The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1 - Kersey III Draft EIS KERSEY III PRELIMINARY PLAT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT JULY 2004 CITY OF AUBURN DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PHONE: (253) 931-3090 FAX: (253) 804.. 3114 25 WEST MAIN AUBURN, WA 98001-4998 DRAFT EN\rIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT WETS) for KERSEY III PRELIMINARY PLAT City of Aubum~ W A Departn1enr of Planning and Community Developlnent "The intent and puqJose of this Draft EIS is to satisfy the requirenlents of the State Environnlentat Policy Act (SEPA), RCW 43.21, and Auburn C~ity Code 16.06~ including the requirelnent to inform citizens and govemnlent agencies of a deternlination pursuant to SEP AJ This document is not an authorization for an action~ nor does it c.onsti tute a decision or rec.ommelldat.lon for an action; in its tlnal foml~ it \vill accompany recorTlmended action and w-il1 be considered in making the final decision on the proposal. DA TE OF ISSUE: July 1 ~ 2004 ~ - (~J Paul Krauss~ AICP Director 8: SEP A Responsible Official Planning & Con11nunity Developlnent TO: Recipients of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement SUBJECT: Draft Environmental Impact Statement- Kersey III Preliminary Plat Date: July 1, 2004 This Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) has been prepared under the direction of the City of Auburn Planning and Community Development Department to evaluate the impacts of the proposed Kersey III Preliminary Plat. The DEIS considers potentia I impacts and mitigation measures for two land use alternatives, which include the subdivision of approximately 170-acres into 403 lots to support 481 dwelling units, and the use of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) criteria to create 628 lots to support 700 dwelling units. A No Action alternative is also analyzed. The project site is located generally west of Kersey Way right-of-way from 49th Street SE (if extended) at its northern limits to the King County line at its southern limits. The project site is located adjacent to and east of the existing Lakeland Hills Divisions 8, 9 and 10. Elements of the environment addressed in the DEIS include surface water, ground water, air quality, earth, traffic and transportation, archaeological/cultural resources and land use. The City of Auburn is the lead agency for purposes of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). The City has decided to establish a 45-day comment period rather than 30 days to allow agencies and interested parties ample opportunity to provide meaningful input. Comments must be received in writing at Auburn City Hall no later than 5 p.m. on August 16, 2004. No extensions beyond the 45- day comment period shall be granted. The City has scheduled a public meeting to allow interested parties the opportunity to provide comments on the DEIS on July 28, 2004 4:00 to 8:00 p.m. at the Lakeland Community Center. FACT SHEET Proposed Action The Proposed Action will involve the development of a low-density preliminary plat of 481 dwelling units or a higher density 700 dwelling unit development on a 170-acre parcel located in the southerly portion of the City of Auburn. The 700-unit alternative would be developed under the city's PUD regulations. The project consists of seven (7) undeveloped forested parcels. The project will be governed by, among other regulations, the City of Auburn zoning and subdivision ordinances. Open space and sensitive areas would be provided or protected as required by the City of Auburn sensitive area regulations. Certain portions of the site will not be developed due to steep slopes, wetland and power line corridors. The project's proposed construction will consist of three (3) divisions and six (6) phases. The proposal includes approximately 620,000 cubic yards of earthwork, which is expected to be balanced on site. The proposal will require the on-site and off-site installation of new public facilities to serve the development, to include water, storm sewer and sanitary sewer lines. Onsite storm facilities include wet ponds for detention and water quality treatment. The proposal also requires the dedication of land for use as a public park. The proposal requIres the dedication and construction of approximately four (4) miles of new public rights of way to serve the development and provide internal circulation. The improvements include internal streets and a new arterial connection from Evergreen Way SE to Kersey Way. Proponent Dana Mower ofDBM Consulting Engineers Representing: Wayne Jones, Lakeridge Development, Inc. Clarence Wright, 6- W, Inc. Todd Duty Lead Agency City of Auburn Department of Planning and Community Development 25 West Main Street Auburn, Washington 98001 Responsible Official: Paul Krauss, AICP, Director Department of Planning and Community Development Contact Persons: Sean Martin, AICP Development Services Coordinator (253) 931-3090 smartin~ci.auburn. wa. us i Duane Huskey, P.E. Assistant City Engineer - Utilities (253) 804-5062 dhuskey@ci.auburn.wa.us Licenses and Permits City of Auburn: Draft and Final EIS Approvals Preliminary Plat Approval Final Plat Approval Planned Unit Development Approval Grading Permit Land Clearing Permit Facility Extension Permit Building Permits Storm, Sewer and Water Meter Permits Puget Sound Clean Air Agency (PSCAA): Notice of Construction Notice of Completion State of Washington: General Permit to Discharge Stormwater Hydraulic Proje ct Approvals Electrical Permits Authors and Principal Author: Principal Contributors Apex Engineering Geotechnical Studies: GeoEngineers Air Quality Studies: McCulley, Frick & Gillman Wildlife Habitat/Streams Air Quality Studies: Raedeke Associates, Inc. Traffic Studies: Transportation Solutions, Inc. Date of Issue Draft EIS: July 1, 2004 Date Comments Are Due August 16, 2004 Public Meeting Lakeland Community Center (Upstairs) Location., Date and Time 5801 Lakeland Hills Way Auburn, W A 98092 (Located at the NW comer of the Lakeland Hills Way/Evergreen Way SE intersection) July 28, 2004, 4:00 to 8:00 p.m. Location of the EIS Department of Planning and Community Development and Other Environmental 25 West Main Street Auburn, W A and the Auburn Branch of the Information King County Library 1102 Auburn Way South 11 Approximate Date of Final City Council consideration of the preliminary plat application is Action anticipated no sooner than December 2004. A separate notice announcing the specific date and time of the public hearing will be provided. Final EIS Date of issuance to be determined. EIS Availability Copies of the DEIS have been distributed to the agencies, organizations and individuals noted on the Distribution List, except for those which were sent a notice of availability as noted on the list (see Chapter 4). Additional copies are available, for a fee (to cover the copying charges) at the City of Auburn Department of Planning and Community Development, 25 West Main Street, Auburn Washington. 111 TABLE OF CONTENTS Fact Sheet 1 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Li~ofFigures_________________________________________________________________ ~ List of Tables x ------------------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1.0 Summary _________________________________________________________ I 1.1 Introduction 2 ------------------------------------------------------------ 1.2 Objectives of the Proposal__________________________________________________ 2 1.3 Pr~ectLocmion_________________________________________________________2 1.4 Project Alternatives Description _____________________________________________ 2 1.4.1 Alternative 481 - Partial PUD Preliminary Plat ___________________________ 2 1.4.2 Alternative 700 - Complete PUD Preliminary Plat _________________________ 5 1.4.3 No Action Alternative 5 --------------------------------------------- 1.5 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for the Alternatives ____________________ 7 Chapter 2.0 Description Of Alternatives ____________________________________________ 19 2.1 Introduction 20 ----------------------------------------------------------- 2.2 Ahernm~e481-P~i~PUDPrelim~~Plm__________________________________20 2.3 Ahernm~e700-ComplclePUDPrelim~~Plm_______________________________20 2.4 No Action Alternative 20 ---------------------------------------------------- 2.5 Utilities, Road and Storm Alternatives 20 ---------------------------------------- Chapter 3.0 Affected Environment, Significant Impacts, Mitigation Measures and Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts ___________________________________________ 26 3.1 Earth Resources 27 -------------------------------------------------------- 3.1.1 Top 0 graphy____________________________________________ ________27 3.1.1.1 Affected Environment 27 ----------------------------------- 3.1.1.2 Signific~lmpacts_____________________________________27 3.1.1.3 MliigmionMeasures ____________________________________31 3.1.1.4 Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts _____________________ 31 3.1.2 Soils and Geology _______________________________________________ 31 3.1.2.1 Affected Environment 31 ----------------------------------- 3.1.2.1.1 Soils 31 ----------------------------------------- 3.1.2.1.2 Geo~~______________________________________33 3.1.2.2 Signific~lmpacts_____________________________________39 3.1.2.3 MliigmionMeasures ____________________________________39 3.1.2.4 Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts _____________________ 40 3.1.3 Geologic Hazards _______________________________________________ 40 3.1.3.1 Affected Environment 40 ----------------------------------- 3.1.3.1.1 Erosion Hazards 40 -------------------------------- 3.1.3.1.2 Landslide Hazards 40 ------------------------------- 3.1.3.1.3 Seismic Hazards 41 -------------------------------- 3.1.3.1.4 V olcanic Hazards 43 ------------------------------- 3.1.3.1.5 Coal Mine Hazards 45 ------------------------------ 3.1.3.2 Si~ilic~lmpacts_____________________________________45 3.1.3.2.1 Erosion, Grading and Vibrations ____________________ 45 3.1.3.2.2 Landslides 46 ------------------------------------ IV 3.1.3.2.3 Seis~ici~ ____________________________________46 3.1.3.2.4 Volcanoes and Coal Mines 46 ------------------------ 3.1.3.3 Mliig~ionMeasures ____________________________________46 3.1.3.3.1 Erosion, Grading and Vibrations ____________________ 46 3.1.3.3.2 Landslides 47 ------------------------------------ 3.1.3.3.3 Seis~ici~ ____________________________________47 3.1.3.4 Unavoidable Significant Adverse I~pacts_____________________ 47 3.2 Water Resources 48 ------------------------------------------------------- 3.2.1 Surface Water 48 -------------------------------------------------- 3.2.1.1 Affected Environ~ent 48 ----------------------------------- 3.2.1.2 Signific~I~pacts_____________________________________48 3.2.1.3 Mliig~ionMeasures ____________________________________50 3.2.1.4 Unavoidable Significant Adverse I~pacts _____________________ 51 3.2.2 Groundwater 51 --------------------------------------------------- 3.2.2.1 Affected Environment 51 ----------------------------------- 3.2.2.1.1 Shallow Groundwater 51 ---------------------------- 3.2.2.1.2 ~gionaIAqui~rs_______________________________51 3.2.2.1.3 Water Budget __________________________________ 53 3.2.2.1.4 ~oun~~~Quali~____________________________53 3.2.2.2 Signific~I~pacts_____________________________________54 3.2.2.3 Mliig~ionMeasures ____________________________________54 3.2.2.4 Unavoidable Significant Adverse I~pacts _____________________ 55 3.3 Wildlife And Habitat 55 ----------------------------------------------------- 3.3.1 Affected Environment 55 -------------------------------------------- 3.3.2 Significant I~pacts ______________________________________________ 57 3.3.3 Mitigation Measures _____________________________________________ 57 3.3.4 ~~oid~kSignific~tAdverseI~pacts______________________________60 3.4 Wetlands And Strea~ Corridors 60 --------------------------------------------- 3.4.1 Existing Conditions ______________________________________________ 60 3.4.1.1 N~ion~Wetl~dInve~o~_______________________________60 3.4.1.2 National Resource Conservation Service Maps _________________ 62 3.4.1.3 WDNR Forest Practice Base Maps __________________________ 62 3.4.1.4 WDNR Natural Heritage Information Syste~ __________________ 62 3.4.1.5 WDFW Priori~ Habitats and Species Database _________________ 62 3.4.1.6 Previous Wetland Studies 64 --------------------------------- 3.4.1.7 Wetland and Strea~ Descriptions ___________________________ 64 3.4.1.7.1 Strea~s 64 -------------------------------------- 3.4.1.7.2 Wetlands 64 ------------------------------------- 3.4.1.8 Wetland Functional Assess~ent 66 ---------------------------- 3.4.2 Significant I~pacts ______________________________________________ 66 3.4.2.1 Direct I~pacts _________________________________________ 66 3.4.2.1.1 ~drologicI~pacts______________________________67 3.4.2.1.2 Erosion/Sedi~entation and Water Quali~ I~pacts________ 68 3.4.2.1.3 Buffer and Habitat I~pacts ________________________ 71 3.4.2.2 Mliig~ion~asures____________________________________73 3.4.3 ~~oid~kSignific~tAdverseI~pacts______________________________74 3.5 Land Use 75 ------------------------------------------------------------- 3.5.1 Affected Environment 75 -------------------------------------------- 3.5.2 Surrounding Land Use ____________________________________________ 75 3.5.3 Ci~ of Auburn Co~prehensive Plan - Goals, Obje ctives and Policies __________ 77 3.5.4 Ci~ of Auburn Shoreline Master Progra~ Substantial Develop~ent Permit _____ 87 v 3.5.5 C~of~b~Zoo~giliilin~ce__________________87 3.5.6 Mitigation Measures _____________________________________________ 88 3.5.7 Un~oid~leSignific~Adv~selmpacts______________________________88 3.6 Transportmion _________________________________________________________88 3.6.1 Existing Roadway Conditions _______________________________________ 88 3.6.1.1 Existing A vailable Transit __________________________________ 93 3.6.1.2 EristingTrnfficVo~mes__________________________________93 3.6.2 PI~nedStrecllmproveme~s ______________________________________93 3.6.2.1 Analysis Methodology and Assumptions _______________________ 94 3.6.2.2 No Action Alternative (Future Background) _____________________ 96 3.6.3 Alternative 481 102 ------------------------------------------------ 3.6.3.1 Project Trip Generation and Distribution ______________________ 102 3.6.3.2 Future Level Of Service Alternative 481 102 ---------------------- 3.6.4 Alternative 700 102 ------------------------------------------------ 3.6.4.1 Project Trip Generation and Distribution ______________________ 102 3.6.4.2 Future Level Of Service Alternative 700 109 ---------------------- 3.6.5.1 Signal W arrants ________________________________________________ 109 3.6.5.2 Site Access 116 --------------------------------------------------- 3.6.5.3 Sight Distance _________________________________________________ 116 3.6.5.4 Forecasted Traffic Safety With the Project ____________________________ 116 3.6.5.5 Mitigation Measures Common to Alterantives 481 and 700 ________________116 3.6.5.6 Mitigation Measuers for the No Action Alternative ______________________ 117 3.6.5.7 Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts _____________________________ 117 3.7 Public Services 117 -------------------------------------------------------- 3.7.1 Affected Environment 117 ------------------------------------------- 3.7.2 Significant Impacts _____________________________________________ 119 3.7.3 Mitigation Measures ____________________________________________ 122 3.7.4 Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts _____________________________ 122 3.8 Utilities 123 ------------------------------------------------------------- 3.8.1 Sewer 123 ------------------------------------------------------- 3.8.1.1 Affected Environment 123 ---------------------------------- 3.8.1.2 Signific~lmpacts____________________________________123 3.8.1.3 MliigmionMeasures___________________________________129 3.8.1.4 Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts ____________________ 131 3.8.2 Water 131 ------------------------------------------------------- 3.8.2.1 Affected Environment 131 ---------------------------------- 3.8.2.2 Signific~lmpacts____________________________________132 3.8.2.3 Mliig~onMeasures ___________________________________132 3.8.2.4 Unavoidalbe Significant Adverse Impacts ____________________ 133 3.9 Archaeological Resources ________________________________________________ 133 3.9.1 Affected Environment 133 ------------------------------------------- 3.9.2 Significant Impacts _____________________________________________ 136 3.9.3 Mitigation Measures ____________________________________________ 136 3.9.4 Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts _____________________________ 138 3.10 Air Quality ___________________________________________________________ 138 3.10.1 Affected Environment 138 ------------------------------------------- 3.10.1.1 ExistingAkQu~i~___________________________________138 3.10.2 Significant Impacts _____________________________________________ 140 3.10.2.1 Impacts During Construction _____________________________ 140 3.10.2.2 Long Term Impacts ____________________________________ 141 3.10.2.3 Indirect and Cumulative Impacts __________________________ 142 VI 3.10.3 Conformity With State Implementation Plan ___________________________ 142 3.10.4 Mitigation Measures ____________________________________________ 142 3.10.4.1 Mitigation Measures During Construction ____________________ 142 3.10.4.2 Long Term Mitigation Measures___________________________143 3.10.5 Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts _____________________________ 143 Chapter 4.0 Distribution List 144 -------------------------------------------------- TECHNICAL APPENDICES VOLUME I Appendix A Report, Geologic, Hydrologic, and Geotechnical Services - GeoEngineers, March 5, 2004 Appendix B Air Quality Analysis - MFG Consultants, March 2, 2004 Appendix C Plants and Animals Assessment - Raedeke Associates, Inc., Auburn, W A, May 17, 2004 Appendix D Wetland Assessment - Raedeke Associates, Inc., May 17, 2004 VOLUME II Appendix E Kersey III - Average Monthly Volume Calculations (Wetland Hydration), June 2003 Appendix F Transportation Impact Analysis - Transportation Solutions, Inc., March, 2004 Appendix G Water Alternatives Analysis - Apex Engineering, March 2004 Appendix H Sewer Alternative Analys is - Apex Engineering, March 2004 Appendix I Road Analysis, Apex Engineering, October 2003 Appendix J Archeological, Anthropological Analysis - Larson Anthropological/Archaeological Services, November 2002. Appendix K City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan Objectives and Policies Appendix L Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design Methods and Examples Vll PRELIMINARY PLAT STUDIES The following reports and studies were prepared as part of the preliminary plat application and are available for review at the City of Auburn, Department of Community Development. These studies are also referenced in the reports prepared for the Kersey III Draft EIS. 1. Kersey Three Residential Development, Traffic Impact Analysis Heath & Associates, August 2000. 2. Wetland Delineation, Functional Values Assessment and Conceptual Mitigation Plan for Kersey Three Project located south of Kersey Way between the intersection of 45th Street SE and 53rd Street SE, City of Auburn, Washington, DBM County Engineers, August 21, 2000. 3. Wildlife Habitat Evaluation, Stream Assessment, Development Impacts and proposed Mitigation Goals for the Kersey Three project. DBM Consulting Engineers, August 21, 2000. 4. Infiltration Evaluation and Arterial Roadway Study, Kersey III Residentia~ Earth Consultants, Inc., August 17, 2000. Vll1 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE Figure 1 Region~~~~dPr~ectVic~~~~___________________________________3 Figure 2 Alternative 481 - Site Plan 4 --------------------------------------------- Figure 3 Alternative 700 - Site Plan 6 --------------------------------------------- Figure 4 Stormwater Discharge Points __________________________________________ 24 Figure 5 Vicinity ~ap - Topography ___________________________________________ 28 Figure 6 Alternative 481 - Site Plan w/Test Plots 29 ---------------------------------- Figure 7 Alternative 700 - Site Plan w/Test Plots 30 ---------------------------------- Figure 8 Soil Erosion Hazard Area 32 --------------------------------------------- Figure 9 Site and Exploration ~ap _____________________________________________ 34 Figure 10 Interpreted Geologic ~ap _____________________________________________ 35 Figure 11 Interpreted Cross Section AA __________________________________________ 36 Figure 12 I~erprcledCrossSectionBB&CC_____________________________________37 Figure 13 Landslide Hazard Areas 42 ---------------------------------------------- Figure 14 Seismic Hazard Areas 44 ----------------------------------------------- Figure 15 Stream Reconnaissance 49 ---------------------------------------------- Figure 16 Shallow Groundwater Equipotential ~ap _________________________________ 52 Figure 17 Existing Conditions - Vegetative Cover Types _____________________________ 56 Figure 18 Potential Wildlife Habitat Connections - Alternative 700 59 ---------------------- Figure 19 National Wetland Inventory ___________________________________________ 61 Figure 20 Forest Practices Resource ~ap_________________________________________ 63 Figure 21 Wetland Hydration Plan ______________________________________________ 69 Figure 22 Auburn Comprehensive Plan (Land Use Developments) ______________________ 76 Figure 23 ~a~sisI~erse~oos~dCo~dm~________________________________89 Figure 24 2005 No-Action P~ Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (1-20) _______________________ 97 Figure 25 2005 No-Action P~ Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (21-41) ______________________ 98 Figure 26 2005 No-Action P~ Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (42-55) ______________________ 99 Figure 27 Project Trip Assignment Alternative 481 (1-20)____________________________ 103 Figure 28 Project Trip Assignment Alternative 481 (21-41) ___________________________ 104 Figure 29 Project Trip Assignment Alternative 481 (42-55) ___________________________ 105 Figure 30 2005 Alternative 481 P~ Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (1-20) __________________ 106 Figure 31 2005 Alternative 481 P~ Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (21-41) _________________ 107 Figure 32 2005 Alternative 481 P~ Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (42-55) _________________ 108 Figure 33 Project Trip Assignment Alternative 700 (1-20) ____________________________ 110 Figure 34 Project Trip Assignment Alternative 700 (21-41) ___________________________ 111 Figure 35 Project Trip Assignment Alternative 700 (42-55) ___________________________ 112 Figure 36 2005 Alternative 700 P~ Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (1-20) __________________ 113 Figure 37 2005 Alternative 700 P~ Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (21-41) _________________ 114 Figure 38 2005 Alternative 700 P~ Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (42-55) _________________115 Figure 39 ProposedS~~~~Options1~d2__________________________________124 Figure 40 Proposed Sewer ~ain Option 1 _______________________________________ 125 Figure 41 Historic Period Land Use 135 -------------------------------------------- Figure 42 Archeological ~onitoring 137 ---------------------------------- ix LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE Table 1 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for Alternatives __________________ 8 Table 2 Eriili~~a~~Segme~s__________________________________________90 Table 3 Intersection! Arterial Level of Service Criteria 94 ------------------------------ Table 4 PM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service - All Alternative s 100 ---------------- Table 5 PM Peak Hour Arterial Level of Service 101 --------------------------------- Table 6 Sight Distance Summary ____________________________________________ 116 Table 7 Student Enrollment 2002-2003 School Year 118 ------------------------------ Table 8 Park Land Dedication Guidelines 119 -------------------------------------- Table 9 Estim~edGen~~Fundlmpact_______________________________________120 Table 10 Projected Students in Kersey III Development_____________________________ 121 Table 11 Calculated Maximum PM Peak Period CO Concentrations (ppm) _______________ 139 x CHAPTER 1.0 SUMMARY 1 1.0 SUMMARY 1.1 INTRODUCTION This chapter briefly describes the alternatives considered and provides a summary of the impacts and proposed mitigation measures that would occur under the alternatives. A more detailed discussion of the alternatives is provided in Chapter 3 of this DEIS and in the Technical Appendices. 1.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE PROPOSAL The objectives of this proposal are as follows: . Provide for single-family housing opportunities in the City of Auburn, . Fill the market need for single - family housing and, . Complete the project while mitigating minimal environmental impacts. 1.3 PROJECT LOCATION The Kersey III project is located within the City of Auburn in the southeasterly portion of the City, immediately north of the King County line and east of the Lakeland Hills Planned Community as shown in Figure 1. The project is located between the terminus of Evergreen Way for the Lakeland Hills development and Kersey Way at the intersection of 53rd Street SE, also shown in Figure 1. The project is located in the Southwest and Southwest Quarter of Section 32, Township 21 North, Range 05 East, W. M., adjacent to and east of the existing Lakeland Hills Divisions 8, 9, and 10. Generally, the site is located west of the Kersey Way right-of-way from 49th Street SE (if extended) to the King County/Pierce County line. The project area includes approximately 1,950 feet of frontage on Kersey Way proximate to its intersection with 53rd Street SEe 1.4 PROJECT ALTERNATNES DESCRIPTION 1.4.1 AL TERNA TIVE 481- PARTIAL PUD PRELIMINARY PLAT This alternative assumes that 481 dwelling units will be constructed on the approximately 170-acre project area utilizing the PUD ordinance on a portion of the site in order to accommodate 409 single family lots and 18 lots to accommodate 72 multiple family dwelling units in four-plexes, as shown in Figure 2. Open space and sensitive areas would be protected as directed the City of Auburn policies and applicable regulations. Under the original proposal approximately 31.4 acres of the site, including wetland and buffers and steep slopes would be set aside as native open space, 7.0 acres of land would be designated for dedication as a public park and 11.1 acres would be retained within the existing powerline corridor. 2 A N : t 1 I I; I ~ j I f Regional Map & Project Vicinity Map Figure 1 , .. I . I ~"',,:,--.......~ "';'... --....:.-..... -~""'-, j ~ J I I I . , .(, , . I 'd, J . I I GRAPHIC SCALE' l o 75150300 ~T U~~+ ' !Inch i:: t 50 fe8l, I ,L I I , ~ ~ . ~ . . I . ' '. 