1 wcwtla LSA Screening Uheckltst
•
City of Tukwila
Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist
Date: 3'2- /6C
Applicant Name: ; 47 o 1 -r,, PLY 1 LC. tJ0 —ks IJ�pc, 4 ,•.*'
Street Address: Co 3(P-c.) Se,„4 1.
City, State, Zip: - k w A it l �8
Telephone: 204) Y 3-3 " v 1-7 ci
Directions
This Screening Checklist has been designed to evaluate the potential for your project to
result in potential "take" of chinook salmon, coho salmon, or cutthroat trout as defined by
Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act. The checklist includes a series of "Yes" or
"No" questions about your project, organized into four parts. Starting with Part A on
Page 1, read each question carefully, circle "Yes" or "No," and proceed to the next
question as directed by the checklist. To answer these questions, you may need to refer
to site plans, grading and drainage plans, critical areas studies, or other documents you
have prepared for your project. The City will evaluate your responses to determine if
"take" is indicated.
RECEIVED
10 112005'
commuN
OEyEtOPMENT
January 25, 2001 ii
Part A: Please review and answer each question carefully. Consider all phases of your project
including, but not limited to, construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and
ongoing and scheduled maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes
answer.
1 -0
Will the project require any form of grading? Grading is defined as any excavating, filling,
clearing, or creation of impervious surface, or any combination thereof, which alters the
existing ground surface of the earth (see Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 18.06,
Zoning Code, Page 18 -11). Please circle appropriate response.
NO - Continue to Question 2 -0
(YYE) Continue to Question 1 -1 (Page 3)
2 -0
Will the project require any form of clearing? Clearing means the removal or causing to be
removed, through either direct or indirect actions, any vegetation from a site (see Chapter
18.06, Page 18 -8). Please circle appropriate response.
NO - Continue to Question 3 -0
YES Continue to Question 2 -1 (Page 4)
3 -0
Will the project require work, during any time of the project, below the ordinary high water
mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers or in wetlands? Ordinary high
water mark is the mark that is found by examining the bed and banks of a stream and
ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common and usual as to distinctly
mark the soil from that'of the abutting upland, in respect to vegetation (see TMC Chapter
18.06, Page 18 -15). Please circle appropriate response.
NO - Continue to Question 4 -0
YES - Continue to Question 3 -1 (Page 5)
4 -0
Will the project result in the processing or handling, storage, or treatment of hazardous
substances? This does not include the proper use of fuel stored in a vehicle's fuel tank.
Hazardous substances are any liquid, solid, gas, or sludge, including any material, substance,
product, commodity, or waste, regardless of quantity, that exhibits the characteristics or criteria
of hazardous waste as defined by Washington Administrative Code 173 -303 (see TMC Chapter
18.06, Tukwila Zoning Code, Page 18 -11). This includes fuel or other chemicals stored on -site
during construction. Please circle appropriate response.
0 Continue to Question 5 -0
YES - Continue to Question 5 -0
5 -0
Will the project result in the withdrawal, injection, or interception of groundwater? Examples
of projects that may affect groundwater include, but are not limited to: construction of a new
well, change in water withdrawals from an existing well, projects involving prolonged
construction dewatering, projects installing French drains or interceptor trenches, and sewer
lines. For the purpose of this analysis, projects that require a geotechnical report pursuant to
the requirements of TMC 18.45.060 and 18.45.080E.4, or would require a geotechnical report
if not exempt under TMC 18.45.080A, should answer Yes. Please circle appropriate
response.
NO - ontinue to Question 6 -0
YES - Continue to Question 6 -0
city of '1 ukunla tSA Screening Uheciatst.
Part A (continued)
6 -0 Will the project involve landscaping or re- occurring outdoor maintenance that includes the
regular use of fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides? This does not include the one -time use of
transplant fertilizers. Landscaping means natural vegetation such as trees, shrubs,
groundcover, and other landscape materials arranged in a manner to produce an aesthetic effect
appropriate for the use of the land (see TMC Chapter 18.06,. Tukwila Zoning Code, Page 18-
13). For the purpose of this analysis, this includes the establishment of new lawn or grass.
