Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEP93-00011 Cancelled - SEP Determinations - 3/4/1993 sTArg 0 �H' 1889 aDY STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Mail Stop PV-11 a Olympia, Washington 98504-8711 e (206) 459-6000 February 3, 1993 Mr. Gary Yando Mason County P.O. Box 578 Shelton WA 98584 Dear Mr. Yando: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the determination of nonsignificance for the grade of 37,590 cubic yards and fill of 2,631 cubic yards for construction of a roadway access to a large lot subdivision proposed by Mr. Harry Nelson (93-11) . We reviewed the environmental checklist and have the following comments. Erosion control measures should be in place prior to any clearing, grading, or construction. These control measures should be effective to prevent soil from being carried into surface water by stormwater runoff. Sand, silt, and soil will damage aquatic habitat and are considered pollutants. Causing or allowing pollutants to enter state waters carries a maximum penalty of $10,000 per day. If you have any questions, please call Mr. Bill Young with our Water Quality Program at (206) 586-5551. Sincerely, Barbara J. Ritchie ` Environmental Review Section BJR:rch 93-419 cc: Bill Young, SWRO Sarah Barrie, SWRO �!a4" 3 A 9 ATg o O ROBERT TURNERS Acting Director �'H�1889 aoy STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES 1111 Washington Street S.E.,P.O. Box 43135 • Olympia, Washington 98504-3135 • (206)902-2200 • (SCAN)902-2200 March 10, 1993 Mason County Department of Community Development ATTENTION: Don Brush Post Office Box 578 Shelton, Washington 98584 SUBJECT: Determination of Non-Significance - Harry Nelson Proponent - Grading, Filling, Road Construction, and Community Drainfield - Hood Canal, Tributary to Admiralty Inlet, Section 09, Township 23 North, Range 03 West, Mason County, SEPA Log No. 21187, WRIA 14.MARI Dear Mr. Brush: Washington Department of Fisheries (WDF) has reviewed the above- referenced Determination of Non-Significance and offers the following comments at this time. Other comments may be offered as the project progresses. The marine waters of Hood Canal are important producers of recrea- tional and commercial species of shellfish. Maintenance of good marine water quality is vitally important to ensure future harvest of these shellfish resources. Pollution from non-point sources, a major contributor to poor water quality, threatens this harvest. Many of the upland areas adjacent to marine shore 14nes contain very shallow native permeable soils and tight underlying soils, such as clay. Community septic field sewage systems in areas containing these soils can have a high failure rate due to horizontal effluent flow along the impermeable soil layer subsequently surfacing in Hood Canal. Frequently, the results are contaminated shellfish, shell- fish decertification, and potential human health risk. Significant decertification of oysters, geoducks, and other hardshell clams has occurred due to such non-point sources in proximity to these resources. Unless adequate measures are taken to reduce non-point pollution, this problem will be greatly exacerbated in the future as growth in the region is expected to increase. Don Brush March 10, 1993 Page 2 The Atlas of Major Geoduck Tracts of Puget Sound, an unpublished manuscript produced by WDF, indicates that commercial geoduck tract number 87 , Ayock Point Tract, is located in the vicinity of the proposal. According to the most recent survey in 1981, this tract contains 72 , 000 pounds of geoduck with a current estimated value to the state of $214 , 560 (current lease auction value of $2 . 98 per pound) . Certification of this tract could be at risk due to non- point pollution from the proposed community septic field sewage system. Decertification would result in lost production, lost harvest opportunity and lost revenue to the state. WDF, therefore, strongly supports wastewater treatment and disposal alternatives that do not have the potential for decertification of commercial or recreational shellfish resources. These alternatives include, but are not limited to, constructed treatment wetlands utilizing subsequent rapid infiltration wetlands and upland storage lagoons with spray land application. One of the major impacts of development adjacent to marine waters, is the introduction of fine grained sediments and pollutants such as oils, heavy metals, phosphates, etc. , into marine receiving waters from roadways, parking lots, and other impervious surfaces. This run-off and the pollutants it contains can adversely affect fish life by filling estuarine and nearshore rearing and spawning habitats, by covering up eelgrass beds, by changing invertebrate and vertebrate species diversity and abundance, and by contaminating important sport and commercial shellfish beds. In order to protect water quality affecting these and other fish resources and habitats, stormwater run-off must be treated. The applicant has not provided details of a stormwater system design for evaluation of potential impacts to fish resources and their habitat. Without such details, we cannot evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed drainage plan for protection of these resources and habitats. WDF has developed stormwater management guidelines for the purpose of protecting fish habitat and aquatic life (enclosed) . The final drainage plan for the proposed development shall conform to the water quality section of these guidelines. A Hydraulic Project Approval shall be required from the Department of Fisheries for the stormwater system. y Don Brush March 10, 1993 Page 3 We appreciate your cooperation in our efforts to protect, perpetuate, and manage the fish resources of the state of Washington. Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments. If you have any questions, please call me at (206) 902-2574 . Sincerely, Neil Rickard Regional Habitat Manager Habitat Management Division NR: lmh: 25 Enclosure: Stormwater Guidelines cc: R. Timothy Flint, WDF Barbara Ritchie, DOE Jo Sohneronne, DOE Ann Esko, DNR Frank Meriwether, DOH Jim Suzuki Post Office Box 358 Woodenville, Washington 98270 GARY YANDO,DIRECTOR PEON.STgTFo o A o u 7� DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT r SN = PLANNING -SOLID WASTE - UTILITIES Zoo N Y o~ BLDG. III • 426 W. CEDAR • P.O. BOX 578 SHELTON, WA 98584 • (206)427-9670 1864 March 12, 1993 Ayock Beach Homeowner' s Association Ernest W. Fors C/O Jim Connolly 1410 N. 13th St. Shelton, Wa. 98584 Re: Comments received on Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA) issued by Mason County 1/21/93 for the grading and filling and construction of a roadway access to large lot subdivision and for future placement of drainfield for Jorstad Creek Mobile Home Park proposal . Dear Mr. Fors and Mr. Connolly: Thank you for commenting on the above referenced SEPA action. You noted five comments which we are addressing as follows. Please reference your letter. Number 1. Construction of the road along the existing easement will occur a significant distance north of the creek exiting Fosens Lake. The existing topography will prevent impacts to the creek as a result of any sedimentation or other impacts associated with construction of this road. Impacts occurring to the creek from future on-site septic systems located on any of the lots comprising this large-lot subdivision will be evaluated on a case by case basis as septic system permits are applied for. The lot (s) utilized for the Jorstad Creek Mobile Home Park community drainfield are at the far north end of the property over a half mile away from the creek. Number 2 . As a condition of the Grading Permit, the access road leading to the Ayock Beach Water System reservoir will remain intact and accessible in its current state. We will require a letter from the applicant indicating same. . A copy of this letter will be sent to you. Number 3 . Upgrading of the fire hydrant area cannot be required of the applicant under this permit. We will advise them of your concerns and point out the benefits which this could provide. Number 4 . The applicant is not seeking access to Hood Canal at this time. It is understood that Ayock Beach consists of private property and that trespass across such property could not occur without permission. -r Number 5. The issue of drainage is a paramount one. As the drainage, initially leads to the state highway right-of-way, the Department of Transportation is responsible for ensuring that minimum impacts occur. I have enclosed a copy of a letter sent to Mason County from DOT. They are currently reviewing an engineered drainage plan for the site and have requested that the County hold the permit until their concerns are satisfied. Mason County will require standard erosion-control devices during construction of -the roadway. The Mason County Building Department may require additional erosion-control measures when they review the application. Staff from both the Building and Planning departments will monitor the work. If impacts begin occurring to the shoreline environment we will stop the project until the problem can be rectified. Regarding the Jorstad Creek Mobile Home Park, the applicant is continuing to submit requested information to Mason County. We are currently waiting for an engineered drainage design for the park (to be located uphill from the existing Jorstad Creek Park a mile north of Ayock) . No SEPA Threshold Determination has been arrived at for that project. Review and permitting of the community drainfield located on one or more of the northernmost lots in the subdivision above Ayock will be undertaken as a component of the overall park proposal environmental review. The site will be posted when comments are being solicited and additional information is available. We hope this addresses your concerns. If you have any questions regarding the above, don' t hesitate to call . Thank you. Respectfully, `Don Bru Planner Department of Community Development MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Planning-Landfill-Utilities MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (WAC 197-11-350) Description of Proposal : GRADING: 37, 590 cubic yards. FILLING: 2431 cubic yards. Construction of roadway access to large lot subdivision. One lot to be used as community drainfield for proposed Jorstad Creek Mobile Home Park currently under a separate permitting review (No Threshold Determination issued to date) . Proponent: HARRY NELSON Location of Proposal : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PARCEL#:323030004000 LOTS 3-5 EX & TAX 791 EX & TAX 1180 FS 00215 Access directly across Highway 101 from Ayock Beach Subdivision, Hood Canal. Project not within shoreline jurisdiction. Lead Agency: MASON COUNTY The Lead Agency for this proposal has determined that it 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 upon request. MITIGATION MEASURES ARE ATTACHED. This DNS is issued under 197-11-350 (2) , the Lead Agency will not act on this proposal for 15 days from the date below. Comments must be submitted by 02/05/93 . DATE: 01/21/93 `=Zo -r3 Signa re f responsible official Date Responsible Official : Gary Yando Director of Community Development 426 W. Cedar, PO BOX 578 Shelton, WA 98584 (206) 427-9670 MIT DNS, rev: 07/07/92 CC: WDOE, WDF, DNR, USACOE, WDW, Skokomish Tribe (2), Ayock Beach Community Assoc. , Jorstad Creek Community Assoc. , Applicant. Mitigation Measures: Harry Nelson, Grading Permit SEPA review 93-11 1. No construction shall be done between November 15 and March 15 . 2 . Silt fence shall be placed on the east right of way or at the toe of embankments. 