0 The project would consist of three (3) divisions developed in six (6) phases each. The proposal will require on-site installation of new public facilities to serve the development to include water, stormwater and sanitary sewer lines. Two stormwater detention and treatment facilities would be constructed totaling approximately 15.0 acres. The proposal requires the dedication and construction of approximately four (4) miles of new public right of ways to access the development and provide internal circulation. These roads include internal streets and a new arterial connection from Evergreen Way SE to Kersey Way. 1.4.2 ALTERNATIVE 700- COMPLETE PUD PRELIMINARY PLAT This alternative assumes that up to 700 dwelling units will be constructed on the approximately 170-acre project area utilizing the PUD ordinance over the entire site in order to accommodate up to 628 single family lots and up to 18 lots to accommodate 72 multiple family dwelling units in four-plexes, as shown in Figure 3. The project will require the application of City of Auburn zoning and subdivision ordinances. Open space and sensitive areas would be protected as directed the City of Auburn policies and applicable regulations. Under the original proposal approximately 31.4 acres of the site, including wetland and buffers and steep slopes would be set aside as native open space, 10.6 acres of land would be designated for dedic ation as a public park and 11.1 acres would be retained within the existing powerline corridor. The project would consist of three (3) divisions developed in six (6) phases each. The proposal will require on-site and off-site installation of new public facilities to serve the development to include water, stormwater and sanitary sewer lines. Two stormwater detention and treatment facilities would be constructed, totaling approximately 15.0 acres. The proposal requires the dedication and construction of approximately four (4) miles of new public right of ways to access the development and provide internal circulation. These roads include internal streets and a new arterial connection from Evergreen Way SE to Kersey Way. 1.4.3 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE The No Action Alternative would allow development of the 170-acre Kersey III site under existing zoning regulations and comprehensive plan. The site is currently zoned R-1, allowing 8,000 square-foot minimum lots. The No Action Alternative would allow for the subdivision of each of the parcels that make up the Kersey III project. The No Action Alternative assumes that public utilities and the extension of Evergreen Way SE to Kersey Way will not be completed because of a lack of coordination and that a lower density would result based on the utilization of on-site wells and drainfield systems. For purposes of the No Action Alternative, it is assumed that a 5-acre minimum lot size (pursuant to King County Code 12.32.010, related to water service requirement.) is required to provide for on-site wells. The No Action Alternative would then yield no more than 34 lots. The No Action Alternative did not consider the location of the 34 lots related to access to the public right-of-way and the City's regulatory limits on the length of dead-ends and single access points. The application of these additional standards would likely further limit the number of lots constructed under the No Action Alternative, but for purposes of the evaluation, the yield is projected at 34 lots, the number capable of meeting the area requirement for individual wells. 5 ".,.' \ I~J~T'ii \\ \\\\-1 ,~ -(\ I ~ .-L ~_.. ~...... ~. ~ r"'''' -.... ~ ....:'- -..... ~ -:... ~..... -...... -...... --...0-... "'1' · · ... f\ nl\ ,\ \ \ S\\\' ~~" " "I' " '.:........ "':" ::'. 'I-,\l ~1 ,... >~ ~I*~\ \ ,'~ "I ' ,', I" , ' : _ , ' · .. · " l'rN~. ~\\\\ ~'\ , I , I ' '.'.:'.:. .:'.:.:. \. N ~~.~ -, JItv ' I r....,... -... ~ -...... ---...... -...... _ ~ _ _ I · ... .... ~ ~l~ll " '~l\\\ \ I I . _ . f U ". J~ ~ ,.::, \ \ \ ), J , , I . .. .. . \ .'.. I. . '. · · tll. J \. .., \ ~ ' \ 'I) . I " , .... \ j .' , - I, '. t~. · ~ \ If t' I' I 11 I . ' " ' ". ::'. . \\1 : , . , ~ ~ 1 . f j' J '0 , " '. ' , , I . , · \\ ~ 1 ' " " , I . ". " , ' ",'. · tI. II ., I ,. f""'\' /' ' I ' , ' , I. ' " ',. . " . I ,. ... I IV, '. '. '. , , I ~' '~~" . , , ' . I ,- , r ,'.' , . ,', . , . . . I · '. '. ", A ~', , , "", . , ' _' . .... ,/ \, ,. ", ~ " I, ' , . " " .' , " . , ' .'. ....: ~:.: ' .. ~ _. ' ' ,.', " I , ' . . _ ",' ."'" .. ' " . , ,'. , ' \ .. , ~ . 'f ~".l! I" I '. _ , , ' ~. · .. - , ........ ~. I<< ~ J I / ' , . . I" · · \ . \~ ~ /. .l~ . I · '. , i--"'" " '. ", . . i I" '~ · · "\ \~ I ~ ... " .- , It. :\ .... " " .::.~. , . _ " " . _ _ ~ I ~. , · .. ~. ~ "1'.. \ ' , . .' L I _ " . , , " , '~, , · ,~\ } * I~ ~ .... ~t , " ','" - ~ , t, ~4 t, I 1.\" '\ ll' .: :::::. , ,. I ' ' , , , ~ \ f ' · ~. ,. /'.... ... ".....,,;. , . ' - 'I,. '- II '. I ' ~; 1-. , \ ~ ~I : ':::.:I::.'~~~:~l' . , -:-_ I ." , .~ ~ " f ftRtl I.' 1 '. ~ ..u..n. ~ ) I .' · " . '" . ~. f ~ ~~~ ' ~... II IU'... . , " , ~. ~ ,,~ II · :,~ .... . " · . , "'" , , 0 , ~ ~ \ l iJ.:. i",,~ ~ '0 , ~ ~ " '''~', , ' , ' · , ,=::s \ ~, l I ~ ~~ 1__- ~ I ",~ ..:::::' J ~ ~~ :;J, j. , V . , . , , ,= = , '".: ~~l'~g.t J ~' ~~~:.::";' ~~ \ ~ ~ " ~, ' ,.', ", , ", _ ' \'1\ . . ..~ '\ ~ .. ~ 1'00 '. .... , ~ , I I I , I.,. . " , , I~" . , J :'l · ~ · .. 1\ J' lit r \ It ,. ., '~ .. , (', ' · j J." ',' , .. ... · · ~ I' ~ '. 'j '" . ......... . ( . , ' , .' : :...., ~ l l ,~\( ~. ~ I ~' ,', , ' - ,', ' " J ,B . ' ' ., )\ 1 ~I \ r /} J~ . , " ;.- . , 1 .. ~ \1 II " , , , . _" , . . , ..1oo'1~~' .\.' ~ ,\iJ,.: / l " , ~ : v Jj..--Jo,.- . ~'___ ::"'0...""-"'- \ ' ' :.~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ IL, .' ,!\ I " ' ' . I~ ,i ~ . I', .', J, ,', ' ',' I ~' .r~~~ 'vi ~~~~~ v - I'n" ~t \ " '. ' . '-. "~ ~RO~ sg, .:, ' " ,,' 'GRAPH/ese, UE I I' .. ~ ' [I I I~ ~ ~ ~~ ' " ' . 'DETENT/Ufr' !t,'" . . . .. ' , 0 75 150 ' , 300 ' · ~. ...:~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~"V' " '. - ":::, '~~',' ' , L ,,', ~ rj 1.1.. ~, , 11~'\\j" """ 'hr . J ' , . i--~~ ,t ,,.j ~\ f':. I. I'" -l ' , ~ l _ \. rlll" , '" I' ~' ~ t. ''(. \ l ~, ," .....~ __ , 'I ' ' ~ ". .... "'~1- ~ } 1~ - ii~) I ", , , ., .....kL~' "':~~ '.. '.". . " ,Ill ~ ! , tlneb;: f50fHf · · · · ~, 1.1 ~ l I "'.I....'" ' "', , , , Ii , . I .'.~'~."'... t~' 'J ~~::::.~., 'I ~ A ~ ' ". " '--"~~', """ , '", '~', , 1 ~ I' - II .... '1 ""''7'.7 , _ _ '" . I ' '.'.t', , \ \ I I tIt; ~' u ~l ~ n . '~,,",', _ ,___ _,'. ~. , . r~ I,. Ih H -:, \ 'I 'I .~..t& J Ii' " 'f "~ . , '" '1 ~.~. " t"', , " :'.' , . \ r r) ..~ T. ~~~ j1 \ 'I i. A 1" " . _ __ . :, , ' ", ' " ~.. .. \ ~~.".. I.. I, , , :' V .~' C ,'J ,I It. :";'1,' II '~~.f;t,. r~.. . _ , _ ". , _._~..~ _. \ ,". . c,/'I ' " " : '1'll ......~, , · " , I, I J '" ' If.. ""..... ~"~~' . , . '~ '. tit 'j ~I IJi/ It II,. : . , " " .. J ,_' . .. ' " " j .,. , I i.."1,.... .. "'~ "', f' · · I.. I i'o ,,1 '" I' · · : · " . .. , "J """'" '. .' , ' , ...". , . .. . , , " I L~.J) / '.!.~: It',.: · '. ". . '. . ' , " I \,t\ , , _ .' . \, . f" .. ~ 6...~ ~', 'I Vv · · r.. · · · .. , , " · ri.l. 7, '." k~~~ ._ ~\ " '~, , ~ .! " \ " .. : : .... · . " " " ' . - "l , , ,"'. . ~ " ioo:.o ...:. _ ""I' ~ ~" _ , , ' . 1 ,., .1.\ I " · .. .. . , ' . _ ~ \, 7-:X , , ~ ," ~~;:; ~ , l,'" . . ~," .... / ' · · · .. · , ' " v · .L l... \ / \ ... , -, ' v ~;;; , ' ,~, '- ~, . ~ \J ?\ tl.[J ~!t~. II ' :.:.'::, " ,,- - ... \ V' .i'"'~-\l . .' "~ i ", I, 's ~1')(( , . I Vv 'iY,~ , I .. · · .. / i...., t , _-.....;. _'\\ y\ \~ \ . ~ I,;, . ... . , ", \.....' '\. ~'\~, \. ~ ~ ~ ~ ill- ..'t~) ~\, '. '.:'.:'" ',' " .:,' , \V A~ ,: I," -, " I I J ~ "J ., .. · ... ... " . J 1".,0- ," , ... .. .....' . .~ / _ , ~ ..~, ~.I, iI' JI ... .... · .. ., I, ~~ \ :....L '. , ,~~., '~"''''1]!\7 ~ rl ':::~.~~.... -/ /1., ' ~'. .:: ~,:::: :.:::: ': :::::::.. .::' , , · '. ' ~\ '~(\...... J~.' "" ", . ' /'\ /~ 1\1 j ~~~_' __I' ~',.~ ~ ~ H I l ... .. .... . · · ~ .\',;""'" '\f , ,'flV ~ ~ ,. ~ . '.' . . .. . .. , .. .. .. . , " , . \ ' ,\ \, ~, '. ~ ,- , ~ ,- , · .~ .. · " .. .. '" " , ' \ ~ l ,.' " . ';,-' . '....." .. . - . . , -"" ~, , '. ", ~ I '1j'J \ ... · .. · ..:.......... ...., , - , _ ' ,.... ~ " ' ." , \, J V i1rt ~ ~ ~ ~ / / ~ \ \ ~~ ~ I' ... · .. ... .... ..... , _ " II ~I\ I.~ ....~~ ~~I\.'-'" .. ' \ ."... .. .. . .. . . : .... .. ..... . - '. '-, - ~'~, ~ J t-.,"J j I \ · ..... ....... . . .... ..... _ _ ~_I i I I I. ~ I ~ ~ ~ \ ~ ~~ '- ,~ ' ,,.. II. ... ...... . 1 "'/1 , ~~ .'. , : : '.: .f........ ....:. · ...... . " . ,_ I _" ,_ ,'. , " _ , ~ ... , ~l"~ If I ~ ...... .... ........: "'~', ,I \ ...--:1, j,,:--'," ',', ~,~ ~~\ ~~~! 'Il~ss ~ ' ... I . .. . ...... . . ."~ " -', , ... ,I ' , . !\ ~ ~ ~ I' I' ~" ' t t ., ,t , .. -.. · It ~,.t.. 25 ::1' ,." r . . '~~" .""" I I \ \ ". .. ... .... ..... ... .. ' , . ' '. j, "'"." ' \ ~V f\ ' 'r'\ ~ \) '1 "t I /, I \ \ ~; II .'t - It, ':: ,t. ....:'.... '~ :::: " " ',' -.;[1 -= .~.- I/?JI w.~ ' I" ~ r)~ \ II ,~\, t ' ' j I i q "fA... .... · · · : ~ I "I I.. ~ , .,. \ \ ~ I 'l~' 'N t. · ..... ...... ....."., 1::1 . ~ -. - . , It. ,\ .." .. · · , - - ~ - .../' J. _ I' ~ JMI .." I , .. ....... .... .. · -.... k J~ , - , I\. " , ~ J ~ ,\ I / ... · · ... · · .. . J.....-;;W; , "\ r 1'__ \ ~ 1 L~ · · ., .... '. '. : ......., ' ~. k -- J I..~,,, - ~." I. f\ ~ ' 'I ~ ~ ) 'i' .. .. II ., ..", fI 'I. ...~ f -....;;;,;;7' -7-,---.:-, . I , \ I .... . " " ~ · ..... .. .It. . r- - ..... W- -, " ,i\ ~ / . ~ I -J1~ rfj. · ."... ~ \ N", /'! ~ f'............... 't. \.,.. , ~ \ ' ' ~~fjJjp": ",: I - Z ~ r \ ' I' I I" . ~ ~ " I ) \~/~\ ~ '~" " ~' Ii- r-trrLt , · -77 /., ~ \ ,ool " ' ~ r--""' . I , \ I 1 ~ \ ~"-}'{'.' .' ...." f' J 1111. '..~ 'if k_k~~ - ~.- ' , .' , .'C.:,;.L!.\ '. 'I \~~ . _ ~ · · i.... t /IJ lit .. ", I - 'I '., '\ roo. I ~ ~~ ~."f' I /;' " /' '" \, ,. .~t\~[[;[;fj'l~:~ '.'~I~~_ _" "-J ,\\l~ ~~ ~~ ~ ) ~ ... - ~~; L /' \, A , " :-..L ~ I I y. I, " '. ---:"K' ~ ~ \ ,\ I ,lw. J J.. l \ ~\j..:~ · .. '~ /, '. I\l K.i I ''\ ~'T """ I ~ \ ,_ '- 'l ,L ~r I f ~ · : /. / r . - "I! ~ I...... I ~, ,/10-- '., ,I " , , , ,~- I l>\, \ _, I ",10 _ ,\\ ..., , _ ':: ..... 7 ~ ~ \~~ I '\ ' I ~ 1'\ . I /1J. I Lll(j 1t', / ' , '. I, .' " ! 1\, , I I I II ~ ~, \ _\~ \ \ ~ " · !t'--" t' " 1. ~~.. _ I. . , \ I'-... j .,. \ ~.:'~::' r ~~l ~ ,; II V 1) , ~~~\\ ~, '1\~'~~~I~T }~.J' -' '-,' .LS.l1 - '\l~~t~~, ~' ~Ir . i\ ~ '1'1.' ,. : l~ I III / LTi,,, t \ I ~~', I ' ..A'" I I I, , I \H " _ ) w N" ,l \l7.~'~J~ I " iJ::; I, 'n'- I~ I ~.l, u.. /'j ,j '~.. . tr'-\:.~~I\~ "I/~\ I. 1 · · 'l ~ A I "',4 . ,[\ , j" v · r: -,~ ,. . "I ~ I .' v . v ~ ''l 'I \ I " '.' ,I , \ I .1 ~ rtp f /I....'~ /: I · Y h \ I l-./,,.r I ' ' , I' ~ 'I ' .. _ J0\, " ....'\:' - v.:~ ..x ::.::7 /" '. "- ----. ~ - I _, ' I,)' , · '" \ I #I \ -, II \ ~ //1 ~ I 'IV"... ~ 1 , I, " , . r '~ , . ~.} · / I 1'/ ,I i) W :I I I V \' - v.' , . 'I~ \~ \\1/ ' ~J~, ti"'f/Vl,1'r v . , Vjjl ' ~.. I V ~~ ~ \ ~, - 4-" . r "", ," '-'.. ~~..ll'~ .. _~~r~'~\ ~~' , . ~ ~ · .f. ~f.!Il I /! lIk""" I ~'JL~ r ~~., , I '\J ~" I .j '~-- .' I 'l. I, - "', ~ ~~ t ~ Y ~~~~', , , ' \~Vt.J'jY~/IX 1-[/ "', I " . ,\, I 'A l,\ I ( , \, \ :.,'1 \ \ 'L' " . 'I \. ~ ,.,' \... x'. I, ,~~\~.\ \\ IL, \ (VI/~llf ,I. );"'7-1 7 · j:j~. n-'iL.,- ", '~, '~~ ;, . , ~--, ,--,',:"",' "," ',,', ,\.~"J \.~ ' .,...-...1, J I .:.-~, ,-'.. ,'" I, . , ., ' ....:... _ .' : ~" '; 7""". " "~" ' . '., . , " ' 1.5 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES FOR THE AL TERNA TIVES The following is a summary of the impacts, mitigation measures, and unavoidable adverse impacts for the three alternatives. A more complete description of the impacts and mitigation measures is provided in Chapter 3. 7 Table 1 - Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for Alternatives EARTH RESOURCES Impacts Potential Mitigation Measures Topography Cut slopes on the order of 25 feet and fills Cuts to range from 5 to 15 feet can on the order of 20 feet for the main typically be held In place uSIng roadway. conventional gravity retaining walls or by Applicable to: grading the slopes 2: 1 or flatter. No Action Alternative Modification to existing topography for Alternative 481 transitions between maIn roadway, Cuts in excess of 15 feet that cannot be Alternative 700 secondary roads, building lots and sloped back could require tiebacks, soil connections to Evergreen Way and Kersey nail or similar engineered walls. Note: Way. Alternative 700 will have Fills compacted and placed to support the less impervious area and Approximately 451,800 cubic yards will new roadways and homes should be more open space resulting be graded for the main road, internal designed to accommodate the type of fill in less grading and roads, lot grading and detention ponds. material used and the underlying soil modification to topography. condi ti ons. The No Action Alternative Permanent fill slopes will generally be is assumed to have smaller inclined at 2: 1 or flatter. topographic impacts due Retaining walls can be used to limit the to the smaller number of lateral extent of the fills. anticipated building lots and less secondary roads Potential retaining wa 11 options for fill and cul-de-sacs. applications include concrete cantilever walls, concrete masonry unit (CMU) block walls, mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls and soldier pile walls. Soils and Geography Settlement due to placing new loads Proper site preparation techniques that ( structures or fill embankments) over include removal of all surficial organic potentially compressible materials such as materials (vegetation, forest duff, topsoil Applicable to: forest duff and undocumented existing fill. and large roots) from below proposed No Action Alternative infrastructure and new fill locations. Alternative 481 Earthwork constraints associated with Alternative 700 excavating, hauling, placing and Unless subsequent exploration and testing compacting lIDisture sensitive soils such indicates portions of the existing fill meet as the native ice contact and glacial till structural fill specifications, all fill should materials. be removed from below proposed infrastructure and new fill embankment Excessive infiltration of stormwater into locations. the soils below detention ponds if relatively free draining materials such as Use of ground improvement techniques advanced outwash are exposed in the such as deep dynamic compaction or pond bottoms. compaction grouting to enhance the in situ condition of existing fill. Mitigate onsite moisture sensitive soils by limiting earthwork activities to the dry season, typically considered to extend from June through October. 8 Table 1 - Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for Alternatives EARTH RESOURCES Impacts Potential Mitigation Measures Soils and Geography Use add mixtures such as lime or cement can be used to improve the workability of onsite moisture sensitive soils during wet weather conditions. Line ponds with relatively impermeable materials if advance outwash deposits are exposed during construction. Liners could consist of natural soil liners or geosynthetic membranes. Onsite ice contact and glacial till soils may be suitable for use for natural soil liners if the use of onsite soils is desired. Geologic Hazards Erosion~ Grading and Vibrations An erosion and sediment control plan Chapter 3.1.3 Erosion could lead to silt laden runoff (ESCP) shall be implemented for the being transported offsite, resulting in a interception and treatment of potential silt Applicable to: water quality degradation of local surface laden runoff that could occur during No Action Alternative water. If unmitigated, the sediment clearing, grading, construction of Alternative 481 budget analysis indicates that soil loss infrastructure, and site stabilization. The Alternative 700 rates could be as high as 2,000 tons per ESCP should provide measures to ensure year during construction of Alternative that no silt-laden runoff leaves the 700. construction site. Excavation soils to be used as fill will Measures identified in the City of Auburn need to be stockpiled and unsuitable or Design Manual and Storm Drainage excess materials would need to be Manual to mitigate short-term impacts to removed from the site. earth environment during construction are proposed. Heavy trucks would be required to transport fill and waste materials, which Following construction, the side slopes of could have impacts on noise and air embankments and cut slopes shall be quality due to dust and could damage protected against erosion by re-vegetation pavement along haul routes. (i.e. hydroseeded). Excavation, compaction and construction Vibration mitigation should include a pre- vehicles and equipment may result in condition survey of areas within 100 feet of vibrations that could damage nearby construction activity and a vibration- structures or disturb nearby residents or monitoring program. wildlife. Vibration impacts from earthwork are anticipated to be moderate Design, construct and maintain features to low. that limit uncontrolled surface water and ground water flow in landslide hazard areas. 9 Table 1 - Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for Alternatives EARTH RESOURCES Impacts Potential Mitigation Measures Geologic Hazards Steeo Slooes and Landslides Steeo slooes and landslides Potential for landslide of existing steep Mitigation for construction in landslide landslide prone slopes. hazard areas or adjacent to landslide areas Applicable to: includes the use of retaining structures and No Action Alternative The conceptual design suggests that new enhanced drainage and/or setbacks to limit Alternative 481 infrastructure will not traverse or be built the potential impacts of landslide hazards Alternative 700 over landslide hazard areas; however, on the proposed development and vice some roads and perhaps the northwest versa. stormwater detention pond might be built adjacent to landslide hazard areas. Design, construct and maintain features that limit uncontrolled surface water or groundwater flow and steep slope and landslide areas. In pond areas, it may re necessary to line the ponds. New permanent cut and fill slopes should be designed and constructed using accepted standards of practice. 10 Table 1 - Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for Alternatives WATER RESOURCES Impacts Potential Mitigation Measures Creation of approximately 60 acres of Surface water discharge from proposed Surface Water impervious surfaces without mitigation stormwater detention ponds will be would cause a net increase in surface designed to match 50 percent of the Applicable to: water runoff. existing peak flow rate for the two year No Action Alternative event under existing conditions and match Alternative 481 Increases in surface water runoff have the the 100 percent peak flow rate for the 10- Alternative 700 potential to increase onsite erosion and year, 25-year and IOO-year storm events increase the rate of offsite stream channel under existing conditions. erOSIon. Restricted discharge rates will reduce the Unmitigated increases in stormwater flow potential for increased storm channel volumes would likely cause accelerated erOSIon. erosIon along portions of the stream banks of Bowman Creek and unnamed Partial infiltration of stormwater on tributary 0043, impacting Kersey Way. individual home sites will also help to mitigate reductions in shallow water flow. Potential reduction in volume of sediment exiting the proj ect site downstream of Supplemental evaluation of stream channel proposed stormwater detention ponds. conditions along Bowman Creek in the vicinity of the outlet of the culvert beneath The reduction in sediment could also Kersey Way that has an existing erosional accelerate erOSIon downstream of the feature. Mitigation for the existing culvert by Kersey Way. condition could consist of a properly designed and constructed energy dissipater and stream channel and bank protection. Groundwater The creation of impervious surfaces would Direct roof runoff water from selected cause a net reduction in groundwater areas to infiltration and dispersion recharge and shallow groundwater flow. trenches on the upslope ends of wetlands Applicable to: in order to restore average annual shallow No Action Alternative Potential reduction of groundwater groundwater flows to onsite wetlands. Alternative 481 recharge to regional aquifers IS not Alternative 700 considered to be significant because of the Define and implement groundwater relatively small area of the site. quality protection measures such as best management practices, spill prevention A reduction in shallow groundwater flow, plans and monitoring of any stormwater however, could adversely affect nearby discharge to groundwater. wetlands. Due to the limitations of onsite soils, it is Potential impacts on groundwater due to not proposed that any stormwater would surface spills of fuels, lubricants and other be discharged to groundwater. chemicals used during construction. Potential diversion of groundwater along Infiltration of runoff from approximately the sewer system with groundwater 3.44 acres of impervious surfaces from following the backfill materials. Alternative 481 could restore average annual shallow groundwater flow rates to onsite wetlands Install backfill seepage barrier with the sewer line connection at defined intervals. 11 Table 1 - Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for Alternatives WILDLIFE AND HABIT A T Impacts Potential Mitigation Measures Applicable to: Clearing and grading activities will impact Wetlands would be encompassed in open movement patterns of some wildlife space tracts that would greatly exceed Alternative 481 species between habitats on and off site. wetland buffer requirements. Alternative 700 State monitored or candidate species would Hydrologic changes to wetlands have the continue to find some habitat onsite, but potential to affect vegetated communities Note: use of the site would be reduced and fewer and wildlife. Measurements of hydrologic The No Action Alternative individuals would be able to use the conditions in wetlands after development is not anticipated to retained habitats. would provide information necessary to impact wildlife and habitat confirm the maintenance and preservation because of the smaller Development of the site would increase the of vegetative and wildlife habitats. number and anticipated degree of fragmentation of existing natural density of potential habitats onsite. Implementation of enhanced open space anticipated building lots. designs and avoidance of all 40% slopes The artificial edge is created between the and landslide areas (except for arterial edges of native forest habitat and roads) and use of low impact development areas would likely increase development techniques as part of the the spread of invasive or weedy plant PUD design would further reduce impacts speCIes. to wildlife and habitat. Open space or park areas would convert natural areas to more open managed habitat of lesser value to wildlife. Reduction of hydrology to wetlands would potentially reduce available breeding and foraged habitat. The creation of ImperVIO us surface, which will likely cause an increase in stormwater flow volumes leaving the site and causIng potential downstream channel and bank erosion. 12 Table 1 - Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for Alternatives WILDLIFE AND HABIT A T Impacts Potential Mitigation Measures Applicable to: Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts Loss of the existing vegetation and soils Alternative 481 and replacement by urban areas that Alternative 700 include impervious surfaces. Retained native habitats would be Note: fragmented and/or isolated from other The No Action Alternative native habitats, thus reducing the value to is not anticipated to wildlife. impact wetlands and streams because of the An increase in the disturbance of the smaller number and patches of native habitats retained onsite as anticipated density of a result of increased human activity. potential anticipated building lots. Impacts to wildlife include direct loss and alteration of existing native habitat and increased levels of human activity. Short-term disturbance associated with clearing and grading that would kill burrowing mammals, nesting birds and amphibians and displace the more mobile wildlife. Local populations of most native species would be reduced and cause a number of changes in the species' common position because of the urban level of development. Animals that are least tolerant of human disturbance such as ground - and shrub- nesting birds, small, ground -dwelling mammals, carnIvores and amphibians would be most affected by the proposed development. 13 Table 1 - Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for Alternatives WETLANDS AND STREAMS Impacts Potential Mitigation Measures Applicable to: Indirect impacts could result from Preservation of all onsite wetlands and construction activity affecting surface and providing buffers that meet or exceed the Alternative 481 near surface flows with potential impacts to recommended requirements. Alternative 700 the hydrology of the onsite wetlands. Reducing water flows to wetland areas Routing stormwater runo ff from the could impact the wetlands and their proposed development through stormwater Note: associated plant and animal communities. detention and water quality facilities prior The No Action Alternative to discharge to sensitive downstream areas. is not anticipated to The creation of impervious surfaces would impact wildlife and habitat likely cause a net reduction in groundwater Limiting hydrologic impacts to major because of the smaller recharge and shallow water interflow to the onsite wetlands by routing roof runoff and number and anticipated wetlands and streams. runoff from undeveloped portions of the density of potential onsite and offsite sub-basin to the wetlands. anticipated building lots. Native growth open space encompassing the wetlands and their total buffers would The use of stormwater detention ponds to total essentially the same acreage as control discharge rates before releasing Alternative 700. roof runoff and other runoff from undeveloped surfaces to the major Sediment transport deposition, particularly wetlands to avoid substantial erOSIon during construction, can adversely impact impacts. plant and animal communities of the wetlands by affecting water quality Monitoring of wetland performance after (increased turbidity, suspended and constructi on. settleable solids, temperature, pollutants), which could adversely affect the suitability Additional infiltration trenches or flow for wildlife habitat. Increases in sediment spreaders located near the source of Stream deposition could occur during construction A to minimize hydrologic impacts from which could adversely affect some wetland site development. Provide a 50- foot vegetation and associated wildlife in the wetland buffer around Wetland D. wetlands. Clearly marking the limits of wetland Clearing and conversion of adjoining areas buffers or setbacks prior to construction to residential and recreational uses will activities on the site to prevent inadvertent increase fragmentation of native habitat and or unnecessary encroachment. increase the risk of spread of invasive speCIes and the addition of increased Including energy dissipaters or flow human activity and associated increase in dispersion facility that outfalls for domestic pets could adversely affect the stormwater detentionJwater quality habitat value of remaining native open treatment facilities to prevent substantial space areas. erosion impacts within Stream A and B. Limiting major initial clearing, grubbing and grading activities where feasible to the drier months of the year (e.g. April to October) or implementing additional Best Management Practices (BMPs) for any such activities during the wet season. This would further reduce the potential for substantial adverse im pacts to wetlands from sediment deposition. 14 Table 1 - Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for Alternatives LAND USES Impacts Potential Mitigation Measures Applicable to: The development of the Kersey III proj ect Mitigation is not anticipated regarding land will convert existing forested and open use in the DEIS as the applicant will be No Action Alternative space land into a preliminary plat with required to demonstrate compliance with Alternative 481 residential and open space land uses. the Auburn Comprehensive Plan policies Alternative 700 and objectives and the Zoning Ordinance. The City is likely to impose mitigation on specific development proposals during the process associated with subsequent permit reviews to ensure compliance is achieved. TRANSPORTATION Impacts Potential Mitigation Measures Applicable to: Alternate 481 will generate 428 total new The City of Auburn collects a trips while Alternate 700 will generate 622 transportation impact fee. Alternative 481 new trips. Alternative 700 Construction of a signal at Evergreen The intersection of Evergreen Way SE and Way SE (extended) and Kersey Way SE Lakeland Hills Way SE will be degraded to is included in the project. Note: a poor level of service. The No Action Alternative Traffic control measures are needed, that is not anticipated to The new intersection of Evergreen Way SE may include a new signal at Evergreen impact the transportation at Kersey Way and 53rd Street SE requires Way SE and Lakeland Hills Way SE network. traffic control and realignment to maintain prior to the opening of the Evergreen functions operations of a four-way Way SE extension to Kersey Way. intersection. Realignment of 53rd Street SE/Kersey Entering site distance requirements in the Way intersection with the proposed southbound direction along Kersey Way Evergreen Way SE intersection IS SE at the eastern site access should meet required. or exceed City of Auburn standards with the construction of Evergreen Way SE PUBLIC SERVICES Impacts Potential Mitigation Measures Police and Fire Service Commensurate Increase In demand Tax revenues generated by the preliminary related to constructed density. plat will be available to the City of Auburn Applicable to: to finance additional staff and equipment needs. No Action Alternative Alternative 481 Incorporation of crime prevention through Alternative 700 environmental design strategies into subdivision and house design to minimize opportunities for crime. Parks Increase In residential population Dedication land for park in accordance increases demand for viable park spaces with City policy, 6.25-acres for each Applicable to: and recreational opportunities. 