Please circle appropriate response.
Checklist Complete
YES — Checklist Complete
Part B: Please answer each question below for projects that include grading. Review each
question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to
construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled
maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer.
1 -1
Will the project involve the modification of a watercourse bank or bank of the
Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers between the ordinary high water mark and top of bank? This
includes any projects that will require grading on any slope leading to a river or stream, but
will not require work below the ordinary high water mark. Work below the ordinary high
water mark is covered in Part C. Please circle appropriate response.
Continue to Question 1 -2
YES - Continue to Question 1 -2
1 -2 Could the construction, operation, or maintenance of the project result in sediment transport off
site or increased rates of erosion and /or sedimentation in watercourses, the Green/Duwamish
rivers, or the Black River? Most projects that involve grading have the potential to result in
increased erosion and /or sedimentation as a result of disturbances to the soil or earth. If your
project involves grading and you have not prepared a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation
Control Plan specifically designed to retain 100 percent of the runoff (including during
construction) from impervious surface or disturbed soils, answer Yes to this question. If your
project is normally exempt under the Tukwila Municipal Code and would not require the
preparation of a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan, BUT may still result in
erosion or sediment transport off site or beyond the work area, answer Yes to this question.
Please circle appropriate response.
NO - Continue to Question 1 -3
Continue to Question 1 -3
1 -3 Will the project result in the construction of new impervious surfaces? Impervious surfaces
include those hard surfaces which prevent or restrict the entry of water into the soil in the
manner that such water entered the soils under natural conditions prior to development; or a
hard surface area that causes water to run off the surface in greater quantity or at an increased
rate of flow from the flow presented under natural conditions prior to development (see TMC
Chapter 18.06, Tukwila Zoning Code, Page 18 -12). Such areas include, but are not limited to,
rooftops, asphalt or concrete paving, compacted surfaces, or other surfaces that similarly affect
the natural infiltration or runoff patterns existing prior to development. Please circle
city of '1 ukw SA Screening Checklist
appropriate response.
Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2)
YES - Continue to Question 1 -4
1 -4 Will your project generate stormwater from the creation of impervious surfaces that will not be
infiltrated on site? For the purpose of this analysis, infiltration includes the use of a
stormwater treatment and management system intended to contain all stormwater on site by
allowing it to seep into pervious surface or through other means to be introduced into the
ground. If your project involves the, construction of impervious surface and does not include
the design of a stormwater management system specifically designed to infiltrate stormwater,
answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response.
NO - Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2)
YES - Continue to Question 2 -0 (Page 2)
Part C: Please review each question below for projects that include clearing. Review each
question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to
construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled
maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer.
2 -1
Will the project involve clearing within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a
watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response.
NO Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2)
YES - Continue to Question 2 -2
2 -2
Will the project involve clearing of any trees within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark
of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? A tree is defined by TMC
18.06.845 as any self - supporting woody plant, characterized by one main trunk, with a
potential diameter- breast - height of 2 inches or more and potential minimum height of 10 feet.
Please circle appropriate response.
NO - Continue to Question 2 -3
YES - Continue to Question 2 -3 •
2 -3
Will the project involve clearing of any evergreen trees from within 200 feet of the ordinary
high water mark of a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of
this analysis evergreen means any tree that does not regularly lose all its leaves or needles in
the fall. Please circle appropriate response.
NO - Continue to Question 2 -4
YES - Continue to Question 2 -4
2 -4
Will the project involve clearing within 100 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a
watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response.
NO - Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 1)
YES - Continue to Question 2 -5
2 -5
Will the project involve clearing within 40 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a
watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? Please circle appropriate response.
