Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit PL13-034 - CITY OF TUKWILA - 2012 WATER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN / SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT2012 TUKWILA WATER SYSTEM PLAN COMPREHENSIVE WATER PLAN UPDATE PL13-034 E13-014 SEPA SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW City of Tukwila Department of Community Development Jim Haggerton, Mayor DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) File Number: Applied: Issue Date: Status: E13-014 July 9, 2013 November 22, 2013 Approved Jack Pace, Director Applicant: City of Tukwila, Public Works Department 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Ste. 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 (206) 4313-0179 Lead Agency: City of Tukwila Description of Proposal: The City of Tukwila is proposing to adopt the 2013 Tukwila Water System Plan Update (WSP). The WSP discusses planning, considerations, existing system condition, operation and maintenance standards for the City, and recommended improvements to meet future water demands in Tukwila's water service area. The six-year and twenty year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) presented in the WSP consists of physical system improvement projects. The physical projects outlined improve the City's ability to provide a sufficient quantity of water at optimum quality. However, CIP projects listed in the WSP should not be viewed as a commitment by the City to implement each project. Completion of individual projects is based on a variety of factors including, but not limited to, funding and environmental review. Please note: This current SEPA application is not completing the environmental review for any of the proposed construction projects contained in the WSP. Individual construction projects will be reviewed on a case by case basis at a future date. Location of Proposal: Address: Parcel Number: Citywide Citywide 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 43.21c.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 December 6, 2013. The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date below. Jack ce, Responsible Official City o Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 (206)431-3670 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone 206-431-3670 • Fax: 206-431-3665 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 43.21C.075) BM Page 2 of 2 11/21/2013 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director MEMORANDUM To: Jack Pace, Director From: Brandon Miles, Senior Planner Date: November 21, 2013 Re: SEPA Review for adoption of Tukwila Water System Plan Update Non -Project SEPA E13-014 Project Description: The City of Tukwila is proposing to adopt the 2013 Tukwila Water System Plan Update (WSP). The WSP discusses planning, considerations, existing system condition, operation and maintenance standards for the City, and recommended improvements to meet future water demands in Tukwila's water service area. The six-year and twenty year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) presented in the WSP consists of physical system improvement projects. The physical projects outlined improve the City's ability to provide a sufficient quantity of water at optimum quality. However, CIP projects listed in the WSP should not be viewed as a commitment by the City to implement each project. Completion of individual projects is based on a variety of factors including, but not limited to, funding and environmental review. Please note: This current SEPA application is not completing the environmental review for any of the proposed construction projects contained in the WSP. Individual construction projects will be reviewed on a case by case basis at a future date. Agencies with Jurisdiction: City of Tukwila Washington State Department of Ecology. Notification: On October 7, 2013 a Notice of Application was published in the Seattle Times. Additionally, potentially impacted agencies were provided notification, by mail, of this non -project SEPA on October 7, 2013. Other Required Permits: None. Documents Adopted by Reference: • None Summary of Primary Impacts: • Earth Concur with checklist. •Air Concur with checklist. • Water Concur with checklist. • Plants Concur with checklist. • Animals Concur with checklist. • Energy/Natural Resources Concur with checklist. • Environmental Health Concur with checklist. Land/Shoreline Use Concur with checklist. • Housing Concur with checklist. • Aesthetics Concur with checklist. • Light and Glare Concur with checklist • Recreation Page 2 of 3 Concur with checklist. • Historic and Cultural Preservation Concur with checklist • Transportation Concur with checklist. • Public Services Concur with checklist. The WSP lays a framework to improve the City's ability to provide water to the City's utility customers. • Utilities Concur with checklist. The WSP will assist in improving the City's water system utility. Comments No comments were received. Recommendation: Determination of Non -Significance. Page 3 of 3 et* ar J uftwi&a Department Of Community Development AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I, Teri Svedahl , HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Associated File Number (s): E13-014 Notice of Application Notice of Decision r Notice of Public Hearing Notice of Public Meeting x Determination of Non- Significance Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Short Subdivision Agenda Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit Shoreline Mgmt Permit Board of Appeals Agenda Packet Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet Official Notice Notice of Action x SEPA Checklist Other: Was mailed to each of the addresses listed/attached on this 22_ day of _November , _2013 Project Name: WSP - Water System Plan Update, City Wide Project Number: Associated File Number (s): E13-014 Mailing requested by: Brandon . , it Mailer's signature: r W:\USERS\TERI\TEMPLATES-FORMS\AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION.DOC Teri Svedahl From: Teri Svedahl Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 8:17 AM To: sepa (sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov); ECY RE SEPA REGISTER (separegister@ecy.wa.gov) Cc: Brandon Miles Subject: Tukwila City Wide Update Attachments: E13-014.pdf Attached is the DNS and checklist for the City of Tukwila city wide water system plan update (WSP). Please address any questions to senior planner, Brandon Miles at Brandon.Miles(a@TukwilaWa.gov Teri/ SveG4i Administrative Support Technician City of Tukwila - Building & Planning Department 6300 Southcenter Boulevard - Ste 100 Tukwila WA 98188 Teri.Svedahl@TukwilaWA.gov The City of opportunity, the community of choice. 