Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutECF_sepa_thunder_hills_20180912_v1.pdfDEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 1 of 23 ENV ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 | www.rentonwa.gov Purpose of checklist: Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal. Instructions for applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use “not applicable” or "does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision- making process. 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. Instructions for Lead Agencies: Please adjust the format of this template as needed. Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B plus the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non-projects) questions in Part B - Environmental Elements –that do not DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 2 of 23 contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal. A. Background [HELP] 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Thunder Hills Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project 2. Name of applicant: City of Renton 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057-3232 425.430.7212 Dave Christensen, Wastewater Utility Engineering Manager 4. Date checklist prepared: September 12, 2018. Project design at time of preparation is 90%. 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Project construction is anticipated to begin in June 2019 and be completed by September 2019, with construction activities to commence during normal business hours (Monday through Friday, 8am to 5pm). 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No. There are no plans for future additions, expansions or further activity related to or connected with this proposal. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. • Thunder Hills Sanitary Sewer Interceptor and Alternatives Analysis Basis of Design Report – Carollo Engineers, Inc. (July 2016) • Technical Memorandum: Summary of Sensitive Area Impacts – The Watershed SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 3 of 23 Company (October 21, 2015) • Technical Memorandum: Geotechnical Investigation – Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (February 13, 2015) • Technical Memorandum: Preliminary Erosion Hazard Evaluation – Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (February 13, 2015) • Technical Memorandum: Flow Analysis – Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (February 24, 2015) • Technical Memorandum: Operations & Maintenance Study – Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (November 13, 2015) • Technical Memorandum: Permitting Assessment Alternatives No. 1 & 2 – Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (October 19, 2015) • Technical Memorandum: Remaining Useful Life (RUL) & Rehabilitation Analysis – Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (February 13, 2015) • Technical Memorandum: (Draft) Risk Analysis – Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (February 24, 2015) • Stream and Wetland Delineation Report – The Watershed Company (October 12, 2015) • Rockery Wall Recommendations – Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (November 1, 2016) • Mitigation Plan (90% design) – The Watershed Company (June 2018) • Landscaping and Planting Plan (90% design) – The Watershed Company (June 2018) • Technical Memorandum: Springbrook Creek Mitigation Bank Use Plan – The Watershed Company (November 2, 2017) • Technical Memorandum: Wetland and Stream/Wetland Buffer Mitigation Cost Estimates (December 4, 2017) • Cultural Resource Assessment Report – The Watershed Company (August 11, 2017) • No-Effect Letter Report for ESA-Listed Species – The Watershed Company (October 20, 2017) • Critical Areas Report – The Watershed Company (April 3, 2018) 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 other applications known to be pending that would affect the proposal. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. • City of Renton Grading Permit • City of Renton Right-of-Way Permit(s) • City of Renton Rockery Building Permit(s) SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 4 of 23 • City of Renton Environmental Review (SEPA checklist) • City of Renton Critical Area Exemption • City of Renton Administrative Modification • City of Renton Land Use Master Application • BP Olympic Pipeline Design Plans Submission Checklist and Equipment Inventory List • BP Olympic Pipeline notification prior to project work within 10 feet of pipeline • Puget Sound Energy Easement Agreement • Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA) • Washington Department of Ecology NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit • Washington State Department of Transportation Limited Access Right-of-Way Permit • Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) • King County Wastewater Treatment Division Approval 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. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The Thunder Hills Sanitary Sewer Interceptor collects sewage from the Rolling Hills neighborhood and is located southeast of Renton City Hall. The interceptor connects to sewer mains that ultimately flow to the King County South Wastewater Treatment Plant. The proposed Thunder Hills Sanitary Sewer Interceptor Replacement project includes the segment from near the intersection of Grant Avenue South and South 18th Street to near I-405 running through a small canyon created by Thunder Hills Creek. Thunder Hills Creek is in a steep, narrow ravine that is incised from stream flows. The Thunder Hills Sanitary Sewer Interceptor traverses along and crosses under Thunder Hills Creek within this ravine. A maintenance road and trails for access to the sewer main are also located along the creek alignment. The existing sewer main was originally constructed in 1965 and consists of 10-inch, 12-inch and 18-inch concrete, asbestos cement, and ductile iron pipe. In 2014 an inspection was conducted to determine the condition of the existing line. Grease buildup, separated pipe joints, broken lip sections, corrosion of cast iron fittings, concrete lining spalling, heavy scale deposits, minor root intrusion, and a sag in one portion of the line were found as a result of the line inspection. In addition, the existing line was not constructed with adequate manholes to allow for proper maintenance of the system. The ravine’s hillside has slumped in several places and erosion