LU f UJ LUKLULLU Lan ocreening Lr7SCKLibf
NO - Continue to Question 3 -0 (Page 2)
YES - Continue. to Question 3 -0 (Page 2)
Part D: Please review each question below for projects that include work below the ordinary high
water mark of watercourses or the Duwamish /Green or Black Rivers or in wetlands. Review each
question carefully, considering all phases of your project including, but not limited to,
construction, normal operation, potential emergency operation, and ongoing and scheduled
maintenance. Continue to the next question as directed for each No or Yes answer.
3 -1
Will the project involve the direct alteration of the channel or bed of a watercourse, the
Green/Duwamish rivers, or Black River? For the purpose of this analysis, channel means the
area between the ordinary high water mark of both banks of a stream, and bed means the
stream bottom substrates, typically within the normal wetted -width of a stream. This includes
both temporary and permanent modifications. Please circle appropriate response.
NO - Continue to Question 3 -2
YES - Continue to Question 3 -2
3 -2
Will the project involve any physical alteration to a watercourse or wetland connected to the
Green/Duwamish River? For the purpose of this analysis, "connected to the river means"
flowing into via a surface connection or culvert, or having other physical characteristics that
allow for access by salmonids. This includes impacts to areas such as sloughs, side channels,
remnant oxbows, ditches formed from channelized portions of natural watercourses or any area
that may provide off channel rearing habitat for juvenile fish from the Duwamish River. This
includes both temporary construction alterations and permanent modifications. Watercourses
or wetlands draining to the Green/Duwamish River that have a hanging culvert, culvert with a
flap gate, diversion, or any entirely man -made or artificial structure that precludes fish access
should answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response.
NO - Continue to Question 3 -3
YES - Continue to Question 3 -3
3 -3
Will the project result in the construction of a new structure or hydraulic condition that could
be a barrier to salmonid passage within the watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black
Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, a barrier means any artificial or human modified
structure or hydraulic condition that inhibits the natural upstream or downstream movement of
salmonids, including both juveniles and adults. Please circle appropriate response.
NO — Continue to Question 3 -4
YES - Continue to Question 3-4
3 -4
Will the project involve a temporary or permanent change in the cross - sectional area of a
watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, the
cross - sectional area is defined as a profile taken from the ordinary high water mark on the right
bank to the ordinary high water mark on the left bank. Please circle appropriate response.
NO - Continue to Question 3 -5
YES - Continue to Question 3 -5
3 -5
Will the project require the removal of debris from within the ordinary high water mark of a
•
(;zty of 1 ukwzOSA Screening Checklist
watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers? For the purpose of this analysis, debris
includes, but is not limited to fallen trees, logs, shrubs, rocks, piles, rip -rap, submerged metal,
and broken concrete or other building materials. Projects that would require debris removal
from a watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers as part of a maintenance activity
should answer Yes to this question. Please circle appropriate response.
NO - Continue to Question 3 -6
YES - Continue to Question 3 -6 •
3 -6 Will the project result in impacts to watercourses or wetlands that have a surface connection to
another watercourse or the Green/Duwamish or Black Rivers but do not contain habitat
conditions that support salmonid use? Such areas may include, but not be limited to hillside
seepsand wetlands isolated from the watercourse or river that have a surface water connection
to the watercourse or river but are not assessable, nor would be assessable to salmonids under
natural conditions. Wetlands with a "functions and values" rating for baseflow /groundwater
support of 9 and above (or moderate) as described in Cooke (1996) should be included. Please
circle appropriate response.
NO - Continue to Question 3 -7
YES - Continue to Question 3 -7
3 -7 Will the project include the construction of artificial waterways or wetlands connected to a
watercourse containing salmonids? For the purpose of this analysis, the construction of
artificial waterways or wetlands includes wetlands, channels, sloughs, or other habitat feature
created to enhance wildlife use, particularly waterfowl use, or may be attractive to wildlife,
particularly waterfowl. Please circle appropriate response.