1 Brandon Miles From: Brandon Miles Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 9:53 AM To: Michael Cusick Subject: 2012 Water Plan System Update Mike - The SEPA review for the above project is nearly complete. I want to check in with you on internal review by other City Departments. Have you made copies of the proposed plan available to other City Departments (Finance, Fire, City Attorney and Parks)? My responsibility is to only coordinate the environmental review of the plan, not to coordinate the policy implications of the plan, which is public work's responsibility. I am going to trust that you have taken the appropriate actions to ensure that other Departments have had the opportunity to review and comment on the plan. Regards, Brandon J. Miles City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 The City of opportunity, the community of choice. 1 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director Notice of Application PROJECT INFORMATION The City of Tukwila's Public Works Department has submitted a non -project SEPA checklist regarding the adoption of the City's Water System Plan Update (WSP). The WSP presents a six-year and twenty year capital improvement plans for the City's water system. The capital improvement plans call out possible physical improvements to the City's water system. Actual completion of the projects in the WSP depends on a variety of factors, including permitting and funding. Environmental review of each project will occur at the time of proposed construction. This non -project SEPA geographical location is the entire City of Tukwila. Projects applied for include: PL13-034 Other known required permits include: None Studies required with the applications include: None. FILES AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC REVIEW The application is available for review at the City of Tukwila, Department of Community Development (DCD), located at 6300 Southcenter Blvd #100. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT Your written comments on the project are requested. They must be delivered to DCD at 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100; Tukwila, WA, 98188 or postmarked no later than 5:00 P.M. on October 21, 2013. Comments may also be emailed to Brandon.Miles@Tukwilawa.gov. APPEALS You may request a copy of any decision, information on hearings, and your appeal rights by calling DCD at (206) 431-3670. For further information on this proposal, contact Brandon Miles at (206) 431-3684, Brandon.Miles@tukwilawa.gov or visit our offices at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100, Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Application Filed: July 9, 2013 Notice of Completeness Issued: N/A Notice of Application Issued: October 7, 2013 ei ti of JuIIwiea Department Of Community Development AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I, _Teri Svedahl , HEREBY DECLARE THAT: Associated File Number (s): x Notice of Application Notice of Decision / /A0 `,/ k Notice of Public Hearing Notice of Public Meeting Determination of Non- Significance Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance Determination of Significance & Scoping Notice Short Subdivision Agenda Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt Permit Shoreline Mgmt Permit Board of Appeals Agenda Packet Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet Official Notice Notice of Action Other: Was mailed to each of the addresses listed/attached on this _7th day of _October , _2013_ Project Name: Water System Plan Update (WSP) Project Number: PL13-034 Associated File Number (s): Mailing requested by: Brandon Miles Mailer's signature: / / / /A0 `,/ k • W:\USERS\TERI\TEMPLATES-FORMS\AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION.DOC agency US ARMY CORP OF ENGINEERS DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR US E.P.A. OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY WSDOT NW REGION DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES WA STATE COMMUNITY DEV WA FISHERIES & WILDLIFE WA FISHERIES & WILDLIFE WASH DEPT OF SOCIAL/HEALTH WA DEPT OF ECOLOGY FIRE DISTRICT # 11 FIRE DISTRICT # 2 KC WASTEWATER TREATMENT KC PARKS & RECREATION KC HEALTH DEPT PORT OF SEATTLE KC DEV & ENVIRON SERVICES attn FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES LARRY FISHER SEPA REVIESU/tL,- rD rI address 4735 E MARGINAL WY S 911 NE 11th AVE 1200 6th AVE PO BOX 48343 PO BOX 330310, MS 240 PO 47015 PO BOX 48300 16018 MILL CREEK BLVD 1775 12TH Ave NW Ste 20] SPO BOX 1788 PO BOX 47703 1243 SW 112th 15100 8th AVE SW ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING 201 S JACKSON ST., MS KS( SEATTLE 201 S JACKSON ST., STE 70(SEATTLE PERMITS 401 FIFTH AVE, STE 1100 SEATTLE PO BOX 1209 SEATTLE SEPA INFO CENTER 900 OAKSDALE AVE SW RENTON C(J514-1 Pe7,3 O3/ city st zip SEATTLE WA 98124 PORTLAND OR 97232 SEATTLE WA 98101 OLYMPIA WA 98504 SEATTLE WA 98133 OLYMPIA WA 98504 OLYMPIA WA 98504 MILL CREEK WA 98012 Issaquah WA 98027 OLYMPIA WA 98504 OLYMPIA WA 98504 SEATTLE WA 98146 BURIEN WA 98166 WA 98104 WA 98104 WA 98104 WA 98111 WA 98055 WA 98104 WA 98104 ISSAQUAH WA 98027 SEATTLE WA 98104 TUKWILA WA 98168 BURIEN WA 98166 SEATTLE WA 98124 RENTON WA 98055 KENT WA 98032 SEATTLE WA 98124 BELLEVUE WA 98009 KENT WA 98032 SEATTLE WA 98124 SEATTLE WA 98133 RENTON WA 98055 SEATTLE WA 98168 SEATTLE WA 98168 SEATTLE WA 98168 RENTON WA 98055 SEATTLE WA 98178 SEATTLE WA 98124 KENT WA 98032 SEATTLE WA 98108 KENT WA 98032 RENTON WA 98055 SEATAC WA 98188 BURIEN WA 98166 SEATTLE WA 98124 SEATTLE WA 98104 AUBURN WA 98092 AUBURN WA 98092 AUBURN WA 98092 WA 98106 WA 98101 WA 98104 WA 98122 WA 98101 WA 98104 WA 98104 KC METRO TRANSIT/SEPA OFFICIAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING 201 S JACKSON ST., MS KS( SEATTLE KC DEPARTMENT OF NAT'L RESOURCES 2015 JACKSON ST., STE 600 SEATTLE KC LIBRARY SYSTEM 960 NEWPORT WAY NW SEATTLE LIBRARY TUKWILA SCHOOL DISTRICT HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT SEATTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT QWEST COMMUNICATIONS SEATTLE CITY LIGHT PUGET SOUND ENERGY HIGHLINE WATER DISTRICT SEATTLE PLANNING & DEVELOPME COMCAST BP OLYMPIC PIPELINE VAL-VUE SEWER DISTRICT WATER DISTRICT #20 WATER DISTRICT #125 CITY OF RENTON BRYN MAWR-LAKERIDGE SEATTLE PUBLIC UTILITIES ALLIED WASTE WASTE MANAGEMENT KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF RENTON CITY OF SEATAC CITY OF BURIEN SEPA Review / Joe Wolf ENVIRONMENT & SAFETY DI' WATER DEPARTMENT PUBLIC WORKS WATER/SEWER DISTRICT JALAINE MADURA, SEPA DENNIS MANES PLANNING DEPARTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF SEATTLE SEPA CONTROL PLANNING & PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL MUCKLESHOOT Cultural Resources Laura Murphy MUCKLESHOOT Fisheries Program Karen Walter MUCKLESHOOT Wildlife Program Mike Middleton DUWAMISH INDIAN TRIBE PUGET SOUND CLEAN AIR AGENCY SEPA REVIEW SOUND TRANSIT/SEPA OFFICIAL UNION STATION DUWAMISH RIVER CLEAN UP COALITION WA ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL PEOPLE FOR PUGET SOUND FUTUREWISE 1000 4th AVE 4640 S 144th STREET 15675 AMBAUM BLVD SW PO BOX 34165 MS 22-332 300 SW 7TH STREET 23315 66th AVE S PO BOX 34023 PO BOX 90868 23828 30th AVE S PO BOX 34019 12645 STONE AVE N 2319 LIND AVENUE SW PO BOX 69550 12606 1st AVE S PO BOX 68147 1055 S GRADY WAY 11909 RENTON AVE S PO BOX 34018 22010 76th AVE S 8111 -1st AVE S 220 FOURTH AVE S 1055 S GRADY WAY 4800 S 188th STREET 415 SW 150th PO BOX 34019 1011 WESTERN AVE #500 39015 172nd AVE SE 39015 172nd AVE SE 39015 172nd AVE SE 4705 W MARGINAL WAY 9 SEATTLE 1904 3rd AVENUE, STE 105 SEATTLE 401 S JACKSON STREET SEATTLE 1620 18TH AVE, Ste 100 SEATTLE 1402 THIRD AVE, STE# 1401 SEATTLE 911 WESTERN AVENUE, ST SEATTLE 816 SECOND AVENUE, STE SEATTLE AGENCY LABELS (N) US Corps of Engineers ( ) Federal HWY Admin ( ) Federal Transit Admin, Region 10 (N Dept of Fish & Wildlife Section 1 FEDERAL AGENCIES IN US Environmental Protection Agency (E.P.A.) ( )US Dept of HUD ( ) National Marine Fisheries Service Section 2 N) Office of Archaeology (\) Transportation Department (WSDOT NW) (\) Dept of Natural Resources ( ) Office of the Governor WA State Community Development •(\) WA Fisheries & Wildlife, MillCreek Office ('NWA Fisheries & Wildlife, Larry Fisher, 1775 12th Ave NW Ste 201, Issaquah WA 98027 WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES N Dept of Social & Health Services ( ) Dept of Ecology NW Regional Office, Shoreland Div. ******* NOD REQUIRES RETURN RECEIPT Dept of Ecology, SEPA **Send Electronically— ( ) Office of Attorney General ( ) Office of Hearing Examiner 6('"j.,001 - ( ('"j h1' ( ) KC Boundary Review Board N\) Fire District # 11 Fire District # 2 '&) KC Wastewater Treatment Div '(N) KC Dept of Parks & Recreation ( ) KC Assessor's Office Section 3 KING COUNTY AGENCIES *IN) Health Department N Port of Seattle KC Dev & Enviro Services-SEPA Info Center `(.J KC Metro Transit Div-SEPA Official, Environmental Planning N, KC Dept of Natural Resources ( ) KC Dept of Natural Resources, Andy Levesque KC Public Library System ( ) Foster Library ( ) Renton Library ( ) Kent Library Seattle Library Section 4 SCHOOLS/LIBRARIES ( ) Westfield Mall Library ` .„Tukwila School District 'j 4 Highline School District Seattle School District Renton School District ) QWEST Communications N.) Seattle City Light N.) Puget Sound Energy Highline Water District N. Seattle Planning &Dev/Water Dept (Comcast Section 5 UTILITIES ') BP Olympic Pipeline '(\,) Val-Vue Sewer District •K,) Water District # 20 N Water District # 125 ' City of Renton Public Works Bryn Mawr-Lakeridge Sewer/Water Dist Seattle Public Utilities 1"\ allied-Waste-zSeraices ( ) Tukwila City Departments ( ) Public Works ( ) Fire ( ) Police ( ) Finance ( ) Planning ( ) Building ( ) Parks & Rec ( ) Mayor ( ) City Clerk Section 6 CITY AGENCIES '.) Kent Planning Dept `T) Renton Planning Dept City of SeaTac ,City of Burien City of Seattle ( ) Strategic Planning *Notice of all Seattle Related Projects Puget Sound Regional Council ( ) SW KC Chamber of Commerce Muckleshoot Indian Tribe * (\) Cultural Resources Fisheries Program Wildlife Program NDuwamish Indian Tribe * Section 7 OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES ‘(\) Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Sound Transit/SEPA `*N Duwamish River Clean Up Coalition * '6,) Washington Environmental Council (J People for Puget Sound * Futurewise * send notice of all aPOlications on Green/Duwamish River ( ) Seattle Times ( ) South County Journal Section 8 MEDIA ( ) Highline Times ( ) City of Tukwila Website P:Admin\Admin Forms\Agency Checklist Public Notice Mailings For Permits SEPA MAILINGS Mail to: (comment period starts on date of mailing) Dept. of Ecology Environmental Review Section *Applicant *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list) *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination KC Transit Division — SEPA Official would like to receive information about all projects that might affect transit demand Tribes — For any application on the Green/Duwamish River, send the checklist and a full set of plans with the Notice Of Application Send These Documents to DOE: SEPA Determination (from PermitsPlus) Findings (staff report, usu. with MDNS) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed or sent to newspaper) SHORELINE MAILINGS: Notice of Application for a Substantial Development Permit must be mailed to owners and to property owners within 500 feet of subject property, comments are due 30 days after the notice of application is mailed/posted. The Notice of Application for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit must include a statement that any person desiring to submit written comments on the application or desiring to receive notification of the final decision on the application may do so within 30 days of the Notice of Application. If a hearing will be held