160614 MAD (SEPA Checklist).pdfMadrona School
Replacement
SEPA Checklist
June 2016
PREPARED FOR:
EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT
20420 68TH AVENUE WEST
LYNNWOOD, WA 98036
PREPARED BY:
ESA
5309 SHILSHOLE AVENUE
NW, STE. 200
SEATTLE, WA 98107
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
INTRODUCTION
Edmonds School District 15 (the District) proposes to construct a new elementary school to
replace the existing approximately 86,500 square foot Madrona School. The existing school was
built in 1963 and is past its useful life, with outmoded civil, architectural, structural, mechanical,
and electrical systems. In addition, the existing facility was designed as a Junior High School for
grades 7, 8 and 9 and does not fit the non-graded K-8 style of education used at Madrona School.
The non-graded program is comprised of multiage centers (classrooms) that span three grade
levels, and each center houses two teachers and 54 students rather than the traditional classroom
setup with one teacher and 20 to 30 students. The non-graded program houses approximately 650
students with 80 total teacher s and staff. The new school would reflect Madrona K-8’s
programmatic differences, meet new District-Wide Educational Specifications, and replace
outdated infrastructure while working within the parameters of the existing site conditions. The
project is funded by a Capital Construction Bond, approved by the voters in February 2014, and
construction is slated for the spring of 2017. Construction of the new school facility would take
approximately a year. An additional 4 months would be necessary to complete demolition of the
existing school and complete sitework.
The proposed new school facility would be constructed on the existing baseball field south of the
existing school, approximately 80,000 square feet in size, include six new single-story buildings.
Future student enrollment and staffing levels are expected to remain the same as existing levels.
The new school would include five new buildings for classrooms and one for the entry,
administration, the gym, cafeteria, kitchen, library, and the school’s music and science programs.
The new school would also have a 3,000 square foot covered play area and new play field where
the existing school is located. As part of the project, there would also be improved parking and
bus and automobile circulation and significant new stormwater management facilities.
June 2016 Page i
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ i
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ......................................................................................................... 1
A. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................ 1
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS .............................................................................................. 4
1. Earth .................................................................................................................................... 4
2. Air ....................................................................................................................................... 6
3. Water ................................................................................................................................... 8
4. Plants ................................................................................................................................. 11
5. Animals ............................................................................................................................. 12
6. Energy and Natural Resources .......................................................................................... 14
7. Environmental Health ....................................................................................................... 15
8. Land and Shoreline Use .................................................................................................... 18
9. Housing ............................................................................................................................. 20
10. Aesthetics .......................................................................................................................... 21
11. Light and Glare ................................................................................................................. 21
12. Recreation ......................................................................................................................... 22
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation .................................................................................... 23
14. Transportation ................................................................................................................... 26
15. Public Services .................................................................................................................. 29
16. Utilities.............................................................................................................................. 29
C. SIGNATURE ................................................................................................................................ 30
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 31
FIGURES ................................................................................................................................................... 35
Figure 1: Project Vicinity
Figure 2: Project Area and Existing Facilities
Figure 3: Topographic Map
Figure 4: Site Plan Concept
June 2016 Page iii
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of the proposed project, if applicable:
Madrona School Replacement
2. Name of Applicant:
Edmonds School District 15
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
Taine Wilton
Capital Projects Office
20420 68th Avenue West
Lynnwood, WA 98036
425-431-7172
4. Date checklist prepared:
May 2016
5. Agency requesting checklist:
Edmonds School District 15
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
Construction of the new Madrona School is expected to begin in the spring of
2017. It is anticipated that construction of the new school would be completed by
the fall of 2018.
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further
activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
No additions, expansion, or further activity is anticipated in the foreseeable future.
The District may add relocatable classrooms (portables) to the site in the future.
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been
prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal.
Madrona K-8 School Project Tree Survey. American Forest Management. January
20, 2016.
Madrona K-8 Topographic Survey. July 2015.
June 2016 Page 1
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report, New Madrona K-8 Project,
Shannon and Wilson, Inc. August 6, 2016.
Preliminary Traffic and Access Review for Replacement. Edmonds School
District – Madrona School. Heffron Transportation, Inc. March 9, 2016.
Regulated Building Materials Assessment Report Madrona K-8 School, Edmonds
School District, Edmonds, Washington. Terracon/Argus Pacific, Inc. September
30, 2015.
Wetland and Stream Delineation Report New Madrona K-8 Project City of
Edmonds, Washington. Shannon and Wilson, Inc. September 15, 2015.
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.
There are no applications for other proposals that are pending for governmental
approvals that directly affect the property.
10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for
your proposal, if known:
State and regional agency approvals and permits that would be needed include:
• Asbestos/Demolition Notification (Department of Labor and Industries and
Puget Sound Clean Air Agency)
• NPDES Permit (Department of Ecology)
Local approvals and permits that would be needed include:
• Building Permit
• Conditional Use Permit
• Critical Areas Checklist
• Demolition Permit
• Land Use Permit
• Park Impact Fee
• Plumbing and Mechanical Permit
• Project Design Review
• Right-of-Way Construction Permit
Page 2 June 2016
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
• Street Use Permit
• Side Sewer Permit
• Landscape Sprinkler Permit
11. 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 District proposes to construct a new elementary school to replace the existing
approximately 86,500 square foot Madrona School. The new school would be
located in the area of the site currently occupied by a baseball field, in the
southeastern portion of the 40.78-acre site. The new school would be
approximately 80,000 square feet and designed for 650 students and 80 total
teachers and staff, maintaining current enrollment and staffing levels. The existing
single-story school, built in 1963, would be demolished after construction of the
new school is completed. The existing facility was designed as a Junior High
School for grades 7, 8 and 9 and does not fit the non-graded K-8 style of
education used at Madrona School (multiage centers that span three grade levels,
with each center housing two teaches and 54 students). The new school would
reflect the Madrona K-8 program, meet new District-Wide Educational
Specifications, and replace outdated infrastructure, with improvements providing
efficiency that allows enrollment and staffing to be maintained within a smaller
school footprint.
The new Madrona School would be a collection of single-story buildings
connected by covered walkways (Figure 4). The southern portion of the new
school would be comprised of five classroom buildings. The northern building
would be comprised of administration; cafeteria; gymnasium; and music, library
and science rooms. During construction, the two play areas would be removed. A
new kindergarten play area would be located on the western side of the site, near
the administrative building, including 3,000 square feet of covered play area. The
open space left by removal of the existing school would be redeveloped into a
new soccer field. The existing track and field located in the southwestern portion
of the site would be elongated to meet current International Association of
Athletics Federations (IAAF) track and field design standards with the play area
and covered play located in the center.
Staff and visitor parking would remain in the same location, as would the parent
drop-off queue. However, the location of the bus drop-off queue would be
redesigned so that it is parallel to the parent drop-off queue and has its own access
to 236th Street SW. A new service/loading area would be constructed as part of
the proposed improvements. It would share access to the site with the bus drop-off
queue and would provide a sidewalk for pedestrians accessing the site. A new
sidewalk would also be constructed between the two driveways on the school
June 2016 Page 3
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
property as part of the proposed upgrades to improve pedestrian connectivity to
the school. New signage for the school would also be provided in the form of a
digital sign near the street. In addition, new stormwater management facilities
would be implemented as part of the proposed improvements.