NO - Continue to Question 3 -8
YES - Continue to Question 3 -8
3 -8 Will the project include bank stabilization? For the purpose of this analysis, bank stabilization
includes, but is not limited to, rip -rap, rock, log, soil, or vegetated revetments, concrete
structures, or similar structures. Please circle appropriate response.
NO - Continue to Question 4 -0 (Page 2)
YES - Continue to Question 4 -0 (Page 2)
Preliminary Environmental Checklist
WAC 197 -11 -960 Environmental Checklist
Purpose of Checklist:
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21 C RCW, requires all
govemmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before
making decisions. An environmental impact statement .(EIS) must be prepared for all
proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment.
The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency
identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if
it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required.
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of Proposed Project:
2005 Small Drainage Projects
2. Name of Applicant:
City of Tukwila, Public Works Department
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
6300 Southcenter Blvd.
Tukwila, WA 98188
(206)433 -0179
Contact: Ryan Larson, P.E.
4. Date checklist prepared:
March 17, 2005
5. Agency requesting checklist:
City of Tukwila
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
It is anticipated that project site no 1 will be advertised for construction in June
2005. Construction will begin in July 2005 and should be completed within 90 to
120 calendar days. The remaining two sites are anticipated to be advertised and
constructed during the summer of 2006. The exact construction timing or schedule
will be determined as the design and permitting processes are finalized and are
dependent on available budget.
1
7. Plans for future additions, expansion or further activity related to or
connected with this proposal:
No future expansion is planned
8. Environmental information that has been prepared, or will be prepared,
directly related to this proposal:
None known.
9. Applications that are pending for governmental approval of other proposals
directly affecting the property covered by the proposal:
None known.
10. List of governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for the
proposal:
The following permits are anticipated:
Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA), Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
(WDFW).
11. Brief, complete description of the proposal, including the proposed uses and
the size of the project and site:
This proposal consists of three (3) separate small drainage projects which have
been identified by citizen complaints and City of Tukwila public works and
maintenance staff as highest priority based on maintenance needs, public
nuisance, and potential damage to adjacent properties. The projects are briefly
described below and identified on the attached Plans.
Project no. 1 — South 140th Street: Fill and abandon existing storm drain pipe that
is located beneath residence located at 4318S 140t Street. Install new storm drain
system and outfall within existing city right -of -way. The existing storm drain pipe is
in poor condition and poses a potential liability to the City due to its location
beneath the house.
Project no. 2 — South 133'd Street Culvert Replacement: Replace an existing
36 -inch culvert with a new fish passable culvert. Extend the west side road
shoulder to attain 2:1 side slopes to provide a more stable shoulder. The
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) has indicated that the new
culvert will need to meet fish passage criteria. The culvert crossing provides
conveyance for a tributary of Southgate Creek across South 133'd Street. The
existing culvert is currently has a reverse grade, which causes sediment to build up
and restrict flows. The existing culvert does not meet current fish passage criteria.
2
Project no. 3 — South 126th Street Culvert Replacement: Replace an existing
24 -inch with a new fish passable culvert. Extend the north and south road
shoulders to attain 2:1 side slopes to provide a more stable shoulder. The
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) has indicated that the new
culvert will need to meet fish passage criteria. The culvert crossing provides
conveyance for Riverton Creek across South 126th Street. The existing culvert is in
poor condition, undersized, and does not meet current fish passage criteria.
A copy of the preliminary plans are attached for review.
12. Location of the proposal, including the street address, if any, and section,
township and range, if known; a legal description, site plan, vicinity map and
topographic map, if reasonably available:
The project sites are located within the City of Tukwila at the street locations noted
above. A location map is attached.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. EARTH
a. General description of the site (underline one):
Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate slope percentage)?