created by the creek has compromised the stability of the maintenance access road and has narrowed the existing maintenance access road in various locations. Past stream bank stabilization measures implemented by the City have included rock gabion walls and placing rock rip rap in the stream, along the stream bank and where the hillside has slumped. Issues with erosion impacts continue to be a problem for the stream bank and hillside. Due to the deterioration of the sewer interceptor caused by erosion and slope sloughing impacts to the sewer line, as well as inadequate manhole access, the City is proposing to SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 5 of 23 make improvements to approximately 2,050 lineal feet of sewer main. The sewer line will be improved through a mix of parallel HDPE pipelines and rehabilitation of the existing line using a cured-in-place (CIPP) lining technology. Additionally, due to erosion, slope sloughing and inadequate width of the maintenance access road, the City is proposing to improve approximately 37,574 square feet of maintenance access road, and stabilize slopes to help alleviate potential, future erosion issues. Approximately 1,205 lineal feet (LF) of 12-inch HDPE sewer line would be installed parallel to the old line from approximately Station 4+40 to 12+20 and 12+35 to 16+60 utilizing traditional trench construction methods. The remaining portion of the existing sewer line (approximately 845 LF) will be rehabilitated using CIPP technology. There is also one section of the line that has a longer than desired spacing between manholes (approximately 1,300), which would make it difficult to install the CIPP lining, as well as allow the City maintenance of this section. Thus, another manhole would be installed behind the Berkshire Apartments. The project includes improving the existing maintenance access road from the portion of the interceptor south of I-405 to roughly Station 30+83. Station 1+00 to station 7+25 of the improvements will be narrow (7’ wide) with just enough width to allow the City’s “easement” machine in this area to perform maintenance. From Station 7+25 south, proposed improvements include adding a turnaround at Station 7+50, building a new access road across PSE property at Station 16+00, and rebuilding the entrance road at Station 30+83 (See Civil Plans dated 9-12-2018). The maintenance access road improvements would encompass approximately 37,574 square feet. The maintenance access road improvements will be constructed adjacent to Thunder Hills Creek and will generally be in the existing location of the maintenance access road. Due to the limited width of the project alignment, the contractor will be required to utilize small excavation equipment to demolish the existing paved areas and build the new maintenance access road. The project specifications and plans will detail measures the contractor will be required to adhere to in excavating, filling, compacting, and grading the maintenance access road improvements in close proximity to identified streams and wetlands. Locally imported structural fill will consist of sand and gravel (quarry spall 2” – 4”) and less than 5% fines, with a maximum thickness of 12" and a minimum of 95% compaction. Approximately the first 150' of the access road entrance will be asphalt paved as well as a 12' wide access on PSE Parcel No. 2023059013. Several different structures will be constructed to alleviate future erosion/undercutting of the roadway and sewer line: Four-foot gabion walls would be constructed on the north side of the ravine between Stations 1+00 and 2+50. A rock buttress would be constructed utilizing large quarry rock (4-man size or larger) on the north side of the ravine between Station 2+50 and Station 5+50. Between Stations 3+80 and Station 5+50 several rockeries would be constructed on the north and south sides of the ravine. Rockeries will be constructed of Ultra or ecology block and will be tiered where possible. These structures will all be embedded into dense native soils or hard sandstone per the Geotechnical Engineer's recommendations for the project. 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. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 6 of 23 The project is in the City of Renton, Washington and runs the length of Thunder Hills Creek, commencing at a gated, paved entrance at the intersection of Grant Avenue South and South 18th Street, extending northwest to I-405. See attached vicinity map. B. Environmental Elements [HELP] 1. Earth [help] a. General description of the site: (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: evidence of past landslide activity is evident on the west slope of Station 5+50 and 3+50, and in an area north of Station 2+50 on the west slope. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The slopes extending downward into the Thunder Hills Creek valley between Stations 0+25 and 6+40 are very steep, with magnitudes of 100 to 150 percent. There are localized slope areas that are near vertical (200 percent magnitude) to overturned due to excavation, sloughing, and/or landslide activity. Generally, slope magnitudes south of this area range from 40 to 100 percent. 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 Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) maps for King County indicate that the ravine and adjacent side slopes are underlain by Alderwood and Kitsap soils (very steep), Alderwood gravelly sandy loam (8% to 30% slopes) and Beausite gravelly sandy loam (15% to 30% slopes). There are no agricultural soils on the site. Soils within the north portion of the site consist of silty-sands and sandy-silts derived from weathering of the underlying sandstone and siltstone. Toward the south, the soils are silty-sand with gravel, consistent with glacial till. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Yes, there are several areas along the project alignment which show signs of soil movement or erosion. These are primarily confined to the west side of the ravine north of Station 5+50. Landslide activity and surface erosion has occurred in this area within the past 50 years (approximately). The movements include sliding of colluvium and highly weathered bedrock from the underlying hard bedrock. Slide thicknesses range from 1 to 3 feet in thickness, 10 to 30 feet in width, and up to 40 feet long. Additionally, there is ongoing erosion along the stream banks and within the channel. In general, the rate of erosion is moderate along some of the banks and relatively slow within the channel. e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 7 of 23 For the proposed trench construction, suitable native soil excavated from the trenches will be used as backfill where possible. Locally-sourced, imported fill, consisting of a sand and gravel mixture with a maximum grain size of 3 inches and less than 5 percent fines, may be necessary if the native soils are unsuitable in some areas. Additional grading will also occur in improving maintenance access to the interceptor. Access roads/trails will be regraded for better maintenance access and to lessen erosion along the existing interceptor alignment. Rockeries will also be installed as an erosion protection measure in supporting the hillside adjacent to the maintenance access road. Rock buttresses may also be installed to support the access road and prevent lateral pipe movements and erosion or undercutting of the sewer line. Total excavation will be approximately 1,550 cubic yards (cy) of cut and 711 cy of fill. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. The potential exists for soil erosion to occur during construction as a result of earth disturbance associated with clearing, grading, and trench digging. Where soil is exposed or fill material is stockpiled there is the potential for wind or surface water runoff to pick up soil particles and transport them off site. Erosion and sediment control measures detailed in Section 8.3 of the “Rockery Wall Recommendations” report (November 1, 2016) are summarized in B.1.h (below). Once construction is complete, erosion is not expected as disturbed areas will be re-vegetated or will be stabilized with gravel. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? The existing gravel maintenance access road/trail is approximately 27,780 square feet (sf). Proposed gravel improvements will expand this to approximately 34,161 sf, adding approximately 6,981 sf of new gravel maintenance access road/trail. The existing portion of the maintenance access road/trail that is paved (asphalt) is approximately 1,713 sf. Proposed improvements will expand this paved (asphalt) surface to approximately 5,439 sf, adding approximately 3,726 sf of new asphalt. The percent of impervious surfaces (asphalt) after project construction is approximately 5%. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: To minimize the erosion and sediment runoff impacts from excavation, grading, and trenching activities required of the project, the work will be performed during the dry season (June through September). Temporary erosion and sedimentation control (TESC) requirements are detailed in the construction plans for this project. A stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) will be prepared for implementation by the contractor for project construction and will include necessary TESC Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be incorporated into construction of the project as applicable. Clearing limits have been defined on the construction plans, and the construction specifications include provisions detailing suitable construction activities. Any runoff generated by dewatering discharge will be treated through construction of a sediment trap if there is sufficient space. If space is limited, other filtration methods will need to be incorporated. Additional perimeter erosion and sediment control features such as double-silt fencing will be added to reduce the possibility of sediment entering the surface water. All other trench and excavation widths and depths will be kept to a minimum during construction. Immediate backfill of trenches, along with timely restoration, will further reduce erosion potential. Project specifications also include approved agency permits and associated requirements and timeline restrictions. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 8 of 23 2. Air [help] 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. There will be emissions of dust generated during construction from earth movement and disturbance. Dust from construction is generally composed of larger particles that settle rapidly. Dust can be spread over a larger area by strong winds or by construction vehicles entering and leaving the site. Dust can also be spread by trucks carrying soil either to or from the site during construction. Given the deep ravine geology of the project location with dense vegetation cover, the dust is expected to be generally confined to the vicinity of the project area. There will also be temporary exhaust emissions from construction vehicles and excavation equipment. Additionally, temporary odor would be generated from the CIPP process which would be detected in the immediate vicinity of the project. However, these pipes will be installed in a trenchless manner and covered as quickly as possible, thereby minimizing the duration of the odor. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. It is possible that some exhaust emissions from I-405, north end of the project, will contribute to the emissions of construction vehicles during the construction of the project. The project will only last a few months with minimal construction and truck vehicles added to the area. Annual average daily traffic (AADT) for I-405 at Mile Post 3.04 (north end of the project), is approximately 100,000 vehicles (https://www.interstate-guide.com/i-405_aadt.html#washington). As a result, the emissions from the temporary construction and truck vehicles at this project site will be orders of magnitude less than that of continuous I-405 vehicle emissions. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Measures used to reduce emissions of dust include but are not limited to the following: • Excessive dust will be reduced by spraying water over the disturbed soil area as needed throughout the duration of the excavation and maintenance access road improvement process. • Double-silt fencing will be erected along Thunder Hills Creek to capture any eroded material and prevent it from reaching the creek. • A rock spall pad will be constructed at the point(s) of ingress and egress for construction equipment to help prevent the spread of dust to the adjacent roadways (gated site entrance at Grant Ave S and S 18th Street and at the cleared PSE easement access along S 18th Street). • Trucks transporting excavated or fill material will be covered or have adequate freeboard to prevent dust and particulates from being blown out of the truck. • Vehicles and equipment will be required to meet all local, state and federal regulations for emissions. 