12. 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.
Madrona School is located at 9300 236th Street SW in Edmonds, Washington
(Figure 1). The property is shared with the former Woodway Elementary School
to the west, and is adjacent to 236th Street SW to the north and residential
properties to the east and south (Figure 2). The site is located in the SE quarter of
Section 36, Township 27 North, Range 3 East, Willamette Meridian. The site is
located on Tax Assessor Parcel 27033600404600. The legal description is: “SEC
36 TWP 27 RGE 03RT-49) NE 1/4 OF SE1/4.”
Figure 3 shows a topographic map of the Madrona School site.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
a. General description of the site (underline):
Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other ___________
The site topography is characterized by flat areas surrounded by steep
slopes. The school is bordered by vegetated hills with a 30 percent slope
descending to the west, a 40 percent decline to the east, and a 13 percent
decline to the south. The northern section of the site, occupied by the
existing school and parking lot, is relatively flat. The parking lot is at-
grade with the track and field area, while the school site gradually
increases in elevation to the south to meet the play area and baseball field.
A steep slope (over 40 percent) between the two open spaces separates the
difference in grade between the baseball field on the upper plateau and the
track and field area on the lower plateau.
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent
slope)?
The steepest slope on the site is located between the two sports fields on
the southern end of the property (which can be up to 60 percent), followed
Page 4 June 2016
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
by the ravines bordering the eastern and western sides of the property
(which are between 30 and 40 percent depending on the location).
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 agricultural
land of long-term commercial significance and whether the
proposal results in removing any of these soils.
The project site is situated on a ridge underlain by Quaternary Vashon till
consisting of silty sand with variable gravel and cobble content (Shannon
&Wilson, Inc., 2015a). The glacial till is underlain by advanced outwash
material at about 80 feet below the surface.
The majority of the property is comprised of Alderwood-Urban land
complex (2 to 8 percent slopes). However, the ravine between Madrona
School and the former Woodway Elementary is comprised of Alderwood
gravelly sandy loam (15 to 30 percent slopes), and there is a 5.6-acre
portion of the southeastern corner of the school property that is comprised
of Alderwood-Urban land complex (8 to 15 percent slopes) (USDA,
2016). No agricultural land of long-term commercial significance is
located within the project area.
d. Are there any surface indications or a history of unstable soils
in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe.
Steep slopes surround the project area. There is some evidence of erosion
on the western side of the site where stormwater runoff has flowed down
the western ravine.
e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate
quantities of total affected area of any filling or grading
proposed. Indicate source of fill.
Excavation and grading would be required for utility extension,
construction of stormwater improvements, construction of the new school,
and track and field improvements, totaling in 16,800 net cubic yards of
export. Excavated material would consist of non-native fill/gravels and
native soil. All excavated material would be hauled off site and disposed
of at an approved offsite location. Approximately 6,200 cubic yards of
imported gravel fill material would be required under proposed pavements
and building slabs.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or
use? If so, generally describe.
The proposed project is surrounded by steep slopes; therefore, the erosion
potential is high. In order to meet current Ecology Construction Storm
Water General Permit requirements, a properly developed and maintained
June 2016 Page 5
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
erosion control plan with best management practices (BMPs) would be
required to control erosion during construction of the proposed project.
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious
surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or
buildings)?
Under the proposed project, approximately 3 acres of new impervious
surfaces would be introduced. However, after the existing school is
demolished, up to 2 acres of land could be returned to pervious surface.
Currently, 19.5 percent of the site is covered with impervious surface.
After construction, 26 percent of the site would be covered with
impervious surface.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other
impacts to the earth, if any:
Temporary erosion and sedimentation control BMPs would be installed to
minimize erosion during construction. BMPs specific to the site and
project would be specified by the District in the construction contract
documents that the construction contractor would be required to
implement. BMPs would include but not be limited to:
• Maintaining cover measures atop disturbed ground, including erosion
control matting, plastic sheeting, straw mulch, crushed rock or
recycled concrete, or mature hydroseed;
• Providing storm drain inlet protection;
• Routing surface water away from work areas and steep slopes;
• Keeping staging areas and travel areas clean and free of track-out
(materials adhering to motor vehicles and inadvertently carried out of
the project site to a staging area or paved road);
• Covering work areas and stockpiled soils when not in use; and
• Completing earthwork during dry weather and site conditions if
possible.
2. Air
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the
proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance
when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and
give approximate quantities if known.
During construction, there would be a small increase in exhaust emissions
from construction vehicles and equipment, and a temporary increase in
Page 6 June 2016
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
fugitive dust due to earthwork for the project. The most noticeable
increase in emissions and fugitive dust would occur during demolition and
earthwork. Exhaust emissions would also be generated from construction
employee and equipment traffic to and from the site.
The new school would include a kitchen area, but basic food production
would be done at a central kitchen and delivered to the site. Any odors
from food warming or other future kitchen uses would be controlled with
the use of exhaust hoods.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may
affect your proposal? If so, generally describe.
There are no offsite sources of emissions or odors that would affect the
proposed project.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other
impacts to air, if any.
The contractor chosen for the proposed project would be required to
comply with applicable Puget Sound Clean Air Agency (PSCAA)
regulations, including:
• Regulation I, Section 9.11 prohibiting the emission of air contaminants
that would or could be injurious to human health, plant or animal life,
or property; and
• Regulation I, Section 9.15 prohibiting the emission of fugitive dust,
unless reasonable precautions are employed to minimize the
emissions.
BMPs specific to the site and project would be specified by the District in
the construction contract documents that the construction contractor would
be required to implement. To reduce fugitive dust emissions from trucks
leaving the site, the contractor would be required to establish wheel-
cleaning stations at the exits from the site and implement dust control
watering on onsite construction haul routes. Streets would be regularly
swept to remove dust and debris from construction vehicles. The
contractor will also be required to maintain construction equipment in
good working order to prevent increased exhaust emissions. See also the
mitigation listed in section B.1.h, above.
June 2016 Page 7
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
3. Water
a. Surface Water:
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.
Three wetlands are located on the project site: Wetland A, Wetland
B, and Wetland C (Figure 3). Wetland A (0.02 acre) is a Category
IV palustrine scrubshrub wetland, Wetland B (0.4 acre) is a
Category III palustrine forested wetland, and Wetland C (0.1 acre)
is a Category IV palustrine emergent wetland (Shannon & Wilson,
Inc., 2015b).
Wetland A is located on the wooded slope between the former
Woodway School and Madrona School. Hydrology in Wetland A
is likely supported by a combination of storm drain discharges
from the upgradient storm drain outfalls and groundwater. Wetland
B is located in the wooded ravine on the eastern property
boundary. Hydrology in Wetland B is likely supported by surface
flow from the surrounding ravine, the storm drain inputs from the
school, and a seasonally high groundwater table. Wetland C is
located along the wooded slope, south of Wetland A. Hydrology in
Wetland C is likely supported by a combination of the upgradient
storm drain discharges and groundwater (Shannon & Wilson, Inc.,
2015b).
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.
Construction would occur in close proximity to the three wetlands.