40% (site no. 1), Site no. 2 is relatively flat and ranges from 0 % -2 %, Site no. 3
has moderate slopes, generally less then 10 %.
c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay,'
sand, gravel, peat, muck)? Specify the classification of agricultural soils
and note any prime farmland.
Glacial till soils.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the
immediate vicinity? If so, describe.
There are no known history of unstable soils.
e. Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantities of any, filling or
grading proposed. Indicate source of fill.
Trench excavation and backfill will generally match existing grades on all the
project sites. Native soils will be used in lieu of imported trench backfill where
determined suitable by the inspector. However, we are anticipating the need
for additional material to replace unsuitable soils and for minor grading to
3
•
match existing grades. We anticipate using imported material in the form of
Crushed Surfacing Top Course or Gravel Borrow (imported from a WSDOT
certified source) for all three projects.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction or use? If so,
generally describe.
g.
Yes, approximately 0.5 acres will be cleared and graded for this project.
Construction will be completed during the dry, late summer season using
appropriate erosion control best management practices and minimizing
disturbed areas.
about what percentage of the site will be covered with impervious
surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
No new impervious surface is proposed.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion or other impacts to the
earth, if any.
Erosion and sedimentation will be controlled through the implementation.of
Best Management Practices (BMPs) as described in the King County Surface
Water Design Manual, and in accordance with City of Tukwila requirements.
Disturbed areas will be restored with hydroseed following construction.
2. AIR
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e.
dust. Automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction
and when the project is completed? Generally describe and give
approximate quantities, if known.
Minor dust and internal combustion engine emissions will be in the air only
during construction.
b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odors that may affect your
proposal? If so, generally describe.
No.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to
the air, if any:
Best management practices will be implemented during construction activities
to reduce and control dust and air emissions. These practices may include
covering soil stockpiles, sweeping or washing paved surfaces, minimizing
exposed areas, and using construction machinery equipped with emission
control devices.
4
3. WATER
a. Surface:
1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the
site, including year -round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds,
wetlands? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state
what stream or river it flows into.
Projects no. 1 and 2 are along Southgate Creek, which flows to the Duwamish
River. Project no. 3 is along Riverton Creek, which flows to the Duwamish
River.
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet)
the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans..
Yes all three (3) sites are within described water, see attached plans.
3) Estimate the amount of dredge and fill material that would be removed
from or placed in surface water or wetlands, and indicate the area of the
site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material.
WDFW has indicated that the Sites nos. 2 and 3 (culvert replacements) will
need to comply with fish passage requirements. This will require installation of
a significantly larger culvert, which will require some minor regarding of the
stream channel. Site no. 1 will have an outfall and energy dissipater structure
constructed in accordance with the WDFW guidelines.
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give
general description, purpose and approximate quantities, if known.
Project No. 1 will not require any diversion of storm water. Projects nos.'2 and
3 will require temporary diversion of creek flows around the project area. Late
summer flows are minor and will be accomplished by means of a sandbag
dam and portable centrifugal pump placed upstream of the culvert
replacement.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year flood plain? If so, note location
on the site plan.
Not known.
Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface
waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of
discharge.
The proposal does not involve the discharge of waste materials to surface
waters.
5
b. Ground
1) Will ground water be withdrawn or will water be discharged to ground
water? Give general description, purpose and approximate quantities, if
known.
No.
2) Describe any waste material that will be discharged into the ground from
septic tanks or other sources (e. g., domestic sewage, industrial,
agricultural, etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of
such systems, the number of houses to be served, or the number of
animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve.
Does not apply.
c. Water Runoff (including storm water)
1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method(s) of
collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Will this
runoff water be discharged or flow into surface waters or ground water?
If so, describe.
All projects are maintenance repairs and upgrades of the existing City of
Tukwila drainage system. No modifications to current collection and disposal
of runoff will occur.
Could waste materials or toxic materials enter ground or surface waters
during or as a result of this proposal? If yes, generally describe.