3 . All work shall be according to engineered design prepared by Norm Kruegar, P.E. and recommendations detailed in Bradley-Noble Geotechnical report shall be followed as necessary. 4 . All grading, filling and excavating shall be performed and kept within the existing right-of-way easement . 5 . Culverts shall be placed as indicated on grading plan. 6 . Mason County shall require additional erosion-prevention devices as are needed to retain the slope and minimize erosional impacts. 2BRISTOL COURT SERVICES TEL : 206-352-1866 Har 16 ,92 12 : 46 No .013 P .O.? Bradley-Noble Geotechnical Company Soils Englneers and Geologists Testing and Inspecting Servicos 16 March 1992 Mr. Bob Rux Tianjin Industries Ltd. , Inc. 17730 15th Avenue N.E. , Suite 161 Seattle, Washington 98155 subject[ Evaluation of site geology and its effect on your proposed access road. to the 73+/- acre property at Ayock Point area on the Hood Canal, Mason County, Washington. Dear Mr. Rux: As requested, we met on your property to discuss the improvements to the roughly pioneered access road from Highway 101 to the upland area of your property. This letter will present our evaluation of site geology, recommendations for improvement to the roadway, and address questions of site work on the stability of the slope. The slope from 101 to the upland area is stee�, with estimated natural slope angles of about 359. The trees growing on the slope suggest that soil creep, the slow downslope movement of the active soil zone, is the most active erosional agent now at work in the upper areas . On investigating soil ea:posures, we found cropping out in the lower slopes, coarsely laminated silts. Our interpretation of the these silts is that they are lacustrine in origin and associated with moraine-dammerd lakes, ice marginal lakes, and kettles. These lakes result from alpine type of glaciation which predates the overlying gravels that form the upper slope. The gravels are probably of Vachon age and were deposited as recessional outwash deposits. After the retreat of the Vachon continental ice sheet and the melting of the glacier that formed the fjord that is now Hood Canal, the recessional outwash sands 92021201 Page 1 of 4 2401 Bristol Court S.W. • P.O. Box 10267 • Olympt,WA 98502 9 Phone(206)357-7833 2BRISTO L COURT SERVICES TEL : 206-352-1566 Mar 16 ,92 12 :46 No .013 P .03 92021201 Page 2 of 4 and gravels were deprived of their lateral support. This loss of support resulted in major landslides along this area during the past 14,000 years. Cutting of the roadway for Highway 101 into the toe of the slope has destabilized portions of this old slide! by removal of toe support. Aiding in creation of elope instability are the underlying lacustrine silts. These silts are for all practical purposes impermeable. Water infiltrating through the highly permeable and porous recessional outwash gravels migrates downward until it encounters the underlying lacustrine silts . The water then has to flow laterally on the surface of the silts. This flow of water is what creates springs and seeps that are comnon at the contact where it daylights adjacent to the highway. During periods of heavy or prolonged rain fall, the water can result in the build-up, of excessive pore pressure and piping of fines which can destabilize the slope. A discussion of the Jorsted Creek Slide by Robert Carson and Jeffrey Gryta is presentee in the Washington Geologic Newsletter Volume 2, Number 3 and provides information on the mechanism of this slide that occurred to the north of your property. To gain access to the upland area of the property, construction of an access road is proposed. We understand from our field conversation that you propose to start the grade up from the area across from this entrance to the Ayoc:k Point development. We recommend that the grade for this ramp be set to ensure that the improved road enters above the contact with tha lacustrine silts. Setting the grade to contact into the silts will result in seepage or water flows that will need to be controlled and will increase the risk of slumping or sloughing of soils onto the roadway, with damage or closure likely. By walking the existing pioneered roadway, you can determine the area where the existing road is cut into gravels and above any observed springs. We estimate that this silts extend up for about 20 to 30 feet above the elevation of Highway 101 in this area. For construction of the ramp to support the new roadway alinement, we have enclosed a copy of our Recommended Grading Specifications. Use of these 2BRISTOL COURT SERVICES TEL : 206-352-1866 Maresg2 12 : 46 No .013 P .04 1 r 92021201 Page 3 of 4 recommendations for filling will ensure that your work is in conformance with indi_tstry practices and the requirements of Chapters 70 and 29 of the Building Code. As we have discussed, fill slopes utilizing compacted gravels and sandy gravels can be constructed to slopes of 1.5: 1 (horizontal to vertical) without creating unstable slopes. We have observed that ravelling of the near-surfacc.i soils and sheet erosion are more of a problem than 2: 1 slopes . Cutting the roadway into thf:i slope is feasible using good civil engineering practices. We suggest that the maximum cut slope be limited to four feet of vertical cut without construction of: retaining structures . Unrestrained slopes will slough to an angle of internal friction which is estimated to mimic the natural slope angles, about: 350. Collection of runoff from the roadway surface will be required to prevent localized saturation and creation of unstable slopes . We suggest that all. water from the roadways be disposed of in an approved manner at the toe of the slope. In the lower portions of the roadway, some long-germ improvement to slope stability may be realized by drilling horizontal drains immediately above the contact with the lacustrine silts. These horizontal drains would relieve the potential for buildup of hydraulic pressures and excessive pore pressures which could destabilize the slope under the roadway. As the roadway moves away from the toe towards the upland area, these horizontal drains would be of some limited use in improving stability. Our evaluation of the propose(I roadway is that it is a feasible project without creating excessive risks, of failure from earth movements. The trees growing on the slopes indicate that this area has been stable for a period of at least 40 years. Local, isolated, small areas of instability are found along the toe. These areas may cause future failure of the slope, which could in an extreme circumstance cause loss or damage to the roadway. To cause this type of loss, a major mass wasting event would need to occur. To minimize this risk, control of surface water is required to prevent areas of localized saturation. leaving the slopes adjacent to the roadway with the existing 92021201 Page 4 of 4 vegetation undisturbed will help improve the long-germ stability. Disposal of spoils from the construction of the roadway over the slopr:s should not be allowed. These spoils will adversely a:l'fect vegetation and will probably become unstable soil masses as they are not keyed and compacted into the slope. Construction on slopes always involves some risk of damage to improvements from earth movements. Four proposed roadway is similar to logging roads and access roads to other developments in the general area. We do not think that you are at any greener risk of loss than these roads are that traverse the same geologic units . We look forward to the opportunity to work with you on this project. If you hav,-zs any questions, please contact us at our Olympia office. Cordially, BRA.DLEY-NOBLE GEOTECHNICAL COKPANY David C. Strong Engineering Geologist Enclosure: Recommended Gradin13 Specifications P�do-S TA T oA N DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT U 2 0T Z .0 N Y o~ Planning - Landfill - Utilities 1864 December 30, 1992 Bob Rux Jorstad Creek Development P.O. Box 358 Woodinville, Wa. 98072 Re: Grading permit application, Henry Nelson, across Highway 101 from Ayock Beach. Dear Mr. Rux: Enclosed please find a Mason County Environmental Checklist. As we discussed by telephone, environmental review is required for grading in excess of 500 cubic yards. Upon receipt of the checklist we will issue a threshold determination and submit the checklist and application materials to affected agencies for a 15 day comment period. We will also notify the Ayock Beach Community Association who have expressed concern regarding the project . Please return the checklist along with a check for $30 . 00 made out to Mason County Treasurer. If you have any questions feel free to give us a call . Thank you. Respectfully, " on rush, Planner Department of Community Development Gary Yando,Director of Community Development • Erik Fairchild,Planning Director Mason County Bldg. III • 426 W. Cedar • P.O. Box 578 • Shelton,WA 98584 • (206) 427-9670 Recycled , 5 Purgose of Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43,21C RCW, requires all governmental 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 impact 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. Instructions for Agalicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully,to the best or your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or Proposal plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline. and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems,the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects, The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Use of checklist for non-Proposal proposals: Complete this checklist for non-Proposal proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For non-Proposal actions, the references in the checklist to the words "Proposal," 'applicant," and "property or Site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM A. BACKGROUND ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proposal: Ayock View Tracts 2, Name of applicant: D.Y.E.T. Industries, Inc. a Washington corporation 6-lAeot' Page 1 of 12 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Jim Suzuki, P.O. Box 358 Woodinville,Washington 98270 Phone: 483-0600 4. Date checklist prepared: 1993 5. Agency requesting checklist: Mason County General Services. G &A 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): April - November 1993. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? if yes, explain: Unknown 8. List an environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, direct) Y Y p p P P Y related to this proposal: None 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain: YC- - -r4s o IS FVC Pu'e'VOSE OF Gocor/'V& CO�n,Hccr✓� N o D/ZA„vF/ezn F.-O,e 'saesrw cede* 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your approval, if known: /5 'A/ P/loccSS. Grading permit, plumbing permits (if applicable), building permits (if applicable), sanitation permits, State of Washington electrical permits, Washington State Department of Community Development, additional water rights permit from the Dept. of Ecology for construction of the water system. 41VD /?cZan_-Z n �9Qov�� <(a-9) /s A q 06tL E �f 0 MC / Pi91el< t'CF?eAl-Li 11, Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the Proposal 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: Displacement of up to 75,000 yards of material and construction of roads, water, power, phone & cable (if available) on property consisting of 12 lots on 76 acres. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed Proposal, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the Site(s). Provide 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. Page 2 of 12 The address is North ????? Highway 101 , Lilliwaup, Washington 98555. Legal description: Government Lots three (3) and four (4), Section three (3), Township twenty three (23) North, Range three (3) West, W.M., excepting therefrom all that portion thereof lying Westerly of existing Primary State Highway No, 9, Eagle Creek to Jorsted Creek and lying Easterly of a line drawn parallel with and distant 500 feet Westerly, when measured at right angles and/or radially from the centerline of said Primary State Highway No. 9, and extending Northerly from Highway Engineer's Station 248+00 to Highway Engineer's Station 253+87.2; except that from the South line of said Lot three (3) Northerly to Highway Engineer's Station 253+87.2, said line shall be drawn parallel with and 400 feet Westerly from said centerline, as conveyed to the State of Washington by deed dated March 21 , 1962, recorded May 8, 1962, under Auditor' File No. 193143, and ALSO, all that portion of Government Lot five (5), Section three (3), Township twenty three (23) North, Range three (3) West, W.M., which lies North of the South 1150 feet and Westerly of the Westerly right-of-way line of Primary State Highway No. 9, and all that portion of said Government Lot five (5), which lies Easterly of the Easterly right-of-way line of Primary State Highway No. 9 and Northeasterly of a line that is 70 feet Northeasterly and parallel to the Northeasterly line of Lot four (4), Block six (6) of the Plat of the First Addition to Ayock Beach, according to the recorded plat thereof in the office of the Auditor for Mason County, Washington, Volume 5 of Plats, pages 79 and 80. EXCEPTING from all of the forgoing, right-of-way for Primary State Highway No. 9 (Olympic Highway) and road rights-of-way. —fiC,1-,��5 Dire)" Parcel No. 32303 00 04000. Boss ,ywY. /o i r2c-ro �nl regN 7 o 14VO K ,Rc-4c# TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR f1413.),dIS10AJ, AGENCY USE ONLY B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the Site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly,steep slopes, mountainous, other: The Site is generally hilly with some flat areas (see topographical map). The Project is on a hillside that rises Westward from Highway 101. For further details see the engineered road plan. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? / 357o 11/2-1. _ 6 170 `J� 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. Pit run gravel. �Fc-055ieNA� ou�wAs�� d, Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Page 3 of 12 No surface indications of unstable soils. One incident of unstable soils due to Department of Transportation using dubious road construction methods when constructing Hwy 101 . c_ AlQ&E 1�fb._r e. Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. ljee Paragraph 12 above. Source of fill to be from the Project recited herein. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Possible, but not probable based upon the time of year of construction and the type of soil. � p-�tld/3CC � 027_ g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? 24000 sq ft roof areas, 4800 sq ft concrete pads, 1800 sq ft sidewalks, 105,600 blacktop road, 1600 sq ft water tower 100 sq ft well shed = 137,900 sq ft or approximately .04165% of impervious surface. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Limit time of construction and use water dams, plastic erosion fencing and straw bales, as recommended by engineer. 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? If any, generally described and give approximate quantities if known. Negligible increase during and after construction. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may effect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None other than that generated from Highway 101. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None necessary. 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. None other than Hood Canal. Page 4 of 12 (2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe available plans. No. -1-PP2vKC 4/60 - , V -o 6i4 N l9L (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. None. (4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions, Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. (5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so,note location on the site plan. No. (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. No. 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. Yes, well water will be withdrawn for houses (specific quantity unknown other than an approximate 800 gallons per day per house) and an unknown amount of surface water will be discharged into the soil. (2) Describe waste material 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. Domestic sewage will be discharged into the ground from septic. Ultimate quantities unknown. The plat consists of 12 lots. Number of persons unknown. — PPOSec- WILL (?C" IA)6LUL7IAIG- �MMcrN�Tf/ c. Water runoff (including storm Water): ✓o2srlW C24`z=-x' PXcfzFC: APPecW. 60 cr-1 /rS . (1) 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 into other waters? If so, describe. The source of runoff will be generated from rain and snow. Most runoff will perc into the gravelly soil. A negligible amount will flow into Hood's Canal. (2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Unlikely, Unknown, Page 5 of 12 d. proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Houses & roads will have seepage pits for roof drains and ditches. 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: XX deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other XX evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other XX shrubs XX grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other XX other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Evergreens and rhododendrons c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other materials to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Extensive use of native plants will be used to replaced excavation(s), if necessary. 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle ongbirds ther: mammals. dee,.bea�lk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other. b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Page 6 of 12 No. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, It any: None. 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. Electric, propane, oil, wood stove & solar will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? None. 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. None known. (1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Fire, police & aid car. (2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None needed. b. Noise (1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, 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-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Imo cts of Construction Noise There would be temporary noise impacts during construction on the Site. At a Page 7 of 12 h ' h representative location 200 feet from construction, Leq would be approximately as follows, according to USEPA (Noise from Construction): Activity La in decibels) Clearing 71-72 Excavation 59-77 Foundations 65 (with pile driving) 77 Building erection 60-72 Finishing 62-77 Construction would effectively be limited to the hours of 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. by the Washington noise code (WAC Chapter 173-60) because of its restrictive limits on nighttime noise. (3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None necessary. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Residential. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe, Z-0 � 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? According to Mason County Planning Staff, the Proposal has no zoning. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? According to Mason County, the Proposal's recommendation for the Page 8 of 12 comprehensive plan is forestry. Otherwise, the Proposal has no comprehensive plan. g. If applicable,what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? According to Mason County: "the Project is not a designated shoreline and does not fall under Shoreline Management." h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? if so, specify. No. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? 60+/- J. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measure to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None necessary. I, Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing projects, land uses and plans, if any: None necessary. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. 12 middle income housing units. (()/u - S /7t--) b. Approximately how many units, if any would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle,or low-income housing. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None necessary. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building materials) proposed? 32 - 40 feet. Wood. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Page 9 of 12 S Views will be improved. c. Proposed measure to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None necessary. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Little to none. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Doubtful. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None known. d. Proposed measure to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None known to be necessary. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Waterfront associated with project. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreation uses? If so describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None known to be necessary. 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. None known. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None known. c. Proposed measure to reduce or control impacts, if any: Page 10 of 12 ti None known to be necessary. 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. Hwy. 101. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If no,what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. Unknown. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Those needed by single family housing. None. 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).Yes, 5000 - 5500 feet of new private road. 6,eA41A16, PC-A J , e, Will the project use (or occur 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 by the completed project? If known, indicate whether peak volumes would occur. 48. 7am & 6Pm. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: 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. No. 12 lot plat already exists. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None necessary. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. Electricity, refuse service, septic system, telephone. Page 11 of 12 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. The utilities needed and/or available are electricity, water emanating from a well, refuse service, telephone and private and community septic system(s). - Telephone service will be provided by U.S. West. - According to Superintendent Public Utility District No. 1 , Duane Nault, "there is sufficient transmission and substation capacity to serve this development." - Cable Service is not available at this time. - Propane Service can be provided by numerous distributors who can provide service to each Unit in the Proposal: - Mail service provided by the local postal service. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature Date Submitted Page 12 of 12