Casper Street Project DNS.pdfCITY OF EDMONDS
121 STH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 (425) 771-0220
RCW 197-11-970 Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS)
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
Description of proposal: This project proposes to significantly improve pedestrian safety by constructing
two missing links of sidewalk along the north and west side of SR -524. The first segement begins at the
northern tip of 3`d Avenue North and extends to the western tip of Puget Drive. The second segment
extends from Olympic View Drive to Olympic Avenue. In addition, three marked crosslks will be enhanced
and permanent "Your Speed" radar driver feedback signs will be installed within this section of the
corridor.
Proponent: City of Edmonds, Public Works
Location of proposal, including street address if any: The project is located on SR -524 from milepost
0.50 to milepost 1.31 within the City of Edmonds. NW %4, Sec. 24 T.27N, R.K. W.M.
Lead agency: CITY OF EDMONDS
The City of Edmonds, acting as lead agency for this proposal, has determined that it does not have a
probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not
required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed
environmental checklist and other information on file with the City. This information is available to the
public on request.
This is not an approval of the proposed action, only a determination of the potential environmental impacts
of the proposal. The City of Edmonds has determined that the environmental impacts are adequately
addressed through the implementation of the City's Comprehensive Plan and the Edmonds Community
Development Code governing land -use standards, construction, clearing, grading and stormwater control,
and critical areas. This determination is issued on the basis of compliance of the proposal with all
applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations and standards.
There is no comment period for this DNS.
XX This DNS is issued under 197-11-340(02); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14
days from the date below. Comments must be submitted by FebruaLy 26 2009.
Project Planner: Kernen Lien, Associate Planner
Responsible Official: Rob Chave, Planning Manager
Contact Information: City of Edmonds 1 121 5th AvepWNorth, EdmorAs WA 98020 425-771-0220
Date: _ February 11, 2009 Sign
XX You may appeal this determination to Robert Chave, Planning Manager, at 121 5th Avenue
North, Edmonds, WA 98020, by filing a written appeal citing the specific reasons for the
appeal with the required appeal fee, adjacent property owners list and notarized affidavit form
no later than February 26, 2009.
You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact Rob Chave to read or ask about the
procedures for SEPA appeals.
XX Posted on February 11, 2009, at the Edmonds Public Library, Edmonds Community Services
Building, and the Edmonds Post Office,
XX Distribute to "Checked" Agencies on the reverse side of this form, along with a copy of the
Checklist.
Page 1 oft
CASPER STREB PROJECT DNS.DOC
2111/09.SEPA
• Mailed SEPA Determination to properties within 300 feet of the site.
• Mailed SEPA Determination and the Environmental Checklist to the following:
XX
Greg Armstrong
XX Environmental Review Section
Transporation Improvement Board
Department of Ecology
PO Box 40901
P.O. Box 47703
Olympia,WA 98504-0901
Olympia, WA 98504-7703
XX
Kojo Fordjour Department of Ferries
Environmental Manager
XX COMCAST
901 3 Ave., Suite 500
Outside Pant Engineer, North Region
Seattle, WA 98121-1021
1525 75' St SW Ste 200
Everett, WA 98203
XX Department of Fish & Wildlife
16018 Mill Creek Boulevard
Mill Creek, WA 98012
XX Washington State Dept. of Transportation
Attn: Ramin Pazooki
SnoKing Developer Services, MS 221
15700 Dayton Ave. N.
PO Box 330310
Seattle, WA 98133-9710
cc: SEPA Notebook
City of Edmonds Zoning Map, November 18, 2008
Page 2 of 2
CASPER STREE PROJECT DNS.DOC
2111/09.SEPA
O'� E'=D�10�
�ljt �E t caf t� d
Purpose of Checklist.
CITY OF EDMONDS
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental
impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with
probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help
you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to
help the agency decide whether an EIS is required.
Instructions forApplicants.
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this
checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer
the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can.
You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer
the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if
a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or does not apply". Complete answers to the questions now may
avoid unnecessary delays later.
Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if
you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of
land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you
submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there
may be significant adverse impact.
NOTE: Projects generating new traffic will be required to submit a Traffic Study prepared by a licensed Professional Civil Engineer.
Specific requirements for the Traffic Study may vary depending upon the project, and will be provided by the City Engineer upon
request. Please contact the Engineering Division at 425-771-3202 for specific study requirements. City review of the Traffic Study
may require assessment of the "Development Project Peer Review" fee of $45 plus the cost of the review.
Use of checklist for nonproject proposals:
Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete
the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D).
For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as
"proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively.
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable:
Caspers Stree/Ninth Ave N/Puget Dr Walkway Project
2. Name of applicant:
City of Edmonds, Public Works
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
1215 th Ave N. EDMONDS, WA 98020.
Page t of t 1
Gaspers st-paget dr -9th ave n walkway project sepa determination.doc:2.11.2009
Phone: 425-771-0220, Fax: 425-672-5750
Contact: JAIME HAWKINS, Address: 121 5TH AVE N. EDMONDS, WA 98020
Phone: 425-771-0235, ext: 1714, E-mail: hawkins@a,ci.edmonds.wa.us
4. Date checklist prepared: February 9, 2009
5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Edmonds.
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
START AND END OF THE PROJECT IS SCHEDULE FROMAPRIL 16 TO SEPTEMBER 31ST
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this
proposal? If yes, explain. N/A
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related
to this proposal. NO
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. TO BE DETERMINED BY DEPARTMENT OFFISHAND
WILDLIFE
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known.
WSDOT GENERAL PERMIT CITY OF EDMONDS RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTIONPERMIT.
11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and 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.
THIS PROJECT PROPOSES TO SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVE PEDESTRAIN SAFETY BY CONSTRUCTING TWO
MISSING LINKS OF SIDEWALK ALONG THE NORTH AND WEST SIDE OF SR 524. THE FIRST SEGMENT BEGINS
AT THE NORTHERN TIP OF 3RD AVENUE NORTH AND EXTENDS TO THE WESTERN TIP OF PUGET DRIVE.
THE SECOND SEGMENT EXTENDS FROM OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE TO OLYMPIC AVENUE. IN ADDITION,
THREE MARKED CROSSWALKS WILL BE ENHANCED AND PERMANENT "YOUR SPEED" RADAR DRIVER
FEEDBACK SIGNS WILL BE INSTALLED WITHIN THIS SECTION OF THE CORRIDOR.
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 range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide legal description, site plan,
vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the
agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related
to this checklist. THE PROJECT IS LOCATED ON SR -524 FROM MP 0.50 TO MP 1.31 WITHIN THE CITY OF
EDMONDS. NW 11, SEG 24 .T.27N, R.3 E. W.M.
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, other:
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? <10%
Pap 2of11
caspers st-puget dr -9th ave n walkway project sepa deternvnation.doc:2.11.2009
C. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know
the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland.
DARKBROWN-TO-BROWN, SILTY, FINE TO MEDIUMSAND WITHFINE GRAVEL.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe.
NO.
e. Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source
of fill.
THE PURPOSE OF THE FILLING IS TO ISNTALL A FIVE-FOOT WALKWAY BEHIND AN EXSTING I8 -IN
CURB AND GUTTTER ALONG THIS SECTION OF SR -524. THE GRADING QUANTITIES SHALL NOT
EXCEED 1,000 CUBIC YARDS OF CUT AND FILL COMBINED. THE SOURCE OF THE FILL SHALL BEAN
APPROVED SITE MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS IN SECTION 9-03.14(1) OF THE 2008 WSDOT
STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe.
YES, EROSION COULD OCCUR AS A RESULT OF CLEARING AND CONSTRUCTION, BUT MEASURES
HA VE BEEN TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION TO MINIMIZE ANY IMPACT BY EMPLOYING BMP.
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for
example, asphalt or buildings)?
100%
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any:
SITE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT.
'r�17t
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.