No.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground and runoff
water impacts, if any:
Appropriate BMPs will be installed to prevent sediment transport into existing
drainage courses and conveyance systems.
4. PLANTS
a. Underline types of vegetation found on the site:
x deciduous trees:
other
x conifer trees:
x shrubs:
other
wet soil plants:
other
6
alder, maple, birch, black cottonwood,
fir, cedar, pine, other
blackberry, salmonberry, vine maple,
buttercup, rushes, .sedge, grasses,
water plants: water lily, milfoil, eelgrass, other
_x_ other types of vegetation: grasses, lawn, ivy.
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
Approximately 0.5 acres will be disturbed by construction. Vegetation to be
removed consists primarily of non - native grass species and blackberry.
c. List threatened or endangered species or critical habitat known to be on
or near the site:
No threatened or endangered species are known to occur on or near the sites.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants or other measures to
preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any:
All disturbed areas will be hydroseeded following construction.
5. ANIMALS
a. Underline any birds and animals that have been observed on or near the
site, or are known to be on or, near the site:
x invertebrates:
x fish: (no.2)
amphibians:
reptiles:
x birds:
x mammals:
insects, mollusks, other
salmon, trout, bass, herring, shellfish, other
frogs, salamanders, toads, other
snakes, lizards, turtles, other
songbirds, owls, hawks, eagles, heron, other
deer, bear, elk, beaver, rabbits, rodents, other
b. List any threatened or endangered species or critical habitat.known to be
on or near the site.
There are no threatened or endangered species known.
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, describe.
No.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any.
N/A
6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be
used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it
will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc.
7
The completed project will not require any energy. Small amounts of gasoline
and /or diesel fuels will be used in equipment during semi - annual cleaning of
the project.
b. Would the project affect the use (potential or actual) of solar energy by
adjacent properties? If so, generally describe.
No.
c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans for
this proposal? List any other proposed measures to reduce or control
energy impacts, if any.
None.
7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic
chemicals or hazardous wastes, risk of explosion or fire that could occur
as a result of this proposal? If so, describe.
Yes, accidental fuel or oil spills from the heavy equipment could occur during
construction.
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
None anticipated.
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards,
if any:
Repairs and refueling of construction equipment would be done away from the
water courses and storm conveyance facilities.
b. Noise
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect the project (e.g.,
traffic, heavy equipment, operation, industrial, other)?
None.
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by, or associated
with the project, on a short-term or a long -tens basis (for example,
traffic, construction, operation, other)? State what hours noise would
come from the site.
Short term noise impacts from construction operations are anticipated during
work hours (typically 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM) for the duration of construction. No
long -term impacts are anticipated.
8
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
Construction equipment will be equipped with mufflers and all operations will
be in accordance with City of Tukwila noise ordinances.
8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
Projects are within City right of way in residential neighborhoods.
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe.
No.
c. Describe any structures on the site.
None.
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
No.
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
City right of way.
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
Not known.
What is the current shoreline master program designation of the site, if
any?
Does not apply.
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an environmentally sensitive
area? If so, specify.
Not known.
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed
project?
None.
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
9
None.
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any.
None.
I. Proposed measures to ensure the project is compatible with existing and
projected land uses and plans in the area.
Does not apply.
9. HOUSING
a. Approximately how many housing units would the project provide, if
any? Indicate whether high, middle or low income housing.
None.
b. Approximately how many housing units would be eliminated, if any?
Indicate whether high, middle or low income housing.
None.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
None.
10. AESTHETICS
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including
antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed?
No structures are proposed.
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
None.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
Does not apply.
11. LIGHT AND GLARE
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day
would it mainly occur?
None.
10
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or
interfere with views?
No.
c. What existing off -site sources of Tight or glare may affect your proposal?
None.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control Tight and glare impacts, if any.
None.
12. RECREATION
a. What designated or informal recreational opportunities are in the
immediate vicinity?