Construction of the new school and the service/loading area would
occur within 100 feet of Wetland B’s buffer and upgrades to the
track would occur within 200 feet of Wetland A and C’s buffers. A
portion of the new school structure would be located within the 60-
foot standard buffer that was adopted through the City’s revised
Critical Areas standards (Edmonds Community Development Code
[ECDC] Chapter 23.40, as adopted May 3, 2016). This may require
a limited area of buffer averaging, which would be completed
consistent with ECDC 23.50.040.G.
The District has avoided all direct impacts to wetlands (wetland
fill) by locating proposed facilities almost entirely within existing
developed areas. However, stormwater is a source of hydrology for
Page 8 June 2016
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
all three of the wetlands. Construction of Underground Injection
Control (UIC) wells for stormwater could impact wetland
hydrology. Treated runoff would be directed to Wetland B to
maintain its base flow and reduce the hydrologic impact of the UIC
wells.
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.
No fill or dredge material would be placed in, or removed from,
surface waters or wetlands.
4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or
diversions? Give general description, purpose, and
approximate quantities, if known.
The project would not require surface water withdrawals or
diversions.
5. Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If
so, note location on the site plan.
The proposal is not located within a 100-year floodplain.
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.
The project would not involve discharge of waste materials to any
surface waters. All waste materials from the project, including
grading spoils and demolition debris, would be transported off site
to an appropriate disposal facility. BMPs specific to the site and
project would be specified by the District in the construction
contract documents that the construction contractor would be
required to implement.
b. Groundwater:
1. Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking
water or other purposes? If so, give a general
description of the well, proposed uses and approximate
quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be
discharged to groundwater? Give general description,
purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
No groundwater would be withdrawn as part of the project.
However, stormwater runoff would be discharged to groundwater
June 2016 Page 9
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
through use of Underground Injection Control (UIC) wells. More
detail on discharge of stormwater to groundwater is provided
below in Section 3.c.1.
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.
No waste material would be discharged into the ground. The
project site would not utilize septic tanks.
c. Water Runoff (including stormwater)
1. Describe the source of runoff (including stormwater)
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.
Stormwater is currently funneled into a trench on the western side
of the property, but due to fast flows, water often pours over the
edge and into the western ravine. Stormwater runoff would be
collected on roofs and in catch basins and conveyed via gravity
flow to stormwater injection (UIC) wells. UIC wells would be
installed to discharge stormwater runoff into the ground. The wells
would infiltrate stormwater runoff into the underlying Vashon
advance outwash soils, which begin approximately 80 feet below
ground surface and are approximately 100 feet thick. No onsite
detention would be required.
2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters?
If so, generally describe.
Waste materials in the form of sediment generated during
construction could enter surface water through stormwater runoff.
The BMPs described below would minimize sediment leaving the
site during construction.
Stormwater runoff would be treated for basic level contaminants
prior to entering the UIC wells to prevent waste materials from
entering groundwater. Stormwater treatment would be provided by
means of stormwater media filters in manholes or vaults.
Stormwater runoff entering Wetland B will also receive basic level
treatment prior to discharge.
Page 10 June 2016
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and
runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any:
The UIC stormwater system included in the site design would control
runoff water impacts. During construction, BMPs would be implemented
to ensure that sediment originating from disturbed soils would be retained
within the limits of disturbance. BMPs may include installation of a rock
construction entrance, catch basin filters, interceptor swales, hay bales,
sediment traps, and other appropriate cover measures. BMPs specific to
the site and project would be specified by the District in the construction
contract documents that the construction contractor would be required to
implement.
In order to mitigate for changes to wetland hydrology, the District would
stabilize the outfalls to the ravines, remove non-native species within the
wetland and buffer, and enhance surface roughness within the wetland.
4. Plants
a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site:
_X__deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
_X__evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
_X__shrubs
_X__grass
____pasture
____crop or grain
____orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops.
____wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other
____water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
_X__other types of vegetation (see below)
In general, the ravines surrounding the school are dominated by evergreen
trees (such as western red cedar and Douglas-fir), ferns, nettles, and
invasive species such as Himalayan blackberry and English ivy. Near the
wetland in the eastern ravine, wet soil plants, such as tall mannagrass, can
also be found. The uplands of the school are predominantly vegetated by
grass, weeds (such as dandelions), deciduous trees (such as maples and
Pacific dogwood), and a few evergreen trees (pacific madrone). Scotch
broom, an invasive species, is located on the steep slope between the
baseball field and the track and field area. Within the building areas there
are also a few nonnative ornamentals. A tree survey was conducted in
January 2016, which identified 479 trees onsite within 10’ of the clearings,
June 2016 Page 11
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
trees on the steep slopes were not identified (AFM, 2016). Presently, the
City of Edmonds does not protect significant trees under its city and
community development code. Tree conservation regulations have been
proposed (Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code
(ECDC) Chapter 23.20); however, they have not been adopted. Under the
draft code, any tree with a diameter of 6 inches or more would qualify as a
significant tree. This would include 99 percent of the trees onsite (474).
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or
altered?
Approximately 12,000 square feet of existing native and ornamental shrub
area and approximately 3 acres of lawn area would be altered. Fifty trees
would be removed, 33 due to health reasons. Invasive vegetation between
the two ball fields would also be removed.
c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near
the site.
The project site does not contain any documented threatened or
endangered plant species (WNHP, 2013).
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures
to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any:
Existing trees on the site would be protected to the extent possible using
tree protection measures including, but not limited to, use of tree
protection fences.
The landscaping plan would place an emphasis on native plants and
drought-resistant ornamentals. The landscape would be designed to
achieve low water use and low maintenance requirements. Landscape
areas would be watered with automatic water efficient irrigation system
intended to be used temporarily until plants have become established.
5. Animals
a. List any birds and other animals which have been observed on
or near the site or are known to be on or near the site.
During the April 2016 site visit, a bald eagle was observed flying
overhead. However, there are no eagle nests identified as being within the
project vicinity (WDFW, 2016). According to the Washington State
Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW), no priority habitats or species
are located onsite (WDFW, 2016). However, the ravines surrounding the
project site are identified as fish and wildlife conservation areas (City of
Edmonds, 2016). It is possible that small mammals such as raccoons,
Virginia opossums, mountain beavers, and eastern gray squirrels may use
the ravine, along with bird species common in forested areas (e.g.,
Page 12 June 2016
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
chestnut-back chickadee, red-breasted nuthatch, Steller’s jay, downy and
hairy woodpecker, and bushtit).
Wetlands near the site may provide a seasonal water source for wildlife
such as birds (for drinking or bathing). It is possible that amphibians may
also use the wetlands as suitable breeding habitat due to the presence of
shallow water with thin-stemmed emergent vegetation for egg laying.
The mowed ballfields to the south of the school may provide foraging
habitat for species such as American robin and Canada goose, which use
open, grassy areas.
While landscaped areas around the school and parking lot are fairly small
and fragmented, they can support species tolerant of human disturbance,
such as house wren, Bewick’s wren, black-capped chickadee, bushtit,
dark-eyed junco, house finch, house sparrow, Steller’s jay, and American
crow. Small mammals such as eastern gray squirrel may forage or nest in
trees in these areas.
Nocturnal species such as owls and bats may be present, but were not
active during the site visit. Other species may only be visible or present in
this area during certain seasons.
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on
near the site.
No threatened or endangered species are known to be on or near the site.