1,000 persons of proj ected population. Alternative 481 Alternative 700 15 Table 1 - Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for Alternatives PUBLIC SERVICES Impacts Potential Mitigation Measures Schools Commensurate increase in the number of Payment of the applicable school impact Applicable to: school-aged children based on the fee at the time of building permit constructed density. No Action Alternative Alternative 481 Alternative 700 UTILITIES Impacts Potential Mitigation Measures Sanitary Sewer Increases the amount of sewage flows Implementation of Best Management proceeding to the downstream pumping Practices for erosion and sedimentation Alternative 481 station and eventually the overall King contro I along Kersey Way for the Alternative 700 County Department of Natural Resources, protection of Bowman Creek and along the Waste Water Treatment Division (King southerly boundary and through the site for County) treatment system. the protection of drainage courses, Option 1 - Sewer Main wetlands and slope areas. This option would require Construction impacts would include the the construction of a sewer trenching and excavation of the sewer line Observation of geotechnical engineering main from the Kersey III along the entire length of the conveyance recommendations for the protection of site on Kersey Way north to system, creating the potential for impacts slope areas during the trenching excavation Oravetz Road, then along from erOSIon and sedimentation to of the force main. the south side of the White Bowman Creek, located to the east, River, connecting to an generally follows Kersey Way corridor. Size of pipes in order to accommodate the existing manhole/sewer remainder of the South Hill Service Area. stub northeast of Lakeland Either proj ect creates the need to provide Hills Lift Station in Oravetz for a sanitary sewer system pursuant to the Road. Auburn 2001 Comprehensive Sewer Plan. 16 Table 1 - Sumlnary of Impacts and J\.litigaflon Measures for Alternatives UTILITIES Impacts Potential M iti gati on l\1easurcs Sanitary Sewer This option would rcq~~ire the excavatLon:J Replacement 0(' bypass of the fiTS~ t\"'tl treilching ~Ul d c:onstructltln of lhe sewer pjpes in Evergreen \"1 ay in ordel' to llLi3.iL11 force main~ and pump ~1atiDn along provide the necessary capacity tbat is Altel'tlat~\re 48 i the southerly boundary of fue Kersey In avai lablc in tlte dowllstream sy~tmn AlternatL ,,'e 700 proj~ct site and through the pr(lj eet ~itt:J \vitbin the Lakeland Hill~ ~ystcrn.. primarily Ihrough -open space and Opt[on 2 - &nitary Sev.rer residrntlal righl-.of-ways of the pla~ lmplr~lnentation of BESt Management Pulnp Sbdon creating ~U~ potential for impacts froln Practi:ccs for erosion and sedlmentation Inierinl Pump Sbtion erosion and sedLnlentation to dO\vnstre.anl control along Kersey Way for the \vhicb would be des~gned \.VCtlands and Bow]nan Creek. protectlon of Bo'NTIlRn Creek and .along the to place a gravity sanitary s(}ufucrly boundary and througb the ~itc for sewer Inaln in the l1CW Annlysis of putllping clcmflI1ds indic~tes the protection of dra[nage courses, Evergreen \\r ay SE tbat ~pi:iCilY improvements are needed in wetlands mld slope ~reasr cxlcndEng to Kersey Way~ the Lakeland systernr and 110rth on Kersey \,ray Observation of geotecbnical engineering co (be nOlth end of the rfhe do Wl lStrc am capaci(y Vt'ould recommrndations for the protection of proj ect si(e. A pUlnp accomrnoda(c Alternative 481 plus slope areas during tbe trenching cxcava(ion station \1II0U td connect to approxinlarely 109 lots in the surrounding of the force ma[~t the exlst[ng gravity ~ys.tcnl service area, in Evergreen Way v..rithin The number of units served by rhis the Lakeland H il t~ rrhc downsneaJl1 capacily wou [d alternative \vould be Hmited to the dcvclopmCTIt~ d~schargiBg a(CCllnmudatc approxirt11tely 638 un its dov..nstrenm capacity. into tbe existing s3nilary under A Iterllative 700. Under this optjoo" sewer lllai t1 within however t no other portion of the Soulh J..l~ II PUOlp station is an interim SQlution and Lakcland r1iHs~ scrvic~ area basln could be accorrnnodatcd participation in 1:I1e consbucllon of IIlC witbj II the Lukeland Sl'Sletn, main ~long K.er3cy W~ to the ~fetro Putnp Station is. sti II required.. Saniwry Sewer The No Action Alternative \lIIould rcqu ire Lot sizes ,vould be 5 acres in size or greater No Action Altenlati ve the dcvoltlpn1cnt of 34 new \vell~ al1d to met:( S UUe Ileal~l Standards. onsite dl'altlfield systems. Lot sizes and drain field systems would need to be s [zed to address existing Ol~s.He sDils and slope conditions~ J7 Table 1 - Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for Alternatives UTILITIES Impacts Potential Mitigation Measures Water Alternative 481 would requIre Development of a booster pump facility approximately 332 gallons per minute and extension of water main along Kersey Alternative 481 (gpm) to be supplied to the site while Way to the Kersey III site per the City of Alternative 700 alternative 700 requires approximately 483 Auburn Comprehensive Sewer System gpm for peak day domestic supply. Plan. Construction impacts include the installation of water service mains along rights -of-way, which would include the management of excavation materials and possible interruption of traffic during construction. Water No impacts are expected from the installation of wells to serve large lot No Action Alternative developrrents ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Impacts Potential Mitigation Measures Applicable to: Potential impacts of five areas within the A professional archaeologist should site which may have moderate potential for monitor ground-disturbing activities No Action Alternative archaeological deposits which were not through topsoil and the upper layer of Alternative 481 evident during the field reconnaissance. glacial deposits in the five areas for the Alternative 700 proposed Kersey III proj ect. These areas may have potential for archaeological deposits due to the ridge In the event that hunter-fisher-gatherer or line and flat areas found in these five areas. historic period archaeological deposits and/or human remains are inadvertently Potential impact to inadvertentl y discovered during construction, ground- discovered archaeological deposits that disturbing acti vi ty should be halted could be encountered during construction. immediately in an area large enough to maintain integrity of the deposits and coordination with several local and state agencies should be held. Discovery of archaeological resources during construction of individual plat developments or under large lot scenario would also require the halting of ground disturbing activities in order to assess and maintain the integrity of archaeological deposits. AIR QUALITY Impacts Potential Mitigation Measures Applicable to: Control measures and best management Air and odor pollutants from trucks and practi ces of the Associated General No Action Alternative construction equipment and operations Contractors of Washington shall be defined Alternative 481 could occur. and implemented for use during Alternative 700 construction. Traffic delays due to construction traffic. 18 CHAPTER 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES 19 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES 2.1 INTRODUCTION This chapter provides a summary and review of the Alternatives to be considered in relationship to the proposed Kersey III Preliminary Plat project alternatives and described in section 1.4. In addition, a review is made of several feasibility alternatives involving options for providing water and sewer service, road access and stormwater management. 2.2 ALTERNATNE 481- PARTIAL PUD PRELIMINARY PLAT Alternative 481 proposes 481 dwelling units on the l70-acre site, including 409 single family ad 72 multifamily units. This alternative will provide approximately 31.4 acres of open space, in addition to 7 acres of public park. This alternative would create approximately 60 acres of impervious area. 2.3 AL TERNA TNE 700 - COMPLETE PUD PRELIMINARY PLAT Alternative 700 proposes the development of a maximum of 700 dwelling units, 628 single family houses and 72 multifamily units. This alternative would provide approximately 35 acres of open space and including approximately 10.6 acres of land for public park. This alternative would utilize the City's Planned Unit Development Ordinance to increase density and provide for more open space. This alternative would create approximately 56 acres of impervious area. 2.4 NO ACTION ALTERNATNE The No Action Alternative assumes the use of onsite wells to provide water and would require 5-are minimum lots. This alternative would propose 34 units on 5-acre lots. The alternative would also utilize onsite drainfields for sanitary service. Access would be provided individually for each of the three separate parcels that make up the site. 2.5 UTILITIESt9 ROAD AND STORM ALTERNATIVES As part of the environmental impact analysis for the Kersey III preliminary plat, several conceptual alternatives for the provision of water, sewer, storm and roads for the project were identified. This section summarizes the alternatives and related environmental and administrative impacts or feasibility. In this section a number of alternatives are presented. Some alternatives were determined to be infeasible or would not otherwise meet City requirements. While analyzed briefly here, these alternatives are not further analyzed in Chapter 3 of the DEIS. 20 Sewer Alternative Two alternatives for sewer service are proposed and analyzed in the Draft EIS. Option 1 - Sewer Comprehensive Plan The City's Sewer Comprehensive Plan, defines service to the project site via a gravity sewer main in Kersey Way, which would follow Kersey Way north to Oravetz Road and then west to a connection to the existing system in Oravetz Road. This alternative would consist of constructing the sewer main in Kersey Way with the sewer main being sized to accommodate the entire South Hill Service Area as identified in the City of Auburn Sewer Comprehensive Plan. The sewer main would connect to the existing manhole northeast of the Lakeland Hills Lift Station in Oravetz Road. Option 2 - Interim Pump Station The sanitary sewer system under the Interim Pump Station option would be designed to place a gravity sanitary sewer main in the new Evergreen Way right-of-way internal to the project, extending to Kersey Way, and north on Kersey Way to the north end of the project site. From there, the sewer main would extend westward to a pump station, which would then pump south through the Kersey Way project, connecting to the existing gravity system in Evergreen Way within the Lakeland Hills development, discharging into the existing sanitary sewer main within Lakeland Hills. This option presents a financial and construction timing risk to the City that requires additional consideration by the City before this option can be pursued. Water Option 1 - Intertie with the City of Bonney Lake The Kersey III project is located outside the City of Bonney Lake water service area boundary. The City of Bonney Lake water service area boundary extends only to the King/Pierce County line. Any consideration of connection to the City's system, which would most likely occur in the area of the Td Street East system, would require water service boundary amendments, which would have to be agreed on by the City Councils of both cities. In addition, the Comprehensive Water Plan for the City of Auburn would also need to be amended to allow for the service boundary change. The option is considered unfeasible because of the lack of jurisdictional coordination to successfully implement this option. Option 2 - Single connection to the Lakeland Hills System This alternative would assume the development of the westerly supply for the Lakeland Hills service area, which would include the extension of a water main in East Valley Highway and the development of a booster pump within the Terrace View development, and providing the additional supply to the Kersey III project through the Lakeland Hills development. If the Kersey III project were to be served solely from the East Valley Highway system, a booster pump within Terrace View may need to be upgraded in order to provide adequate supply for the Kersey III development without the use of the easterly supply system along Kersey Way. Supplying the Kersey III project and surrounding areas solely from the East Valley Highway system could potentially require an amendment to the Water Comprehensive Plan to allow for the interim use of the East Valley Highway system to supply the Kersey III project. When the booster pump and service areas are installed within the 21 Terrace View development, the system of pipes retween Terrace View, through Lakeland Hills and to the Kersey III site, would be adequate to provide the supply of water to the Kersey III project. Option 3 - We1l5B An alternative source of water supply originally considered was the water that could be extracted from Well 5B, which is constructed in the southwest portion of the Foxwood development of Lakeland Hills. The connection of Well 5B to the Lakeland Hills service area system would only provide the additional reliability since only supplemental water rights were issued for this well. The City's maximum withdrawal rate has not increased associated with these supplemental rights so this option is not viable as the existing supply in Lakeland is not capable of supplying the water necessary to serve the project. Option 4 - Kersey Way Extension (Water Comprehensive Plan) The Water Comprehensive Plan for the City of Auburn shows an extension of water main south on Kersey Way from the existing terminus at the White River. A booster pump station would also be required. This extension reaches the frontage of the Kersey III property and is the planned method for providing water services to the site. Four alternatives and the improvements, constraints and approvals were reviewed regarding water service. Only two of these alternatives were determined to be feasible. Only Options 2 and 4, the connection from East Valley through Lakeland and the Kersey Way Extension will meet City of Auburn water plans and are analyzed further in Chapter 3. Road Design The specification for the road to service the Kersey III site includes a connection from the terminus of Evergreen Way east to Kersey Way. While minor modification in alignment may be made, the flowthrough connection through the site is a City requirement. Analysis of the road in the EIS is found in Appendix I of the Technical Appendices. The analysis in Appendix I includes the engineering specifics of the road in making the transition down the hill to Kersey Way as well as other requirements such as ntersection spacIng. The City requires a more than one access point to subdivisions greater than 75 units and a through connection will be made between the existing Evergreen Way terminus through the project site to Kersey Way. This road would be a Collector Arterial, designed with no stop signs or significant turns in order to provide for adequate flow of traffic through the site. The road would also have restricted lot access, i.e. all lots would need access off side streets or minor access roads and would not be permitted direct access to the arterial. While the road may have slight variations in alignment within the project, the connection to Kersey, the flow through and restricted access characteristics will need to remain. Storm Drainage Option 1 - Infiltration versus Detention Infiltration of stormwater, pursuant to the City of Auburn's Design and Construction Standards, is the preferred disposal method. This disposal method is dependant on acceptable soil conditions, topography and proper treatment of water. However, due to the existing soil conditions/types and steep topography, large-scale infiltration of stormwater is not feasible. 22 Option 2 - Selection of Discharge Point The conceptual storm drainage plan identifies two existing discharge locations would be utilized. These are labeled as Point A and Point B on Figure 4. Point A is located at the northeast corner of proposed Division III. This is a 24-inch corrugated metal culvert crossing under the unimproved/dirt driveway within 49th Street SE right of way. This culvert is located within a relatively deep drainage course/stream and receives runoff from the majority of Divisions II and III. Figure 4 illustrates the approximate onsite basin contributing flows to this location. This discharge location would be the appropriate outlet for this storm facility as it is the natural outlet location for the contributing drainage basin. Point B is an 18- inch culvert crossing under Kersey Way near the northwest corner of proposed Division I. This culvert receives runoff from a small portion of Division II, the existing BP A/easement and approximately the remaining westerly 2/3 of the Division I site. Runoff then crosses Kersey Way and drains into Bowman Creek. The other two culvert crossings are located east of Point B, along Kersey Way, adjacent to proposed Division II and are labeled as Point C and Point D in Figure 4. Point C is an 18-inch culvert crossing located approximately 350 feet northwesterly of the Kersey Way/53rd Street SE intersection. The on-site tributary area is relatively small portion of Division I. This culvert outlets into Bowman Creek. Point D is an 18-inch pipe that crosses Kersey Way at the northeast corner of 53rd Street SEe intersection. This pipe enters a catch rnsin, crosses 53rd Street SE, heads northerly and outlets into Bowman Creek. This pipe receives runoff from a relatively small position of the easterly side of Division I. Point B would be the appropriate location for this detention point outlet. This location is approximately 16=t and 50=t feet downhill of Point C and Point D respectively. This allows a better opportunity to convey this portion of site's drainage into the detention facility. Point B receives the majority of the runoff from the existing sub-basins contributing plans to Points B, C and D. Diverting runoff into Point C or Point D would contribute more water into the upper sections of Bowman Creek than what those stream reaches currently experience. This can create significant or accele rated stream channel erosion within those upper reaches. Discharge rates are to meet the City of Auburn's Design and Construction Standards. These rates are usually calculated using the existing contributing area to a discharge point. DBM's preliminary analysis for the detention pond within the Division II used the entire area of Division II and Division III, 77.7 =t acres. The contributing existing area to Point B is approximately 42.7 =t acres. The detention system release rates would need to be adjusted. Generally, using the lesser contributing existing area will calculate lower existing flow rates. Assuming the same developed area as DBM's analysis, this will result in larger pond volume requirements. Option 3 - Multiple versus Consolidated Detention Facility Locations Due to the existing discharge locations described within Option 2, a single large detention system/water quality facility outletting into one location would not be feasible. This concept would not maintain the natural drainage patterns by diverting runoff from one existing sub basin into another. Diversion of 23 I '( ..491h ST. 8.E. . ".T I ~ ' II ; ~ ~~ III I~ I', ~. ~ Ii I I -:::;;:.-. ~\C ~ " ...\.\ '~'~...JIL. '(i Jil Ii. tJ ~' .' ~ ., 'p' , I II :.: ~~ ~ \ \ I:\~ .;~~~\\II:!l111 ~\ ~\~\k ~ ~~ ~~ ~. · , \ \ ~ ~ ,~, ~~J ~ l'%~'--) ) - ~, ~ ~ ....,. ~,~, ~ ,,~\\ ~~~ ~\~~ · \ · ~~ .' I' ~ \\\ f , .~ '.. ""' ;~ ~ fI,\'!, · ~ !. ~ '. /I~ i ~\ \ \ '~\\ v~\ ~ ~ ~~, : I \~l~ \ \. - " ~! . ' , ~ \\ \) \~h \~, ~~ \\vP ~~'1,bIIP/ 1~1J q\~\' .' \~ .....r ""V, I /1 A " \ \ · I ~ I" \ I . I; ~\ \,~l ,'tj 1\' lIP, IllIUh I '\ ' '~l ~ ~ ~ 'V....... '\1/ I\.\ I i II \ , \ \ ~ ,I Sril \ ~ Ii i/, --- j -' ~ · If. \Ii IL l,l~ \ ~~ ~ I, I I. \ \~ ~ I . -6 I,A' ~.\!\ ~ ~I&' ;!t~IJ;fj~ ~ I ~,,!~ Ill!!!j' '~~ .,J#~ . I " I III \ ,!\ \ \ ~'\ ~"8 '~I ~/fl .... ~}; ~. :I ~ "..1\ 'I ~ ...., .b ;; - 'I' I , ~I'.\\ 'M · ~ ~ WI ~l/j) I( L ~ ~.~ ~ \~ ~'~ \~~~ N~P~~~~~ \. ~ \ 1 ~ \\{ / ~ ~ ~ ~~~IJ J ~ ,t _ ~~ \L'1~~~~\~~I"qh; \iV \ \ ii\ \ \ '\~\. \\ \\ \;" · ,\ ~ \ ,~'S:.,,~PJII~ IV, ,,, ....... ~ ~'7)A"~.. '~\~ '';:~ ~~~~"" ~:- __ i~V '1 \ ... ',\ \" \. \, ' I V I t I / I \ \ l U / / ~~\~: ~ ,I I ~~. :'"-.....~"Es' I .........~ · I ,. · V ~ \ ~ : ~~I! '-I I f \\lJ/ v1 ,\,,::%' I ~I J _ - ..~~ "i!!II&... ~~~~ --- ~._.', q ~ t I l Idll~ \ 'ell V)' 7. 'l!J '7i1h' ~ ~~ ~! ' ilrllD \ X . "\(~ .J I ( l' W{~~\ \ l!t~ ~ V/J ~~? ~~.~-"-~~M ~ '. ..,J~ / ~1 ~ 1 ~ I ~ ~~ ~~\I\\ /1 ~~ ,;~ ~~~ ~] '_,r~L(rllol' .. ~ ~ ~\, ~ _ '-I v / ~ " \"W-~ ~\l Y ~.-.,' \t\ '\\ .' ',- ~~ ~ ~- ,t-'.l '~~ 1 Hlfi I' ~~ :~. I ~ ~ ....... '- l-V '-.~ ~~\ ,'\ J f ~ ~ ::::::::::: ~~:\\" ~ ~\ .,.-- j ~L · '., ,r;' · t I / I"'" ~ ~.../:. I, III'~ II h~' ~. ~ ~ · ~ ~ ',\ .... vJ ~ z":' ~~ ~_-::__ ~ ~ I I i I~' J'~ ~~lJ~ ,,~ 1/ ~/ ~ vi II ,.L.: ~_'(' ~!111 m'l\d I r ~ ~ .,-. l I I / IIU /L""'-:: ~ E~-:~ ~~~ I ,~ IJ :lll~UtJl' lie. -, ~L~: .-, ~ A II' I \" ~j t ",' ~ " ,-~j " I ~ I _..-: .....1.'... r;:: 'I I' t' :' , , ,u_~ ~ ~~ ~ ~'/i ::-. ~ 'I"ri ~ !:I Itl'll I 1111/ ' l4 ~~. ~ I~ I '---....... ~!It ......-,:,. ~ ./ ~ ) 1 ' :1 ' . , ~ , l · ~ I ~ ..-- '- 7~ ~ ",,- j fJ I ~ f t I I'~ ~ I ~ I ~ .- "" ..........-.... , : :;- ~ ~ # I LI' i I r : t ~:W_ 1& ~~ ~ ~ _....__~ I~ ~ ::'-;"~/llli Ifllllll'!lll, ; df~~~ ( ~ ~ ~ '/,.~ ,ti: ~ ~ ,- - '( / I ~ 'I li'll' I ~ jijl 'J~~ j'&t -::-~ .' ___~ ~~~~'~ ~~~J f lltl'!fl!. 1\111111.:[1/1! · ~ ~~ I, I HI -- ..- ._;~ b.\" ""-,.. ~ II I lId ll' I '. I'.... ~"- ~ ~ I ~ ~~ ---~ ~ ~--... ~\8::~ 't': --~ \ lll'llllllll 11. I I r.. ~ ~:~ I ~~:?-~..~. ~ ~1~: _:= J,~~'~~~~illf !\j!lll\\!lrl:~I\ ll\~ II! ~ JIIII t ~ \ 'J ~ · ~ /, % ;r~./""""~....__ -- ~//. ~_...... ~ · . "'''........._ ""Ii ,1'1 II, I' '. I . . ,. . I' ~I 'II. .;; ;. ~=_-=:::::--.;.:: ~ · ...too... .1-.... .1 Y' ~ ~ --.J!' Il' '1111 · '. I ...l ~\ \,. . . ...... y ~ 0 ~ I,~ VJ~ ~_~ /: -..:.:::~!~ ~~~., V11/fl\\I\111,!/I/l,./! "t' ~\ WJ, ~ '/!J, ..~ ~-;~. -/--. '../ ~ ....... ~......., ,.~ '-.. ,j If, I. 11 ,It 11/1 I , , ~ \ I J 7 ~ .::::::...:;) \ \ ~~. , ......-~ :e-- ~. ~... ~,\ 1 r{l 1 fIll: I { I! I I i \ · \ ! 'I I I 1//,'1 ~}I I /~- -h. \~~~"~~~~I; I; ./rli~l\ '11f I ~ '. q i 1\ .~j//II If II '~~VWj,' ",.,.............. J ......~_. ...~~~:'~~ I il;J)iillllll~ 1('('/1 ! ~ \ ~ Ii I I ) 1/ ! r. ---/ -... .I V ~ - ...... "'\~" '. ,:,\~ ' I ii, ! I II I · ~, 1\ I I ~ '/ -_._~~~// 1'/.- 0, , \:\~.....,,, ~ '11/ 1111/1 1'\ \\ : I ' \~ 1\ \;' II .-. ---/ / V j r 1?0o"'.. r-.. \ , ~ it, jl!l/! I \ 'I \ ; ~~ \; \ I , :4._ : ~ '" r "'- .,II' ~' II II ~ I: I \ I .' \ t \ \' I ~ '/ ~~ ...I r~~. I..~",\'( \~_ ''j :; II I \ Ill! 11\\1 \ ~ ~~\ v I I I · \;.. .... ~' '\ I II t I, I \ h I . I ~ ~ ~, /.,~... ~'" ,00; ~~".~:Ill(' J : II ~ ~~~~\ I J Wl}fdW//1 I/./tl;d ~. /.//~~~~~.~~~~ fitj~ :11\\!\\I\\\ ~~~~\~ -\\\ stormwater can cause greater impacts than would otherwise occur by discharging runoff at the natural/existing locations. The site improvements proposed within Division III have the potential to divert stormwater away from the existing wetlands, creating impacts to wetland function. An analysis was prepared to determine the existing average monthly flow volumes supplying these wetlands and how much of the site roof area is necessary to closely match those flow volumes. The analysis concludes that the roof areas within Division III and a portion of Division II, along with the contributing offsite basins, need to be directed to these wetlands. A Preliminary Wetland Hydration Plan showing a stormwater pond capable of supplying runoff to these affected wetlands demonstrated this can be accomplished. The larger detention pond outlet is to have a flow splitter to convey a portion of the discharge into Wetland C. The remaining discharge is to be conveyed towards Point A. Option 4 - Locating Storm Drainage Facility within the BP A Easement An existing Bonneville Power Administration (BP A) easement, with transmission lines, is located along the western portion of the Division I site. This area had been cleared and is currently grass covered with small areas of tree groups and bare dirt. Dirt/gravel maintenance access roads traverse the easement areas. To minimize clearing of the site, locating storm facilities or portions of these facilities may be an alternative. BP A staff has indicated that it may be possible to locate storm facilities within their easement areas. This is reviewed on a case-by-case basis. A BP A application together with the storm drain system resigns must be submitted for their review and comments. The BP A reviews designs for clearances around the transmission towers, safety and how access is maintained through the easement areas. The conceptual storm drainage plan shows approximately the easterly ~ of the proposed detention pond within the easement area. Storm pipes from the east cross this area to discharge into the pond. It appears feasible to locate more of the detention pond into the BP A easement. This could allow the pond outlet be located closer to the existing discharge location; Point B as shown on Figure 4. The pond access road could be combined with the BP A access roads, pending future discussions. 25 CHAPTER 3.0 AFFECTED CONDITIONS, SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS, MITIGATION MEASURES AND UNA VOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS 26 3.0 AFFECTED CONDITIONSt9 SIGNIFICANT IMP ACTSt9 MITIGATION MEASURES AND UNA VOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMP ACTS 3.1 EARTH RESOURCES The Earth Resources section is based on the "Geologic, Hydrogeologic and Geotechnic al Report" by GeoEngineers, Inc., dated 03/05/04, which is attached to the DEIS as Technical Appendix A. The site vicinity is shown on Figure 5. The site plans associated with Alternative 481 and Alternative 700 are shown as Figures 6 and 7 respectively and include the location of the test pits analyzed in support of this element. 3.1.1 TOPOGRAPHY 3.1.1.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT The site is located along the northeastern side of an upland plateau generally between the White River and Lake Tapps. The site consists of an alternating series of three ravines and two ridges that generally slope downward from south to north. The topography is shown on the vicinity exhibit, Figure 5. The western ravine intersects the southern site boundary at an elevation of approximately 470 feet and slopes down toward the northeast where it intersects the northern site boundary at an elevation of about 220 feet. The westernmost portion of the site includes slopes that are generally greater than 30 percent. The central portnn of the site is occupied by a ridge that has a maximum elevation of approximately 570 feet at the southern site boundary, and slopes down toward the north with an average grade of about 15 percent. Two relatively narrow north-northwest trending ravines, separated by a ridge, are located within the eastern portion of the site. Slopes along the eastern ridge are commonly greater than 25 percent. 3.1.1.2 SIGNIFICANT IMP ACTS The design of the development will be influenced by the existing topography. The proposed stormwater detention ponds for Alternatives 481 and 700 are located within the lowest areas of the existing on-site drainage pathways, as dictated by topography. In general, site development should attempt to follow existing contours, but cuts of 25 feet and fills of 20 feet are anticipated for the extension of Evergreen Way SE through the proposed subdivision. The extension of Evergreen Way SE will require the modification of slopes that are greater than 40%. Secondary roads and cul-de-sacs will also require modification of the existing topography with slopes greater than 25% to achieve smooth transitions between the main roadway and building lots and an effective internal transportation network. Total grading volumes are expected to be on the order of 450,000 cubic yards. Most of the building lots will require some grading to establish building pads and acceptable connections to roads and utilities. Alternative 700 has a higher housing density, but smaller footprint than Alternative 481 (Figures 6 and 7). The smaller building envelopes associated with Alternative 700 may result in smaller impacts to topography than Alternative 481. The No Action Alternative is assumed to have less topographic impacts than Alternative 481 and Alternative 1)0 because of the significantly smaller number of anticipated building lots. 27 : l... ; . ",.J- ;':' 1 .."( _ toJ . ~ \ '!:. ."-- v 0 "- I") N ""'" N 0 l.1- >- (/) ::2 Z 0::: (D 3: 0 -l-' I..