None known.
b. Would the project displace any existing recreational uses? If so,
describe.
No.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation including
any recreational opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant.
None.
13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION •
a. Are there any sites, structures or objects listed on, or proposed for
national, state or local preservation registers known to be on or near to
the site? If so, generally describe.
None known.
11
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historical,
archaeological, scientific or cultural artifacts of importance known to be
on or near the site.
None known.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any.
Does not apply.
14. TRANSPORTATION
a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe
proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if
any.
The sites are all on City of Tukwila public roadways.
b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the
approximate distance to the nearest transit stop?
No.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How
many would the project eliminate?
None.
d. Will the proposal require any new roads, streets or improvements to
existing roads or streets (not including driveways)? If so, generally
describe, and indicate whether public or private.
No.
e. Will the project use (or be in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail or air
transportation? If so, generally describe.
No.
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated as a result of the
project? Indicate when peak traffic would occur, if known.
g.
Does not apply.
Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any.
Does not apply.
12
15. PUBLIC SERVICES
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (e.g.,
fire and police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally
describe.
No.
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public
services, if any.
None.
16. UTILITIES
a. Underline utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas,
water, telephone, refuse service, sanitary sewer, septic system, other.
b. What utility service will be needed by the project? Who (which utility)
will provide the service, and what utility construction will be required on
or in the immediate vicinity of the site?
None.
C. SIGNATURE
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge.
understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision.
Signature:
Date submitted:
The following checked items are included with the Checklist:
X Vicinity Map
X Project Plans
KPG, Inc.
0520 - Sepa.doc
3/17/05
13
PUBLIC WORKS DEPT_
•ENGINEERING •STREETS•VATER•SEVER•BURDINC•
e?,Y t611Rw46A
• Architecture •
Landscape Architecture
• tt.R Enginee„ng •
2005 SMALL DRAINAGE PROGRAM
SEPA SUBMITTAL
VICINITY MAP
•
PUBLIC WORKS DEPT.
• ENGINEERING •SPREETS•WATER•SEWER•BUILDINC•
WPM' BP 91611Ww46A
MINIM
• Architecture •
Landscape Architecture
• Civil Engineering •
2005 SMALL DRAINAGE PROGRAM
SEPA SUBMITTAL
VICINITY MAP
.PUBLIC WORKS DEPT.
•ENGINEERI NC •STREELS•RATER•SERER•DUILDING•
eMI IP eA TVIIRw46A►
• Architecture •
Landscape Architecture
• Clvil Eagineertng •
2005 SMALL DRAINAGE PROGRAM
SEPA SUBMITTAL
VICINITY MAP
PUBLIC WORKS DEPT.
• ENGINEERING •STREETS•WATER•SEWER•DUILDING•
)
aat
"CPC
SEPA
checked ik..d
SUBMITTA
field to x
2005 SMALL DRAINAGE PROGRAM
SITE NO I
S '40TH ST
---- _ -- file no
ate !msaas
K //
REMOVE EXISTING CULVERT
AND REPLACE WITH NEW FISH
PASSAGE CULVERT
0 510 70 40 W
SCALE: I. = 40'
S 133RD STREET
PUBLIC' WORKS DE'PT.
4 o
! L�i � • EY(: I \'EERI \G +STREETS•WATER•SEWER•BT LDi \G+
2005 SMALL DRAINAGE PROGRAM
S!TE NO 2
S !33RD STREET
0510 20 w 6n
SCALE 1' 40'
S 126TH STREET
— REMOVE EXISTING CULVERT
AND REPLACE WITH FISH PASSAGE CULVERT
P W0 .2FCS DEPT'.
• ENGINEERING • STREETS *WATER* S EWER • BUILDING
detrad
dim
dxd�d
ma et ea
1440
110
rer....
