HomeMy WebLinkAboutEx07_SEPA_Environmental_ChecklistSEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 1 of 2
SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
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
contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal.
A.Background [HELP]
1.Name of proposed project, if applicable: VMAC Natural Grass Field Resurfacing
2.Name of applicant: Port Quendall Company
Exhibit 7
RECEIVED
Clark Close 12/09/2021
PLANNING DIVISION
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99139815-4078-409C-B259-C55D27FC788C
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 2 of 3
3.Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Sean Vanos, Director of Facility
Operations, (p) 1-425-203-8070, 12 Seahawks Way, Renton, WA 98056
4.Date checklist prepared: November 28, 2021
5.Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton, Community and Economic Development
Department
6.Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): February-March 2022
7.Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or
connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
There are no plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with
this proposal. The maintenance activities envisioned in this proposal will be completed on a
periodic basis, potentially on a 10-year cycle, but permits and additional environmental review,
as applicable, will be completed with any future work.
8.List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be
prepared, directly related to this proposal.
Shoreline Mitigation Plan, Wetland Assessment, Standard Stream or Lake Study, and Habitat
Data Report
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.
None known.
10.List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known.
City of Renton: Drainage Review, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Exemption,
Mitigation Plan
Department of Ecology: Construction Stormwater 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. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project
description.)
Proposal involves resurfacing of natural grass fields at Virginia Mason Athletic Center (“VMAC”)
constructed in 2007. The current use of the site is administrative offices and practice fields for
the Seahawks professional football franchise, and no change of use is proposed. Project will
involve excavation of approximately 250,000 square feet of sand and organic material deposited
on fields via regular maintenance activities over the last 14 years and reinstallation of sod
consisting of three varieties each of Kentucky Bluegrass and Perennial Rye. Excavation will
maintain the existing 36” soil cap over existing indicator fabric and contaminated soils. No native
soils or soils associated with the cap layer will be disturbed. Excavated material will be
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99139815-4078-409C-B259-C55D27FC788C
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 3 of 4
transported to a barge accessed via a temporary ramp on a 16’ wide section of VMAC’s
shoreline for disposal offsite. The material will be recycled in the production of top soil at a port
facility in Tacoma. The ramp and steel plating would create access for small dump trucks to haul
material to the barge. Trucks will not be driving in or on the existing shoreline soils. Existing
shoreline plants would be transplanted from the ramp zone to avoid damage and reinstalled
after the project is completed. Re-vegetation will occur as needed consistent with the original
revegetation plan for the VMAC project. No significant trees or significant tree protection zones
would be impacted. No drainage patterns will be altered. Total project timeline estimated to take
5-7 days.
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.
Proposal is on VMAC property located at 12 Seahawks Way, Renton, WA 98056 in location of
existing natural grass fields. The property is generally located in the Southwest 1/4 of Section
29, Township 24 North, Range 5 East, King County, Washington. A site plan and vicinity map
are attached. B.Environmental Elements [HELP]
1.Earth [help] a.General description of the site:
(circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other _____________
b.What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
0%. Fields to be resurfaced provide a flat playing surface for professional athletes.
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 site is generally located on the eastern shore of Lake Washington on the former delta of
May Creek. The subsurface geology of the site is a combination of fluvial deltaic, lacustrine near
shore and constructed fill deposits overlying Pleistocene glacial sediments and Eocene volcanic
and sedimentary bedrock. Historically, fill has been placed on the site, first with the construction
of the Lake Washington Ship Canal, then later in 1955 to extend the shoreline and grade. The
source of historic fill is not well documented, but it is thought to be a highly heterogenous
subsurface mixture of clay, silt, peat, sand, gravel, and cobbles, as well as discarded debris and
abandoned structures from prior site activities. Geology and subsurface conditions were
determined with development of the site in 2007 and documented as part of the SEPA checklist
prepared then. Field explorations at that time discovered depth to bedrock varied between 17.5
feet to greater than 50 feet. In general subsurface soils under the fields consist of either fill
material, soft estuarine deposits, loose alluvial soils and underlying very dense bedrock, or stiff
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99139815-4078-409C-B259-C55D27FC788C
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 4 of 5
to very stiff silty and clay and medium dense sand overlying bedrock. Above these layers is a
36” soil cap placed over existing contamination as part of a cleanup action. This soil layer will
not be disturbed with this proposal.
d.Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so,
describe.
Liquefaction and settlement are potential concerns. The upper 50 to 60 feet of soil within the
May Creek delta are loose and potentially susceptible to liquefaction during a strong
earthquake. The site is within City of Renton mapped “Seismic Hazard Area” per critical areas
maps.
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.
Approximately 250,000 square feet of applied sand and organic material (grass) will be
excavated from the site. Approximately 5,340 cubic yards of sand and organic matter will be
excavated off the fields. No fill will be added, but a new turf layer will be installed.
f.Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe.
Minor erosion could occur as a result of excavation activities as part of the project. A Temporary
Erosion And Sediment Control Plan will be prepared and best practices will be followed to
mitigate erosion and prevent sediment from leaving the project area. After the project is
complete, no erosion is anticipated.
g.About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project
construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
100% of the project area is pervious surface and this will be the case after project completion.