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
The Puget Sound area is located within the Pacific Flyway, which is a
flight corridor for migrating waterfowl and other avian fauna. The Pacific
Flyway extends south from Alaska to Mexico and South America. No
portion of the proposed project would interfere with or alter the Pacific
Flyway.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any.
As required under ECDC 23.90.030, the District would undertake
measures to protect wildlife habitat within the forested ravines. These
would be identified in a fish and wildlife habitat conservation area
mitigation plan and may include measures identified in ECDC
23.90.030(C)) such as:
• a native vegetation planting plan;
• plans for retention, enhancement or restoration of specific habitat
features;
June 2016 Page 13
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
• plans for control of nonnative invasive plant or wildlife species; and
• stipulations for use of innovative, sustainable building practices.
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.
Electricity and natural gas would be used to meet the new school’s energy
needs.
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by
adjacent properties? If so, generally describe.
No existing or proposed buildings within the project boundaries would be
tall enough to block the use of solar energy by adjacent properties. No
other aspect of the project would interfere with solar energy use by others.
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:
Energy conservation features included in the proposed new school would
include:
• Skylights or roof monitors to provide daylighting for student
occupied spaces.
• North and south oriented classrooms for optimum daylighting and
reduction in electric lighting.
• Access from classrooms to outdoor learning gardens
• Continuous air barrier and air leakage testing during construction
to reduce infiltration and energy loss.
• Vestibules at all main entries to reduce heating and ventilation
loads by creating an air lock.
• High performing windows with low-e coatings that would be
optimized based on the window orientation.
• Continuous insulation on exterior of building to prevent energy
loss from thermal bridging.
• Solar readiness for future installation of solar panels on 100
percent of the roof area.
• Energy source metering and display kiosk to inform building
occupants and owners of both real time and long term energy use.
• Electrical:
Page 14 June 2016
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
o Daylight controls that automatically dim electric lighting in
areas adjacent to windows.
o High efficiency LED lighting for all spaces providing
lighting power density of less than 0.5 watts per square
foot.
o Vacancy sensors in every room that would automatically
turn lights off when space is unoccupied.
o Motion sensors on exterior lights that would automatically
dim lights to 10 percent when the area is unoccupied.
o Plug load controllers that automatically switch off 50
percent of electrical outlets in classrooms and offices to
reduce vampire loads from printers, monitors, and desk
lamps during off hours.
• Mechanical:
o Air to air heat recovery in classrooms.
o Decoupled heating and ventilation “DOAS” systems in
classrooms.
o Radiant floor heating in classrooms.
o Low temperature heating water system.
o High efficiency condensing boilers.
o Central air to water heat pump to supplement boiler plant.
o High efficiency condensing water heaters.
o Low flow plumbing fixtures.
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.
Accidental spills of hazardous materials from equipment and vehicles
could occur during construction. However, a spill prevention and control
plan would be developed to prevent the accidental release of contaminants
into the environment.
1. Describe any known or possible contamination at the site
from present or past uses.
According to the Department of Ecology Facility/Site(s) database,
Madrona School is a hazardous waste generator due to the presence of
a Conditionally Exempt Small Generator (Ecology, 2016).
The Regulated Building Materials Assessment Report found that the
existing school contains asbestos throughout the buildings
June 2016 Page 15
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
(Terracon/Argus Pacific, 2015). Bulk samples of suspect asbestos-
containing materials (145) were collected and analyzed. Of those
samples, 19 materials were found to contain greater than 1 percent
asbestos, six materials were assumed to contain asbestos, and two
materials were found to contain less than 1 percent asbestos.
Of the paint chip samples collected, 17 were found to contain
detectable levels of lead (70 percent). In addition, mercury-containing
fluorescent light tubes were identified in the buildings, high-intensity
discharge (HID) lamps were identified in the gymnasium and on the
exterior of the buildings, and light ballasts associated with fluorescent
light fixtures were observed to be PCB-containing and electronic
(Terracon/Argus Pacific, 2015).
2. Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that
might affect project development and design. This
includes underground hazardous liquid and gas
transmission pipelines located within the project area
and in the vicinity.
The existing school contains asbestos and lead paint as described
above under 7.a.1. There is also a boiler building onsite that would
be demolished as part of the project.
3. Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might
be stored, used, or produced during the project's
development or construction, or at any time during the
operating life of the project.
Chemicals stored and used during construction would be limited to
gasoline and other petroleum-based products required for
maintenance and operation of construction equipment and vehicles.
During operation of the new school facility, chemicals stored and
used on site would be limited to cleaning supplies and mild acids
and bases used for middle school science and would be stored in
vented flammable resistant cabinets.
4. Describe special emergency services that might be
required.
No special emergency services would be required.
5. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental
health hazards, if any:
Site-specific pollution prevention plans and spill prevention and
control plans would be developed to prevent or minimize impacts
from hazardous materials.
Page 16 June 2016
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
All asbestos-containing materials would be removed and properly
disposed of by a qualified State of Washington licensed asbestos
abatement contractor in accordance with all applicable local, state,
and federal regulations. Any previously encountered material
encountered during construction activities would be sampled for
asbestos prior to being impacted by demolition. Disturbance of
painted surfaces with detectable concentrations of lead would be
performed according to Washington Labor and Industries
regulations for Lead in Construction (WAC 296-155-176).
Workers disturbing surfaces with lead-containing paint would be
provided the proper personal protective equipment and use proper
work methods to limit occupational and environmental exposure to
lead.
b. Noise
1. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect
your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation,
other)?
There are no existing sources of noise in the area that would
adversely affect the proposal.
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.
Vehicle and equipment operation during construction could cause
noise impacts to nearby residents. Construction hours and noise
levels would comply with the City of Edmonds noise standards
(ECDC 5.30). The standards state that maximum permissible
sound levels in residential communities are not to exceed 55 A-
weighted decibels (dBAs). However, maximum permissible sound
levels may be exceeded by construction activities between 7:00
a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on
Saturdays. After construction is complete, noise levels would not
increase over current conditions because enrollment would stay the
same.
3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts,
if any:
Construction activities would be restricted to hours and levels
designated by ECDC 5.30. If construction activities exceed
permitted noise levels, the District would instruct the contractor to
June 2016 Page 17
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
implement measures to reduce noise impacts, such as additional
muffling of equipment.
8. Land and Shoreline Use
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or
adjacent properties? If so, describe.
The project site is currently used for the Madrona School and is shared
with the former Woodway Elementary School in the southwest portion of
the property. Adjacent properties include residential properties. The
former Woodway Elementary School is currently being used by Lynndale
Elementary while the new Lynndale Elementary School is being
constructed. Construction of the new school will be completed in January
2017, at which time the former Woodway Elementary will be temporarily
used by Mountlake Terrace Elementary. When the new Mountlake Terrace
Elementary School is completed in the fall of 2018, the former Woodway
Elementary will be vacant. The proposal would not change the current
land use of the site and would not affect land uses on nearby or adjacent
properties.
b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or
working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural
or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be
converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If
resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in
farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm
or nonforest use?
The site is not currently, and has not been previously, used for working
farmlands or working forest lands. No agricultural or forest land would be
converted to other uses.
1. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts,
if any: Will the proposal affect or be affected by
surrounding working farm or forest land normal
business operations, such as oversize equipment
access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and
harvesting? If so, how:
No working farm or forest lands are located nearby the proposed
project, so the project would not affect or be affected by working
land business operations.
c. Describe any structures on the site.
The main structure on the site is the single-story Madrona School, which
consists of five separate buildings connected by covered pathways and one
Page 18 June 2016
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
boiler building. Other structures on the site include playground equipment
and a storage shed.
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
The existing approximately 95,000 square foot Madrona School and
related improvements, including a 2,500 square foot covered play area,
covered walkways, parking areas, and playground equipment, would be
demolished after the new school is constructed and ready to be occupied.
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
The City of Edmonds zoning classification of the site is RS-8 (Single
Family, 8,000 square foot lots).
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the
site?
The City of Edmonds comprehensive plan designation of the site is Single
Family Urban 1 (City of Edmonds, 2015).
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program
designation of the site?
The project site is not within a shoreline jurisdiction; therefore, there is no
applicable shoreline master plan designation.
h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the
city or county? If so, specify.
The City of Edmonds critical areas maps show fish and wildlife
conservation areas for “other” species encompassing the existing school in
an area roughly corresponding to the forested areas surrounding the school
and ball fields. In addition, it shows erosion hazard areas and landslide
hazard areas as being located onsite. These hazard areas are identified as
being located in the eastern and western ravines and in the middle of the
existing field area, between the baseball field and the track field area, and
along the western edge of the proposed school. A wetland critical area is
also shown in the southeastern corner of the site, corresponding to the
location of Wetland B.
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the
completed project?
No one would reside in the completed school. The capacity of the
completed new school would be the same as the existing school (650
students). Enrollment growth is not anticipated; therefore, future staffing
levels are expected to remain the same (approximately 80 teachers and
June 2016 Page 19
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
staff, including itinerant staff that support Madrona School and other
District schools).
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project
displace?
The completed project would not displace any people.
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts,
if any:
No displacement would occur; therefore, no mitigation measures are
needed.
l. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with
existing and projected land uses and plans, if any:
The project would not change existing land uses. The project would obtain
a project design review permit from the City of Edmonds before
construction.
m. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with
nearby agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial
significance, if any:
The project is not located near any agricultural or forest lands, so no
measures to ensure compatibility are required.
9. Housing
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any?
Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing.
No housing units would be provided as part of the project.
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated?
Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing.
No housing units would be eliminated.
c. Describe proposed measures to reduce or control housing
impacts, if any.
The project would not cause housing impacts; therefore, mitigation
measures to control housing impacts would not be required.
Page 20 June 2016
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
10. Aesthetics
a. What is the tallest height of any of the proposed structure(s),
not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building
material(s) proposed?
The height of the new school buildings would be a maximum of 30 feet at
the gymnasium. The building height of the classrooms would be 20 feet or
less (not including any rooftop mechanical equipment). The principal
exterior building material would be brick masonry.
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or
obstructed?
Views from adjacent residences facing the current school would not likely
be changed by the project because dense vegetation is located between the
residential neighborhoods and the school. The views most likely to be
altered would be from 236th Street SW when the existing school is
demolished. Although the new school would be slightly upslope, it would
be approximately 500 feet farther away from the street, making it less
noticeable with a new soccer field located between the roadway and the
school.
c. Proposed measures to control or reduce aesthetic impacts, if
any:
The school has been designed to reduce aesthetic impacts to neighboring
residences homes through use of setbacks and landscaping.
11. Light and Glare
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What
time of day would it mainly occur?
Exterior lighting would be required for personnel and building safety.
Outdoor circulation areas and parking lots would be illuminated by LED
light sources. Lighting systems would be designed to provide illumination
levels in accordance with the recommendations of the Illuminating
Engineering Society, consistent with Energy Codes. A typical streetlight is
designed to emit 1 footcandle, a measurement of illumination. Exterior
lighting at the new school would be designed to 0.5 footcandles and would
be turned off at 10:00 p.m.
The addition of a digital, illuminated sign would comply with City of
Edmonds code to meet required setbacks and comply with hours of
operation.
June 2016 Page 21
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety
hazard or interfere with views?
Exterior building and property lighting from the completed project would
not be a safety hazard and is not expected to interfere with views.
c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your
proposal?
No offsite sources of light or glare would affect this proposal.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare
impacts, if any:
It is anticipated that both exterior and interior lighting would be on timers
so that the site would be mostly dark at night. Exterior lights would be
designed to 0.5 footcandles.
12. Recreation
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in
the immediate vicinity?
The closest recreational opportunities are provided onsite. They include
orienteering courses, two playgrounds, and two fields (baseball and track
with soccer field) that are jointly used by the City of Edmonds and
Madrona School. The property is well used by local residents for
recreation. Many people use the orienteering trail system to walk their
dogs, and many joggers utilize the school’s track for running and walking
(Shannon &Wilson, Inc., 2015b). In addition, a year to year interlocal
agreement exists between the City of Edmonds and Edmonds School
District No. 15 for the scheduling of playfields at Madrona School (City of
Edmonds and Edmonds School District 15, 2015). Although the baseball
field is not typically used by the community, the track and field area is
sometimes used by soccer teams.
The closest park to Madrona School is Hickman Park, which is located
0.75 mile away. The 3-acre park includes a picnic area, trails, playground,
a baseball diamond, and soccer fields. The Klahaya Swim and Tennis
Club is also located nearby (0.65 mile). In addition, the recreational
facilities associated with Sherwood Elementary School, Scriber Lake High
School, and the former Woodway Elementary School, are also located less
than a mile from the school.
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational
uses? If so, describe.
The proposed project would temporarily remove play areas and the
baseball field during construction of the new school. Once the new school
Page 22 June 2016
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
is built, and the existing school has been demolished, a new covered play
area, play field, and kindergarten play area would be provided. It is
possible that a new baseball field would also be constructed after the
existing school is removed. As part of the project, the existing track and
field area located in the southwestern portion of the site would be
elongated to meet current International Association of Athletics
Federations (IAAF) track and field design standards.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on
recreation, including recreational opportunities to be provided
by the project or applicant, if any:
During construction of the new school, use of the existing kindergarten
play area would be maintained. Construction would be phased so that
older students have access to either the existing play area, the track and
field area, or the new covered play area during construction. Impacts to
recreational users after school hours would be related to closures of the
track and field area while it is being upgraded. The construction period for
the track and field upgrades is expected to be of short duration.
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation
a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near
the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing
in national, state, or local preservation registers located on or
near the site? If so, specifically describe.
The existing Madrona School, built as the Madrona Junior High School,
was constructed in 1963 and is over 45 years old. The school features six
detached buildings and two athletic fields. The single-story buildings were
designed in the New Formalism style and embody the style’s characteristic
emphasis on the structural grid, use of vertical posts, and colonnades. The
buildings feature low-pitch side-gabled roofs with skylights. The school
was designed by the architectural firm Waldron & Dietz of Seattle
(Waldron & Dietz, 1962).
Three other schools in Edmonds were designed by Waldron & Dietz:
Woodway Elementary School (1956), Edmonds High School (1959), and
Olympic School (1966). The firm also designed the award-winning
Edmonds Community College Master Plan in 1965 (Houser, 2016b).