3. Water [help] a. Surface Water: [help] 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 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 9 of 23 yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Thunder Hills Creek, seven small tributaries to the creek, and six wetlands occur in the immediate vicinity of the project site. For the project, Thunder Hills Creek was designated as Stream A, the remaining tributaries were designated as Streams B-H, and the six wetlands on site were designated Wetlands A-F (as noted in the Stream and Wetland Delineation Report (included in SEPA package submittal). Thunder Hills Creek is a perennial stream that flows north-northwest through the ravine formed by the creek. The portion of this creek that is adjacent to the project area flows through the ravine, and eventually crosses under I-405 via a 48” diameter culvert. The creek becomes Rolling Hills Creek (a tributary of the Black River) which flows through a combination of storm drain pipes and open channels. connecting to Rolling Hills Creek, which is a tributary of the Black River. Over time the City of Renton has placed rock riprap in the channel and positioned rock gabion baskets along portions of the creek bank to control erosion. The creek is not fish-bearing and there is a total fish passage barrier in the vicinity of the I-405 crossing. The tributaries to Thunder Hills Creek are small, seasonally-flowing streams that collect stormwater runoff, some of which are also fed by groundwater seeps or upstream wetlands. They generally flow in open channels and are mostly dry during the summer with the exception of Stream E located in the upstream portion of the project area, which contained flow during a site visit in August. None of the tributary streams are fish- bearing. Wetland A is associated with Stream E and borders the pedestrian trail that runs along Thunder Hills Creek (the trail forms a partial impoundment of Stream E, which flows through the wetland). This is a forested, depressional wetland rated as Category 3. Surface water from Stream E, localized ground water and water impounded by the trail contribute to the wetland hydrology. Wetland B is a small riverine wetland that contains forested and emergent vegetation types. This wetland receives its hydrology from the overbank flooding of Thunder Hills Creek as well as from localized groundwater. The wetland is rated as a Category 2 wetland. Wetland C is made up of scrub-shrub and emergent vegetation. It is the only wetland rated as a Category 4 wetland. This wetland is located on a bench above Thunder Hills Creek and is disconnected hydraulically. Its hydrology comes from ground water seepage. Wetlands D, E and F are all Category 3 wetlands. Wetland D is a small riverine wetland with emergent vegetation. It receives its hydrology from Thunder Hills Creek and localized ground water. Wetland E is a disturbed wetland that formed on fill that was once the stream channel for Thunder Hills Creek. It is a depressional wetland with scrub-shrub and emergent vegetation. Wetland F has emergent vegetation and is a slope wetland hydraulically supported by a hillside seep. 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. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 10 of 23 The proposed project will require work within 200 feet of all above listed streams and wetlands on site. Work will take place intermittently along the banks of Thunder Hills Creek (landward of the ordinary high water mark) so that stream bank and maintenance road stabilization measures can be constructed. Work will also occur in the remaining stream buffers as well as all of the wetland buffers. Two wetlands will be directly impacted by fill material (gravel maintenance access path improvement), further described in 3.a.3 (below). 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. It will be necessary to remove some material from the Thunder Hills Creek stream bank in areas that require erosion control improvements such as rock buttresses as discussed in Section B.1.e. Any imported suitable structural fill (as discussed in Section B.1.e.) required during this process will be obtained from an approved local vendor. Additionally, gravel will also be obtained from an approved vendor and will be imported to repair the existing maintenance access road/trail. Temporary and permanent impacts to wetland and stream buffers that occur during fill and dredge activities will be mitigated on site utilizing the planting schedule (various native groundcover, shrubs, and trees) noted in the Impacts and Mitigation Plan (included in SEPA package submittal), resulting in approximately 42,945 sf of buffer mitigation through vegetation re-planting. Wetland E will have approximately 17 sf, and Wetland F will have approximately 1,315 sf of disturbed area for construction of the proposed interceptor improvements. Wetland F sits in the original alignment for the access road along the northwest portion of the interceptor alignment. This wetland appears to be originating from a seep in the trail due to lack of maintenance of the road, is generally comprised of compacted soil, and has invasive vegetation (Himalayan blackberry and English ivy) encroaching into this area. The grading in these wetlands is due to the increasing need to stabilize the area surrounding Thunder Hills Creek. Proposed improvements have been kept as minimal as possible. Temporary and permanent impacts to wetland and stream buffers will be mitigated on site utilizing the planting schedule noted in the Impacts and Mitigation Plan (included in SEPA package submittal), as well as provide wetland mitigation banking or in lieu of fee for mitigation of the unavoidable permanent impacts to wetlands and their buffers. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. The project will not require any surface water withdrawals. Cofferdams will be used to provide temporary bypass to divert water around the large woody debris installation areas. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. According to FEMA Firm Map, there is no 100-year floodplain associated with Thunder Hills Creek. 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. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 11 of 23 The project would not involve any discharges of waste materials to the streams or wetlands in the project area, due to proper BMP installation noted in B.1.h and as noted in the TESC construction plans for the project area. b. Ground Water: [help] 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 ground water will be withdrawn for drinking water use. In areas where the trenching will occur below the water table, shallow groundwater may need to be pumped out of the trench as necessary to complete sewer pipe replacement. In these instances, any withdrawn ground water would be allowed to infiltrate back into the ground. 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 materials will be discharged into the ground. c. Water runoff (including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. The only sources of runoff are from storm water and temporary discharge from dewatering activities. Storm water or dewatering water would infiltrate naturally back into the ground at the project area. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. There is a slight potential for minor construction related spills such as drips of oil or fuel if construction vehicles or equipment are fueled at the site, which could enter ground water or Thunder Hills Creek. However, measures would be put in place to minimize and contain any spills. 3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. Wetland E will have approximately 17 sf, and Wetland F will have approximately 1,315 sf of disturbed area for construction of the proposed interceptor improvements. Wetland F sits in the original alignment for the access road along the northwest portion of the interceptor alignment. This wetland appears to be originating from a seep in the trail due to lack of maintenance of the road, is generally comprised of compacted soil, and has SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 12 of 23 invasive vegetation (Himalayan blackberry) encroaching into this area. The drainage pattern in the vicinity of the site is not anticipated to be affected by the 17 sf of disturbance in Wetland E due to the small size of that fill. The drainage patter near the site is also not anticipated to be significantly affected by the 1,315 sf of disturbance in Wetland F since that wetland is a product of a seep in the trail due to lack of maintenance in the road and maintenance for the project should help to better direct the water from the seep into the creek and nearby pervious ground. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: The erosion and sediment controls and SWPPP/BMPs noted above (under Section B.1.h) would control surface water runoff impacts. In addition, any fueling of construction equipment or vehicles will take place in a designated area away from Thunder Hills Creek that has containment measures established. Any trucks or construction equipment will be on site for only as long as they are needed and removed from the area and vicinity of Thunder Hills Creek and wetlands as soon as possible. 4. Plants [help] a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: _x__ deciduous tree: red alder, bigleaf maple, Oregon ash, hazelnut, Sitka willow _x__ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, _x__ shrubs: Indian plum, evergreen blackberry, salmonberry, salal, sword ferns, ladyfern _x__ grasses ____ pasture ____ crop or grain ____ Orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops. _x__ wet soil plants: buttercup, panicled bullrush, skunk cabbage, horsetail, American speedwell, coastal hedgenettle, fowl mannagrass, impatiens sp., reed canarygrass ____water plants: _x__other types of vegetation: night shade, Himalayan blackberry, English ivy, Japanese knotweed, youth on age, bigflower tellima b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Vegetation will be removed from the improved maintenance access road/trail areas, at the turnaround areas, and along the maintenance access road. Most of the vegetation to be removed consists of ivy, blackberries, ferns, salal, grasses and other shrubs. Additionally, 40 trees (see the Existing Site plans and Critical Areas Report), that are located directly in grading or maintenance access path areas are proposed to be removed. Approximately 0.9 acres of vegetation will be removed throughout the project area. However, temporary and permanent impacts to wetland and stream buffers will be mitigated on site utilizing the planting schedule (various native groundcover, shrubs, and trees) noted in the Impacts and Mitigation Plan (included in SEPA package submittal), resulting in approximately 42,945 sf of buffer mitigation through vegetation re-planting. c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 13 of 23 During the wetland delineation in 2015 and in the recent March 2018 site visit by Stantec biologists, no rare, threatened or endangered plant species were noted. A query of the Washington Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage Program Database and site reconnaissance indicated that there are no rare, threatened or endangered species of plants are located on or near the site. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Prior to construction, clearing and grading limits will be delineated on plans and onsite to limit vegetation removal and/or disturbance. Where applicable, any disturbed areas will be replanted or hydro-seeded and allowed to naturally re-vegetate. Additionally, temporary and permanent impacts to wetland and stream buffers will be mitigated on site utilizing the planting schedule noted in the Impacts and Mitigation Plan (included in SEPA package submittal). e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. English ivy, evergreen blackberry and Himalayan blackberry grow along the project route. 5. Animals [help] 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. Examples include: birds: hawk, songbirds mammals: deer, squirrels, mice, voles fish: non-fish berring stream due to downstream fish passage blockage b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. No ESA listed species are known to occur in the immediate vicinity of the project area. A query of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife IPaC Trust Resources Database (draft report attached with this application) indicated that four federally threatened species, one federally proposed threatened species, and 13 species of migratory birds could potentially be located near the site. The federally threatened species that were noted in the IPaC report include bull trout, marbled murrelet, streaked horned lark, and yellow-billed cuckoo. The proposed threatened species that was noted in the IPaC report is the North American wolverine. The database indicated that there is no critical habitat for any of these species found within the project location. The 10 species of migratory birds identified as birds of conservation concern (BCC) that may be located in the area include: bald eagle, great blue heron, lesser yellowlegs, long-billed curlew, olive-sided flycatcher, red-throated loon, rufous hummingbird, semipalmated sandpiper, short-billed dowitcher, and western screech-owl. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 14 of 23 Yes, as the site is located within the Puget Sound region, and the entire Puget Sound region is part of the Pacific Flyway (https://www.audubon.org/pacific-flyway). d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Although Thunder Hills Creek is not a fish-bearing stream, the cedars from on-site tree removal will be used to create large woody debris within the creek (an aspect of quality fish habitat) near the northern end of the site. This will be done in the event that the fish barrier is somehow removed in the future. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. There are no known invasive animal species on or near the site. 6. Energy and Natural Resources [help] 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. Beyond gasoline and diesel for running construction equipment, no energy resources will be required for the completed project. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. The project will require the removal of several trees located within the exiting maintenance path, within the grading areas, and to make way for the improvements for the maintenance path. The removal of these trees will decrease the shade coverage for some portions of the nearby properties, allowing these properties to consider installation of photovoltaic harnessing of solar energy. 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: Construction vehicle idling will be minimized to reduce gasoline and diesel consumption. 7. Environmental Health [help] 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. There is a potential for spills of oil or fuel to occur from construction equipment or vehicles during fueling or operations. 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. There are no known (past or present) contaminants at the site. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 15 of 23 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. A 20” diameter petroleum pipeline owned by BP Olympic Pipeline is located near the center of the project (at approximately 15+00). The existing sewer interceptor currently crosses at least two feet beneath the petroleum pipeline alignment, approximately 12 feet below ground surface. 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. Oil and fuel will be utilized for construction equipment. 4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. It is not anticipated that any special emergency services will be required by the completed project. In the event of an emergency, local fire, aid or rescue services and personnel may be required during construction. 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Any fueling of construction equipment or vehicles will take place in a designated area away from Thunder Hills Creek. In the event of an unintentional leak from a construction vehicle on site, containment measures will be established (e.g., silt fence and/or straw wattles). Work at the BP Olympic pipeline crossing location will be coordinated with BP Olympic Pipeline and will adhere to BP Olympic’s construction requirements (including but not limited to performing vacuum excavation or hand digging within 24-inches of the pipeline) for that aspect of the proposed project. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Typical urban noise (dogs barking, people talking, doors closing) and traffic noise from I-405 can be heard at the project site. However, existing sounds and noise levels will have no effect on the project. 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. Construction equipment will generate short-term noise increases during regular business hours only (typically 8am to 5 pm). It is anticipated that work will only occur Monday through Friday. There will be no long-term noise as a result of the proposed project. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: The contractor may implement the following mitigation measures for construction noise: SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 16 of 23 • Construction operations can be scheduled or timed to keep average sound levels low. Those activities producing the highest noise levels can be scheduled to coincide with the highest ambient noise levels such as peak traffic periods, as much as possible. • Construction hours will be limited to specific times in accordance with City noise ordinances. • Equipment will not be left idling when not in use. 8. Land and Shoreline Use [help] 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 actual site is located down within a ravine. Currently the site is utilized as a sewer main and existing maintenance access road/trail, which runs along Thunder Hills Creek. There are single-family (across the street on Eagle Ridge Road to the southwest of the project site) and multi-family residences (along the ravine where the project site is located), as well as open space/recreation areas surrounding the project alignment. The project area is crossed by Puget Sound Energy high voltage electrical lines (above ground) and a 20” diameter BP Olympic petroleum pipeline (approximately 12” beneath the ground surface with at least 2 feet separation between the pipeline and existing sewer). The project will have no effect on any of the current uses of this site or the 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? It is unknown if the site has been used for any agricultural practices or working forest lands in the past and it is not currently used for those purposes. Given the steep slope nature of the ravine that the maintenance path and Thunder Hills Creek reside in, it is highly unlikely that any aspect of the project site has been used as farmland or working forest lands. 