on the application, the hearing notice must include the information that written comments may be submitted, or oral presentation made at the hearing. Notice is sent to Ecology's NW Regional Office Shorelands & Environmental Assistance Program. Shoreline Permit Notice of Decision: Mail to: (within 8 days of decision; 21 -day appeal period begins date of filing with DOE) — Notice to DOE must be by return receipt requested mail (this requirement included in SSB 5192, effective 7-22-11). Department of Ecology Shorelands Section, NW Regional Office State Attorney General *Applicant *Indian Tribes *Other agencies as necessary (checked off on attached list). *Any parties of record * send only the staff report, site plan and the SEPA Determination Send These Documents to DOE and Attorney General: Permit Data Sheet Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (printed out from PermitsPlus) Findings (staff report or memo) Shoreline Permit Application Form (filled out by applicant) Drawings/Plans of project (site plan, elevations, etc. from PMT's) - Site plan, with mean high water mark & improvements — Cross-sections of site with structures & shoreline - Grading Plan — Vicinity map SEPA determination (3 -part from Sierra) Findings (staff report or memo) SEPA Checklist (filled out by applicant) Any background studies related to impacts on shoreline Notice of Application Affidavit of Distribution (notice was mailed) P:Admin\Admin Forms\Agency Checklist Teri Svedahl From: Teri Svedahl Sent: Monday, October 07, 2013 9:37 AM To: sepa (sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov) Cc: Brandon Miles Subject: NOA-SEPA Attachments: WSP_NOA.pdf; WSP_SEPA_CHECKLIST.pdf Attached is the Notice of Application and SEPA Checklist for the City of Tukwila's Water System Plan Update. Teri, Sveda hL Administrative Support Technician City of Tukwila - Building & Planning Department 6300 Southcenter Boulevard - Ste 100 Tukwila WA 98188 Teri.Svedahl@TukwilaWA.gov The City of opportunity, the community of choice. City o itivila ESA Screening Checklist City of Tukwila Endangered Species Act Screening Checklist Date: 05/21/2012 Applicant Name: Michael Cusick, PE Street Address: 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 City, State, Zip: Tukwila, WA 98168 Telephone: (206) 431-2441 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 2, read each question carefully, mark the appropriate "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. H:\land Use Applications in PDF\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan2011.doc Page 1 City c_ kwila ESA Screening Checklist 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 (TMC 18.06.370). Please mark the appropriate response. NO - Continue to Question 2-0 YES - 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 (18.06.145). Please mark the 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 mark the 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 (TMC 18.06.385). This includes fuel or other chemicals stored on-site during construction. Please mark the appropriate response. ✓ NO - 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 or would require a geotechnical report if not exempt should answer Yes. Please mark the appropriate response. ✓ NO - Continue to Question 6-0 YES - Continue to Question 6-0 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 (TMC 18.06.490). For the purpose of this analysis, this includes the establishment of new lawn or grass. Please mark the appropriate response. ✓ NO — Checklist Complete YES — Checklist Complete H:\Iand Use Applications in PDF\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan20I I.doc Page 2 City o cwila ESA Screening Checklist 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 mark the appropriate response. NO - 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 mark the appropriate response. ✓ NO - Continue to Question 1-3 YES - 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. 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 (TMC 18.06.445). Please mark the appropriate response. ✓ NO - 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 mark the appropriate response. ✓ NO - Continue to Question 2-0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 2-0 (Page 2) H:\Land Use Applications in PDF\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan2011.doc Page 3 City c, kwila ESA Screening Checklist 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 mark the 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 mark the 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 mark the 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 mark the appropriate response. ✓ NO - Continue to Question 3-0 (Page 2) 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 mark the appropriate response. ✓ NO - Continue to Question 3-0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 3-0 (Page 2) H:\Land Use Applications in PDEISEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan20l I.doc Page 4 City tkwila ESA Screening Checklist 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 mark the 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 mark the 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 mark the appropriate response. 1 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 mark the appropriate response. 1 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 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 mark the appropriate response. ✓ NO - Continue to Question 3-6 YES - Continue to Question 3-6 H:\Land Use Applications in PDF\SEPA Environmental Review Application-1an20I I.doc Page 5 City o kwila ESA Screening Checklist Part D (continued) 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 seeps and 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 mark the 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 mark the 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 mark the appropriate response. • NO - Continue to Question 4-0 (Page 2) YES - Continue to Question 4-0 (Page 2) El: \ and Use Applications in PDFISEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan2011.doc Page 6 SEPA Checklist STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT CHECKLIST Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: City of Tukwila 2012 Water System Plan Update 2. Name of Applicant: City of Tukwila 3. Date checklist prepared: May 21, 2012 4. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila 5. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): see attached sheet 6. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. see attached sheet 7. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Please refer to the WSP for a description of environmental information relevant to each specific CIP project. 8. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. Development within the City's water service area will continue throughout the life of this plan and is consistent with King County and City of Tukwila's planning policies, the Urban Growth Boundary, and other environmental regulations including the Endangered Species Act. H:\L.and Use Applications in PDF\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan20I I.doc Agency Comments Page 1 A. BACKGROUND 5. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The City of Tukwila Water System Plan. Update (WSP) discusses planning considerations, existing system condition, operation and maintenance standards for the City, and recommended improvements to meet future water demands in Tukwila's water service area. The six-year and twenty-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) presented in the WSP consist mainly of physical system improvement projects. The physical projects outlined improve the City's ability to provide a sufficient quantity of water at optimum quality. Projects are defined by time period projected with the projected, estimated costs associated with each project. However, CIP projects listed in the WSP should not be viewed as a commitment by the City to implement each project as it is planned with the rate and schedule shown. Actual project implementation will be based on environmental review, permits and approvals, available funding, and scheduling requirements. This WSP is a non -project action. A separate Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review will be completed prior to actual implementation and construction of each specific project. Certain categorical exemptions from the SEPA review process may apply to specific projects, in accordance with WAC 1.97-11-800 under part nine of the SEPA rules. 6. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain: A new WSP update will be required in six years. At that time, projects that are beyond the six-year planning horizon will be updated. As noted above, projects scheduled in the CIP in the next 6 years will have a SEPA review conducted as part of each individual project. SEPA Checklist Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments . List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. Does not apply. 10. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. The WSP is a non -project action. Specific projects cited in the WSP will have a separate SEPA review where necessary. 11. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, the tax lot number, and section, township, and range. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. Does not apply. 12. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? The SEPA checklist is a 2012 WSP update. It is for the portion of Tukwila served by the Tukwila Water System. If future projects require SEPA, a separate checklist will be prepared for that project. H:U.and Use Applications in PDFISEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan20I Ldoc Page 2 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: Does not apply. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Does not apply. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Does not apply. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Does not apply. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Does not apply. H:\Land Use Applications in PDFISEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan20l Ldoc SEPA Checklist Agency Comments Page 3 SEPA Checklist Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Does not apply. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Does not apply. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Does not apply. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (for example, dust, automobile odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Does not apply. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Does not apply. H:U.and Use Applications in PDFISEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan2011.doc Page 4 SEPA Checklist Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Does not apply. 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. Does not apply 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. Does not apply. 3. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Does not apply. H:\Land Use Applications in PDFSEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan20l I.doc Page 5 SEPA Checklist Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. The City of Tukwila is not applying for additional water rights in conjunction with this WSP. 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Does not apply. 6. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. Does not apply. b. Ground: I . Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. The City of Tukwila is not applying for additional water rights in conjunction with this WSP. There are no City water utility operations that involve discharge to groundwaters. H:V.and Use Applications in PDF\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan201 I.doc Page 6 SEPA Checklist Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 2. Describe waste materials that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve: Does not apply. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): I. Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Does not apply. 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Does not apply. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Does not apply. H:U.and Use Applications in PDF\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan20 I 1.doc Page 7 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Does not apply. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Does not apply. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Does not apply. H:\Land Use Applications in PDFISEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan2011.doc SEPA Checklist Agency Comments Page 8 Deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other Evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other Shrubs Grass Pasture Crop or grain Wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other Water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other Other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Does not apply. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Does not apply. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Does not apply. H:\Land Use Applications in PDFISEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan2011.doc SEPA Checklist Agency Comments Page 8 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: 5. Animals a. Circle any birds or animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: Hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: Mammals: Deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: Fish: Bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: Other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Does not apply. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Does not apply. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Does not apply. 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. Does not apply. H:\Land Use Applications in PDF\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan20l l.doc SEPA Checklist Agency Comments Page 9 SEPA Checklist Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. Does not apply. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Does not apply. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Does not apply. 1. Describe special emergency services that might be required. Does not apply. 2. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Does not apply. H:\Land Use Applications in PDF\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan2011.doc Page 10 SEPA Checklist Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments b. Noise 1. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Does not apply. 2. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Does not apply. 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Does not apply. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Does not apply to the WSP. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Does not apply to the WSP. H:\Land Use Applications in PDFISEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan2011.doc Page 11 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: c. Describe any structures on the site. Does not apply to the WSP. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Does not apply to the WSP. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Does not apply to the WSP. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Does not apply to the WSP. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Does not apply to the WSP. H:\Land Use Applications in PDRSEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan20 I I.doc SEPA Checklist Agency Comments Page 12 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Does not apply to the WSP. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Does not apply to the WSP. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Does not apply to the WSP. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Does not apply to the WSP. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Does not apply to the WSP. H:U.and Use Applications in PDF\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan201 l.doc SEPA Checklist Agency Comments Page 13 SEPA Checklist Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing? Does not apply. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Does not apply. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Does not apply. 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? Does not apply. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Does not apply. H:\L.and Use Applications in PDF\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan201 I.doc Page 14 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: 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? Does not apply. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Does not apply. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Does not apply. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Does not apply. H:\Land Use Applications in PDF\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan2011.doc SEPA Checklist Agency Comments Page 15 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: 12. Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Does not apply. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. Does not apply. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Does not apply. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, National, State, or Local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. Does not apply. H:UJand Use Applications in PDF\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan2011.doc SEPA Checklist Agency Comments Page 16 SEPA Checklist Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. Does not apply. 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. Does not apply. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Does not apply. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Does not apply. H:\Land Use Applications in PDF\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan201 I.doc Page 17 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Does not apply. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Does not apply. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Does not apply. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Does not apply. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. Does not apply. H:\Land Use Applications in PDF\SEPA Environmental Review Application-)an2011.doc SEPA Checklist Agency Comments Page 18 Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Does not apply. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system other: b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Does not apply. H:\Land Use Applications in PDF\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan2011.doc SEPA Checklist Agency Comments Page 19 SEPA Checklist (NON -PROJECT PROPOSALS (E.G., SUBURBAN PLANS AND ZONING CODE TEXT CHANGES) MUST COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING PAGES). C. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON -PROJECT PROPOSALS (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 1. How would the proposals be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? The Plan is a long-range water system plan that would not result directly in the implementation of specific projects. Therefore, the Plan itself would be unlikely to increase long-term discharges to water, emissions to air, production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances, or production of noise. Overall, the Plan would not likely increase regional discharges of pollutants to the environment. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: The Plan would not result in increased discharges to water, emissions to air, production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances, or production of noise. Therefore, no measures to avoid or reduce such increases are proposed. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? The Plan is a long-range water system plan that would not result directly in the implementation of specific projects. The Plan itself would be unlikely to adversely affect plants, animals, or fish, including threatened & endangered species. The Plan includes goals for the City of Tukwila water conservation program. Reductions in water use through conversation would reduce the need for surface water withdrawals, which could potentially benefit instream flows and fish resources (including endangered salmonids), & aquatic & riparian plants & animals. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: Long-term adverse impacts on plants, animals, fish, and marine life are not expected under the Plan. Therefore, measures to protect flora and fauna are not proposed. H:\Land Use Applications in PDFISEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan2011.doc Page 20 SEPA Checklist Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Agency Comments 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? The Plan is a Tong -range water system plan that would not result directly in the implementation of specific projects. Therefore the Plan would be unlikely to directly deplete energy or natural resources. The Plan itself would not require any additional long-term energy sources. The City of Tukwila would continue to implement programs to meet water conservation goals, which would further reduce the potential for depletion of water resources and energy supplies. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: The Plan would not result in long-term, adverse impacts on energy and natural resources. Therefore, measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are not proposed. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitats, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? See attached sheet. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: The Plan would not result in adverse, long-term impacts on environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated for government protection. Therefore, no measures to protect such resources are proposed. 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? See attached sheet. H:\Land Use Applications in PDF\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan201 I.doc Page 21 C. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON -PROJECT PROPOSALS 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? The Plan is a long-range water system plan that would not result directly in the implementation of specific projects. Therefore, the Plan would be unlikely to directly use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated for government protection. The Plan also would be unlikely to adversely affect threatened and endangered species habitat. The Plan includes goals for the City of Tukwila's water conservation programs, which may benefit instream flows. Maintaining instream flows would directly benefit habitat for endangered salmonids, along with aquatic and riparian habitat used by other listed species such as the bald eagle. Benefits to sensitive areas from water conversation would occur at a lower level if the Plan were not implemented. 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? The Plan is a non -project plan of future actions that would not directly affect land and shoreline use in the planning area. The Plan itself would not change land and shoreline uses or designations. The Plan includes the City of Tukwila's new water conservation goals, which could benefit instream flows and shoreline uses. The Plan is consistent with the requirements of the Growth Management Act and local and regional land use plans. Any City of Tukwila actions themselves would not encourage land or shoreline uses that are incompatible with existing plans. Future land and shoreline uses would be determined by local land use plans, zoning codes, and development regulations, not by the City of Tukwila activities. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? The Plan is a long-range water system plan that would not result directly in the implementation of specific projects. Therefore, the Plan would be unlikely to directly increase demand on transportation, public services, or utilities. The Plan itself would not have any affects on transportation, public services, or non -water utilities. In planning to meet future water demand, it is necessary to coordinate with other planning efforts to ensure consistency. These include the coordinated water system plans with Cascade Water Alliance, City of Seattle and neighboring water purveyors and King County's Regional Wastewater Services Plan. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: The Plan would not result in direct or indirect adverse impacts on shoreline and land uses. Therefore, measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are not proposed. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public service and utilities? See attached sheet. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: The Plan would not result in long-term, adverse impacts on transportation, public services, and utilities. Therefore, measures to reduce or respond to such demand are not proposed. 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with Local, State, or Federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. The Plan would be consistent with and support all local, state, and federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. In implementing the Plan, the City of Tukwila would comply with all applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations. D. SIGNATURE SEPA Checklist Agency Comments Under the penalty of perjury the abo answers under ESA Screening Checklist and State Environmental Policy Act Checklist are true and co y fete he best of myJfowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature. Date Submitted: H:\Land Use Applications in PDFISEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan2011.doc Page 22 C. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON -PROJECT PROPOSALS 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? The Plan is a long-range water system plan that would not result directly in the implementation of specific projects. Therefore, the Plan would be unlikely to directly use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated for government protection. The Plan also would be unlikely to adversely affect threatened and endangered species habitat. The Plan includes goals for the City of Tukwila's water conservation programs, which may benefit instream flows. Maintaining instream flows would directly benefit habitat for endangered salmonids, along with aquatic and riparian habitat used by other listed species such as the bald eagle. Benefits to sensitive areas from water conversation would occur at a lower level if the Plan were not implemented. 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? The Plan is a non -project plan of future actions that would not directly affect land and shoreline use in the planning area. The Plan itself would not change land and shoreline uses or designations. The Plan includes the City of Tukwila's new water conservation goals, which could benefit instream flows and shoreline uses. The Plan is consistent with the requirements of the Growth Management Act and local and regional land use plans. Any City of Tukwila actions themselves would not encourage land or shoreline uses that are incompatible with existing plans. Future land and shoreline uses would be determined by local land use plans, zoning codes, and development regulations, not by the City of Tukwila activities. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? The Plan is a long-range water system plan that would not result directly in the implementation of specific projects. Therefore, the Plan would be unlikely to directly increase demand on transportation, public services, or utilities. The Plan itself would not have any affects on transportation, public services, or non -water utilities. In planning to meet future water demand, it is necessary to coordinate with other planning efforts to ensure consistency. These include the coordinated water system plans with Cascade Water Alliance, City of Seattle and neighboring water purveyors and King County's Regional Wastewater Services Plan. Please respond to all questions. Use separate sheets as necessary. Applicant Responses: Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: The Plan would not result in direct or indirect adverse impacts on shoreline and land uses. Therefore, measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are not proposed. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public service and utilities? See attached sheet. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: The Plan would not result in long-term, adverse impacts on transportation, public services, and utilities. Therefore, measures to reduce or respond to such demand are not proposed. 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with Local, State, or Federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. The Plan would be consistent with and support all local, state, and federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. In implementing the Plan, the City of Tukwila would comply with all applicable Local, state, and federal laws and regulations. D. SIGNATURE SEPA Checklist Agency Comments Under the penalty of perjury the abo answers under ESA Screening Checklist and State Environmental Policy Act Checklist are true and corpfete he best of myiowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: Date Submitted: H:\Iand Use Applications in PDEISEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan201 l.doc Page 22 CITY OF TUKWILA RECEIVED Department of Community Develop 09 2013 SEPA 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98"l.�uwl �NVIRONIVIENTAL Telephone: (206) 431-3670 FAX: (206) 431r8.9PM- REVIEW E-mail.: planning@TuhvilaWA.gov APPLICATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY Permits Plus TYPE: P-SEPA Planner: File Number: �� 3 ----6/47/ Application Complete Date: Project File Number: .-)( /—_ 63q Application Incomplete Date: Other File Numbers: NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: 2012 TUKWILA WATER SYSTEM PLAN UPDATE LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS (this information may be found on your tax statement). Citywide for the Tukwila Water System DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR : The individual who: • has decision making authority on behalf of the owner/applicant in meetings with City staff, • has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and • is the primary contact with the City to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: Address: Phone: E-mail: Michael P. Cusick 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100, Tukwila WA 98168 (206) 431-2441 michael.cusick@tukwilawa.gov FAX: (206) 431-3665 Signature: Date: 9/00/67, /did, /J'7 �d/ se y1/ OD H:\Land Use Applications In PDF\SEPA Environmental Review Application-Jan2011.Doc