Overall, approximately 40% of the VMAC site is impervious, including buildings, plazas, and
surface parking and driveways that will not be altered with this proposal.
h.Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any:
A Temporary Erosion And Sediment Control Plan will be prepared and best practices will be
followed to mitigate erosion and prevent sediment from leaving the project area. After the project
is complete, no erosion is anticipated.
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.
Dust may be generated during excavation activities. On-site small excavators will generate
emissions from internal combustion engines. Emissions from vehicles visiting the VMAC are
present today and will continue at the same levels following completion of the maintenance
work.
b.Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so,
generally describe.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99139815-4078-409C-B259-C55D27FC788C
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 5 of 6
No.
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any:
Dust will be suppressed by spraying water, if needed, during construction. Any sand/soil piles
will be covered to the extent practicable during excavation activities.
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 yes, describe
type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into.
The VMAC property enjoys approximately 1,887 feet of Lake Washington shoreline. This
proposal would utilize approximately 16 feet of shoreline for barge parking and ramping. Original
development of the facility involved cleanup and restoration of offsite wetlands and buffer.
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, the project will require small dump trucks to traverse the shoreline to deposit excavated
material onto a barge for transport. Dump trucks will not drive along the shoreline, but will drive
on steel plates and ramps. Shoreline plants will be temporarily relocated to allow this transport
to occur and will be replanted when it is complete. Excavation and resurfacing work as noted in
Paragraph A.11 will occur on the portion of the engineered fields that are located within the
shoreline setback.
3)Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed
from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected.
Indicate the source of fill material.
None.
4)Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
No.
5)Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan.
No.
6)Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so,
describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
No.
b.Ground Water: [help]
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99139815-4078-409C-B259-C55D27FC788C
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 6 of 7
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.
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.
There will be no discharge of waste material into the ground from septic tanks or other sources.
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.
Stormwater is the only source of runoff at the VMAC property. On the project site, stormwater is
infiltrated through the vegetated turf and sand and collected in the field subdrainage system
above the soil below and eventually into Lake Washington.
2)Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe.
No.
3)Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If
so, describe.
No.
d.Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage
pattern impacts, if any:
No impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are proposed.
4. Plants [help] a.Check the types of vegetation found on the site:
__deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other (alder saplings, cottonwood, red-osier
dogwood, Sitka willow, pacific madrone, pacific willow)
__x__evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other (Douglas fir, Sitka spruce, western red
cedar)
__x__shrubs
__x__grass
____pasture
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99139815-4078-409C-B259-C55D27FC788C
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 7 of 8
____crop or grain
____ Orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops.
__x__ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, 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?
Field turf grass will be removed and replaced as part of the proposal. Existing plants in the
shoreline will be temporarily moved and replanted.
c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site.
None known.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance
vegetation on the site, if any:
Reinstallation of sod on fields consisting of three varieties each of Kentucky Bluegrass and
Perennial Rye.
e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site.
Himalayan blackberry and scots broom.
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, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: Canada geese, eagle, osprey,
heron
mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: deer, nutria, beaver
fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: salmon, shellfish, trout,
speckled dace, three-spine stickleback, northern squawfish, yellow perch, black
crappie, bass, mountain whitefish, large scale sucker, longfin smelt, prickly
sculpin, turtles
b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site.
Chinook salmon and bull trout
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
Yes, adult Chinook Salmon in Lake Washington migrate past the site on their way to Cedar
River each summer. In addition, the entire Puget Sound Region is part of the Pacific Flyway, a
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99139815-4078-409C-B259-C55D27FC788C
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 8 of 9
route for migratory birds extending from Alaska to South America.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
None.
e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site.
None known.
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.
The completed project will have no energy needs. The VMAC facility generally uses electricity
for cooling, and natural gas for heating and cooking.
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties?
If so, generally describe.
No.
c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal?
List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any:
No impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are proposed.
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.
1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses.
Former wood treating operations at the site ended in 1981 and the property was subsequently
used for storage of bulk mulch prior to redevelopment to the VMAC. With development of the
original facility, Prospective Purchaser Consent Decrees were negotiated with the Department
of Ecology under the Model Toxics Control Act in 2000. Cleanup of the property consisted of
excavation and replacement of soils in the Baxter Cove area, soil stabilization, and capping of
contaminated soils. A 3-foot soil cap and 18” sand layer was placed over the site to prevent
incidental contact of potentially hazardous residual materials from the wood treatment
operation.
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.
None known.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99139815-4078-409C-B259-C55D27FC788C
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 9 of 10
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.
None. An Integrated Pest Management Plan was developed to address management
techniques and potential chemical uses on the natural turf fields with the original VMAC
development. the IPMP is still in place and governs any chemical and fertilizer applications.
Preferred management of pests is through a combination of cultural methods and accepted
tolerance levels.
4) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
No special emergency services are anticipated.
5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
No impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are proposed. Environmental health
hazards are controlled now via a 18” sand layer and 3 foot soil cap over existing contamination,
which will not be disturbed with this proposal. The IPMP will continue to be followed for routine
field maintenance following this periodic maintenance activity.