- 0 0... Q) 0::: I E > (J) I- 0 0 ~ l") 0 0 2000 4000 r") ~ t1) I I I ~ 0 SCALE IN FEET ./"" ill I- CONTOUR INTERVAL 25 FEET .,/ 0 N <( EXPLANATION: I u 6 EXISTING DEEP WELL/BORING o PW-1. /'" rr) Reference: USGS 7.5' topographic quadrangle maps H Auburn, Wash.," 1994 and 0 "Sumner, Wash.H 1973. n L{) 0 GEoENGINEERS (;j ~ VICINITY MAP 0.... /'" :2 0 Earth Science + Technology FIGURE 5 w 0:: I I ~ J I N 0 300 I I ~ ~ SCALE IN FEET 8-41- Ij I -N- Tp.20 I I' I / I I I I I ! +-,- I I I,~ I I 'f~-~11 b w lL. o Z .f-z 0 - to W ...J ~ - u (J) o ---- " " - - - -- r--... ,... . A_ ~ ~ - - ~y 0 II I I I I I II II rTIIl- -, r I - ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I Ir~ I I I ;> / ~ .~ I I I I 1 1 1 I. I I I I r~ I I tl/ OJ a. ILlllllllll1 ._- _~_ ,- -:- )- -I-'T~r----r-~I--'l~_" ,- -- ~J \ I /1 111111 \ "- '\ \ I // r---- I I I I I I I \ " '\ \ I / t~---- I I I I I I I \ 1 '\ ~ I -- I ---1----1 J I I I I J : / //1 - - _ _ - - - - - - - -t - - - -1 I I I I I I I // _ I ,--- ---1---- - l ~- - - - I - - - -~ - - - ~ I - - - I ---- - _1____ I I I I , " I ~ - - -~ I - - - -t - - - - I 1_ :_1_: - L J - L - '\-:" II I ----- ___1.___ I I I I I I I ., / f---~ I I I I I I I I / // _ _ _ _ I - - - T - - - I I I I I I I / .- _ -1, - - - - ~ ~~ I -'-' { r- 'T--'--'~ - - - -II --- I I I I I I r--' I ---~--- \ , I I I I I I I I \ ' or- ---T--- I l_l-l_I_LJ_L_f\-_~ '0..1 --- ..-J------lllil l{) I I I I / I __ -- I I or- I I I I / ~ .....-- \ .....,-t- --j I I I ~I // I I ~ l.......... ..... )-___ L-Q.. --- --:1.... ~ ~/........../ ~/ I, l-r-I~ ---I /:: . :1: I · v'/ I I l~~- I 1 I \', I . .:. :.. ~ ~ /' /,"" ,... I I I I I I I \ ',. ?', : :- . '.. I /' ~ _I, ~ -'r 1 J1_ ~ - T L -/11 y:.....' \ - 11 I I I I I I / I \ ----.J \ '\ I I I I I I I I // . . :(" : = = - I ~. \ \ ............ I \ ...... - \ ----- \ __I I 3.1.1.3 MITIGATION MEASURES Similar mitigation measures are expected for Alternatives 481 and 700. The earthwork required for either alternative will be extensive because of existing sloped terrain caused by the series of ridges and ravines. The steep slopes resulting from cuts that range from 5 to 15 feet high can typically be held in place using conventional gravity retaining walls or by grading the slopes 2H: 1 V (horizontal:vertical) or flatter. Cuts in excess of 15 feet that cannot be sloped back could require tieback, soil nail or similar engineered walls. Fills compacted in place to support the new roadways and homes should be designed to accommodate the type of fill material used and the underlying soil conditions. Permanent fill slopes will generally be inclined at 2H: 1 V or flatter. Retaining walls can be used to limit the lateral extent of the fills. Potential retaining wall options for fill applications include concrete cantilever walls, concrete masonry unit (CMU) block walls, mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls and soldier pile walls. Mitigation measures to control settlement as a result of embankment construction are discussed below. No mitigation measures are currently proposed for the No Action Alternative, but similar measures proposed for Alternatives 481 and 700 could be expected, depending on specific constructions plans for the No Action Alternative. 3.1.1.4 UNA VOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMP ACTS The proposal will result in the modification of slopes greater than 40% to complete the road and utility construction necessary to serve the site. 3.1.2 SOILS AND GEOLOGY 3.1.2.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 3.1.2.1.1 Soils The characteristics of surficial soils are the result of the combined influence of the following six factors: (1) the parent material from which the soil was derived, (2) climate, (3) living organisms, (4) topographic effects, (5) the length of time that the soil has been developing, and (6) modification by humans. The surficial soils throughout the Puget Lowland, including the site, have developed on materials that were deposited, or exposed by erosion, during the most recent glaciation of this area (refer to the following Geology section). The soils have been forming for about 13,000 years, since the retreat of the glacier, which is a relatively short time by geologic standards. The soil-forming processes generally have not greatly modified the characteristics of the geologic materials from which the surficial soils are derived. All on-site soils have been mapped by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) as either Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, with a 6 to 15 percent slope designation (AgC) over the majority of the site, or a 15 to 30 percent slope designation (AgD) in two areas with steeper slopes. The Alderwood series consists of moderately well drained soils formed in glacial deposits. The two areas of AgD soils are located in the northeastern portion of the site along Kersey Way and along the southern half of the western site boundary (shown on Figure 8). According to NRCS, the permeability of Alderwood gravelly sandy loam is moderately rapid in the surface layer and subsoil, and very slow in the substratum. Runoff is slow to medium in areas mapped as AgC, and medium in areas mapped as AgD. The erosion hazard is moderate in areas mapped as AgC and severe in areas mapped as AgD. 31 T N tat tm1 "" 300 600 1 I - ~ ~ J r 1 SCALE IN FEET I 'V '" <ow \ \ ~ .twl' .>" ~" "~ . . ,. , ^ I '~ ~ ~ l, '''' ~ ,. ~ 11.: ~... ~ ,~rl '. . ,I" 1"1-,1' " ,,~,.,,=.p, "",,,, ,.' '~'" .~..., , ,\' ""r", , f ~- ... ~ II: 1+ "" 1Rm ' .i "'0 t .' I ... J -" .h 1~~1i1"l , J.. I, '~tm' '\ i " "". "1 T I References: Auburn GIS planimelric CAD files provided by Apex Engineering, June 2002. OB~ .. ...,~... [ 1"~ , II tJ ~j I I 1111 . , I"I"'^^ ... I... ntt r i I r'I' t II 3.1.2.1.2 Geology In general, the site is underlain by a six (6) inch to I-foot thickness of forest duff and topsoil, which in turn overlies one of four distinct geologic units; fill, ice contact deposits, glacial till and advance outwash. The fill is undocumented and some of it was observed to contain organic matter. The ice contact, glacial till and advance outwash deposits are primarily sandy materials with variable, clay, silt, gravel, cobble and boulder content. The native glacial soil will provide suitable bearing support for the new infrastructure (homes, roads, retaining walls, embankments, etc.). The organic soils (forest duff and topsoil) and non-engineered fill are often relatively compressible, and large settlements can occur when new loads are placed over these materials. Mitigation will be required to address the potential settlement associated with these materials. Subsurface explorations completed for this evaluation included the drilling of five (5) borings (B-1 through B-5), and the excavation of 23 test pits (TP-l through TP-23). Three of the five borings were completed as piezometers (wells used to monitor groundwater levels). The exploration locations are shown on Figure 9. Previous explorations completed by Earth Consultants, Anderson Design Consultants and Techram Securities, located on Figure 9, were also reviewed as part of this evaluation. Figures 10, 11 and 12 consist of a surficial geologic map and three cross sections of the site based on the existing literature, previous subsurface explorations in the site vicinity and the subsurface explorations completed for this evaluation. The geologic map (Figure 10) identifies four (4) primary units, from youngest to oldest: 1) Fill (Ht), 2) Vashon ice contact deposits (Qvi), 3) Vashon till (Qvt) and 4) Vashon advance outwash deposits (Qva). The ice contact, till and advance outwash units were deposited during the most recent glaciation of the region, which occurred 13,000 to 15,000 years ago (during the Quaternary period), and E known as the Vashon stade of the Fraser glaciation. Recently (Holocene epoch) placed fill (artificially placed soil) is present over glacial deposits (Qvt or Qvi) in the southwestern portion of the site. Only those areas with an observed or inferred fill thickness of approximately five (5) or more feet are mapped on Figure 10. Fill located within the southwestern portion of the site includes sub grade material for an existing unpaved roadway, and dumped yard waste. The sub grade fill generally consists of medium dense silty sand with gravel and occasional cobbles, and appears to be re-worked till (Qvt) and ice contact deposits (Qvi) that originated on site. Subgrade fill encountered in test pits TP-ll and TP-12 was approximately 10 feet thick. A previo usly completed test pit along this roadway also encountered fill with a minimum thickness of 11 feet (ECTP-2, located on Figure 9). The thickness offill may exceed 11 feet in the vicinity of these test pits, based on surface conditions. Minor amounts of fill (less than 4 feet thick) consisting of loose to medium dense silty sand were observed in test pits TP-4 and TP-20. Vashon ice contact deposits (Qvi) at the site generally consist of a medium dense to dense mixture of sand, silt and gravel, with occasional cobbles. Qvi was encountered beneath fill in test pits TP-4 and TP-20. Qvi was also encountered at or just below the ground surface in all five borings and six of the test pits (TP-2, -6, -10, -13, -15- and -16). These sediments were deposited by meltwater on or adjacent to glacial ice. Vashon ice contact deposits are mapped within the western, central and lower-elevation areas of the site (Figure 10). The on-site Vashon ice contact deposits are interpreted to have a maximum thickness of approximately 40 feet, and are underlain by Vashon till or Vashon advance outwash (Figures 11 and 12). On-site subsurface explorations indicate that Qvi is more widely distributed at the site than indicated by existing geologic maps of the site vicinity. The relatively low permeability of the observed ice contact deposits would limit the utility of a stormwater infiltration pond at the locations of the proposed detention ponds (near borings B-1 and B-4). 33 '1 \ N I .. tMJ 600 I I (. 'II" . I ~ ,..', " ~ , , mn ' T I ,. IN"'" t tMt~ , r 1 """" 0 (.() (V) 0 C\J :--z f 0 c..~ to .~.....+ -! i .~' ~.'. ,<- ' ~. ; I ,~ ; I - "', \"" ! 111 U I 0 c 0 1- +J () ID f!J (fJ (j) 0 L Ov / I ~ IOJ / 4-' (J) / Q) 3 / Ova .r ~ / 4-J OJ :J I Qvi o co UJ ~--7 .. C "..,.. , ~ ?/ o 0 /"' /' r') ~ / / / () / ...., OJ / / Q) f/J / (fJ / / ? ? ?- - - - _?- - - - _?- - - _?- - \+-. / t 4- UJ / VI o rJJ / ........ -.- -....- _ -- ---. t I . ? ---- --- --- -"""'" -...... ---- - ~ -- -. / ..- . v 0 /' ~ / ,.. U / / I al / / /' ./ / ./ ~ / / Qvt ?/ /t / / / / ?// Qss ~I ~ ? ,.,.. / .................-----....- Qss . - - - _?- - ? ? ? ? ---- ~ -.-- - -...... - - - - - - ......... - - - ? '" ? . ~ .. ~ III'II!IWIIIlM' ....... ~ ~ ............... _ ~ _ ......... _ ...... _ ............. .........-: ~ I I _________.--_____ j . I Qpy EXPLANATION: ,.. I m Qvi VA.5HON ICE CONTACT DEPOSITS BORING - -GEOLOGIC CONTACT Qvt VASHON TILL (DASHED WHERE. Ova VASHON ADVANCE OUTWASH APPROXIMAiE) -?- -?-INFERRED GEOLOGIC Qss SALMON SPRINGS DRIFT CONTACT Qpy PUYALLUP FORMATION HORIZONTAL SeA VERTICAL seAl s shown are based on interpolation between widely spaced explorations 'and VFRTlrAI FXA~l <(un --.l ......, I ~0 (188M c08 l8SJJO) 6~-dl I ~ u ~ (f)W --.l I ~--.l--.l ~- <( <( / z~u aI-- I N~J- -wfr: (\,. 0:::: > W o > I I 1 / J 0. en 1 en 1 0 I ~ I o I ~ 3: I ~ 0 0 -+-' <.0 0 I ~ 5 0J N I 001 ~ I :J 0. I ~ I I ,V-V UO!lJdS I I SSOJJ_ I eM I ()SeM4POU .OL )eSHO) I ~o) ~-8 ~~ I ! I I I I I I / (\. o 0 0 0 0 0 / 5S :1: ~ ~ ~ ~ / / (le8:l-) NOIl\i^3l3 / / / u / / g / (),/ (/) j' ~ / ~ L / o. U) c / ~ ~ w o I / ~ ~ u w <( / Q): o ~ t= u ~-- :J Ci r/ &. ~ 0 0 / (f) ~ , :z w U1 / ~ () UC> Q) jU ~~ I '"CJ l1J -.I > a::: ?: - u :=! 0 Q.. / J --. f- <( Ul C 'zzzz / Q) )9900 _ I ~ : _C _L I ::2 > n. -+-1 .~~~:i 0 I Q) , > > > (f) ()SOe4lnos .09 )8SHO) 9-dl I .0 c: . - ...... ct1 (/) / 0 - . > > > en :;.::; .0000 /.2 / ~ ()S084)nOs .Og )esHo) 9-dl / ~ +J / c' () 0, t; G / en c ~w S / rn o. 6:::S0 8 / I 0 -0 u~~ 0 I ~ :J u~ 0 / 0 t- W -0- w~ / ..D. 0: s: OWX o;:U / I o I 0 a::: ~ n, Q) l-- I- -.J (f) Ct:: W Z / L (f) tn 0 <( 0_ u. 0 , 0 }~}.:! t589i ~ u / (', f I I c ~ ,- ('-. / ~ I ~L I I I / I 2. ::: i=: 'I 0!' / I ~ Vashon till (Qvt) at the site generally consists of dense, gray to gray-brown silty sand with occasional cobbles and boulders that was deposited at the base of the glacier and overridden by thousands of feet of ice. Qvt was identified beneath fill in test pit TP-12, and beneath Vashon ice contact deposits in borings B-1, B-2 and three of the test pits (TP-4, -10 and -15). Vashon till was also encountered at or just below the ground surface with a minimum thickness of six feet in 10 of the test pits (TP-1, -3, -5, -7, -8, -9, -14, -17, -22 and -23). Qvt is thicker than 40 feet at borings B-1 and B-2 and is inferred to have a maximum thickness greater than 100 feet beneath the westernmost portion of the site (based on well logs of PW-1 and PW-2, as shown on Figure 5). Till was also identified in four previously completed on-site test pits (ECTP-6, -7, -8, and -9, located on Figure 9). Vashon till is generally mapped within the site areas of higher elevation (Figure 10). The Vashon till unit is likely underlain by Vashon advance outwash or Salmon Springs drift, as shown on Figures 11 and 12 (based on well logs ofPW-1, PW-2, TW-1 and T-6; Figure 5). The relatively low permeability of till observed at the surface and shallow subsurface would limit the utility of a storm water infiltration pond at the location of the proposed detention pond near boring B-1. Vashon advance outwash (Qva) at the site generally consists of dense, gray-brown gravelly sand with cobbles and silt. Qva was encountered beneath an approximate 33-foot thickness ofVashon ice contact deposits in boring B-4. Boring B-5 and test pits TP-18 through TP-21 encountered Qva within five feet of the ground surface. The log ofa 320-foot deep on-site well (TW-1, located on Figures 5,9 and 10) drilled during 1979 is interpreted to have encountered an approximate 200- foot thickness of Qva in the southern portion of the site. Streams flowing from the advancing ice sheet during the early part of the Vashon stade deposited these sediments. Vashon advance outwash is mapped within the north-central portion of the site (Figure 10). The Vashon advance outwash is inferred to have a maximum thickness of about 200 feet, and is underlain by Salmon Springs drift (Figures 11 and 12). Inferred contacts with Qva in cross section 'B-B' (Figure 12) are based on the logs of two off-site wells (PW-1 and PW-2, as shown on Figure 5). Zones of relatively low permeability observed within the advance outwash deposits at boring B-4 could cause significant groundwater mounding that rmy limit the function of a stormwater infiltration pond at the location of the proposed detention pond near B-4. Salmon Springs drift (Qss) is not exposed at the site and was not encountered in borings B-1 through B-5, or test pits TP-1 through TP-23. Existing geologic maps of the site vicinity indicate that Qss is exposed between the approximate elevations of 100 and 300 feet within one mile north and west of the site. The log of a 320- foot deep on-site well (TW -1; Figures 5, 9 and 10) drilled during 1979 indicates that Qss beneath the site consists of gray to yellow "hardpan," gravel, sand and minor amounts of clay. These sediments were likely deposited during the Salmon Springs glaciation, prior to the Fraser glaciation. The Salmon Springs drift cons ists of glacial and interglacial sediments, including fluvial sand and gravel deposits. The contact between Qss and the overlying Qva is interpreted to occur at an elevation of about 320 feet in the vicinity of TW-1. The Puyallup Formation is inferred to underlie Qss beneath the site at an approximate elevation of 110 feet (Figure 11). The Puyallup Formation (Qpy) is not exposed at the site and was not encountered in the recent on-site subsurface explorations. Existing geologic maps of the site vicinity indicate that Qpy is exposed between the approximate elevations of 100 and 125 feet within one mile north of the site. The log of a 500-foot deep test well located near the eastern site boundary (T -6, located on Figure 5) indicates that Qpy consisting of interglacial clay, silt and sand was encountered between the approximate elevations of 80 and 120 feet. Existing regional geologic maps and cross sections indicate that Qss and Qpy are underlain by a sequence of older glacial and interglacial deposits that extend to an inferred elevation of approximately -1,000 feet in the site vicinity. These older glacial and interglacial deposits are underlain by Tertiary sedimentary 38 bedrock with andesite intrusions. Bedrock and the overlying sequence of older glacial and interglacial deposits were not encountered in any of the on-site borings and are not exposed in the site vicinity. 3.1.2.2 SIGNIFICANT IMP ACTS It is anticipated that the project will attempt to balance cuts and fills at the site to reduce the amount of import or export of materials. The existing ice contact and glacial till materials contain an appreciable fines content, rendering their workability very sensitive to the soil moisture content. If the moisture content of these soils is more than a few percent above their optimum moisture content, they become very difficult, if not impossible to compact to structural fill specifications. Operation of equipment on these soils will also be very difficult during wet weather conditions. The native advance outwash deposits contain fewer fines and are generally less sensitive to moisture. Zones and lenses of relatively permeable sediments were observed in the ice contact, till and advance outwash deposits. There is a potential for significant stormwater leakage into the subsurface if detention ponds are constructed in these deposits. The proposed stormwater detention pond near boring B-1 is also in the vicinity of steep slope areas. Significant stormwater leakage in the vicinity of steep slopes could potentially affect slope stability. Similar impacts to soils and geology are expected from Alternatives 481 and 700. The smaller footprint of Alternative 700 may result in less impacts to soils and geology than Alternative 481. The No Action Alternative is assumed to have less soil and geologic impacts than either Alternative 481 or 700 because of the significantly smaller number of anticipated building lots. 3.1.2.3 MITIGATION MEASURES The potential impacts of the existing soil and geology conditions on site development generally fall into one of three categories: 1. Settlement due to placing new loads (structures or fill embankments) over potentially compressible materials, such as forest duff and undocumented, existing fill. 2. Earthwork constraints associated with excavating, hauling, placing and compacting moisture sensitive soils, such as the native ice contact and glacial till materials. 3. Excessive leakage of stormwater into the soils below detention ponds if zones or lenses of relatively free-drainin g materials are exposed in the pond bottoms. The mitigation measures discussed below are applicable for Alternatives 481 and 700. The potential settlement issues can be partially mitigated by using proper site preparation techniques that include removal of all surficial organic materials (vegetation, forest duff, topsoil and large roots) from below proposed infrastructure and new fill locations. The existing fill on site is undocumented and likely non-engineered (not placed to specified compaction criteria). Unless subsequent exploration and testing indicates portions of the existing fill meet structural fill specifications, all existing fill should be removed from below proposed infrastructure or new fill embankment locations. Impacts associated with earthwork using the on-site, moisture sensitive soils can be mitigated by limiting earthwork activities to the dry season, typically considered to extend from June through October in the greater Puget Sound region. Even during the "dry season," periods of wet weather are likely, and it may be necessary to limit earthwork activities during those times. It may be necessary to moisture condition (dry back) soils if they become too wet during inclement weather or their natural moisture content is appreciably above their optimum moisture content. If earthwork activities occur during the "wet season," 39 those earthwork activities may need to be limited to windows of good weather, or all-weather fill may need to be imported to the site. Admixtures such as lime or cement can be used to improve the workability of on-site, moisture sensitive soils during wet weather conditions. Depending on the specific design and location with respect to steep slopes and if relatively free-draining materials, such as permeable zones or lenses of sand and gravel are exposed in the bottom of the proposed stormwater detention ponds, it will be necessary to line those ponds with relatively impermeable materials. The liners could consist of natural soil liners or geosynthetic membranes. The on-site ice contact and glacial till soils may be suitable for use as natural soil liners and detention pond embankment fill, provided they possess a suitably high fines content and can be compacted to the requisite compaction levels. 3.1.2.4 UNA VOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMP ACTS No unavoidable significant adverse impacts to soils or geology are anticipated from Alternative 481, Alternative 700 or the No Action Alternative. 3.1.3 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 3.1.3.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 3.1.3.1.1 Erosion Hazards Erosion of soil is a natural, ongoing physical process by which sediment is removed from topographic high points and transported down gradient by a variety of geomorphic processes. The erosional processes most commonly encountered within and acljacent to the site include soil creep and sheet wash, slope ravel, and rill and gully erosion. Erosional processes may be accelerated during construction by removal of vegetation and exposure of native soils. Removal of vegetation as a result of and concurrent with the modification of topography and unmanaged stormwater runoff contributes to increase in erosion. Loose, non-cohesive soils with small particle sizes are particularly susceptible to erosion. The rates of various erosion processes can be significantly reduced during and following construction by implementing conventional construction practices designed and constructed to reduce erosion impacts. Erosion hazard areas are defined by the Auburn City Code as those "areas identified by the USDA Soil Conservation Service as having a severe rill and inter-rill erosion hazard" (Auburn City Code 16.06.030). Erosion hazard areas, as identified by the City of Auburn (City of Auburn Erosion Hazard Areas map, dated January 18, 1996) are shown on Figure 8, on all slopes with a grade of 15 percent or more. The erosion hazard areas distribution shown on Figure 8 is a refinement of those areas identified by the NRCS and City of Auburn, based on site-specific topographic and geologic information. Based on a sediment budget analysis using the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE), it is estimated that approximately 5.5 tons per year of soil is eroded within the site under existing conditions. RUSLE was used to estimate soil loss caused by raindrop impact, overland flow and rill erosion. Note that RUSLE estimates only the gross amount of soil moved from its original position; it does not estimate net soil erosion (gross erosion minus deposition). The actual volume of soil eroded from a site is generally much smaller than calculated by RUSLE. 3.1.3.1.2 Landslide Hazards Landsliding is the slow to rapid, downslope movement of a mass that includes rock, soil and/or vegetative cover. The failures may occur as planar slides, block slides, rotational slumps, debris avalanches and 40 mudflows. Landsliding usually occurs on steep slopes and is commonly initiated during periods of intense or prolonged rainfall when the water table is high. Landsliding also can be initiated by removing lateral support from the toe of a slope or by overloading the slope with fill material or water. The City of Auburn classifies landslide hazard areas as follows (City of Auburn Landslide Hazard Areas map, dated January 18, 1996): Class I - Known landslide hazard Areas of known landslide hazard will be identified using the following criteria: . A combination of slopes greater than 15% underlain by silt or clay. . Evidence of movement during the Holocene Epoch (from 10,000 years ago to present), or the occurrence of mass wastage debris. . Areas designated by UGSG and/or DNR as Quaternary slumps, earthflows or landslides. . Canyons potentially subject to inundation by debris flows or catastrophic flooding. . Slopes which could potentially become oversteppened and unstable as a result of stream erOSIon. . Slopes greater than 40% with a vertical relief of 10 or more feet. Class II - No landslide hazard Areas of no landslide hazard will consist of slopes less than 15% and not meeting any of the criteria for Class I. Class III - Unknown landslide hazard Areas of unknown landslide hazards will be those hillslopes between 15% and 40% which are not underlain by silt or clay. Class I landslide hazard areas, as identified by the City of Auburn (City of Auburn Landslide Hazard Areas map, dated January 18, 1996), are shown on Figure 13. The remainder of the site is identified as Class II or Class III landslide hazard areas by the City of Auburn. Landslide hazard areas are also defined by the Auburn City code as those "areas potentially subject to landslides based on a combination of geologic, topographic and hydrologic factors." (ACCI6.06.030) 3.1.3.1.3 Seismic Hazards The Puget Lowland area is a seismically active region that has historically experienced thousands of earthquakes. Based on past earthquake activity, the Uniform Building Code assigns the Puget Lowland region a Zone 3 rating for seismic activity on a scale of 1 (lowest) to 4 (highest). Seismic hazards represent risk of injury or damage to humans and property resulting directly from earthquakes. Seismic hazard mechanisms include surface fault rupture, ground shaking and associated ground failure such as liquefaction and landsliding. Liquefaction is the loss of strength by loose, saturated soil when subjected to vibration or shaking. A review of the geologic map for Auburn (Mullineaux, 1965) identifies no faults in the immediate vicinity of the site. The closest mapped fault is a north-south trending fault exposed near the Green River, where it is down-thrown on the east side and cuts through pre- V ashon glacial deposits located 41 ~ 1\ I I I \ . I T N tM) tM1 ~ 300 600 I I I I SCALE IN FEET i t J ! t . 'I \ f I '< , \ .,,, 'P'rLII '" ~ If u.: \~ ."+ olr1oJot , r+" ~......~,. \ "- """" Tm$' f " I """ ~I ", '" u" I 1 , ",. r , J 1 .Ir ",' ".- . , "\', ~ '1.. . ~o I .' I .. . . " 1 '. , . I tf..... References: ~~bl~r.n ,~~~.?Io~~~_~(ri~ ~AD files provided by Apex Engineering, June 2002 DBM .. ...._ UlA A......_~ '1f'\(\f\ 'UJ" (\'. t ^ t .... I ,. jI\. t ,kt ....'" 1 "'... ~...J:,J... Un' approximately six miles east of the site. Recent scientific articles suggest that fault movement in the southern Puget Sound area may have occurred between 500 and 1,500 years ago. Based on the available data, surface fault rupture is unlikely to occur at the site. Historical evidence collected by the u.S. Geological Survey (USGS) suggests the number and location of seismically triggered landslides are related to other known factors affecting landsliding, such as material type, slope inclination and groundwater conditions. Therefore areas at risk for seismically triggered landslides are the same areas identified as landslide hazard areas. The City of Auburn classifies seismic hazard areas as follows (City of Auburn Seismic Hazard Areas map, dated January 19, 1996): Class I - Known seismic hazard Areas of known seismic hazard will be identified using the following criteria: . The presence of Holocene alluvium . Class I - Known landslide hazard areas. Class II - No seismic hazard Areas of no seismic hazard will include terrain not included in Class I - Known Seismic Hazard areas or Class III - Seismic Hazard Unknown areas. Class III - Unknown seismic hazard Areas of unknown seismic hazard will include terrain comprising of recessional deposits not included in Class I - Known Seismic Hazard areas. Class I seismic hazard areas, as identified by the City of Auburn (City of Auburn Seismic Hazard Areas map, dated January 19, 1996), are shown on Figure 14. The remainder of the site is mapped as Class II (no seismic hazard) areas by the City of Auburn. Seismic hazard areas are also defined by the Auburn City Code as those "areas subject to severe risk or damage as a result of earthquake induced ground shaking, slope failure, settlement, soil liquefaction or surface faulting". Seismic hazard areas on Figure 14 have been identified for areas designated as landslide hazard areas on Figure 13. The seismic hazard areas distribution shown on Figure 14 is a refinement of those areas mapped by the City of Auburn as Class I seismic hazard areas, based on site-specific field observations and topographic information. The remainder of the site is classified as Class II (no seismic hazard), based on site-specific field observations and topographic information. 