D UST.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may effect your proposal? If so, generally describe.
NO
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to the, if any:
NONE
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.
YES, SHELL CREEK
Page 3 of 11
caspers st-pvget dr -9th ave n walkway project sepa detennination.doc:2.1 1.2009
(2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If
yes, please describe and attach available plans.
YES, PLEASE SEE ATTACHED SIEDEWALK 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. Indicate the source of fill
material.
NONE
(4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description,
purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
NO
(5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan.
NO, BASED ON EXISTING DATA.
(6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the
type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
NO
b. Ground:
(1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
NO
(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
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.
SURFACE RUNOFF AND COLLECTION METHOD IS EXISTIING WITHIN SR -524. SEE ATTACHED
PLAN.
(2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe.
NO
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any:
ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL ARE TO BE PER CITY OF EDMONDS STANDARD AND
AS OUTLINED IN THE SPECIFICATIONS AND CONTACT DOCUMENTS.
4. Plants
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other:
Page 4 of 11
tripe st-puget dr -91h ave n }walkway project sepa determination.doe2.11.2009
5.
X evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other:
X shrubs
X grass
pasture
crop or grain
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other:
water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other:
other types of vegetation:
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
PLEASE SEE ATTACHED PLANS.
C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
N/A
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other materials to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site,
if any:
REPLACING FIR TREES WITH 2 I PSIPE THUJA OCCIDENTALIS (PYRAMIDALIS)
Animals
a. Check or circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on
or near the site:
N/A birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other:
N/A mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
X fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: COHO AND CHUM SALMON
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
NONE KNOWN.
C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
PACIFIC FLY WAY.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
NONE.
6. Energy and Natural Resources
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed
project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc.
SOLAR ENERGY WILL BE USED TO POWER THE RADAR SPEED LIMIT SIGN AND DRIVER FEEDBACK
SIGN.
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally
describe.
NO
Page 5 of 11
caspers st-puget dr -9th ave n walkway project sepa ddCmr nation.doc:2.11.2009
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:
NONE.
1. 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.
NO
(1) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
N/A
(2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
N/A
b. Noise
(1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment,
operation, other)?
BURLINGTON NORTHERN SANTA FE RAILROAD TRACKS ARE WITHIN 700 -FEET OF THE
INTERSECTION OF 3po AVENUE AND CASPERS STREET.
(2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or
a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise
would come from the site.
TRAFFIC AND CONSTRUCTION EQUIPENT HOURS NOISE THAT WOULD COME FROM THE SITE
WILL BE DURING THE HOURS OF OPERATION SET BY THE CITY UNDER ECC 5.30 7 -AM TO 6 -PM
MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY
(3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
NO WORK SHALL START BEFORE 7 AM AND NO WORK SHALL GO BEYOND 6 -PM..
8. Land and Shoreline Use
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
CITY AND STATE RIGHT=OF-WAY, CURRENT USE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES IS SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCE.
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe.
NO
C. Describe any structures on the site.
THERE ARE NO STRUCTURES ON THE SITE. THE= IS AN-URBANPRINCIPAL ARTERIAL.
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
NO
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
RS -12, RS -8, AND RS -6
Page 6of11
cmpm st-puget dr -9th ave n walkway project cepa determination-doc M 1.2009
L What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
SINGLE FAMIL Y PESO UR CE AND SINGLE FAMILY URBAN I
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master plan designation of the site? NIA
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. NIA
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
NIA
j. Approximatelyhow many people would the completed project displace?
N/A
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:
N/A
9. Housing
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? 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 principle
exterior building material(s) proposed?
NIA
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
N/A
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
N/A
11. Light and Glare
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? NONE
Page 7of11
caspers st-puget dr -91h ave n walkway project sepa detennination.d0e:2.11.2009
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views?
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?
THE CONTSTR UCTION OF THIS SIDEWALK WILL SIGNIFICANTLY IMPOR VE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY
ALONG ONE OF THE CITY'S BUSIEST PRINCIPLE ALLOWING USERS TO SAFELY CROSS SR -524 WHEN
ATTENDING SCHOOL, CHURCH OR CATCHING A SCHOOL OR PUBLIC TRANSIT BUS SYSTEM.