1) 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. There are no surrounding working farm or forested lands in relation to the project site. c. Describe any structures on the site. There are three foot bridges that cross Thunder Hills Creek and some rock gabion walls adjacent to Thunder Hills Creek. Up at the top of the ravine, roughly 100+ feet on either side of the project site, there are several apartment complex buildings far from where the construction activities will take place. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No structures will be demolished during the construction activities at the project site. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 17 of 23 e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The ravine where the project site resides runs through several tax parcels, the majority of which are zoned RM-F (residential multi-family), with some vacant RM-F land at the corner of South 18th Street and Grant Avenue South. The zoning of the small portion of the northern end of the site is R-8 (residential, 8 dwelling units per acre) as well as vacant. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? According to the City of Renton COR Maps viewer (http://rp.rentonwa.gov/HTML5Public/Index.HTML?viewer=CORMaps), the comprehensive plan designation of the site is residential high density with a small portion at the north end of the project site designated as residential medium density. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Thunder Hills Creek is not designated as a shoreline environment within Renton’s Shoreline Master Program or within the City of Renton COR Maps system. h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. According to the King County iMap tool (https://gismaps.kingcounty.gov/iMap/), portions of the project site contain the following environmentally sensitive areas classifications: erosion hazard and coal mine hazard. The City of Renton sensitive area maps (http://rp.rentonwa.gov/HTML5Public/Index.HTML?viewer=CORMaps) indicate sensitive areas cover most of the site and are classified as coal mine, erosion, and landslide hazard area. The As noted in the Geotechnical Investigation Technical Memorandum (Stantec, 2015), there is evidence of shallow landslide activity along portions of the slow west of the access maintenance path, and most of the slopes that extend into the Thunder Hills Creek ravine can be classified as geologically hazardous (steep slope/landslide hazards). The project site also contains Thunder Hills Creek (classified as a Type Np stream per RMC 4-3- 050.G.7.a), tributary streams and wetlands (as described further in the 2015 Stream and Wetland Delineation Report for the site), which are classified as critical areas. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Although the project site runs through various privately owned residential multi-family parcels, the project site is located deep down within a ravine where no people currently reside or work or will work at the completed project. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? The project will not displace any people. The maintenance access path adjacent to the creek is utilized by pedestrians through most of the project area. Upon completion of the project, the path can still be accessible both to maintenance equipment as well as local residential pedestrians. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable, the project will not displace any people. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 18 of 23 L. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Utility installation, maintenance and use is allowed within the RM-F and R-8 zone classifications and are considered compatible with applicable land use plans; thus, no measures are proposed. m. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts to agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: Not applicable, as there are no nearby agricultural or forest lands of long-term commercial significance. 9. Housing [help] a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Not applicable, as the project is a sewer replacement and maintenance access road improvement, and with no housing affected. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Not applicable, as the project is a sewer replacement and maintenance access road improvement, and with no housing affected. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not applicable, as the project is a sewer replacement and maintenance access road improvement, and with no housing affected. 10. Aesthetics [help] a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Not applicable, as no structure, building, or antennas will be constructed for this project. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Not applicable, as all project activities will occur deep down into a ravine along Thunder Hills Creek, well below any views from the multi-family residences surrounding the ravine. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Not applicable, as there will be no aesthetic impacts because of the project. 11. Light and Glare [help] a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? No light or glare will be produced by the project. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 19 of 23 b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not applicable, as there will be no light or glare because of the project. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? No existing sources of light or glare will affect the proposal. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Not applicable, as there will be no light or glare because of the project. 12. Recreation [help] a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Philip Arnold Park, Talbot Hill Reservoir Park, Thomas Teasdale Park, Cedar River Park, Burnett Linear Park, and Tiffany Park are all located within a mile of the project site. There is also an open, grassy area on Eagle Ridge Drive near the Eagle Ridge Apartments used for dog walking. The existing maintenance access road is also currently utilized by local pedestrians as a walking trail. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. The maintenance access road will be temporarily closed and will not be accessible by the public during construction. Once construction is complete the access road will be re-opened to public access. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: No measures are proposed given that the project construction work will be temporary, and the maintenance access path will be improved and open to public access at completion of the project. 