3.1.3.1.4 V olcanic Hazards V olcanic hazard areas are defined by the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan as areas having the potential for floods (which could include mudflows or lahars [lahars include landslides or mudflows consisting of aerially expelled material from a volcanic vent]) resulting from volcanic activity on Mount Rainier. No volcanic hazard areas are identified on or adjacent to the site by the USGS (Crandell, 1973) or the City of Auburn (City of Auburn Volcanic Hazard Areas map, dated January 18, 1996). The site is 43 \ l I - I il N \ '7llU i I \ UIL2 ptJ 600 l l'~ I \"~' ",' : " \ " 1\ r::-J~ I'D) ~r ,", \ ~ ..., ~ I ' ' (\ \ I ; <<, , - .l I" I I . " ! ; I I '. .1 I ,,' 11 ,., t " .' I \ ", .' " I \ ) .' ! ! " ,~, ,0 ~. c \ "'''niD . '" ., . , tm ,8., _ :". ~I r -" / .,' \ , ,< I " "'J.\ T I References: Auburn GIS planimetric CAD files provided by Apex Engineering, June 2002, D8^ t\- ~ ,II""'" of the Kersey Threet Auburnt WAf AUQust 2000 ano'" City of Auburn Seismic Haz tl f~ _ J "it f .l I f'\ · II I L _ _ _J l lL ~ ~.L - - - -'!~ ~ _L.J.. -~-~-j---~ _t1.L A _ L /\i1. also located outside of lahar inundation zones, pyroclastic - flow hazard zones and post-lahar sedimentation areas identified in another volcano hazards evaluation for Mount Rainier. 3.1.3.1.5 Coal Mine Hazards The principal issues regarding public safety and property damage related to abandoned coal mines include: (1) sinkholes and related gas emissions or concentrations, (2) trough subsidence, and (3) coal spoils. The City of Auburn does not contain any coal mine hazard areas (King County Sensitive Areas Map Folio, dated 1990). 3.1.3.2 SIGNIFICANT IMP ACTS 3.1.3.2.1 Erosion, Grading and Vibrations Much of the site soils are categorized as an erosion hazard, as shown on Figure 8. Some of these sensitive soils will be disturbed during construction, increasing the erosion potential. Construction activities that typically affect erosion potential include vegetation removal, grading, fill placement, and spoils removal or stockpiling. Erosion could lead to silt-laden runoff being transported off-site, resulting in water quality degradation of local surface waters. Based on a sediment budget analysis using RUSLE, it is estimated that approximately 2,000 tons per year of soil could be eroded within the site under unmitigated construction conditions. Alternative 700 may have a smaller potential to cause erosion than Alternative 481 because of its smaller building envelope, assuming that mass clearing and grad in g is implemented during construction. However, the larger number of building lots under Alternative 700 may result in increased vegetation removal, grading, utility services connections (excavated trenches), and soil stockpiling, depending on specific construction plans for either alternative. The No Action Alternative is assumed to have a smaller potential to cause erosion than Alternative 481 because of the anticipated smaller number of lots and the anticipation that mass grading would not occur. Excavated soils to be used as fill would need to be stockpiled, and unsuitable or excess materials would be removed from the site which increases erosion potential. Fill material may be required in excess of that available from on-site excavations. It is anticipated that several sources of fill may be available in the Auburn area in volumes sufficient enough to meet project demands without adversely impacting those local sources. It is also anticipated that several soil disposal sites will also be available. Depending on the locations of the aggregate sources and disposal sites, heavy trucks would be required to transport the fill and waste materials. The smaller footprint of Alternative 700 may result in less grading than Alternative 481. Less grading is assumed for the No Action Alternative than for Alternative 481 or Alternative 700; thus grading impacts are anticipated to be lower for the No Action Alternative. Earthwork activities at the site, such as excavating dense glacial materials, compacting fill soils, or simply running trucks and construction equipment, may result in vibrations that could damage nearby structures or disturb nearby businesses, residents or wildlife. Housing developments are located west and south of the site, and several homes ae located within the exclusion area in the central portion of the site. Vibrations associated with earthwork activities can cause cracks in nearby structures and settlement if those structures are founded over loose soils. However, there are few existin g structures immediately adjacent to the proposed development. Thus, vibration impacts from earthwork are anticipated to be moderate to low. 45 Since Alternative 700 may result in slightly less earthwork than Alternative 481, the potential construction vibration impacts associated with this alternative may also be slightly smaller. The No Action Alternative is assumed to require less earthwork than Alternative 481 or Alternative 700, so potential construction vibration impacts are also expected to be less for the No Action Alternative. 3.1.3.2.2 Landslides Based on the results of the site explorations and reconnaissance, there is a potential for landsliding of existing, steep, landslide-prone slopes. This can be triggered by a seismic event, an increase in pore water pressure from excessive rainfall or uncontrolled surface water, or construction that traverses or cuts into a steep slope. With the exception of the western limits of Evergreen Way SE, the site can be constructed without traversing landslide hazard areas. However, some roads and perhaps the northwest stormwater detention pond (near Boring B-1) might be built adjacent to landslide hazard areas. Alternative 700, Alternative 481 and the No Action Alternative are not expected to have substantnl impacts to soil geologic hazards, with the condition that sufficient engineering controls will be required to ensure that the development does not increase the potential for landsliding in those hazard areas. The impacts are anticipated to be roughly the same for Alternative 481 and Alternative 700. Impacts to the No Action Alternative are assumed to be similar to Alternatives 481 and 700, but may vary depending on specific construction plans for the No Action Alternative. 3.1.3.2.3 Seismicity The entire site may be subjected to earthquake shaking and should be considered to have a moderate to high seismic risk from shaking forces. Liquefaction, lateral spreading and fault rupture are not anticipated to impact the proposed development. 3.1.3.2.4 V olcanic and Coal Mine Hazards V olcanic hazards or existing coal mine hazards are not expected to adversely impact Alternative 700, Alternative 481 or the No Action Alternative. 3.1.3.3 MITIGATION MEASURES 3.1.3.3.1 Erosion, Grading and Vibrations The mitigation measures described below are appropriate for Alternatives 481 and 700. The applicant shall prepare an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) that should be followed during and after construction, and that provides for the interception and treatment of potential silt-laden runoff that could occur during clearing, grading, construction of infrastructure, and site stabilization. The ESCP should also provide measures to ensure that no silt-laden runoff leaves the construction site. The project ESCP will describe general requirements, soils and ground-cover protection measures, conveyance systems and sedimentation facilities. To the extent practical, the ESCP would be in accordance with the requirements of the Department of Ecology's Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. In addition, the City of Auburn's Design and Construction Standards manual outlines several measures to be implemented during earthwork and grading activities. The applicant will be responsible to implement those measures in their construction plans and on-site during construction activities. Following construction, the side slopes of embankments and cut slopes should be protected against erosion. As a minimum, side slopes should be jute matted and re-vegetated (i.e., hydro-seeded). 46 Disposal or re-use of the excavated soils as fill for this project will depend upon whether a number of factors such as the type of soil (coarse-grained or fine-grained) and its moisture content. These determinations require site-specific analysis, construction planning and sequencing and an economic evaluation. It is anticipated that a significant portion of the excavated soils will be reused as fill on the project and that several aggregate sources and disposal sites will be available for additional fill requirements and disposal of unsuitable materials, respectively. As a minimum, vibration mitigation should include a precondition survey of adjacent structures located within 100 feet of proposed work areas and a vibration monitorin g program. The purpose of the vibration monitoring program will be to establish the buffer distances required between vibration-sensitive structures and construction equipment such that the measured vibration levels are less than published threshold level; that can cause damage. If the initial vibration monitoring evaluation indicates vibration levels at vibration-sensitive structures is greater than the threshold level, additional mitigation measures will be implemented, such as increasing the buffer distance or using smaller construction equipment. 3.1.3.3.2 Landslides The mitigation measures described below are appropriate for Alternatives 481 and 700. Mitigation for construction in a landslide hazard area (west end of Evergreen Way) or adjacent to landslide hazard areas (portions of planned roads and possibly a detention pond in the northwest portion of the site) will need to be a primary design consideration. Mitigation could include use of retaining structures, enhanced drainage and/or setbacks to limit the potential for impacts of development proximate to the landslide hazard areas. Typically, buffers and building setbacks from the edges of landslide hazard areas are approximately 50 feet and 15 feet, respectively. However, specific recommended buffers and setbacks could be provided once the specific locations and designs of on-site structures are determined. Buffers and setbacks based on site specific studies and designs could be less (or more) than those indicated above. Other engineering controls (mitigation) include designing, constructing and maintaining features that limit uncontrolled surface water or groundwater flow in landslide hazard areas. In pond areas, it may be necessary to line the ponds so that infiltration of stormwater does not adversely impact the stability of adjacent slopes. New permanent cut and fill slopes should be designed and constructed using accepted standards of practice. With the exception of the main arterial roadway (extension of Evergreen Way SE), Alternative 700 could also be designed to avoid the designated landslide and seismic hazard areas identified on Figures 13 and 14. This would be consistent with the intent of the PUD to provide a more sensitive environmental design. 3.1.3.3.3 Seismicity There is a risk of earthquake induced shaking at the site, as with all sites in the Puget Sound region, and the intensity of the shaking could be severe. Where practical, construction activities in seismic hazard areas should be avoided. The impact of strong ground shaking can be mitigated by designing the proposed improvements in general accordance with the seismic provisions of the applicable edition of the building code at the time of design and construction. 3.1.3.4 UNA VOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMP ACTS The alteration of slopes greater than forty percent (40%) is a significant adverse impact but unavoidable for the construction of the Evergreen Way SE extension. 47 3.2 WATER RESOURCES The Water Resources section is based on the "Geologic, Hydrogeologic and Geotechnical Report" by GeoEngineers, Inc., dated 03/05/04, and the "Wetland Assessment" report by Raedeke Associates, Inc., dated March 2004, found in Technical Appendices A and D respectively. 3.2.1 SURFACE WATER 3.2.1.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT The site is located within Water Resources Inventory Area (WRIA) 10, the Puyallup- White watershed, which drains approximately 1,050 square miles in King and Pierce counties. Five wetlands (Wetlands A, B, C, D, and 1, located on Figures 6 and 7) and two unnamed intermittent streams have been identified in the western portion of the site. The headwaters of the two intermittent streams are located in the vicinity of Wetlands 1 and B, respectively (Figures 6 and 7). Surface water runoff from the western portion of the site flows into unnamed tributary number 0043, shown on Figure 15. Significant blockage of culverts beneath 49th Street SE (stream station 3+00) and Kersey Way (stream station 17+00) were observed during a September 2002 stream reconnaissance. After an approximate 3-foot high cascade from the culvert beneath Kersey Way, the unnamed tributary discharges into Bowman Creek near stream station 45+50. Surface water runoff from the eastern portion of the site flows through a culvert beneath Kersey Way, near stream station 14+00 of Bowman Creek (Figure 15). Significant erosion was observed near the outlet of this culvert. An approximate 15-foot wide erosional bowl with a 7.5 foot vertical drop was observed approximately 20 feet north and downstream of the culvert. This erosional feature appears to be progressing in an upstream direction, toward Kersey Way. As authorized by Chapter 90.48 of the Revised Code of Washington (90.48 RCW) (Water Pollution Control Act), Chapter 173-201A of the Washington Administrative Code (173-20IA WAC) (Water Quality Standardsfor Surface Waters of the State of Washington) has established water quality standards for surface water in Washington. Surface water quality criteria include; fecal coliform organisms, dissolved oxygen, total dissolved gas, temperature, pH, turbidity, toxic, radioactive or deleterious materials and aesthetic values. Specific concentrations or threshold values for these surface water quality criteria vary according to the classification of a specifc water body. Surface water body classifications include Class AA (extraordinary), Class A (excellent), Class B (good) and Class C (fair). Ecology has prepared a list, as specified by Section 303( d) of the federal Clean Water Act, which identifies impaired surface waters that do not meet the water quality standards specified by 173-201A WAC. The White River in the site vicinity and Bowman Creek are classified as Class A surface waters according to 173-201A WAC. There are five sites along the White River in Ecology's 303(d) list of impaired and threatened waterbodies, within a 2-mile radius of the site. The listed water quality parameters from these five sites are instream flow, pH and temperature. Impairment of these water quality parameters may adversely affect fish habitat. 3.2.1.2 SIGNIFICANT IMP ACTS The creation of impervious surfaces will cause a net increase in surface water runoff. Alternative 481 and Alternative 700 would add approximately 60 and 56 acres of impervious surfaces to the existing site, respectively. The potential impact of the No Action Alternative will be directly related to the amount of 48 'V w ~ HANNEL DISTANCE (FEET) I b \ . .'" L- ~I. Itures shown are approximate. 0 6( national purposes only. It is intended to assist in the identification of features I : document. Data were compiled from sources as listed in this figure. The data · fj(:J t h ~~ t) ~"t n f1 rQ "r'r"l' rn to" r rr"'\m nl ~t ~ Th~rt:l mr1\/ ht1\/p hA~n II n~ t1 t Q~ t tl t h ~ added impervious surfaces. Increases in surface water runoff have the potential to increase on-site erosion and increase the rate of off-site stream channel erosion. Increases in stormwater flow volumes would likely cause accelerated erosion along some portions of the stream banks of Bowman Creek and unnamed tributary 0043. Sediment deposition in the proposed stormwater detention ponds (under Alternatives 481 and 700) is expected to cause a reduction in the volume of sediment exiting the project site. This reduction in sediment could increase the erosive potential of streams by causing a sediment-starved condition (lower sediment concentrations when compared with existing conditions), and thus accelerate erosion downstream of the site. The potential reduction of sediment deposition is not considered to be significant because of the relatively small area of the site (approximately 170 acres) with respect to the Bowman Creek watershed (approximately 1,500 acres) . Construction activities such as clearing and grading will increase the potential for soil erosion, which may impact water quality if significant amounts of sediment are allowed to enter the surface water drainage system. 3.2.1.3 MITIGATION MEASURES Similar mitigation measures are expected for Alternatives 481 and 700. Mitigation measures for the No Action Alternative will be dependent upon its specific design. Runoff directed to stormwater detention ponds will be routed through pipes under Alternatives 481 and 700, and not through the natural open channels on site. The use of open channels to route stormwater is not feasible, given the steep slopes present on site. Use of pipes to convey stormwater will reduce the potential for erosion. Surface water discharge from the proposed stormwater detention ponds under Alternatives 481 and 700 will be designed to match 50 percent of the existing peak flow rate for the 2-year storm event under existing conditions. Discharge from the proposed ponds will also be designed to match (100 percent) the peak flow rates for the 10-year, 25-year and 100-year storm events under existing conditions. These restricted discharge rates will reduce the potential for increased stream channel erosion. Partial infiltration of stormwater to mitigate reductions in shallow groundwater flow (refer to the following Groundwater section) will also reduce some of the increased runoff caused by impervious surfaces. Additional mitigation measures regarding erosion by surface water runoff were presented in the Geologic Hazards section. The additional runoff created by the project that discharges to the off-site erosional feature observed at the outlet of the culvert beneath Kersey Way and near Bowman Creek (near stream station 14+00) should be mitigated concurrent with development of the proposed Kersey III project. This project's increased runoff has the potential to undermine Kersey Way. It is recommended that a supplemental evaluation of stream channel conditions along Bowman Creek in the vicinity of stream station 14+00 be completed during final design. Mitigation for the existing condition could consist of a properly designed and constructed energy dissipater, and stream channel and bank protection. Additional mitigation measures to prevent surface water quality degradation from soil erosion during construction activities have been defined under the "Erosion, Grading and Vibration" section (3.1.3.3.1). 50 3.2.1.4 UNA VOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMP ACTS No unavoidable significant adverse impacts to surface water are anticipated from Alternative 481, Alternative 700 or the No Action Alternative. 3.2.2 GROUNDWATER 3.2.2.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 3.2.2.1.1 Shallow Groundwater Localized zones of shallow groundwater were encountered in the western and eastern portions of the site, within Vashon-age glacial deposits in four (4) of the recent on-site borings (B-1 through B-4) and one test pit (TP-4). Three (3) test pits in the eastern portion of the site (SL-7, -15 and -25, located on Figures 9 and 16) completed during a previous on-site investigation also encountered shallow groundwater. Shallow lenses of wet soil were also encountered in the western portion of the site, in test pits TP -6, ECTP-2, ECTP-7 and ECTP-8. These shallow zones of groundwater were typically encountered at depths of 5 to 30 feet beneath ground surface, in 2- to 10- foot thick lenses of sand or silty sand that were underlain by sediments with low permeability. Mottled soils observed in five other recent test pits (TP-l, -3, -5, -10 and -17) and three test pits (ECTP-6, -7 and -13, located on Figure 9) from a previous investigation indicate that shallow groundwater also may be present at these locations during wetter periods of the year. The shallow groundwater zones encountered are perched on localized deposits of low permeability sediments. Groundwater flow within these shallow perched zones is expected to mimic the topography and travel in down-slope directions, as shown on Figure 16. Shallow groundwater in the western portion of the site flows toward Wetlands A, B, C, D and 1 (located on Figures 6 and 7). Shallow groundwater in the eastern portion of the site generally flows toward the north. A portion of shallow groundwater at the site is also expected to migrate downward and provide recharge to the deeper regional aquifers. 3.2.2.1.2 Regional Aquifers Based on existing studies of the area, the shallowest regional or laterally extensive aquifer beneath the site occurs within the Vashon advance outwash (Qva) sediments at an inferred elevation of approximately 300 to 350 feet. However, existing geologic maps, cross sections, and well logs in the site vicinity also indicate that the presence of the Qva aquifer is uncertain beneath the southern portion of the site and is absent beneath the northwestern portion of the site. The log of on-site test well TW -1 indicates that no water was encountered in Qva sediments during drilling. Figures 11 and 12 illustrate the inferred subsurface distribution of Qva sediments. Where present, groundwater within the Qva aquifer beneath the site is inferred to flow north, toward the White River. Existing geologic maps, cross sections and well logs in the site vicinity indicate that the Salmon Springs drift (Qss) aquifer is present beneath the entire site. Qss sediments are interpreted to be present directly beneath Qva sediments, or directly beneath Qvt sediments (where Qva is absent), as shown on Figures 11 and 12. The contact between Qva and Qss sediments is inferred between the approximate elevations of 280 and 320 feet. The log of on-site test well TW-l indicates that groundwater was encountered in Qss sediments between the approximate elevations of 260 and 21 7 feet during drilling, with a measured static water level elevation of about 304 feet. Groundwater within the Qss aquifer beneath the site is also inferred to flow north, toward the White River. 51 IJ- I -'f\ , , llr, 'j N I - 600 , , J I I , I : ~ "~I ,l EC 'i,% " , I I" . J . '~~ ~ " ",', ',< " ~ ' '~" 'I · "~"'" '" '.. . i I. I) \ , 1lGt'UO ,',' '" "', Tp..23 ~ ' " I '1[' " "~,, ",' I YTP-1S',.'"" ",m: ' " l 1(,,', ."?s~ Ii. / " 1m~' llal . " , ", ~. , , 'I TW 1 (.) .", "'," " ", SL- 7 [!] /'/ -r" ," I I ,( I \ j I ' ~ 1 -N ,. L \ i . . ...i ~ ' .. . . I -"'-1 t l~ I I 1 t~ f tWI:m C ~ _ _~~ ~_~.__ I 1 One additional aquifer, identified as the "Q(B)c" aquifer, is inferred to be present in the site vicinity, beneath Salmon Springs drift (Qss). The Q(B)c aquifer is located in an older sequence of pre-V ash on glacial and interglacial sediments. The bottom of the Qss aquifer (inferred elevation of 110 to 120 feet) and top of the underlying Q(B)c aquifer are inferred to be separated by approximately 50 feet of low- permeability sediments of the Puyallup Formation (Qpy). The Q(B)c aquifer is inferred to be about 60 to 70 feet thick, with a basal elevation of about 50 feet. The Q(B)c aquifer is inferred to be underlain by an additional sequence of low-permeability sediments until sedimentary bedrock is encountered at an inferred elevation of 1,000 feet. Bedrock in the site vicinity is not expected to be a significant source of groundwater because of its fine-grained and cemented nature. A review of records on file with the Washington State Department of Ecology identified two groundwater right certificates and one surface water right certificate within half a mile of the site. The two groundwater right certificates are held by the City of Auburn for wells located approximately 800 to 2,000 feet west of the site, located within the Lakeland Hills development. These wells extract water from the Salmon Springs drift (Qss) aquifer. The surface water right certificate is for an unnamed spring located about 600 to 2,600 feet north of the site used for domestic and irrigation purposes. 3.2.2.1.3 Water Budget A water budget evaluation was completed to estimate surface water runoff: evapotranspiration, recharge to groundwater, and shallow groundwater flow to wetlands at the site under existing conditions. The methodology and results of this evaluation are presented in the 03/05/04 report by GeoEngineers, Inc. (Technical Appendix A). Based on an average annual precipitation rate of 42.4 inches per year (in/yr), 20.4 in/yr are estimated to provide groundwater recharge under existing conditions. Existing average annual evapotranspiration is estimated to be 21.6 in/yr, or about 50 percent of precipitation. The remaining 0.4 in/yr is estimated to provide direct surface water runoff. Shallow groundwater flow to Wetlands A, B, C, D, and 1 is estimated to be approximately 4,400 cubic feet per day (cfd), or about 23 gallons per minute (gpm) under existing conditions, on an average annual basis. 3.2.2.1.4 Groundwater Quality A 1995 study of groundwater in southwestern King County concluded that there were no significant chemical differences in water quality among the Quaternary aquifers (which includes the Qva, Qss, and Q[B]c aquifers). Based on water quality data from 223 wells in southwestern King County, this study also concluded that there is no widespread degradation of groundwater quality. A comparison of water quality data from this 1995 study for wells completed in Quaternary aquifers with groundwater quality standards established by 173- 200 W AC indicates that all of the samples met the criteria for total dissolved solids, nitrate, heavy metals (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, selenium silver and zinc), and organic compounds (including benzene, bromoform, carbon tetrachloride, chloroform, ethylbenzene, methylene chloride, toluene, trichloroethylene and viny I chloride). Fecal coliform concentrations exceeded the established criterion in less than one percent of the samples. Iron and manganese were the only parameters that exceeded the established criteria at a significant frequency (greater than 10 percent of the samples). 53 3.2.2.2 SIGNIFICANT IMP ACTS The creation of impervious surfaces will cause a net reduction in groundwater recharge and shallow groundwater flow. Alternative 481 would introduce approximately 60 acres of impervious surfaces and could potentially reduce groundwater recharge to 16.1 in/yr on an average annual basis. This recharge rate is about 21 percent lower than estimated under existing conditions. As a result of this reduction in recharge, a similar reduction in shallow groundwater flow can be expected under Alternative 481. Alternative 700 would introduce approximately 56 acres of impervious surfaces. The impact to shallow groundwater flow under Alternative 700 would be similar, but slightly less than under Alternative 481. The No Action Alternative is expected to have a similar, but slightly smaller impact to groundwater recharge and shallow groundwater flow, in a direct relationship with the extent of introduced impervious surfaces. Installation of a sanitary sewer system within Kersey Way (an option under Alternatives 481 and 700) could alter shallow groundwater flow paths by diverting shallow groundwater toward permeable backfill material in the trench excavation for the sewer line. This potential alteration to shallow groundwater may reduce flow toward Bowman Creek. The potential reduction of groundwater recharge to regional aquifers is not considered to be significant because of the relatively small area of the site (less than 0.3 square mile) with respect to the Puyallup- White watershed (greater than 1,000 square miles). However, a reduction in shallow groundwater flow could adversely affect nearby wetlands. Potential impacts on groundwater quality include surface spills of fuels, lubricants, and other chemicals used illring construction and operation of the proposed development. Turbidity and suspended solids from construction activities generally do not affect groundwater. Near-surface sources of potential groundwater contaminants are less likely to affect the regional aquifers, which occur at greater depths and are typically overlain by one or more sequence of low permeability sediments. 