100,
SEPA
SUBMITTAL
2005 SMALL DRAINAGE PROGRAM
SITE NO 3
S 126TH STREET
VI 0
11.1,
Em�,
sulmwAii
mean 07
EEkE ohm
sw•
M
ma=
A
PUBLIC WORKS DEPT.
• ENGINEERING •STREETS•WATER•SEWER•BU1LBING•
EPPY thlINw4`.A
■-
• Archltecture •
Landscape Architecture
• ClvB Engineering •
2005 SMALL DRAINAGE PROGRAM
SEPA SUBMITTAL
VICINITY MAP
.PUBLIC WORKS DE.F'T.
•ENGINEERING•STREETS•IYATER•SEWER•BUILDING•
MTV ISM TlilM1111601
1.UP
• Architecture •
Landscape Archftecture
• ChM Engineering •
2005 SMALL DRAINAGE PROGJECElk
IED
SEPA SUBMITTAL !APR 1 1
SITE 1 S 140TH STREET
COmAAt i.
2005'
ITy
DEVELOPMENT
2005 SMALL DRAINAGE PROG
SEPA SUBMITTAL
SITE 2 - S 133RD STREET APR 1 1
WORKS S 13 E .41' T.
.P 1JLIC •ENGINEERING•STREETS•WATER•SERER•BUILDING •
WIMPY BIE thilIMWMIA
LI
• Architecture •
Landscape Arradtectura
• Cloll Rosh:tearing •
RE
CEIV
2005 SMALL DRAINAGE PROGRAM
SEPA SUBMITTAL 1APR 1 1
EO
005
SITE 3- S 126TH STREET COMMUNITY
----�PR
AND ENERGY
DISSIPATOR IN RAVINE
FILL AND AB 3 DONy
EXISTING STORMMDRAIN IPE
UNDERNEATH RESIDEN +E
S ;MOTH STREET
CONNECT TO (STING CATCH
BASIN AND INS LL NEW STORM
r -,. DRAIN AND OU ALL WITHIN
'CITY RIGHT -OF AY
0 5 10 20 40 •
SCALE r = 40'
drawn
checked
■ aJD
dir
•
d bt
date
3/05
3/05
3/05
3/05
SEPA
SUBMITTAL
2005 SMALL DRAINAGE PROGRAM
SITE NO I
S 140TH ST
0 s 10 20 40 60
SCALE: 1' = 40'
REMOVE EXISTING CULVERT
AND REPLACE WITH NEW FISH
PASSAGE CULVERT
P UBLIC WORKS DEFT.
• ENGINEERING •STREET•WATER•SWER•BUILDING•
by
dde
Men Design
2005 SMALL DRAINAGE PROGRAM
Me
0 ■
*
>, 1
`° -�
moo"
SEPA
SUBMITTAL
2
than
111T
3/05
3 •
SITE NO 2
S 133RD STREET
poi �t
►un
3/05
no 0520PLr02D
bkno
� AS
�
DO
date
residue
TRIBUTARY OF
RIVERTON CREEK
S 126TH STREET
1
REMOVE EXISTING CULVERT
AND'REPLACE WITH FISH PASSAGE CULVERT
. - -
0 5 10 20 40 60
SCALE 1" =
,)
3
IF
by
date
_
2005 SMLL , tc.,
DR,i'INAGE PRO R I i
tile
s
:ill I.4
Ef28162-Cs
lit °I; WO IRIECSI -0..E9-F2' T.
°ENGINEERING* STREETS 0 WATER*SEWER °BUILDING o
D
woe °
&Aped
eur
3/05
SEPA
SUBMITTAL
.#
drawn
tsg
3/05
_
rfc:'- -"" 104
Architecture
laudicerpe Archtlecture
.....„.....,
Orb= D=Ain
3
• .
ebecked
to
3/05
SITE NO 3
I
S 26TH STREET
proj col
Ito
3105
no mew=
Poi dir
ade AS SHOW
field bk ae
no
date
rdattets
date 3/05