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreation uses? If so, describe.
NO
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be
provided by the project or applicant, if any:
PEDESTRIANS WILL HAVE AN ADDED SAFER ROUTE TO WALK ON BY NOT HAVING TO CROSS
SR -524.
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers
known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe.
NONE KNOWN
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance
known to be on or next to the site.
N/A
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
NO
14. Transportation
it. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street
system. Show on site plans, if any.
THIS PROJECT IS WITHIN STATE ROUT 524
b. Is site currently served by public transit? If no, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit
stop?
SR -524 IS ONE OF THE MAIN ROUTES COMMUNITY TRANSIT USES IN AND OUT OF THE CITY OF
EDMONDS.
C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate?
NO
Pages of 11
caspers st-puget dr -9th ave n walkway projaet cepa detetminadon-d=2. t 1.2009
d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not
including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private).
THE PROPOSAL WILL IMPROVE THE WALKING SURFACE, FROM DIRT TO CONCRETE OF THE TRAIL
PEDESTRAIN ALREADY USE. THE PROPOSAL WILL ALSO ENHANCE EXISTING UNCONTROLLED
PEDESTRAIN CROSSINGS TO IMPROVE THEIR VISIBILITYA ND SAFETY.
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so,
generally describe.
NO
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when
peak volumes would occur.
THE EXISTING ADT ON THIS SECTION OF SR -524 RANGES FROM 9900 VDP TO 14,000 VPD BASED ON
2005 COUNTS. BASED ONANANNUAL GROWTH OF 3%, THE ADT ON THIS FACILITYI'S EXPECTED TO
REACH 25, 000 ADT BY 2026.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
THIS PROPOSAL CONSISTS OF THREE MAJOR ENGINEERING COMPONENTS. THE FIRST IS TO
CONSTRUCT 3200 LINEAL FEET OF FIVE-FOOT SIDEWALK ALONG THE WEST AND NORTH SIDE OF
SR -524. THE SECOND IS TO IMPROVE TRHEE UNCONTROLLED PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS THAT WILL
RECEIVE ENHANCEMENTS CONSISTENT WITH WSDOT DM FIGURE 1025-5 IN ORDER TO IMPROVE
THEIR VISIBIILTY AND SAFETY. THE THIRD AND FINAL COMPONENT WILL CONSIST OF THE
INSTALLTION OF PERMANENT RADAR SPEED SIGNS THAT WILL INFORM DRIVERS OF THEIR
TRA YELLING SPEEDS.
15. Public Services
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police
protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe.
NO
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any:
NO
16. Utilities
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone,
sanitary sewer, septic system, other:
THE PROJECT IS WITHIN A PRINCIPAL. ARTERIAL/PUBLI RIGH -OF -WAY, THEREFORE ALL UTILITIES
ARE PRESENT WITHTIN THE RPOJECT.
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.
PLEASE SEE ATTACHED PLANS.
C. SIGNATURE
D. The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them
to make its decision.
Page 9of11
caspers st-pugct dr -9th ave n walkway project sepa determination.doc:2.11.2009
D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS
(do not use this sheet for project actions)
Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the
environment.
When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal,
would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in
general terms.
1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of
toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise?
N/A
Proposal measures to avoid or reduce such increases are:
N/A
2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life?
N/A
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are:
N/A
3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?
N/A
Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are:
N/A
4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or
under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered
species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands?
N/A
Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are:
N/A
S. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land
or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans?
N/A
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are:
NIA
6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities?
N/A
Page 10 of 11
caspers st-puget dr -9th ave n walkway project cepa detemunatian.doc:2.11.2009
Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are:
N/A
7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the
protection of the environment.
N/A
Page 11 of 11
cwpers st-puget dr -9th ave n walkwaypm3e t sepa deters ination.doe:2.11.2009