3.2.2.3 MITIGATION MEASURES Mitigation measures recommended to address potential reductions in the quantity of shallow groundwater flow under each of the alternatives include partial infiltration of stormwater runoff generated on site. The water budget evaluation indicates that infiltration of runoff from approximately 3.44 acres of impervious surfaces from Alternative 481 could restore average annual shallow groundwater flow rates to Wetlands A, B, C, D and 1 to those calculated under existing conditions. Required impervious area runoff contributions for Alternative 700 would be approximately 6 percent less than under Alternative 481, because of the approximate 6 percent reduction in impervious areas (56-acres versus 60-acres). It is recommended that these infiltration trenches have a depth of 2 to 4 feet, and be placed near the upslope ends of the wetlands. Based on grain -size distribution data from shallow soil samples near the existing wetlands, a preliminary design infiltration rate of 1.0 inch per hour is estimated. This design infiltration rate is based on the ASTM Gradation Testing table (Table 7.2) presented in Ecology's Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. Based on the water budget evaluation, ideal impervious area runoff contributions for Alternative 481 should be approximately 2.03, 1.14, 0.13 and 0.14 acres for Wetlands A and 1 (combined), B, C and D, respectively. Mitigation measures recommended to address the potential diversion of shallow groundwater along the sewer system within Kersey Way (an option under Alternatives 481 and 700) include the installation of backfill seepage barriers. Seepage rnrriers installed at approximate 100- foot intervals would prevent 54 shallow groundwater from flowing along the trench of permeable backfill material, thus preventing the diversion of existing shallow groundwater flow paths. Specific design recommendations for the backfill seepage barriers are presented in Technical Appendix A. Mitigation measures recommended to address groundwater quality impacts include groundwater quality protection techniques such as construction best management practices, spill preventnn plans, and monitoring of any stormwater discharged to groundwater. 3.2.2.4 UNA VOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMP ACTS No unavoidable significant adverse impacts to groundwater are anticipated from Alternative 481, Alternative 700 or the No Action Alternative. 3.3 WILDLIFE AND HABITAT The Wildlife and Habitat section is based on the "Plants and Animals Assessment" prepared by Raedeke Associates, Inc., dated May 17,2004 as found in Appendix C, Volume 1 of the Technical Appendices. 3.3.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT Logging took place on the entire site around the 1930s. As shown on, Figure 17 "Existing Conditions Vegetation Cover Types" the site consists of upland (non-wetland) areas that encompass most of the site: grassland, shrubland, deciduous forest, coniferous forest and mixed deciduous/coniferous forest. Wildlife tracks and scat were observed on old logging roads in various habitats throughout the property. In addition, the site contains two small streams that flow northward through the western portnn of the project site and join near the north property boundary to form one channel and five small wetlands exist on the west portion of the property, three are associated with the on-site stream channels. There exist two separate types of deciduous forest on the property. One type of deciduous forest contains young (15-25 years old) stands of red alder, black cottonwood and bittercherry trees. The older deciduous forest contains the same trees as noted above in addition to big-leaf maple trees. Scattered western red cedar and Pacific dogwood also exist intermittently throughout these stands. Second or third growth conifer stands about 70 years old, consisting of Douglas fir, red alder and big -leaf maple trees, are scattered throughout the site. The shrub land on the property occurs within the powerline corridor and bisects the project, dividing it into east and west halves. The last major habitat represented on the property is grassland. A comprehensive list of the observed vegetation and understory plants identified on the project site is included in Appendix C to this document. One species of reptile, a garter snake, typical of Puget Sound lowland habitats was observed on the property . Several species of birds were observed. Observations of mammals, or indications of their presence, were made on site. A comprehensive list of the observed and expected species for the property is included in Appendix C to this document. Two water habitats, Bowman Creek and the White River exist off-site. There is no direct fish access to the project site and no fish species have been observed or documented on site or in the tributary stream to Bowman Creek. However, the on-site tributary stream (and wetlands) contributes seasonal surface water to Bowman Creek. Streams and their surrounding habitats, such as the on-site tributary, are an important 55 r ;:::::: c::i a:::.:::::a ----. .:::::I: ----- I-- .... r I-- LLI .. ::::>>.-:- 1]1 ~ !::: I.LA ::z: en -- LLI C C ~ a:I u:>> t- I-- ~ en ::::::!: ~ en ~ ::::t CJ ~ i:i:.!:! !:!:!.!:! LU ::::t ~ LU ~ lS en en C:C LU - c.,:) _ ~ >< ~ C):Z: LLI i== ca !:!::' ca r:t:: a=:: C) D:: C) :is !:!:!!:!:! :is~. C) ~ a..... LLI a3 ~ CD u: t-- u: C) c..;)::::>> C):::::>> :z:. ......... · C) CI:) LLI .. ... LLI i=:!.5 ifj..S! :Z:..S! LL. en t:::. u... ~ =- C) C)...-... I- LL. u:J c:. en ~ I-- LLI...... u.I ~ - - - - - LL.. LL. -a en ~ <C at:: I:!:!" ~ us==~ ~~ 9!~ ~ifj ~fd ~fd ~ gJ gJcs ~ 5 ~ ~g ~ C I-- .... I:: LU ELLIE ae:: u.I r:t::.::a IX ~ ~ ~ ,....... ui C) ~ c::I: . . . ~ Z5 c..;) ~ 0 ::=.::: -- ~ -- I-- c.:: 1--.::::3 ...... c:a -.:I ......, '-'..... LL.. .... ~ ..... c:> .... LU ~~ LU ~ LU ~ U:>>C> enLU enLU u:>> 5 5:>" CJ ~ ca Ii) $:I ~.. ~ ~ ~ ~ 8: 53 8: :3 ffi :3 ~ :3 ~ ~ fd fd:2 ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a.. i:l a ~ <C ~ c:C iif G:i iif -I iif -I c:tCJ CJ =c. :is c.,:) en ~ II ffi Ci:i I ~..: ... 1 :;; .- .- ~ I ~! ~ = · -== en 0 >-a IQI 0:::: If: I .. f " u..I en LL.. ... == -C""C E u ....... D.. D.. D.. '-' LL.. LL.. LL.. LL.. .... rI 'VI-LN3CISEI~ A.LISNElC '^^O-, ,--------_______________ - f . _< .---.~.-.~~.-.~----.-._~~ ~-- i I -,- . . ~' . . I I . . ~ . . ~ _ N~.~~-~-- - ! I ~/ - j i ~ ..... . . . . I I - . . . . I I . . . . I I . . . . ., I I ,,~ \L ,..---- -\\cp) , ~--~-----------------~-~~ / / ' j , : - ~,,_~ ~+".r ~ "'~'"--J~~.f _~/ .. I ;/,,0-' /~.," ,/ ",( ./ ;: / ~~~f . i. , : '1; /,//'~/. / f f / if I -I I -" f // f t-) ~E {.. ! <C · ~-} j >' ~/ /~.{ f - J ! f .i. if, { -l- . ~ t .,.r- .-,~ ~ 'i- ,,' ~ .........' - "- - - . :z: ~ t:::l en LLl a::: i!= __' en ::z u.I I:J I ~ I:~f~ '., ~ "- '. .-' I tj\t~l' . -~'"',. >j_~~: source of base flows as well as forage and shelter for a variety of wildlife species including birds, mammals, amphibians and reptiles. 3.3.2 SIGNIFICANT IMP ACTS The impacts described here apply to Alternatives 481 and 700. All alternatives considered in the DEIS involve urbanization. Urbanization is a process of habitat alteration that changes the characteristics of the plant communities and the habitat available for wildlife. The process of urbanization will affect the existing plant and animal communities in three ways: (1) direct changes in and loss of the habitats available; (2) increase in human use and disturbance associated with development; and (3) changes in the hydrologic characteristics of the site, with potential for impact to wetland communities (both plants and animals). Preparation of the site for development, including the clearing of existing vegetation and construction of impervious surfaces, has the potential to alter wetland vegetation communities due to changes in the volume and timing of surface water runoff that can affect seasonal water levels and fluctuation within the wetlands. Based on hydrologic modeling and analysis conducted by Apex Engineering (2003) and GeoEngineers (2003) for the Kersey III project and the proposed plan for wetland hydrology replenishment, the site would receive volumes of groundwater interflow and runoff after development that should maintain wetland hydrology. In general, impacts to wildlife include direct loss and alteration of existing native habitat and increased levels of human activity. Impacts also include short-term disturbance associated with clearing, grading and construction activities that can result in the loss of burrowing mammals, nestling birds and amphibians and displace the more mobile wildlife. Urbanization also may result in reduced nesting success and productivity due to competition from urban-adapted species, habitat fragmentation or increased exposure to edge environments. In addition, native species can be adversely impacted by domestic pets. Wildlife movements would be restricted to parts of the site that were undeveloped, such as the corridor of land underneath the BP A power lines. The creation of impervious surface within the Kersey III project site would likely cause an increase in stormwater flow volumes leaving the site, which would cause downstream channel and bank erosion within unnamed tributary 0043 and Bowman Creek. This could adversely affect stream habitat, such as loss of existing pool and riffle habitat, loss of stream bank vegetation and loss of spawning areas. Stream habitat loss could result in a reduction in usage by cutthroat trout and Coho salmon, which currently use portions of Bowman Creek. Most of these impacts also apply to the No Action Alternative because that alternative does constitute site development, but it would have different impervious surface and lot size requirements. The amount or configuration of retained open space cannot be determined, except that the primary wetland, stream and other sensitive areas with buffers are generally protected under City regulations. No single site-wide, coordinated system of roads would occur and with more piece-meal development, the number of road crossings would still fragment existing native habitat, however, not likely as great as under Alternatives 481 and 700. Reduction in local populations of forest-dwelling wildlife under this alternative could be less than the other alternatives if less total area is cleared. 3.3.3 MITIGATION MEASURES Direct impacts to wetlands and streams would be avoided under the proposed development alternatives. Buffers that meet or exceed the recommended minimum buffer of 50 feet for wetlands and streams would be established. See the Wetland Section 3.4 and Technical Appendix D for further discussion. In 57 addition, the wetlands and streams shall be protected through the granting of open space tracts to ensure long-term protection of these areas. Under the development alternatives, open space tracts of native forest would also encompass identified steep slopes. These would generally be contiguous with retained wetlands, stream, and buffers, as well as the BP A corridor, to form a complex of native habitats for wildlife that is also contiguous with native forest habitat off-site to the north, east, and south. These areas would provide nesting, feeding and resting areas for a variety of wildlife species, as well as avenues of movement to off-site habitats. Hydrologic changes to wetland have the potential to affect vegetation communities and wildlife use of these habitats. Potential hydrologic impacts to wetlands will be minimized by infiltration of rooftops and other treated runoff. The volume of water entering the wetlands during the spring and early summer shall be within 10 percent of the existing conditions, thus minimizing impacts to the plant communities in the wetlands. Measurements of hydrologic conditions in the wetlands after development would provide information necessary to determine if additional mitigation would be feasible and if it is necessary to adequately protect wetland hydrology. The site plans for the development alternatives will also be required to include the following mitigation measures for the site: . The open space tracts, including the BP A easement, remain contiguous with forested areas to the north, east and south, which would allow species to pass from east to west and north to south through native habitat. . Discourage the use of pesticides, herbicides and insecticides so as minimize impacts on native wildlife and vegetation, as well as water quality of downstream waters. . Attempt to minimize impervious surface coverage by leaving as much natural vegetation as feasible within development areas or use of vegetated swales or filter strips. Together with the stormwater management system, this will help keep excess stormwater flow to a minimum and help prevent erosion and sediment deposition in downstream watercourses, thus protecting their habitat functions. . Natural open space on the Kersey III site, aside from that encompassing sensitive areas and buffers, should include retention of snags or other defective live trees, where feasible and in consideration of safety concerns, to provide potential habitat for pileated woodpeckers, Vaux's swifts and other cavity nesters. Downed logs and other woody debris and forest duff could be retained in parts of the Kersey III site, where feasible, given safety or logistical considerations, to retain potential habitat for amphibians. . Additional stands of native forest habitat (e.g., 50 to 100 feet wide) should be provided in the proposed park tract or similar features alongside the BP A corridor to provide some forested cover for animal movements to off-site habitats to the south; in addition, open space tracts encompassing steep slope areas in the western part of the site could be extended to the south boundary to connect with existing forested stands off site to the south. See Figure 18. . Landscaping in common areas and residential lots will be required and will utilize native plant speCIes. Landscaping with native plant species, , especially providing trees and shrubs in the rear yards that provide ground cover for nesting birds, cover for small mammals, and feeding sites (such as where landscaped areas abut native growth areas) can help increase habitat values of otherwise altered landscapes. In addition, landscape and irrigation design concepts could include encouraging 58 KERSEY III CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON UNDEVE~OPED POTENTIAL WILDLIFE HABITA TCONNECTION FORESTED . ALTERNATIVE 700 Wetland C - _J \ I i \ \~ \" s I' , ~~\ ~\ I" ~ ::. ..'t.r' c;~.~, \ \ '(\ " ~ .' ~ .. =_o(',;.::,,~~;/;:..:~..,;~!\ \ \. I 1 V~\ \ \ ~ ~ ) . ,( (\ ~\' ~'\~' :>\\!!.n ~ "," j:~S KEY , ~Ih\~\~, ~~~ ~\ '; ',', , l) ::5~, i _11_ PROJECT SITE BOUNDARY ! '~\l~~)',,' ' r ;, tfJ EXISTING WETLANDS \ ,~~\l.~," A, \) : ~ r tff ~-, & RA, EDE, KE.IDENTIFIED WETLANDS (2002} II)' ':;,\' \K, , " ...;:: ~ 1\ V -.....' (Approximate locatlon) II r \ I . ~:., . 'IJ. 1\ ~/ ,\ z Ii 'I ! r ',I" -: ' (j f. ::::.:!/~ >- RAEDEKE.IDENTlFlED STREAM (2002) (Approximate location) - I" I \'1 . >>c ~i ~ ~ ;\,\' t 1,\\ ,J '~ \',' ,7 V ;~)~ '/ ' ~ ~:", , --..... ~ NATURAL OPEN SPACE ", \' I]'I'\~: /, '// ~--U- (f '. ~ POTENTIAL AVENUES OF MOVEMENT Ul I ' ~, IoN"" ~,<< It;;:r, , " ',f!' rtA FOR WILDLIFE ~ /!' : ,rFtl1 i~W ,\- ,;I~ - ~~:%~~~~ ~ ""';1- .' ,~ ' :.', r,)' ", <~~~.. :t f' " I, ~t-H 1+/11 ' I'~:I.; ,I, ~~'J r,r' ,,{J . ,~:~} / H U I ",~ -: I I, I,' , Q lJ.!J ij / I r /~: ti ~. ; .' Z I ' 'l!jjT I "!"o / 7 . I . , a ' ! ' 01/"11 { ';//-; '~ . I' j '/,~ , , ~ j' . J Ijtj( ,,' I 'HH! 'I '~d ' . ~I.l , :,"~ 'il 1 'II; . . 1 q I .:tl.(. i '/-/, \ 0, ~ . ~T 'f) /. . (, if t j I ,\1~~. '1'-11/ II, I 7% ' 'Of':: 'I ~ ."..,' :', .J Ii III 'ilk; I.({i ' 1x: t JI; ".~ ~ ~ ~ :0": ':'J Z, J . ,,~ ,: " ~,'t.'\ !:f'l i1 ,JTr l" \'" , 't-- 0 V'"t ~',:" I .t7' ,9'/', ' ' .'); ,\ i 111 I d ',.IF; H-,?l I \'\.., ~ ""~ Vi' '~.. I" .' i\\/ I 1 I' . '/, ft'l . . : \ P; "fl"JI tJ ~'"' \'. i~\>Jf I ;i l II 11 '17 '1'111~? 9 ~~i ;>'4 ~$&,~;f\;:; ,00-""" ~ , ,J ' '. . ' I II 1'!Jr. AA i / ~ ~/~a?:;\, \~(-2 ~> ..... t'.. .,' i . I '!\lli,' ~ H '19:' & ,',M. ~ j:,~~~ "; \;~ r ''-r. ~~"~ : l:~~' ~ ,~!7, 1'"lil "\'1, IT -' ~ J,l~ J 0 ..-:~ ~ x' 1/; I !\'.i~ll '~~11~ '1\. ' ~'- (I;':~ ~ ',,' "'-'" 7//' Y1 I I~ ~ \: 't\~ ~\~, ~ .1', .~ .~ 'I '" ~ ; ! -- ;,;;' , '" '( 'i I t'~U)( '1\'( Jj\ ~~" ~' 'I V- uf". \~ VI i,rr lJ :~ Gl .~, ~ ,t r\ ~ ~~I, J .. ,,)',!, I I J. '~'\' ~ .,. \i\~ :Jill ..V,-, ::::, c< " ~ \1 ~, , ,(~ W " r\ ~~' ~',\ t ~~! ~;i't' !\ I l'\\' - ~-ii-' ~ '=;j:! " / Z , I \ \{ , \,1;\: I' ~~~ ~ 1\.~. f;;~,;: ... 4 1-1 / 0t ',~~ WC/ . S ~ 'j t: ~;; '::;,-~ts?- T ~. ~ north ' \ ~\ .kr I~A\\ ,\,'~; I 7) '/ ~~ 'J~ (1 ~t1."" "1)' I r.- ~~~ ' ", ~', \,:b 1-.. , m I ~\ \ \~~\ j \,,:~2i\~i ~ I liil ~~~~~ ~ /1/ /.>';"-1\ \1\ I h., ,I ..i!: 1\1..1.':,' lilY., ',:~: '\'.' " '\ ,IL · W ~'- 400 \' '\\" 't,-\I(\\ j:; / '.. III i f.. , i} 'r'- "'., 'I \ S\ ':}- ~~ fI: _I \ ~I~" ': V1:'Y-\ ~ ~~~ ~ .. =r'- '- -, - ~ ~ I: '\ ., ;~" , I r I !Ol ' ' ", ~': ,~~~~ :2' 11: (;)!:}tl i'9;~~' ' /'?I :v~:\\ I ~. -.: ~ 7 i::.:' 1, :;\ ~ I;, (.,~~ \ , ~ ~, ' '~\\' ,'/" ~r.::r ",,7 1-1.,1 ! \ 1 ~:. ,~'>' \,,-' '-,$1[\).., ", . ~j r:l'~~": 7J'~' ...q ~:~~: '1 '7"7 ,/ \,' ~""" '"', '\..;f 0 ;% ~~ ~~ \ \j \ Z 1 ' Ii I'll I' ' '. ,,/ J ~ k;j-,'T ! · <"'I ,\, __ II.') ~ ~ f\'~ W" \'" \ ~ \' ~,~~r Vi j 'y ,} lil.,;>- .7:1 I / \ ' ,\:\. · ,-- i..... ~:' y, :?i'~ ~~~,~~i ~".,L... ,\ i})~ \ RAEDEKE ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 . ,,,S it iJ ~Ij ~'1 fi '~~rJ ~ ':- I ~~-'" "-"~..{ ~~'~ 'lit! ~ :; (\ ~, '~\~{ . ;' on ~~~ ~ ' " .. \\{\ :\:\. '. ..' '"" -'- 'kPry . j/) il \ ~'" i t'.., 'l~ J," ,.= '" ' 0 5711 NORTHEAST 63RO ST, SEATTlE, WA 98115 .. :,~l!~\~~~ ~. ~H1J1)i ~)'a " / ~ , / li~: ~\:2!/~\:' ~ y~~;}\V/! T t.., rrH ~\j'~ J 1206) 525.8122 f~ (206) 526-2880 ,~~ ,'J , JLl::':Z-:'.i ------4Lj LLC _ \\" \" " ~-....:_ _ .~~ ;;: "' ~ '........ -~, '~"""', -<<-. t LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL , RAEDEKE ASSOCIATES PROJECT: 2001-021-001 DA TE: 03-04-0.4 DRAWN BY; CJM Base information by Apex Engineers; file feb-Z001.dwg received 2/27/04, the use of water-conserving, low-volume irrigation and discouraging the use of exotic ornamental plantings. . The roads that are proposed across areas of native forest habitat (including the BP A corridor) should include bottomless (e.g., arch) culverts to allow passage of small, ground-dwelling animals. See Figure 18. . Interpretive or educational materials could be developed or made available in order to foster an understading and appreciation of the primary natural features of the property (e.g., functioning of wetlands and streams, stormwater management to minimize impacts to wetlands, wildlife habitat) and vicinity by future residents and visitors. Such an appreciation can help to limit unnecessary disturbance or destruction of native vegetation or wildlife. Materials could include signs or materials available from public agencies or local conservation groups. 3.3.4 UNA VOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMP ACTS Development of the site under any of the alternatives discussed above would result in the following unavoidable adverse impacts: . Loss of much of the existing native vegetation and soils and replacement by urban areas that include impervious surfaces. . Retained native habitats would be fragmented and/or isolated from other native habitat areas, thus reducing the value to wildlife. . A substantial reduction in the local populations of most native wildlife species on the site over time, due to loss of forest habitat, and a shift in species composition to favor species more adapted to residential and urban areas. Many of the animals that are displaced from the site to remaining on-site or adjacent off-site habitats would likely perish. . Some species of wildlife (e.g., large mammals that require large blocks of habitat) would likely be eliminated from the site. . An increase in the disturbance of the patches of native habitats retained on-site as a result of increased human activity. 3.4 WETLANDS AND STREAM CORRIDORS The information in this section is taken from the Wetland Assessment performed by Raedeke Associates, Inc., dated May 17, 2004, in Appendix D. 3.4.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3.4.1.1 NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (1988) National Wetland Inventory (NWI), Auburn Quadrangle map was examined to identify previously inventoried wetlands within or near the project area. Figure 19 depicts the NWI inventoried wetlands within the project area. 60 - . R~Osc. R306H t ~ . . !l iI H :t a. H .".- ii- - - -- a :~ e. "t:J s:: .g: ~ ~ ~ s: - . . . ... ,.... . -~~ -"'..._--- . U.S. Fish and Wildlife National Wetland Inventory (1988) map for the project area. See Table 2 for a key to the mapping symbols. ,. ~-~~.,"~ , fIGU~ 1~ The Auburn Quadrangle map shows several wetlands located within and adjacent to the subject property. These consist of a stream that is classified as riverine, upper perennial, unconsolidated bed, permanently flooded wetland (R3UBH) located in the western half of the property, and a second stream that is classified as a riverine, intermittent, streambed, seasonally flooded wetland (R4SBC) located in the eastern half of the property. The stream that is shown to be located in the eastern portion of the property was not found during a 2002 site investigation (see section 3.4.1.7.1 for further discussion). These two wetlands appear to drain northward to Bowman Creek, which is depicted as a riverine, upper perennial, unconsolidated bed, permanently flooded wetland (R3UBH) located north of the property on the north side of Kersey Way. Wetlands shown on the NWI are general in terms of location and extent, as they are determined primarily from aerial photographs. Thus, the number and area extent of existing wetlands located within the project area may differ from those marked on an NWI map. 3.4.1.2 NATIONAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION SERVICE MAPS According to the soil survey, soils of the study area consist of the moderately well- drained Alderwood soil series (Map Codes AgC, 6 to 15 percent slopes and AgD, 15 to 30 percent slopes). Alderwood soils are moderately well-drained over a hard pan below 1.5 to 3 feet. These soils formed under conifers in glacial deposits (till) on uplands. The elevation ranges from 100 to 800 feet. Although the mapped soils for the site are not hydric; they may contain un-mapped, smaller hydric inclusions such as the poorly- drained Norma, Bellingham, Tukwila and Shalcar hydric soils. 3.4.1.3 WASHINGTON DEP ARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (WDNR) FOREST PRACTICE BASE MAPS As shown in Figure 20, the Forest Practice Base Map (WDNR 2002; Figure 5; Table 3) indicates that two Type 5 streams flow through the property. The WDNR map indicated that one stream originates off-site to the south of the property, then flows northward through the western portion of the property to Bowman Creek, a WDNR Type 3 water, which is located off-site on the north side of Kersey Way. The other stream is depicted in the eastern portion of the property as a stream segment. This stream is depicted entirely within the project site and is not shown to flow to any other stream or wetland by the Forest Practice Base Map. The two mapped streams are depicted in the same general location as the streams that are shown in the USFWS NWI. Bowman Creek flows to the northwest generally along the east edge of the Kersey Way right-of-way to the White River, which is a WDNR Type 1 water located approximately 0.5 miles north of the property. 3.4.1.4 WDNR NATURAL HERITAGE INFORMATION SYSTEM Searches of the WDNR Natural Heritage Information System (WDNR 2003) did not reveal any documented occurrences of rare plants, high quality native wetlands, or high quality native plant communities in or within the vicinity of the project area, nor were any identified during our field surveys. See Appendix C for agency correspondence. 3.4.1.5 WDFW PRIORITY HABITATS AND SPECIES DATABASE A search was made of the WDFW PHS database and maps to determine if any endangered, threatened or sensitive wildlife species or critical habitats are known to exist on or in the vicinity of the project site. No documented habitats or use of the Kersey III site by any such species was found. Based on available habitat descriptions for endangered, threatened, and sensitive plants and animals species thought to occur in King County and our field surveys and experience in the Pacific Northwest, 62 _c ~,~ . FOREST PR,ACT I CE RESOURCE tv1 A P .. TOWNSHIP 2 1 NORTH. RANGE 05 EAST ( Vi . M . ) SECTION 32 APPLICATION #: \ I -I I }I I t I I , J I J .' I . ~ ~82oot EE j 38201J i i I ; t ; I I " . I ---- 1 / ."".. I - I :E EE J I 3806 3aOe~O .. I ! I SITE \ I l I (( EEl EB I EEl 8 Q tOO 2COO })OO 4 (XX) 5JJO ..... 0 e- ~, )1 t." '" l f" .... 1 ..'Ita. "'- ...... "'- '- '''' , ...... '- '- , "' j '""""' " '- '" '- " " " "\... '.. .... ~ I '"Q fEEf I Mle s::: ~ ~ t this ~:x disphYJ a,o\!tce infofil\ot:O/l tl)1" ,~o,~ on the map. bit ~s (oud ?i U'i;t this fa I' ee t i ,'~. r H j. r or"'l i.r e. 1 he ideali q d res..ree. eo. bel ~ o~.." h.lu. I UJ Q . AOU'I':7 Pain: .1(01""11 ~~".L~t. I :as ! nett. cl tcoiog: - lfsl GrGuld Wohr t 20& ~G'S-7000 Oote >>QP Cre~~ed: Vey 1> 200t ~ ! forest Frtciic:3 (ONR) fP Aler', Site (80~ /52 7-J305 ! IU.O 27 ~ I ~ I.. . . I . . l(GrN~. See I ns+ruc t ions ~ DISClAIWER: See l:qen<f ~ ! tdh~ dtfotlr:ar lOt tg,!tU t, ~f en:t: tf u(bop!. I ,... 9 .,.... ~ ~ Washington Department of Natural Resources (2002) Forest Practice Map for the project area. See Table 3 for a key to water types. ,.. __ c_ .- < FIG.Y~20 : none of these species would likely find adequate habitat conditions on the site, and are thus not likely to be present within the project site. 3.4.1.6 PREVIOUS WETLAND STUDIES DBM Consulting Engineers (2000a) and J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. conducted wetland assessments for the Kersey III project site. Four palustrine, forested (PFO) wetlands were identified within the western portion of the site. These are Wetland A (0.370 acres), Wetland B (0.490 acres), Wetland C (0.151 acres), and Wetland D (0.057 acres). Wetland B was found to include a small area dominated by emergent vegetation located at the north end of the wetland. 3.4.1.7 WETLAND AND STREAM DESCRIPTIONS Existing conditions of on-site wetlands and streams for the project alternatives are shown in Figure 17. 3.4.1.7.1 Streams Two unnamed streams were encountered during a 2002 site investigation. These streams have been labeled "A" and "B" for purposes of discussion, are intermittent and originate in the western PJrtion of the Kersey III project site. As shown in Figure 17 both Streams A and B flow northward to the northeast comer of the Division III. The headwaters of Stream A are located upstream of Wetland 1 approximately 200 feet south of the wetland. Wetla nd B forms the headwaters of Stream B. Stream B flows north from the north end of the wetland to join Stream A and become Stream AB. Stream AB flows northward for approximately 300 feet before leaving the project site. Stream AB flows northward from the project site through the ravine for approximately 1,200 feet to the south side of Kersey Way. Stream AB passes beneath Kersey Way through a concrete pipe and flows approximately 100 feet further to the north before reaching Bowman Creek. Water was present within Streams A, Band AB at the time of the May 2002 site investigations. Water was not present within anyon-site portion of the stream channels during the September 2002 site investigation; however, water was present within a 500-foot long segment of the off- site portion of Stream AB extending upstream from Bowman Creek. The location of Streams A and AB corresponds closely to the location of the R3UBH wetland shown in the USFWS (1988) NWI and also to the location of the Type 5 stream shown in the WDNR (2002) Forest Practices Base Map for the western portion of the property. Stream B appears to be un-mapped by either the USFWS (1988) NWI or the WDNR (2002) Forest Practices Base Maps. A topographic swale is located in the vicinity of the stream that is depicted in the eastern portion of the property by both the USFWS (1988) NWI and the WDNR (2002) Forest Practice Base Maps. A culvert beneath Kersey Way is located at the terminus of the swale. However, the swale was determined to not be a stream because water was absent and a stream channel was not present within the project site upslope from the culvert at the time of the 2002 site investigation. In addition there was not evidence of scouring, debris dams, sediment deposits, or other evidence of surface water flow observed. The culvert appears to capture flow from a roadside ditch located on the south side of Kersey Way rather than flow from the swale within the project site. 3.4.1.7.2 Wetlands The project site contains approximately 1.1 acres of wetlands (Figure 17) based on previous delineations (DBM 2000a) and the 2002 site investigations. Five wetlands, all of which occur within the western portion of the Division III area, comprise the total on-site wetland acreage. 