13. Historic and cultural preservation [help] 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 ? If so, specifically describe. As part of the 2017 Cultural Resource Assessment Report (Stantec), a 0.5-mile search radius was used to locate sites within survey proximity of the project area. According to the Washington Information Sysytem for Architectural and Archeological Records Database (WISAARD), there are no properties in the vicinity of the project site that are listed on the National Historic Register. There is one listing on the Washington Heritage Register, Renton Coal Mine Hoist Foundation, located across I-405 from the project area at the intersection of Grady Way and South Benson Road. There are several multi-family residences near the site that have been in place over 50 years and are eligible for listing but have not been evaluated for eligibility to be included in the SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 20 of 23 historic register. These multi-family residences are clustered to the southwest and northeast of the project area in proximity to I-405 including along 108th Avenue SE to the south, and Mill Avenue South, South 6th Street and Cedar Avenue South to the north. A review of the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation’s (DAHP) archaeological database indicated the presence of two sites in the general project area. The nearest, an archaeological district associated with past coal mining activity, is located to the north and outside of the ravine where replacement of the sewer project will take place. The other site is located to the south of the project site along SR-515. 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. A review of the DAHP’s WISSARD database did not reveal any evidence of cultural or historic use or occupation at the project site. The site is located near historic coal mining activities, but there is no indication that coal mining took place on the site itself. Desktop analysis and field survey work was conducted by archaeologists in July 2017 to identify potential cultural material (evidence, artifacts, etc.) or areas of cultural importance on or near the site. The resulting Cultural Resource Assessment Report (Stantec 2017), was reviewed and approved by a Registered Professional Archaeologist (RPA). No historic or pre-contact cultural material was identified within the project area. Previous manipulation of the landscape for the construction of the sewer lines in 1965 and erosional control and stream modification has disturbed or displaced any potential cultural material in the project area. 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 described in the 2017 Cultural Resource Assessment Report (Stantec), the project area was surveyed again beginning from the northern end of the project area near I-405. No cultural material was identified on the surface of the project area or in exposed erosional cut banks. Only one location was identified as a potential location for a subsurface testing (shovel test probe [STP]). The DAHP’s WISSARD database was accessed for archaeological, cultural and historical resources. No consultation was conducted with area tribes. 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 measures are proposed as no disturbance to any resources is anticipated because of the project. 14. Transportation [help] 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 project site is accessed at the south end of the alignment at the intersection of Grant Avenue South and South 18th Street. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 21 of 23 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 closest King County metro bus stop to the project site is located less than ¼ mile to the south at South Puget Drive and Grant Avenue South. c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non-project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? Not applicable, as the project will not add or remove any parking spaces. 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). The gated sewer maintenance access road will be improved, which is also used as an unofficial walking trail by the community. No improvements to hard paved roads or state transportation facilities will be required because of the project. 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 does not occur in the immediate vicinity of water, rail or air transportation and will therefore not utilize any of this type of 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? Given that the project is replacement of existing sewer lines, there is not anticipated to be any needed maintenance activities for the first few years after installation is complete. When maintenance or monitoring is required, there will be trips to the site for maintenance activities, involving one or two vehicles perhaps one or two times in a month. 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 project would have no effect on agricultural or forest lands. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: No measures are proposed. 15. Public Services [help] 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. No, the project will not increase the need for public services. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 22 of 23 b.Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Not applicable as the project will not have direct impacts on public services. 16. Utilities [help] a.Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other - tv cable b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. The project is a sewer utility improvement project of the City of Renton’s existing sewer system located along Thunder Hills Creek. No additional utility construction or installation is associated with or proposed for the project. C. Signature [HELP] The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: ___________________________________________________ Name of signee: Kristi Rettmann Position and Agency/Organization: permitting Coordinator - Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. Date Submitted: October 3, 2018 D. Supplemental sheet for nonproject actions [HELP] (IT IS NOT NECESSARY to 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; pro- duction, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2.How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 23 of 23 Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: 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? Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment.