HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA Dock Blanket DNS - SEP Determinations - 7/22/1986 R
U.).,-,
ANDREA BEATTY RINIKERDirector
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY"
Mail Stop PV-11 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8711 • (206) 459-6000
July 22, 1986 I
JUL 23 1986
Patti Miller-Crowley
Mason County Department GENERAL SERVICES
of General Services
Courthouse Annex 1
North Fourth & West Cedar
P.O. Box 186
Shelton, WA 98584
Dear Ms. Miller-Crowley:
I have reviewed your letter regarding "blanket" DNS's for building docks
on specified lakes in Mason County. I have the following comments:
1. A DNS which covers multiple docks is an acceptable procedure under
SEPA if the threshold determination was made taking into account the
cumulative probable significant adverse environmental impacts of all
proposed docks. This, in my opinion, could only be accomplished if
there were specific dock construction criteria, which I understand
is the case. Also, this presupposes that the lakeshore is such that
there are no sites which are so environmentally sensitive that a
dock would create a significant adverse impact.
2. I have some difficulty with the DNS only applying to certain
contractors. Would the impacts differ if an individual were to
build his/her own dock assuming the dock criteria were met?
3. The issuance of an expiration date on a DNS is somewhat complicated.
Presumably, a DNS is valid unless conditions change which would make
adverse impacts likely. An arbitrary "expiration" date does not
seem to fit with this criterion. However, SEPA does provide for
withdrawing a DNS if there are significant adverse environmental
impacts (WAC 197-11-340(3)(a)(ii). If, as I understood you to say,
each individual dock requires a building permit and if those
permits have not been issued prior to obtaining new information, the
DNS may be withdrawn. What I am suggesting is that Mason County may
wish to review the DNS and conditions on an annual basis to see if
new information under WAC 197-11-340(3) exists and if so, withdraw
the DNS. While this would not technically be a part of the DNS,
i.e. , expiration, it would seem to be a means of achieving the same
objective.
� 3
� A
Patti Miller-Crowley
July 22, 1986
Page 2
4. The other route we discussed is the issuance of the DNS for a
specific number of docks. This would ensure periodic review and
avoid cumulative impacts from sneaking up on you.
I hope this is of some assistance and if you want to discuss it further,
please give me a call at 459-6018.
Sincerely,
Marvin Vialle
Environmental Review Section
MV:bjw
TO
DATE TIME AM
FROM /Z PM
AREA CODE c�
EXT.
M
E ono
S
S 2 Gov IL
A QOQ
G
E
SI ED
PHONED[] BACK CALL RNED❑ SEE YOU ❑ Mj AFL❑ WAS IN DppF
i
K � MASON COUNTY
DEPARTMENT of GENERAL SERVICES
Courthouse Annex I N. Fourth & W. Cedar
P.O. Box 186 Shelton, Washington 98584
(206) 426-5593
building environmental health maintenance parks&recreation planning sewer&water
July 3, 1986
Marvin Vialle
Department of Ecology
Mail Stop PV-11
Olympia, Washington 98504
Dear Mr. Vialle:
At long last I am writing you a summary of the conversation we had several
weeks ago. Last year Bill Kingman (previous Mason County Planner) issued
what I will call "blanket" DNS's for two Mason County contractors. Mr.
Kingman had the contractor prepare a single checklist for all minor new
construction and repair on an individual lake. Thus the checklist was
defined generically (common impacts) and geographically (defined lake) . I
believe that Mr. Kingman felt this action was covered under WAC 197-11-060
3,c,ii p. 4 of the SEPA rules.
These checklists were prepared for Mason and Wooten Ickes. Bill then put an
expiration date on each checklist to allow for annual review. Db comments
to the contrary were received on this activity last year. This year, I had
the contractors submit new "blanket" checklists with a new expiration date.
Additionally, a new checklist was submitted for any new minor construction
on Phillips Lake.
Kari Rokstadt-Samuelson of DOE called me and told me that this action is not
allowed under SEPA. She said I could adopt an existing checklist, but if a
hydraulic permit was required there would still need to be a 15 day review
period for each proposal. Since the Department of Game has issued "blanket"
hydraulic permits to the contractors for minor new construction on each
individual lake, I cannot understand the purpose of the review period.
During our conversation I explained the situation to you and asked where in
the SEPA rules it says that you cannot issue a checklist that covers similar
activities in a limited geographical area. I do not propose to issue
"blanket" DNS's for saltwater or wherever a "blanket" hydraulic permit has
not already been issued.
You informed me that you could not put an expiration date on environmental
checklists and suggested I limit the number of docks or bulkheads per
checklist to allow for periodic review. I am agreeable to this suggestion.
I believe that the 15 day review period in these cases serves no purpose.
The Department of Game is already aware of the work since a "blanket"
hydraulic permit for the contractor has been issued. The only comment I
_ ever receive from DOE on a lake dock or bulkhead is a form letter which
tells me to make sure that the project is consistant with the Shoreline
Master Plan, a fact of which I am already well aware.
Vialle/DOE
July 3, 1986
Page 2
Contractors have a very limited building season in this area. Often a
neighbor will see work being done and will want his done at the same time to
save expense. A 15 day review period for ' these minor projects is an
unnecessary hardship.
Finally, Mr. Vialle, I too am concerned about the cumulative impact of these
projects and therefore am willing to limit the number of projects per
checklist as you suggested. However, I believe that the best way to address
this problem would be through an amendment of the Shoreline Master Plan.
I am requesting that Mason County be allowed to use the "blanket" DNS's that
we have already issued. In the future any "blanket" DNS issued to a
contractor would be under the conditions you suggested.
Sincerely,
1
/V W
tti Miller-Crowley
Planner
PMC/jJ
co
6
AILZ44 .
-(P'``�'� �� '�°�- .�� cam.) • '
S� Z� AIO
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
A. BACKGROUND:
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: D frvC-?.C: - ,
2. Name of applicant: h Ak e- S 4vi
3. Address b phone number of applicant b
contact
Person:
7 /�� 2- E c t/ �, f��� 1,v,�v C c3n
�, o &'y /0SS> 134? doh
4. Date checklist prepared:
5. Agency requesting checklist: ��ys�� �O�-✓�
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable) :
gf
•7� 7 cf
7. Do you have any plans for future expansion, or further activity
related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. 14,1L'
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been
prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this
proposal.
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.
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be neede
for your proposal, if known. // /'ol /),p/ -,0 V,'I 1,4
11. Give a 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. (Lead agencies may modify
this form to include additional specific information on project
description. )
Dam (a ,.� s�7vct•�i.. odes a (?y s� `-ec-,/-• Is
00 b91urs
w� , Uh l� cx,n_4 !'P,T�cI F/Arv,;I�q
1
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
12. What is the 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, 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 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.
yY) a s a �e
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS:
1. EARTH:
a. General description of the site (circle one) :
Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous,
other
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate
percent slope)?
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 not any prime farmland.
d. Are there surface indications or history of
unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so,
describe.
2
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR
a AGENCY USE ONLY
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate
quantities of any filling or grading proposed.
Indicate source of fill.
i
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing,
construction, or use? If so, generally describe.
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with
impervious surfaces after project constructions
(for example, asphalt or buildings)?
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or
other impacts to the earth, if any. :
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
describe and give approximate quantities, if known.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor
that may affect your proposal? If so, generally
describe.
H/A
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or
other impacts to air, if any:
N/A
3
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
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.
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to
(within 200 feet) of the described waters? If yes, please
describe and attach available plans.
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.
Indicated the source of fill material.
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or
diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate
quantities if known.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so,
note location on the site plan.
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.
4
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
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.
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 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.
C. Water Runoff (including storm water) :
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.
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so
generally describe.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and
runoff water impacts, if any:
4. PLANTS:
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the
site:
deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
shrubs
grass
pasture
crop or grain
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage,
others
water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
5
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed
or altered?
C. List threatened or endangered species known to be
on or near the site.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or
other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on
the site, if any:
S. 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, songbirds, other
mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other
fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to
be on or near the site.
C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so,
explain.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife,
if any:
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.
N/A
6
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
b. Would you project affect the potential use of solar
energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally
describe.
H/A
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:
N/A
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.
1) describe special emergency services that might
be required.
N/A
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control
environmental health hazards, if any:
b. Noise.
1) What types of noise exists in the area which may
affect your project (for example: traffic,
equipment operation, other)?
N/A
2) What types of 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.
7
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise
impacts, if any:
8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE:
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent
properties?
b. Has the site been used r agriculture?foIf so,
describe.
C. Describe any structures on the site.
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
e. What is the current zoning classification of the
site?
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation
of the site?
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master
program designation of the site?
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an
'environmentally sensitive' area? If so, specify.
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work
in the completed project?
N/A
J. Approximately how may people would the completed
project displace?
N/A
8
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement
impacts, if any:
N/A
1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible
with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any:
9. HOUSING:
a. Approximately how may units, if any, would be
provided? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-
income housing.
N/A
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be
eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-
income housing.
N/A
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing
impacts, if any:
N/A
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?
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be
altered or obstructed?
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic
impacts, if any:
11. LIGHT AND GLARE:
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal
produce? What time of day would it mainly occur?
N/A
9
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a
safety hazard or interfere with viers?
N/A
C. What existing off-site sources of light or glare
may affect your proposal:
N/A
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and
glare impacts, if any:
N/A
12. RECREATION:
a. What designated and informal recreational
opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing
recreational uses? If so, describe.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on
recreation, including recreation opportunities to
be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
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.
b. Generally describe any landmark or evidence of
historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural
importance known to be on or next to the site.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if
any:
10