While Waldron & Dietz were notable architects and the Madrona Junior
High School is over 45 years in age, there is no indication that it was a
notable project by the firm, nor does it appear to embody unique
construction methods or design elements that would support listing the
building on national, state, or local preservation registers.
A review of historic registers indicates that there are no properties listed
on or determined eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic
June 2016 Page 23
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
Places or Washington Heritage Register on or adjacent to the school site
(DAHP, 2016). Madrona School is not listed on the City of Edmonds
Register of Historic Places or the Snohomish County Register of Historic
Places.
b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian
or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials
or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or
areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list
any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such
resources.
There is one recorded archaeological site within 1 mile of Madrona
School. This is located approximately 0.90 mile east and is a segment of
the historic Seattle-Everett Interurban Railroad. Two cemeteries are
approximately 0.70 mile to the west: the Edmonds Memorial /
International Order of Odd Fellows Cemetery (c. 1910) and the Restlawn
Memorial Park (c. 1951). The Edmonds Memorial Cemetery is listed on
the Washington Heritage Register. Approximately 0.70 mile south is the
Firland Sanatorium complex (1914) which is listed on the Washington
Heritage Register. No professional cultural resource studies have been
conducted on the Madrona School property. Three studies have been
conducted within 1 mile; none of these identified any cultural resources
(Baker, 2012; Hartmann, 2008; Schultz, 2006).
The Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation’s (DAHP)
Statewide Predictive Model classifies portions of the project area as “Low
Risk” and “Moderately Low Risk” for encountering subsurface Precontact
cultural resources (DAHP, 2010). The site is underlain by Pleistocene-
aged Vashon glacial till (Shannon &Wilson, Inc., 2015a) and has not been
subject to substantial natural deposition since the end of the last Ice Age.
The lack of any significant natural deposition during the Holocene period
substantially diminishes the potential for intact, buried precontact
archaeological resources. There is a thin layer of imported topsoil (fill)
overlying the till (Shannon &Wilson, Inc., 2015a) and soils are primarily
classified as Alderwood-Urban land complex (2 to 8 or 8 to 15percent
slopes (USDA, 2016). Alderwood-Urban land soils consist of soils
developed within glacial parent material, but which has been subject to
extensive human modification, such as grading and filling. A review of
original construction documents reveals that school construction required
extensive cutting and filling to overcome the natural slopes and
undulations of the original landform. There is no evidence to suggest that
archaeological sites would have ever been present within the school
property, but if they had been, it is likely that they would have been
destroyed or very significantly disturbed during original preparation of the
school construction site.
Page 24 June 2016
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
The closest known ethnographic place names are three shoreline locations
over 1.5 miles west along the Puget Sound: Edwards Point, Wells Point,
and Richmond Beach where kinnickinnik was gathered (Hilbert et al.,
2001). Further review of historic maps and published Native American
ethnographic studies suggest a low probability for encountering either
Precontact-era or historic-era cultural resources on the Madrona School
property (Anderson Map Company, 1910; Hilbert et al., 2001; Kroll Map
Company, 1934; Kroll Map Company, 1952; Kroll Map Company, 1960;
USGS, 1895; USGS, 1953; USGS, 1968; USGS, 1973; USGS, 1981; US
Surveyor General, 1860).
During the 20th century, the Madrona School property was under the
ownership of H. T. Lewis and later Edward Brady until the State acquired
the land by 1952 (Anderson Map Company, 1910; Kroll Map Company,
1934; Kroll Map Company, 1952; Kroll Map Company, 1960). The
project area appears to have remained undeveloped until construction of
the school began in 1962.
c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to
cultural and historic resources on or near the project site.
Examples include consultation with tribes and the department
of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological
surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc.
As cited in response to questions 13a and 13b above, the following
sources were reviewed in order to identify any potential cultural resources
in the project vicinity:
• DAHP;
• The City of Edmonds Historic Preservation Commission, and the
Snohomish County Historic Preservation Commission for any
recorded cultural resources, cemeteries, national, state, or local
register-listed historic properties;
• Previous studies on or near the project area;
• DAHP’s Statewide Predictive Model;
• Historical maps of the project area dated 1860, 1895, 1910, 1934,
1952, 1953, 1960, 1968, 1973, 1981; and
• Ethnographic studies.
d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for
loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include
plans for the above and any permits that may be required.
No cultural resources have been identified on the property. The area is
considered by DAHP to be “Low Risk” to “Moderately Low Risk” for
buried cultural resources (DAHP, 2010).
June 2016 Page 25
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
Under any circumstances, if cultural resources are inadvertently identified
during the project, the developer will comply with state laws requiring the
protection of cultural resources and human remains (RCW 27.53, RCW
27.44, RCW 68.50, and RCW 68.60). The developer will temporarily halt
work in the immediate vicinity of the identified resources and notify the
District. The District will notify DAHP and Affected Tribes to negotiate
mitigation and/or avoidance measures.
14. Transportation
a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or
affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the
existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
The site is bounded on the north by, and accessed from, 236th Street SW,
which is designated as a Local Access roadway by the City of Edmonds.
Edmonds Way (also designated as State Route [SR] 104) is a Principal
Arterial located about 600 feet east of the site. Other Local Access
roadways that serve the vicinity include 93rd Avenue W and 94th Avenue
W, which both extend north from 236th Street SW. The school
replacement project would retain the two existing driveways in their
current locations; however, changes to internal site circulation would
modify how those driveways are used. The existing western access
driveway would be used for automobile (parent, staff, and visitor vehicles)
access and egress. Access and egress for school buses and a portion of
staff parking would be consolidated at the existing eastern access
driveway (Figure 2).
b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by
public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the
approximate distance to the nearest transit stop?
The site is not directly served by public transit. However, Community
Transit provides bus service to the City of Edmonds. The closest bus stops
are located about 950 feet away from the site (walking distance) on
Edmonds Way (SR 104) just south of 236th Street SW. These stops are
served by Community Transit Route 416 (both directions), which operates
seven days per week between the Lynnwood Transit Center and Edmonds
Station with headways (time between consecutive buses) of 30 minutes
from about 5:20 a.m. to 9:50 p.m. on weekdays. Farther from the site (just
over a mile), there are stops located along 244th Street SW which are
served by Community Transit Route 130. Route 130 provides seven-day
service between Edmonds Station, Aurora Village Transit Center, and
Lynnwood Transit Center. It also operates with 30 minute headways from
about 5:30 a.m. to 9:50 p.m. on weekdays. The Edmonds School District
would also continue to provide school-bus transportation for students that
qualify.
Page 26 June 2016
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed
project or non-project proposal have? How many would the
project or proposal eliminate?
The replacement school project proposes to provide a total of 119 parking
spaces (including five ADA spaces); this is the same number of parking
spaces that exist currently at the site and none would be eliminated.
However, improvements to on-site circulation with increased capacity for
parent-vehicle and school-bus load/unload would provide additional space
for evening and/or weekend event parking. The parent-vehicle load/unload
and queue area encircling the proposed main parking lot would provide
capacity for an additional 40 vehicles to park during evening or weekend
events. The school-bus load/unload area has room for up to 40 additional
vehicles to park during event conditions. In total, the site would have
capacity to accommodate 199 vehicles for evening and/or weekend event
conditions.