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 noises in the area that occur on a regular basis that will adversely impact the
project. I-405 is located near the site, although traffic noise is not affected to adversely impact
the project. The former adjacent rail line has been replaced by the King County Eastside Trail
Corridor named “Eastrail.”
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)? Indi-
cate what hours noise would come from the site.
During excavation, there will be noise from small bulldozers and haulers that will have noise
levels similar to traffic with no to minimal impact on adjacent uses.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
Adherence to City of Renton noise regulations for construction hours.
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.
Current land use of site: professional football franchise administrative facility and practice
fields.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99139815-4078-409C-B259-C55D27FC788C
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 10 of 11
Current use of adjacent properties: Lake Washington is located to the west, Lake Washington
Boulevard and I-405 are located to the east, residential condominiums are located to the
north, Quendall Terminals property (currently vacant) is located to the south.
No land use changes are proposed with this proposal and there will be no affects on 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?
No.
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.
c.Describe any structures on the site.
The existing practice facility is a 200,00 square foot, three-story office building and indoor
practice field. A 5,500 square foot Maintenance Building is located on the SE portion of the site.
d.Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
No.
e.What is the current zoning classification of the site?
Commercial / Office / Residential (“COR”)
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
Commercial / Office / Residential
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site?
Shoreline High Intensity, Lake Washington Reach C
h.Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify.
The VMAC property is within a “Seismic Hazard Area” per the City of Renton critical areas
map.
i.Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99139815-4078-409C-B259-C55D27FC788C
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 11 of 12
Not applicable.
j.Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
None.
k.Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:
No impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are proposed.
L.Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land
uses and plans, if any:
No change of use is proposed with this proposal for periodic maintenance of existing natural
grass athletic practice fields.
m.Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts to agricultural and forest lands of long-term
commercial significance, if any:
No impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are proposed.
9. Housing [help] a.Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, mid-
dle, or low-income housing.
None.
b.Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low-income housing.
None.
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
No impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are proposed.
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?
No buildings or structures are proposed.
b.What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
No.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99139815-4078-409C-B259-C55D27FC788C
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 12 of 13
b.Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
No impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are proposed.
11.Light and Glare [help] a.What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly
occur?
Glare from excavator headlights could be visible for a short time for any excavation activity
completed in the late afternoon in dusk or semi-darkness due to early winter sunsets. No glare
would result from the completed proposal.
b.Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views?
No. There will be no light or glare resulting from the finished proposal.
c.What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
None known.
d.Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
No impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are proposed.
12. Recreation [help]
a.What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
Public access to the shoreline is provided on the VMAC site along the north property line. The
King County Eastside Rail Corridor known as the “Eastrail” is adjacent to the VMAC’s east
property line. Recreational activities include running, walking, and biking.
b.Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe.
No. The proposal would maintain existing professional athletic practice fields, and Eastrail
recreational 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 impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are proposed.
13. Historic and cultural preservation [help]
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99139815-4078-409C-B259-C55D27FC788C
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 13 of 14
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.
No.
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 cultural resources report was submitted with the original development of the VMAC and is in
the City’s files. This assessment did not identify any cultural resources eligible for listing in the
National Register of Historic Places. Literature review suggested that a Duwamish site may
have been present at the historic mouth of May Creek, assume to have been located on a
nearby property to the south.
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.
Reference to prior cultural resources report prepared for development of the site.
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 impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are proposed. All of the material to be
excavated from the site is fill added over the past 14 years. No native soils will be disturbed
and there is no potential of disturbance to cultural resources.
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.
I-405 provides regional access to the site. The site is served by Lake Washington Boulevard
and NE 44th St, the primary access to which is via exit 7 from I-405. Other vehicular access is
also provided b
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 currently served by public transit.
c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non-project proposal
have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate?
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99139815-4078-409C-B259-C55D27FC788C
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 14 of 15
No parking spaces would be added by the proposal and no parking spaces would be
eliminated.
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).
No.
e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air
transportation? If so, generally describe.
The proposal will use a barge to transport excavated fill material from the site.
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?
No additional vehicle trips would be generated by the proposed maintenance activity. Vehicle
trips and travel patterns associated with the existing VMAC uses would not be altered.
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.
No.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
No impacts are anticipated and no mitigation 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 additional public service needs are anticipated. Public services associated with the existing
VMAC uses would not be altered.
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any.
No impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are proposed.
16. Utilities [help] a. Circle utilities currently available at the site:
electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system,
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99139815-4078-409C-B259-C55D27FC788C
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 15 of 16
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.
No utilities are proposed as part of this proposal. Existing utility connections for the VMAC
facility will not be altered.
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 __________________________________________________
Position and Agency/Organization ____________________________________
Date Submitted: _____________
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?
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are:
Sean Vanos
Director of Facility Operations - Seattle Seahawks
12/7/2021
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99139815-4078-409C-B259-C55D27FC788C
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 16 of 16
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.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99139815-4078-409C-B259-C55D27FC788C