City of Edmonds parking requirements for elementary schools are outlined
in ECDC 17.100.050.M.1. The ECDC requires 11 spaces per 100 students,
as well as nondedicated parking areas onsite to accommodate special event
parking.
Based on the future school capacity of 650 students, 72 parking spaces
would be required by ECDC. The proposed project would provide 119
angled parking spaces, which would meet the minimum requirement and
provide an additional 45 spaces for school-day event parking. As
described, the site would also have capacity to accommodate an additional
80 vehicles in the queue/load/unload areas for evening and weekend
events, bringing the site total to 199 spaces. The proposed parking supply
would meet the City’s code requirements.
d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing
roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation
facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe
(indicate whether public or private).
A sidewalk would be added on the south side of 236th Street SW between
the school’s two existing driveways. This sidewalk would connect to a
new on-site walkway adjacent to the easternmost driveway and provide
improved pedestrian connectivity to the school. No other improvements to
existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle, or state transportation facilities
would be required to accommodate the proposal.
June 2016 Page 27
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate
vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally
describe.
The project would not occur in the vicinity of or use water, rail, or air
transportation.
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the
completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak
volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume
would be trucks (such as commercial and nonpassenger
vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to
make these estimates?
Based on traffic counts performed at the site driveways in October 2015,
the existing school is currently estimated to generate about 1,350 trips per
day (675 in, 675 out). The peak volumes occur during the morning arrival
period from 8:30 to 9:30 a.m. when the school generates about 400 trips
(225 in, 175 out). Volumes are also high during the afternoon dismissal
period with the school generates about 310 trips (145 in, 165 out) between
3:15 and 4:15 p.m. The school was observed to generate about 115 trips
(50 in, 65 out) during the commuter PM peak hour of the adjacent
roadway network (from 4:30 to 5:30 p.m.).
The proposed replacement school would have the same enrollment
capacity and a smaller building (in terms of overall floor area) compared
to the existing school. Therefore, the project would not result in any new
trips generated on the local roadway network.
g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the
movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or
streets in the area? If so, generally describe.
The proposal would not interfere with the movement of agricultural or
forest products on streets in the area because no agricultural or working
forest lands are located within the vicinity of the project site.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation
impacts, if any:
The project includes several components that would improve traffic
circulation and pedestrian safety compared to current conditions, including
the addition of a new sidewalk connection along the south side of 236th
Street SW and improved internal site circulation, passenger-vehicle
queuing capacity, and separated school-bus/parent-vehicle access and
egress patterns.
The District would require the selected contractor to develop a
construction management plan (CMP) to address traffic and pedestrian
Page 28 June 2016
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
control during construction of the school. The CMP would define truck
routes, lane closures, walkway closures, and parking disruptions, as
necessary. To the extent possible, the CMP would direct trucks along the
shortest route to arterials and away from residential streets to avoid
unnecessary conflicts with resident and pedestrian activity. The CMP may
also include measures to keep adjacent streets clean on a daily basis at the
truck exit points (such as street sweeping or onsite truck wheel cleaning)
to reduce tracking dirt offsite. The CMP would identify parking locations
for construction staff. To the extent possible, construction employee
parking would be contained onsite.
15. Public Services
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public
services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public
transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe.
The project would not result in an increased need for public services.
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on
public services, if any.
Because an increased need for public services is not required; mitigation
to reduce impacts to public services is not proposed. However, two service
areas would be provided onsite for fire protection: one along the eastern
boundary of the site and the other on the track field.
16. Utilities
a. Underline utilities currently available at the site:
Electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer,
septic systems, 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.
All of the utilities noted above currently serve the school site. Utilities
would be extended from 236th Street SW to serve the new school, and
would potentially be extended all the way through the property to connect
with the utility system located in the residential neighborhood to the south.
June 2016 Page 29
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
REFERENCES
American Forest Management (AFM). 2016. Madrona K-8 School Project Tree Survey. January
20, 2016.
Anderson Map Company
1910 Anderson’s Atlas of Snohomish County. Electronic document,
http://www.historicmapworks.com/Map/US/699402/Township+27+North++Range+3+
East++W+M+++Puget+View++Bayview++Richmond+Fruit+Garden/Snohomish+Cou
nty+1910/Washington/, accessed April 27, 2016.
Terracon/Argus Pacific. 2015. Regulated Building Materials Assessment: Madrona K-8 School.
September 30, 2015
Baker, R. Todd
2012 Cultural Resource Survey for the Proposed Edmonds Community Health Center
Project, Edmonds, Snohomish County, Washington. Prepared for Community Health
Center of Snohomish County by Terracon Consultants, Inc., Mountlake Terrace, WA.
On file, Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation,
Olympia, WA.
City of Edmonds. 2016. City of Edmonds GIS. Available at: http://maps.edmondswa.gov/Html5
Viewer/?viewer=html
City of Edmonds. 2015. City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan. Adopted July 28, 2015.
City of Edmonds and Edmonds School District No. 15. 2015. Interlocal Agreement Between
City of Edmonds and Edmonds School District No. 15 for Repairs, Maintenance, and
Scheduling of Playfields at Madrona Nongraded K-8 School. August 11, 2015
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP)
2010 Statewide Predictive Model. Last updated 2010. Electronic document,
http://www.dahp.wa.gov/, accessed April 26, 2016.
2016 Washington Information System for Architectural and Archaeological Records
Database (WISAARD). Electronic document, http://www.dahp.wa.gov/, accessed April
26, 2016.
Ecology (Washington State Department of Ecology). 2016. Facility Site Report: Edmonds
School District Madrona School (Facility/Site: 34486491). Accessed 4/7/2016.
Hartmann, Glenn D.
2008 Cultural Resources Assessment for the Swift Bus Rapid Transit Project, Technical
Memo 0711A-3, Snohomish County, Washington. Prepared for OTAK by Cultural
Resource Consultants, Inc., Bainbridge Island, WA. On file, Washington State
Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia, WA.
June 2016 Page 31
SEPA Environmental Checklist– Madrona School Replacement
Heffron Transportation, Inc. 2016. Preliminary Traffic and Access Review for Replacement.
Edmonds School District – Madrona School. March 9, 2016.
Hilbert, Vi, Jay Miller, and Zalmai Zahir
2001 Puget Sound Geography: Original Manuscript from T. T. Waterman. Lushootseed
Press, Seattle. Available from Zahir Consulting Services, Federal Way, WA.
Houser, Michael C.
2016a Dietz, Robert H. Electronic document, http://www.docomomo-
wewa.org/architects_detail.php?id=26, accessed April 27, 2016.
2016b Waldron, Lawrence G. Electronic document, http://www.docomomo-
wewa.org/architects_detail.php?id=110, accessed April 27, 2016.
Kroll Map Company
1934 Kroll’s Atlas of Snohomish County. Electronic document,
http://www.historicmapworks.com/Map/US/31587/Page+01++Edmonds/Snohomish+C
ounty+1934/Washington/, accessed April 27, 2016.
1952 Kroll’s Atlas of Snohomish County 1943 revised 1952. Electronic document,
http://www.historicmapworks.com/Map/US/488893/Page+1+Township+27+N+R+3+E
++Edmonds++Edwards+Point++Wells+Point/Snohomish+County+1943+Revised+195
2/Washington/, accessed April 27, 2016.
1960 Kroll’s Atlas of Snohomish County. Electronic document,
http://www.historicmapworks.com/Map/US/56147/Township+27+North++Range+3+E
ast++Edmonds++Woodway+++Page+001/Snohomish+County+1960+Published+by+K
roll/Washington/, accessed April 27, 2016.
Schultz, Erica
2006 New Tower (“NT”) Submission Packet – FCC Form 620. Prepared for Washington
State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation by EBI Consulting,
Burlington, MA. On file, Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic
Preservation, Olympia, WA.
Shannon & Wilson, Inc. 2015a. Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report: New Madrona K-
8 Project. 9300 236th Street SW City of Edmonds, Washington. August 6, 2015.
Submitted to Edmonds School District #15.
Shannon & Wilson, Inc. 2015b. Wetland and Stream Delineation Report: New Madrona K-8
Project. City of Edmonds, Washington. September 15, 2015. Submitted to Edmonds
School District #15.
US Geological Survey (USGS)
1895 Snohomish, WA, 30’ Series Quadrangle. US Geological Survey, Reston, VA.
1953 Edmonds East, WA, 7.5’ Series Quadrangle. US Geological Survey, Reston, VA.
1968 Edmonds East, WA, 7.5’ Series Quadrangle. US Geological Survey, Reston, VA.
1973 Edmonds East, WA, 7.5’ Series Quadrangle. US Geological Survey, Reston, VA.
1981 Edmonds East, WA, 7.5’ Series Quadrangle. US Geological Survey, Reston, VA.
Page 32 June 2016
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
US Surveyor General
1860 Township 27 North, Range 3 East Survey Map. Electronic document,
http://www.blm.gov/or/landrecords/survey/yPlatView1_2.php?path=PWA&name=t270
n030e_001.jpg, accessed April 27, 2016.
Waldron & Dietz
1962 Madrona Junior High School Construction Plan Set, Sheets 1-E9. On file, ESA, Seattle.
WDFW (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2016. Priority habitats and species
online mapping. Available: http://wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/phs/.
WNHP (Washington Natural Heritage Program). 2013. Rare plant species and vegetation
communities GIS mapping.
June 2016 Page 33
SEPA Environmental Checklist – Madrona School Replacement
FIGURES
June 2016 Page 35
N 205th St
N 200th St
F
ir
d
ale
Ave
Au
rora
Ave
N
9
5
t
h
P
l
a
c
e
W
2 40th St SW
E
d
m
onds
W
ay
NW 2 05th St
232nd St SW
87
th
A
ve
W
234th St SW
236th St SW
242nd St SW
238th St SW
244th St SW
231st St SW
8th
Ave
NW
3rd
Ave
NW
F
re
m
ont
Ave
N
1
04th
Ave
W
224th St SW
88t
h
Av
e
W
228th St SW
84th
Ave
W
Hwy99
92nd
Ave
W
1
00th
Ave
W
Madrona School Replacement SEPA Checklist . 160195 Figure 1Project Vicinity
U:
\
G
I
S
\
G
I
S
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
1
6
x
x
x
x
\
1
6
0
1
9
5
_
M
a
d
r
o
n
a
_
S
c
h
o
o
l
_
S
E
P
A
\
0
4
_
W
o
r
k
i
n
g
\
F
i
g
0
1
_
V
i
c
i
n
i
t
y
.
m
x
d
(
l
x
e
,
4
/
2
6
/
2
0
1
6
)
SOURCE: King County, 2013; WSDOT, 2015
0 1,600
Feet
Seattle
LynwoodEdmonds
Madrona K-8 School
Project Area
I-5 I-405
236th St SW
235thP l a c e S W
90
t
h
P
l
a
c
e
W
91
st
Ave
W
91
s
t
P
l
a
c
e
W
235th St SW 94th Place
W
238th S t S W
95
t
h
P
l
a
c
e
W
96t
h
A
v
e
W
9
4
t
h
Av
e
W 93
rd
Ave
W
9
2
n
d
Av
e
W
240th St SW
Madrona School Replacement SEPA Checklist . 160195 Figure 2Project Area and Existing Facilities
U:
\
G
I
S
\
G
I
S
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
1
6
x
x
x
x
\
1
6
0
1
9
5
_
M
a
d
r
o
n
a
_
S
c
h
o
o
l
_
S
E
P
A
\
0
4
_
W
o
r
k
i
n
g
\
F
i
g
0
2
_
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
_
A
r
e
a
_
a
n
d
_
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
_
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
.
m
x
d
(
l
x
e
,
4
/
2
6
/
2
0
1
6
)
SOURCE: King County, 2013; WSDOT, 2015
0 400
Feet
Madrona K-8 School
Former WoodwayElementary School
Playground
BaseballField
Track andField
Percent Slope
40% and greater
Ald. or Eve. soil 15% - 40%
15% - 40%
MA DR ONA S CHO OL
ED MO N DS SCH O OL D I ST RI C T | 16 MAY 201 6
MA HLU M A RC HIT E CTS IN C
EX IS TIN G SIT E CON DI TIO NS
Wetland A
Wetland C
Wetland B
Madrona School Replacement SEPA Checklist . 160195 Figure 3
Topographic Map
!
!
" # # " $ %
" # # " $ %
"
$ & %
'
" & ( ( "
% " & %" #
%
%
% % " & ) % $
" &
) % $
" & ) ) (
" %
)( % )
) " (
( " "$
* ) & ) "( "$
( ( " & * %
*
"(+ & ) "
) " & )
" " "
" & )
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
' '
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
EN TRY
CO UR T
C
O
V
E
R
E
D
P
L
A
Y
PLAY FI EL D
TRA C K/ F IE LD
(E XI STI NG LO CA TIO N )
BU
S
L
OO
P
E
V
E
N
T
P ARK
I
N
G
(4 0)
E
V
E
N
T
P ARK
I
N
G
(1 9)
E
V
E
N
T
P ARK
I
N
G
(2 1)
S
T
A
F
F
&
P
A
R
E
N
T
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
(
1
1
9
TO TA
L
)
SE
R
V
I
C
E
/
L
O
A
D
I
N
G
MA DR ONA S CHO OL
ED MO N DS SCH O OL D I ST RI C T | 16 MAY 201 6
MA HLU M A RC HIT E CTS IN C
SC HE MA T IC SI TE PLA N
0 50'
100'
A DMI N
L
E
A
R
N
I
N
G
C
E
N
T
E
R
S
L
E
A
R
N
I
N
G
C
E
N
T
E
R
S
L
E
A
R
N
I
N
G
C
E
N
T
E
R
S
L
E
A
R
N
I
N
G
C
E
N
T
E
R
S
L
E
A
R
N
I
N
G
C
E
N
T
E
R
S
L
E
A
R
N
I
N
G
C
E
N
T
E
R
S
L
I
B
.
GY M
KITC H E
N
2
3
6
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
W
EX IS TI NG W ET LA ND
(CA TE GO RY I I I )
C
O
M
M
O
N
S
MU SIC
CE
N
T
R
A
L
C
O
U
R
T
Y
A
R
D
ORIGINAL 50FT BUFFER
ADOPTED 60FT BUFFER
(MAY 03, 2016)
Madrona School Replacement SEPA Checklist . 160195 Figure 4
Site Concept Plan