64 The boundaries of Wetlands A, B, C and D were surveyed by DBM Consulting Engineers (2000a) at the time of their original delineation. The boundaries of Wetlands A and C, as adjusted during the 2002 field investigations, and another previously unidentified wetland (Wetland 1) have not been surveyed. Two of the on-site wetlands are isolated depressions (Wetlands C and D). The other three wetlands (Wetlands A, B, and 1) are associated with two intermittent streams (Stream A and Stream B) located within the western portion of the property. Wetland A Wetland A is a small, linear wetland fringing both sides of the Stream A channel in the eastern portion of Division III (Figure 17). The wetland is approximately 0.39 acres in size. Wetland A consists of a palustrine, forested, broad-leaved deciduous (PFO 1) vegetation class according to the USFWS wetland classification system. Wetland 1 Wetland 1 is located within the Stream A drainage approximately 150 feet upstream from Wetland A (Figure 17). The wetland is approximately 0.02 acres in size based on visual estimates made in the field by Raedeke Associates, Inc. staff. Wetland 1 consists of a palustrine, forested, broad-leaved deciduous (PFO 1) vegetation class according to the USFWS wetland classification system. Wetland B Wetland B is the largest on-site wetland at approximately 0.49 acres in size. The linear wetland is located within the Stream B drainage in the northwestern portion of the project site, approximately 300 feet northwest of Wetland A (Figure 17). Wetland B includes three vegetation classes; palustrine, forested, broad-leaved deciduous (PFO 1), palustrine, scrub-shrub, broad-leaved deciduous (PS S 1) and palustrine, emergent, persistent (PEMl) according to the USFWS wetland classification system. The majority of Wetland B consists of forest vegetation including red alder, salmonberry, stinging nettle and lady fern (DBM 2000a). Wetland C Wetland C is a small, isolated wetland located approximately 200 feet north of the northern portion of Wetland B (Figure 17). The wetland is approximately 0.20 acres in size. Wetland C consists of a palustrine, forested, broad-leaved deciduous (PFO 1) vegetation class according to the USFWS wetland classification system. The wetland is dominated by red alder trees and salmonberry (DBM 2000a). Wetland D Wetland D is a small, isolated wetland located approximately 500 feet southwest of Wetland A (Figure 17). The wetland is approximately 0.06 acres in size. The wetland consists of a palustrine, scrub shrub, broad-leaved decDuous vegetation class that is dominated by hardhack spirea, slough sedge, and skunk cabbage, with approximately 25 percent of the wetland area unvegetated due to the presence of deeply ponded water. Red alder trees that are rooted outside the wetland boundary overhang the wetland (DBM 2000a). The wetland receives water from groundwater seepage from the sides of the shallow depression that contains the wetland, as well as from sheet flow from the uplands. 65 Off-site Wetlands Associated with Stream AB A series of small off-site wetlands are located to the north of the project site within the bottom of the ravine that is associated with Stream AB, between the property and the south side of Kersey Way. All but one of these consists of small areas that were visually estimated to be less than 1,000 square feet in size at the time of our 2002 field investigations. The wetlands are dominated by salmonberry, vine maple, red elderberry, pig-a-back plant, and skunk cabbage overhung by red alder trees that are rooted within the upland sides of the ravine. Several other wetland areas ranging in size from less than 1,000 square feet in size to up to approximately 1 acre in size are located adjacent to Bowman Creek located on the north side of Kersey Way from the project site to the White River located approximately 0.5 miles to the north. Principal among these is an approximately l-acre, multiple vegetation class (emergent, scrub-shrub, and forested) wetland that is located approximately 1,500 downstream from the project site. 3.4.1.8 WETLAND FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT Wetlands A, B, and C were rated high for water quality improvement and overall habitat functions; moderate for flood/stormwater control, base flow/groundwater support, natural biological support, and specific habitat functions; and rated low for cultural/socioeconomic value. Wetland D was rated higher than the other wetlands for flood/stormwater control, base flow/groundwater support and water quality improvement (DBM 2000a). Wetland 1 was rated moderate for flood and storm water control, base flow/groundwater support, water quality improvement, natural biologic support, and specific habitat functions. The wetland was rated low for overall habitat functions and cultural/socioeconomic value. Overall, Wetland 1 provides the lowest level of functions and values for all five on-site wetlands. 3.4.2 SIGNIFICANT IMP ACTS Implementation of the proposed Kersey III Preliminary Plat, as proposed would develop a range of urban residential housing densities of 3 to 6 units per acre as well as native open space including sensitive area tracts. Commensurate roads, utilities and storm water facilities will be included in the site development and would be similar under both the 481 and 700 alternatives. The project will be developed in accordance with the City of Auburn zoning and subdivision ordinances. The plat may utilize the Planned Unit Development (PUD) ordinance in order to provide for multi family units. On-site storm facilities will include wet ponds for detention and water quality treatment. The proposal also requires the dedication of land for use as a public park. 3.4.2.1 DIRECT IMP ACTS No filling of the wetlands and streams is proposed under Alternatives 481 or 700. Stream crossings would occur as a result of insta llation of the sanitary sewer line under both the Kersey Way option and the lift station option; however, all crossings of streams would occur within the existing road prisms of Kersey Way, Oravetz Road and 49th Street SE and would not require the filling of wetlands or streams. By retaining the on-site wetlands, streams and their buffers in their native state within Sensitive Areas Tracts, development of the site, as proposed, would avoid direct alteration of any wetland or streams. Under the No Action Alternative, sensitive areas would continue to be protected under the City's sensitive areas regulations. Direct wetland impacts would have to be avoided or compensatory mitigation would have to be provided. 66 3.4.2.1.1 Hydrologic Impacts Overall, it is likely that hydrologic impacts of the 481 and 700 Alternatives will be similar due to the similarity of site design including location of roads, lot location and stormwater treatment. It is likely that the No Action Alternative would result in less hydrologic impacts to on-site wetlands than either Alternative 481 or 700 because of the lower residential density, less grading, less clearing and the creation of less impervious surface. While no direct impacts would occur to wetlands or streams as a result of activit ies anticipated to support the proposed development, activities such as the clearing of vegetation, grading, construction of impervious surfaces and stormwater collection and detention facilities would modify the surface hydrologic conditions of the site. This could cause indirect wetland impacts through modification of the on-site hydrologic conditions of the wetlands and/or streams. These changes could cause an increase in total surface water run-oft: concentration of water into surface channels, and increases in peak discharge ofa drainage basin during storms, as well as decreased recharge of near-surface groundwater (interflow). Changes to existing surface and subsurface flows could also affect hydrology within the wetlands. Sources of wetland hydrology include surface flow from the contributory basins and direct precipitation falling within the wetlands. In addition, a shallow layer of low permeability till underlies virtually the entire site and the wetlands generally act as discharge points of the shallow groundwater aquifer. Shallow groundwater flow to Wetlands A, B, C, D, and 1 is estimated to be approximately 23 gallons per minute under existing conditions, on an average annual basis (GeoEngineers 2004). Thus, under current conditions, the shallow groundwater interflow "perched" above the glacial till provides a major source of water to the wetlands. The on-site wetlands are highly susceptible to local changes in shallow subsurface interflow patterns that may result from the proposed plans because of the dependence on shallow groundwater interflow. The hydrologic effects of site development on wetlands, and their plant and animal communities depends on the magnitude of changes to their hydroperiod (the time of year, frequency, duration, and depth of inundation) as well as the amount of siltation, following development compared with the existing conditions. The potential susceptibility of a particular wetland to these changes depends on its size, topographic position, relation to surface and ground water sources and proximity to proposed development of different types. Impacts from surface water discharge from the proposed stormwater detention ponds will be limited due to compliance with the City's Storm Drainage Manual. The ponds will be designed to match 50 percent of the existing peak flow rate for the 2-year storm event under existing conditions for the 481 and 700 alternatives. Discharge from the proposed ponds will also be designed to match the peak flow rates for the 10-year, 25-year and 100-year storm events under existing conditions. Two primary detention/water quality ponds are proposed to be constructed within the site: one would be located west of Wetland C and would discharge into the ravine that contains Stream AB downstream of all on-site wetlands; the other would be constructed adjacent to Kersey Way in the vicinity of the BPA powerline easement and would discharge to a concrete culvert beneath Kersey Way located east of the intersection of Kersey Way with 49th Street SEe In addition to these two facilities, several smaller detention ponds would be constructed adjacent to the buffers of the on-site wetlands in order to detain rooftop runoff before discharge into the wetlands. The proposed stormwater management features could alter the volume and timing of water flowing to the wetlands. In addition to potential impacts resulting from alterations to surface water flow patterns and timing across the project site, the creation of impervious surfaces will likely cause a net reduction in groundwater recharge and shallow groundwater interflow to the wetlands and streams. Approximately 60 67 acres of new impervious surfaces within the project site would be created for the construction of Alternative 481. Slightly less new impervious surface (56 acres) would be created under Alternative 700. New impervious surfaces could potentially reduce groundwater recharge by about 21 percent compared with that estimated for existing conditions under Alternative 481 and would likely be similar, but slightly less under Alternative 700 (GeoEngineers 2004). Hydraulic Simulation Program Fortran computer modeling of existing and post-development was prepared for the overall hydrologic conditions of Wetlands A and B (see Appendix E - Average Monthly Volume Calculations Wetland Hydration) for Alternatives 481 and 700. Wetland 1 was included in the analysis for Wetland A because it was located within the same drainage as Wetland A. The computer models predict that there could be approximately 87 percent less water available to Wetland All and 78 percent less water available to Wetland B when shallow groundwater interflow and surface water inputs are considered together on a yearly basis. Computer models for Wetlands C and D were not generated. It is likely that similar reductions in hydrologic inputs could be experienced for these wetlands from the development of Alternative 700. Reduction of water volumes available to the on-site wetlands from development of the Alternative 481 likely would be slig htly greater than under Alternative 700 due to the greater area of proposed new impervious surface under Alternative 481. In general, changes to existing wetland plant and/or animal communities are considered unlikely to occur when the amount of hydrology available to a wetland on a yearly basis does not change more than 10 percent. However, in the case of the on-site wetlands, existing plant and/or animal communities are more likely to be adversely impacted by an increase/reduction in available water volume that would occur during the first half of the growing season (February through June) because this is the portion of the year when many native plant and wildlife species, particularly amphibians, are often most vulnerable to changes in available water volumes and corresponding water levels within the wetland. Thus, estimates of percent change of water volumes available to the wetlands during this portion of the year are a more valuable measure of potential impacts to the existing wetland communities than annual estimates. For Alternatives 481 and 700, it is estimated that approximately 8.4 acres of rooftop runoff, all of the available runoff from the up- gradient off-site sub-basin, all of the undisturbed on-site areas, and approximately 1.7 acres of backyard area adjacent to the wetlands would have to be infiltrated in order to maintain volumes of water available to Wetland All and Wetland B during February through June within 10 percent of the pre-development volumes (Apex Engineering 2003). The Conceptual Wetland Hydration Plan is shown in Figure 21. Under Alternative 700, water volume available to Wetland All during this part of the year would decrease by approximately 9 percent. From February through June, water volume to Wetland B would decrease ~ approximately 7 percent. Under Alternative 481, water volumes available to the wetlands would decrease by slightly more than under Alternative 700; however, these changes also would be 10 percent or less. Under the No Action Alternative, the 5 acre lot sizes should allow much of the water flowing to the wetland to continue to provide hydrology. The amount of impervious surfaces and thus the amount of surface runoff should be greatly reduced. Smaller detention ponds would be required due to the smalle r volume of runoff from project roads. 3.4.2.1.2 Erosion/Sedimentation and Water Quality Impacts Erosion/Sedimentation Impacts Clearing and grading activities associated with the proposed development would expose erodible soils on the site and increase surface run-off rates from storms when soils are saturated. In addition the installation of the sanitary sewer line using either the Kersey Way or Lift Station options have the 68 ~ I ...-- ........ I - -------r " JSSUMFIlON: . , · . - - ......... - ... ' - '- ......... . . t"'.fJMUr~ftW$ANU.m~YlmNDIIlW.\IDl.",,': r ',' · - - -,-.... - - - ~ ~ - - - - - --1 ~ ' I ' . ASSWE 0; w: ftISIm IlIA YttL . ~ 1ttNI)S' I ' ' ", · ~ (W $1E ftISIm JIA IlM1G mNm I ' ' . JSSUIf:,NfAS~IttNm..TO~, .'" t . ' ~ .,.~R.\mllNCRJXI_t\\LIC1MJt1mtOnErEI1NIS t r '~.. - -.M'_ -- _ _ .......'..' , " .' ' I .t AUltIlST _ CI ,11 e.w PRmTt II, tfJIf 10,'1)1 , " '. '. I I ' .. ..........,.. - ........... .. - --- " . I1WC)S , ' ' " "':' I 'MJ' " " " . , ~" 1SlU' cw . FtaStm J.9 WlL. TO I1VI$ , ,.' " J ~~SJTEfm1iD~'1l'.1OmlMDS " ' ", AlAE NfJS __ YI\1J.NIS 'ft( DPJIf TO I11NlB " , ",to __~._IJ.~CCtMBlOnE,,~~.,' I, . . I '," , '~'l1ITtOl11N&iHtItE:_tnom.~_4TO',o', r, . J, ' a b, ft'tWIJ 810 ~ l~. ~ (0) Nl) (o)NElCQ1ED ~nE ' " . , , I , I ~mat(fKlIOlJLIH)_ND._lrt1ll:atSJE 't' , " ,,' ~'smE>>, _10M: tEJalOOIf POHOS.'SU8, jj!8ASt$.(b) a (~1I:.,..I' " ,.' . , I', _ rt H ~ S1SrM IW<<) r&mLY TOT HE HW. mM)S ~ .... /, "A II) 8 & If1fIJJUNJ.Y IUIlD UIG K ~'KI,STSIJ) .. · " " .' &1" $OS _ AIH'" \fRIrADf, " " '" t" ;"" ' . , I '. ' , ' r . t:~C.'_'A~ClnE'MAS.rusm,""H'. '''' .:' I ' '-41mUmmp(H)llCW)lfnE"~I(f:1)I.a ~ . I, '. " "t.DILll8ttwTlG/Hnr.<f_frM--- >, -I "" "1 tftm ' ' " ~ ~ W.. f j J ~ ' I. ~ ' l_,twu._ftlStW*TtI.~p(..rM.InNfJ.A. . ' . I' I .. "" .'MUM IS fWQID m' A norSPRl'.llil1llAf .. _ · nt: _ ~ st.UIIC MD mea DR I1t* ,'. "" . " 7. 'n! IF mE . All TlI.stWI Nf) 1m WIDn't. UIS'kL,Lt ; C<<\lCIED If A ~ mat MJ fWTED n 11iE Cfi mE ~'m .. I " GRAPHIC SCALE I I" 0 ' 75 150 300 ~ ':1. 1 Inch = 150 fBsf . r .1 I I , . I ' ,. 'f, I , l: , I ' '., <, j' ,. , , , potential to create erosion and deliver sediments to off-site wetlands and streams including Bowman Creek and the White River. The potential for erosion delivery of sediments is greatest during the construction period and depends on the construction season, soil types, the amount of exposed soils, slopes, surface drainage patterns and mitigation measures. Sediment transport and deposition, particularly during construction, can adversely impact plant and animal communities of the wetlands by affecting water quality (increased turbidity, suspended and settleable solids, temperature, pollutants) which could adversely affect the suitability for various forms of vertebrate and invertebrate wildlife. Large areas of the on-site soils are classified as moderate to severe erosion hazard (GeoEngineers 2004). The majority of these areas will remain as native vegetation areas because they are located on steep slopes, reducing the potential for erosion and sedimentation impacts to the on-site wetlands. However, proper implementation of erosion and sedimentation control measures during md after construction would further limit the potential for erosion and sedimentation impacts to on-site wetlands. In addition, wetland buffers can be effective in sediment and pollutant removal and erosion control. In general, wetland buffers that have well-established vegetation cover, soil duff cover, favorable micro-topography and slope would aid in preventing introduction of substantial sediments from adjacent construction to wetlands. A 50-foot-wide buffer for Wetlands A, Wetland B, and the majority of Wetland C and 25-foot wide buffers for all on-site streams is proposed under the current application. Buffers for Wetlands A and B have well-established vegetation and favorable micro-topography and slope that would be likely to provide adequate protection from erosion/sediment and water quality impacts. Buffers for Wetland C or Wetland 1 are not shown on the current site plan; however, a 50 feet wide buffer was assumed for purposes of this analysis. Wetland C and Wetland 1 buffer characteristics are similar to those of Wetland A and Wetland B, and would be likely to provide adequate protection from erosion/sediment and water quality impacts. Therefore, in general, no substantial adverse sediment-delivered impacts to water quality of Wetlands A, B, C or 1 are expected with the application of a 50-foot buffer. The current site plans for Alternatives 481 and 700 provide a 25 foot buffer for Wetland D, the western extent of Wetland C and Streams A, B, and AB. Sediment-delivered impacts to water quality may occur if proposed buffers are less than 50 feet in width for these wetlands and streams. While the proposed buffers have well established vegetation, soil duff cover, and favorable micro-topography and slope, it is unlikely that they would afford sufficient protection to the wetland from sediment/erosion impacts due to their narrow width. Both the Kersey Way and Lift Station options for the sanitary sewer would require that the line be located within the road prism of approximately 2,500 feet along Kersey Way from the southern extent of the Kersey Way frontage to 49th Street SEe Under the lift station option, the sewer line would connect to the project site along 49th Street SEe This would cross Stream AB near the northeast comer of the Division III portion of the property. The Kersey Way option would extend the sewer line along Kersey Way to Oravetz Road and then along Oravetz Road for approximately 0.5 miles to connect with the existing sanitary sewer line for the Lakeland Hills lift station. This would cross Stream AB and Bowman Creek where they flow under Kersey Way and also would cross Bowman Creek a second time where it flows under Oravetz Road. Existing buffers between Bowman Creek and Kersey Way and between Oravetz Road and the White River may not be sufficient to prevent sediment delivered impacts to these water bodies. 70 Water Quality Impacts Some increases in sediment deposition would be expected in on-site wetland buffers and potentially the wetlands, particularly during construction. An increase in sediment deposition within the wetland has the potential to adversely affect some vegetation and associated wildlife in the wetlands. However, by providing adequate buffers and with the use of standard erosion and sediment control measures, most sediment generated is likely to be trapped locally within proposed detention ponds or settling basins (where appropriate) and at the outer edges of the buffers and will not reach the wetlands. Following construction, as the site is landscaped and less soil is exposed, much less sediment is typically generated and water quality impacts from sedimentation are often reduced compared to sedimentation levels immediately following land clearing and construction activities. Pollutants and nutrients generated from developed portions of the site after construction ("operational" impacts) could be discharged from the detention facility that collects runoff as part of the stormwater runoff and suspended solids and sediment load. If unmitigated, pollutants have the potential to accumulate in the downstream wetlands located off-site to the north within the Stream AB ravine and could potentially cause adverse impacts to habitat conditions for plants and animals. Inputs of runoff from urban development could cause changes in other water quality parameters, such as pH, conductivity, suspended solids and nutrients such as phosphorus and nitrogen. Direct runoff from maintained landscapes within yards adjacent to on-site streams and wetlands may carry fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides to the wetlands and streams. Introduction of these chemicals to on-site streams and wetlands could potentially have adverse impacts on plants and animals within these native vegetation communities. Herbicide and pesticide drift chring application can be an additional method of introduction of these chemicals to wetlands and streams and can have similar impacts. The potential for water quality impacts to wetlands and streams under Alternative 481 would likely be less than those under Alternative 700 because of lower residential density and less likelihood for introduction of fertilizers, pesticides or herbicides via surface runoff from adjacent yards or accidental overspray. Water quality impacts to wetlands and streams would likely be least under the No Action Alternative because of lower residential density, less clearing, and the creation of less impervious surfaces. 3.4.2.1.3 Buffer and Habitat Impacts Buffer Impacts Under both development alternatives, the wetlands and streams on the Kersey III site generally would be retained within native open space areas that include buffers for wetlands. In addition, Wetland A, Wetland 1 and Wetland B, are located in proposed native open space tracts that include set asides for steep slopes. The on-site native open space tracts are contiguous with off-site sensitive areas encompassed by Stream AB and its buffers and steep slopes associated with the Stream AB ravine. Linkage of these areas helps provide avenues of movement for wildlife among them and between the on- site and off-site habitats. The two smaller, isolated wetlands, Wetlands C and D and their buffers, are not contiguous with the larger native open space tracts. Thus, these two wetlands would not be linked to other wildlife habitats retained as native vegetation areas. Encroachments within the minimum 50-foot recommended buffers such as road or utility line crossings of wetlands or streams are not appropriate. As currently proposed under the 481 and 700 alternatives, encroachments within the 50-foot minimum buffer would occur in the following areas: (1) within the western portion of the buffer for Wetland C by the proposed location of western stormwater treatment facilities; (2) within the western portion of Wetland D by proposed home lots; and (3) within the northern 71 portion of Stream AB by the proposed location of lift station and sewer line under the lift station option. Construction activities and implementation of the proposed development would result in both short-term disturbances to wildlife inhabiting the wetlands and long-term disturbance from increased human activity (and associated increase in domestic pets) and clearing and conversion of adjoining areas to residential and recreational uses. Fragmentation of native habitat increases the risk of spread of invasive plant species, which could also adversely affect the habitat value of remaining native open space areas. Fragmentation also decreases the effectiveness of the area to provide higher quality, habitat, requiring mobile pedestrian species to enter the developed portion of the site for local migration between natural areas. Because of the uncertainty with the location of potential lots, roads and utilities under the No Action Alternative, it is difficult to predct the level of habitat impact relative to Alternatives 481 and 700. Required native growth open space encompassing the wetlands and their buffers would likely be similar under the No Action Alternative as long as direct impacts to wetlands and streams or their buffers did not occur. However, due to lower residential densities, effective wetland and stream buffers may be greater under the No Action Alternative due to the greater potential for retained native open space within the minimum 5-acre lots. Lower human density should reduce the potential for disturbance in the wetlands and associated buffers, compared with the development alternatives. Buffer Effectiveness Wetland buffers can provide a variety of functions to varying degrees, such as hydrolo gic and water quality functions (e.g., peak flow reduction, sediment, nutrient, and pollutant removal, maintenance of water temperatures), protection from human disturbance and vegetation and wildlife habitat (e.g., upland habitat, contribution of large woody debris). Buffer effectiveness is evaluated on the basis of protecting these wetland functions, but this effectiveness with respect to buffer width can vary in relation to a number of factors, including slope, vegetation and soil characteristics, the mture of adjoining land uses, disturbance history and geographic location. With respect to hydrologic and water quality functions, most of the water quality protection is provided within the first 50 to 100 feet of buffers. Relative protection for some functions is often determined by the characteristics of the buffer, such as vegetation density and structure, slope, and soil characteristics rather than width exclusively. Moreover, stormwater management and control facilities, as well as water quality treatment facilities, and best management practices for erosion and sediment control provide a primary means of protection of hydrologic and water quality functions of wetlands. Alternatives 481 and 700 provide habitat corridors formed by the larger wetland systems and their buffers that would be contiguous with adjoining native open space areas. In particular, the sensitive area tracts encompassing Wetlands A, 1, and B would connect to the large area of native forest within the Stream AB ravine located to the north of the project site. The width of the habitat corridors created by these sensitive areas and their respective buffers and native open space encompassed by steep slopes is consistent with overall widths of habitat corridors suggested to provide avenues of movement and dispersal of amphibians. Given the actual buffer widths on of these corridors, the well-developed forest buffers would continue to function as a source of snags and large woody debris. In the context of unavoidable impacts to wildlife habitat on site, including those species associated with wetland habitats, wetland and stream buffers that are a minimum of 50 feet in width would protect most wetland and stream functions on site. Native growth open space encompassing the wetlands and their buffers would total essentially the same acreage on both Alternatives 481 and 700. Proposed wetland and 72 stream buffer widths would also be the same. Lower lot density under Alternative 481 could decrease the potential for disturbance in the wetlands and associated buffers compared with Alternative 700. 3.4.2.2 MITIGATIONMEASURES City of Auburn requires that development of the site under any of the three alternatives avoid or minimize impacts to most of the regulated sensitive areas (e.g., wetlands and streams) and attempt to limit impacts to these native habitats by retaining them within open space tracts that include buffers of native vegetation. As noted previously, direct impacts (i.e., fill or excavation) to on-site wetlands would not occur under the development alternatives. Thus, 100 percent of the existing wetland acreage on both sites would be retained under the proposed development as currently defined. Buffers that meet or exceed the current recommended requirements for most on-site wetlands would be established within designated open space tracts encompassing a substantial area (18 percent) of the project site. While direct impacts are not currently proposed under either Alternative 400 or 700, preparation of detailed engineering plans for site development may show that the filling Wetland D and provision of compensatory mitigation for direct wetland impacts would be more practical or cost effective than extensive routing of roof runoff to maintain hydrology within the wetland at pre-development levels. In order to mitigate for potential hydrologic impacts, the project has been designed such that the volume of water reaching Wetlands A, B, C, D, and 1 and would be augmented by infiltration facilities located up-gradient of the wetlands in order to re-establish wetland hydrology to levels similar to those that existed prior to development. (See Figure 21, Wetland Hydrating Plan.) The City of Auburn has a stated overall goal of achieving no net loss of wetland functions and values (City of Auburn 1997). In the event future wetland fill is proposed, mitigation should provide that the original wetland functions and values be restored including, but not limited to, hydrologic and biologic functions. The Washington Department of Ecology (1998) recommended mitigation ratio for direct impacts to scrub-shrub wetlands at 2: 1 for wetland creation and restoration and 4: 1 for wetland enhancement on an acreage basis. In addition if wetland fill is determined to be necessary, a mitigation plan should be developed based upon available site plan information. The plan should present: (1) a grading and planting plan and construction specifications prepared in conjunction with a landscape architect; (2) a monitoring plan outline; (3) evaluation criteria and performance standards, and (4) a discussion of contingency plans and bonding. The preliminary plat shall incorporate design features to minimize the impacts to the wetlands and their buffers, including: . Route stormwater runoff from the proposed development through stormwater detention and water quality facilities prior to discharge to sensitive downstream areas (Stream AB), . Limit hydrologic impacts to all on-site wetlands by routing roof runoff and runoff from undeveloped portions of the on-site and off-site sub- basin to the wetlands to re-establish wetland hydrology to levels similar to those that existed prior to development. 73 . Use of stormwater detention ponds to control discharge rates from rooftops and undeveloped surfaces to the major wetlands to avoid substantial erosion impacts. . Provide minimum 50-foot native vegetation buffers for all on-site wetlands and streams. Compensatory mitigation would not be required if wetland loss or alteration is not proposed. However, if it is determined during final site plan design that the filling or other disturbance of wetlands and streams is necessary, then compensatory mitigation would be provided at the recommended ratios. . The applicant shall be required to define the limits of wetland buffers on all plan sets and mark said limits in the field prior to any clearing or construction activities on the project site to prevent inadvertent or unnecessary encroachment; . Energy dissipaters or flow dispersion facilities must be provided at outfalls for stormwater detentions/water quality treatment facilities; . Grading activities should be limited to the drier months of the year (e.g., April to October). Alternatively, the implementation of additional best management practices (BMP's) for any such activities during the wet-season shall be developed. . To ensure that unforeseen impacts do not impact future function, the applicant will be required to develop and implement a plan to monitor the hydrologic changes in onsite wetlands. At a minimum, the plan shall include the length of time for monitoring, performance standards and contingency plans if it is determined that on-site wetlands have been adversely impacted by changes in hydrology. . The northwestern stormwater facilities shall be placed outside the buffer for Wetland C. . The applicant shall ensure that the route all utilities are located outside wetland and stream buffers where possible. 3.4.3 UNA VOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMP ACTS No significant unavoidable adverse impacts to wetlands or streams are anticipated to result from Alternative 700 or Alternative 481. Development of the site, including clearing of native vegetation and construction of impervious surfaces, will change site recharge patterns and create greater surface runoff: which could result in some unavoidable changes to the hydrologic conditions in the wetlands. With mitigation measures, the primary hydrologic impacts to the wetlands can generally be limited to insignificant levels, as long as hydrologic changes are kept within acceptable limits as determined through hydrologic modeling. Some limited additional sediment deposition and associated water quality impacts from the proposed development areas are unavoidable, but can be kept to minimal levels through the use of stormwater detention/wetpond facilities and other erosion/sediment control measures. 74 3.5 LAND USE 3.5.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT Kersey III Preliminary Plat Site The Kersey III preliminary plat site is located in the southerly portion of the City of Auburn, generally between Kersey Way on the east and the Lakeland Hills development on the west. Kersey Way will provide access from the east and the existing Evergreen Way, which presently terminates at the site, would provide access from the west. The site constitutes approximately 170 acres. The site is currently undeveloped and is generally forested. Several wetlands have been found in the westerly-northwesterly portion of the site and drainage from the site generally follows a southwest to northeast pattern, consistent with the site's topography. The property is part of the watershed for Bowman Creek, located along the easterly side, which terminates in the White River. An existing power line easement runs north-south through the site just east of the center of the site. The City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan designates the site with two designations, as shown in Figure 22. The power line right-of-way is designated as "Open Space" and the remainder of the site is designated as "Single -Family Residentia I." The project site is currently zoned R-1, Single Family Residential. 3.5.2 SURROUNDING LAND USES Lakeland Hills Divisions 8~ 9 and 10 The existing Lakeland Hills Divisions 8, 9 and 10 are located to the west of the project site. These divisions are single-family subdivisions ranging in lot size from approximately 7,200 to 10,000 square feet. The Lakeland Hills area is within an adopted special plan area, "Lakeland Hills." The Lakeland Hills area is separated topographically from the project site by approximately 75 to 100 feet of relief between the development above and the Kersey III project area, although the two are contiguous. These relatively steep slopes are located uniformly along the Kersey III project site's west boundary. Evergreen Way SE currently terminates into the site at the westerly boundary and is proposed to continue into the site. Lakeland Hills Divisions 9 and 10 dedicated open space along their eastern limits, contiguous to the project site that serves as a permanent greenbelt, separating the lots developed in those Divisions from the project site. 2nd Street Community The King County/Pierce County line forms the Kersey III project's southern boundary. Immediately to the south of this county line is the ld Street East neighborhood comprised of single - family homes on large lots, generally accessed from 2nd Street East. This area is designated as "Moderate Density Single- Family" on the Pierce County Comprehensive Plan and is zoned Moderate Single-Family (MSF.) This area is designated as "Single-Family Residential" on the Auburn Comprehensive Plan and is located within the City of Auburn's Potential Annexation Area. Kersey W ay Corridor Kersey Way forms the northerly boundary of the easterly portion of the site. East of the corridor, existing homes on larger lots are located generally north/northeast, in proximity to the intersection of 53rd Street 75 j \ ~ \ t 1 11 Il' 'm't JAy t 3$ W '"I = ~ III j I"" I , t . ~....- 12&Y Dt I' e m - .. 0- m .. ., - ,-<NI> ~ C to i ~ i U I .- .. 1] i. ~ .., ,.... ~ c i~t E ~ ~ ~ - . m ~ 'tl E - .0 I .t: Ul~miOi! .J, ~ ~.. ~..U.. 0 ~o. ~m~~ ~1. -..I ' C ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~m~~omE tUIU~ E ec...oEEcUJ&Ul ~tn.cEo J'tl m ~ ~B ~~ ~ OU ~'C c~ Q.' IU .0 U 0' ~ 00 ~l.a~J: ~~M~u ' C .... m 4J c., .. c e m'C.cE~.c 1U~.c ~~ ~ 1- jco-2l mm~OCl~JD.' J ~~IIOZjICjID.Ol .c nn I III II ~ ~ ~ .. SE and Kersey Way. Further to the north, on the north side of Kersey Way, is an existing batch plant and sand and gravel operation. All parcels located proximate to and north of the project site on the west side of Kersey Way are zoned R-1, Single Family Residentialand are designated "Single-Family Residential" on the Auburn Comprehensive Plan land use map. The Kersey III project abuts several properties in the central portion of the site, which are not part of the project. In this area, there are two homes on larger parcels accessed from Kersey Way via 49th Street SEe North of the westerly portion of the site, the steep slope areas continue to the north and there are existing homes on larger lots in this area. These lots are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential and are designated "Single-Family Residential" on the Auburn Comprehensive Plan land use map. Kersey W ay East Directly to the east of the site and Kersey Way are large lots with single - family homes. This area is designated as "Rural Residential" on the Auburn Comprehensive Plan land use map. 3.5.3 CITY OF AUBURN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES The City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan was originally adopted in August 1986 and was amended to comply with Growth Management Act in April 1995 and further revised through December 2003. The Comprehensive Plan contains goals, objectives and policies, which have been developed to guide land use decisions and the use of natural resources within the City. The City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan is based on 22 goals; and several objectives and policies to support those goals that were developed as a result of an in response to a wide range of issues identified during the Plan's public involvement process. The full text of the applicable goals, objectives and policies are provided in Appendix K. The following is a summary analysis of the Comprehensive Plan in relation to the project. Applicable goals, discussion statements and policies from the Comprehensive Plan are identified followed by a discussion of the alternatives' consistency with those policies. Goals Goal 13 - City Utilities To protect the public health and safety by providing efficient and cost effective water, sanitary sewer, storm drainage and solid waste services to the community. Ensure that development will only occur if the urban services necessary to support the development will be available at the time of development. Discussion: Auburn will only permit development if adequate public facilities are or can be guaranteed to be available to support new development. Goal 16 - Transportation System Auburn will expand and improve its transportation system in cooperation and coordination with adjacent and regional jurisdictions to ensure concurrency and compliance with the Growth Management Act and to provide a safe and efficient multi- modal system that meets the community needs and facilitates the land use plan. Discussion: To ensure that new development does not outstrip the ability of the City's transportation system to serve it, Auburn will only permit development if adequate transportation facilities are or can be guaranteed to be available to support new development. 77 Goal 18 - Environmental and Natural Resources To maintain and promote a safe and healthy environment, preserve the quality of life and to protect the area's most unique sensitive and productive natural resources. To encourage natural resources industries within the City to operate in a manner, which enhances, rather than detracts from, the orderly development of the City. Discussion: Thick forest, wildlife habitats and river shorelines are some of the attractions of Auburn and its surrounding areas. As development occurs however, some of these features that serve to make the area attractive are being lost. Auburn is committed to the maintenance, enhancement and preservation of these features in recognition of the important role they play in Auburn and the region's high quality of life. Goal 19 - Hazards To minimize the risk from environmental and manmade hazards to present and future residents of the community. Discussion: Natural and manmade hazards exist in the Auburn area, which can affect the health, safety and property of Auburn residents and businesses. Some of these hazards include flooding, landslides, earthquakes, volcanic activity and waste materials. The City will seek to limit the exposure of the residents and business of this community to these hazards. Goal 21 - Parks., Recreation and Open Space To provide and maintain a comprehensive system of parks and open spaces that respond to the recreational, cultural, environmental and aesthetic needs and desires of City residents. Discussion: The availability of parks and open spaces to the residents of Auburn plays a key role in the residents' high quality of life. As more development occurs in this area, the importance of these places increases. Auburn is committed to expanding and maintaining the City's park and open space system to ensure that its residents are adequately served by this vital community service. Land Use Element Policies LV -14 - Residential densities in areas designated for single - family residential use shall be no greater than 6 units per acre in areas with good transit availability (a quarter mile or less to a route with at least half hour service), accessory dwelling units should be permitted to allow increased dens ities. Provisions in the accessory dwelling unit ordinance will limit the density increase permitted depending upon the zoning district. The bulk of the single - family residential communities should be developed at a density between 4 and 6 dwelling units per acre. LV-18 - Residential development should be related to the topography, circulation and other amenities as guided by the policies of this plan. LV-20 - The development of new neighborhoods shall be governed by the development standards, which allow some flexibility. Flexibility should be considered to encourage compact urban development to provide protection of critical areas and resource areas (including, but not limited to, agricultural resource areas, cultural resources, forest resource lands, mineral resource area, hillsides or wetlands.) and to facilitate non-motorized transportation. The City should implement mechanisms such as planned unit developments, which allow variations from normal development standards in exchange for enhanced design standards and environmental protection while maintaining consistency with this plan. 78 LU-25 - Areas abutting major arterials should be carefully planned to avoid potential conflict between the development of the arterial and single - family uses. Single - family uses in such areas should be platted in a manner in which orients units away from the arterial; however, non-motorized access between the residential area and the arterial should be provided. Where such orientation is not possible, a transitional area should be zoned for moderate density use. In areas with existing single - family developments, substantial flexibility can be permitted for street front buffering. LU-26 - Development design should utilize and preserve natural features, including, but not limited to, topography and stands of trees to separate incompatible land uses and densities. LU-27 - Development design should use open spaces, including parks, to separate incompatible uses. LU-3l - Multiple family developments should be located functionally convenient to the necessary supporting facilities, including utilities, arterials, parks, transit service, etc. LU-33 - Multiple family dwellings shall not be permitted as a matter of right in single -family residential districts, but should be permitted only where necessary to remove potential blight to buffer single - family uses from incompatible uses or activities or to allow effective use of vacant areas. Standards for such sites should provide for design review to ensure compatibility and provide that the density of the development is consistent with the density of adjacent single - family uses. LU-34 - Siting of moderate density units shall be encouraged as a buffer between single-family areas and more intense uses. Such buffering is appropriate along arterials where existing platting prevents effective lot layout for single - family units. Also, such buffering is appropriate between single - family areas and commercial and industrial uses. Where there are established single - family areas, the design and siting of moderate density units shall be controlled to reduce potential conflicts and to ensure buffering of uses. Higher density units are not to be considered such a buffer. LU-35 - Higher density developments or larger scale multi-family developments should be limited to residential areas where they can be developed as a unit with the necessary supporting facilities. Such development shall provide adequate access by developed arterials with minimal potential to generate traffic through single-family areas. Extensive buffering measures shall be required where such areas adjoin single - family residential areas. Care should be exercised to avoid creating barriers to pedestrian and bicycle movements. Where feasible, new multi- family developments should be planned in conjunction with single-family and moderate density development. LU-39d - Single-family detached residential neighborhoods should be protected from intrusion by nonresidential or multi-family uses. Discussion applicable to IDth Alternative 481 and Alternative 700: The development of 481 single- family units on 170 acres is generally consistent with the site's "Single Family Residential" Comprehensive Land Use Designation. 481 units would result in approximately 2.8 units per acre, slightly below the preferred density of 4-6 dwelling units per acre identified in LU-14. The development of 700 single -family units would result in approximately 4.2 units per acre, which would be consistent with the preferred density identified in L U -14. Both alternatives are capable of compliance with the City's sensitive areas ordinance. Both alternatives preserve wetland areas and leave much of the steep slope area along the westerly portion of the site as open space in compliance with LU-18 and LU-20. 79 Both alternatives are capable of designing the subdivision so that lots are oriented away from the arterial, and access is provided from adjacent internal streets, as preferred in LU-25. The application of the City's Planned Unit Development (PUD) criteria is specifically in compliance with LU-20, which encourage "flexibility in development standards and the utilization of planning unit developments in exchange for advanced design features and environmental protection while maintaining consistency with the plan." Division III proposes 18 multi- family lots, utilizing four-plex housing products under both alternatives, which is only permissible through an approved PUD. While the project is capable of meeting the 10,800- square-foot minimum bt size necessary for a four-plex, the location and orientation of the multi-family lots would conflict with the objective 7.5 and land use policies LU31- LU35 and LU39d. Capital Facilities Element Policies The Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan defines that: "The provision and sizing of a public facility such as streets or water and sewer lines can play a significant role in influencing the rate or time in a development and is an important means of managing growth..." (Auburn Comprehensive Plan, 2003, page 5-2) CF -1 - Lands designated for urban growth by this Plan shall have an urban level of essential public facilities (sewer, water, storm drainage, and park) prior to or concurrent with development. CF-2 - Development shall be allowed only when and where such development can be adequately served by essential public services (police and fire) without reducing level of service elsewhere. CF-3 - If adequate facilities are currently unavailable and public funds are not committed to provide such facilities, developers must provide such facilities at their own expense in order to develop. CF -12 - No new development shall be approved which is not supported by a minimum of facilities to support the development and which does not provide for a proportionate share of related system needs. CF-13 - The City of Auburn Comprehensive Water Plan is incorporated as an element of this Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Water Plan for the City of Auburn shall reflect the planned land uses and densities of this Comprehensive Plan. CF-16 - The City shall continue its policy requiring that water system extensions needed to serve new development shall be built prior to or simultaneously with such development, according to the size and configuration identified by the Comprehensive Water Plan as necessary to serve future planned development. CF -18 - The City shall continue to recognize the overall system impacts of new development under the City water system through the collection and appropriate use of system development charges of similar fees. CF-23 - The City shall continue its policy requiring that sewer system extensions needed to serve new developments shall be built prior to or simultaneous with such development according to size and configuration identified by the Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan and Comprehensive Plan as necessary to serve future plan development. Location and design of these facilities shall give full consideration to 80 the ease of operation and maintenance of these facilitie s by the City. The City shall continue to use, to the extent permitted by law, direct participation, LIDs, and payback agreements to assist in the financing of such oversized improvements. Whenever any form of City finance is involved in a sewer line extension, lines that promote a compact development pattern will be favored over lines traversing large undeveloped areas where future development plans are uncertain. CF-25 - The City shall continue to recognize the overall system impacts of new development upon the City's sewer system, through the collection and appropriate use of system development charges and similar fees. CF-27 - Within those designated urban density areas of the City and within the sanitary sewer utility's designated service area, sewage service should be provided by public sewers. CF-37 - The City shall required developers to construct storm drainage improvements directly serving the development including any necessary offsite improvements. CF-38 - The City shall require that offsite storm drainage improvements needed to serve new developments are built prior to or simultaneous with such developments according to the size and configuration identified by the Comprehensive Drainage Plan as necessary to serve future planned developments. The location and design of these facilities shall give full consideration to the ease of operation and maintenance of these facilities by the City. The City shall continue to use direct participation, LIDs, and payback agreements to assist in the financing of offsite improvements required to serve the development. CF-39 - The City shall recognize the overall system impacts of new development upon the City's drainage system through the collection of system development charges or similar fees to assist in the financing of new and oversized (e.g. regional) drainage improvements. CF -45 - The City shall promote policies, which seek to maintain the existing conveyance capacity of natural drainage courses. CF -52 - The City shall evaluate the feasibility and opportunity to improve the water quality of its existing discharges to the river systems to enhance water quality in response to the Endangered Species Act. CF-53 - The City shall seek to minimize impacts to the natural river system's hydrology by encouraging pretreatment of surface flows of new development and reintroduction of the groundwater where possible. Discussion applicable to both Alternative 481 and Alternative 700: Alternatives 481 and 700 both include the option of extending water from a future booster station at Kersey Way and the White River south on Kersey Way to and within the Kersey III site. This proposed system would be consistent with the Comprehensive Water Plan and the size and configuration of the waterline would be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Water Plan. Both Alternatives could also provide for the extension of the water utility from East Valley Highway with a booster pump augmentation and through the existing water system in the Lakeland Hills development. Impacts on the water utility would be balanced by the payment of the applicable system development charges. Alternatives 481 and 700 both incorporate the option of providing sewer service from the Kersey III site to an existing connection in Oravetz Road to the north. This alternative is consistent with the City of Auburn Comprehensive Sewer Plan and the applicable policies. 81 The development and operation of an interim pump station at the southerly end of the Kersey III site that pumps southerly back through the site and connects to an existing sanitary sewer system in Evergreen Way within the Lakeland Hills development, is also a consideration of Alternative 481. The City has determined that the pump station would not require an amendment to the Comprehensive Sewer Plan if the pump station were provided on an interim basis only. The development would still have a requirement to participate in the extension of sewer in Kersey Way consistent with the Comprehensive Sewer Plan. Both alternatives would install sanitary sewer systems prior to or simultaneous with the development of the Kersey III site and pipes and configuration would be consistent with Comprehensive Sewer Plan requirements. The sewer service for the Kersey III site would be by public sewer and overall system impacts would be balanced by the payment of the applicable system development charges. Both alternatives propose the collection, conveyance, storage and discharge of storm drainage in an environmentally responsible manner. The applicant will be required to construct the storm drainage improvements directly serving the development including necessary offsite improvements. The City will also require the offsite storm drainage improvements be installed prior to or simultaneous with new development. The City will also recognize the overall system impacts of the development on the City's drainage system through the collection of appropriate charges or fees. The City requires analysis of the downstream natural drainage courses and utilization of water quality and water quantity storm drainage design criteria. The project and proposed storm drainage improvements have been analyzed to ensure compliance with City environmental policies in this EIS. It is anticipated the existing conveyance capacity of existing natural drainage courses will not be impacted if properly mitigated. The project site is not capable of providing a stormwater runoff infiltration system. The evaluation of onsite soils by GeoEngineers determined that the soils would not be suitable for infiltration of stormwater (See Appendix A). Minimization of impacts to the natural river system's hydrology can be achieved by encouraging pretreatment of surface flows of new development. The City's Storm Drainage Manual will require the Best Management Practices for the development of stormwater treatment and detention facilities, which would incorporate Best Management Practices for the pretreatment of surface flows. Transportation Element Policies TR-13 - Efficient transportation system seeks to spread vehicle movements over a series of planned streets. The goal of the system is to encourage conductivity while preventing unacceptably high traffic volumes on anyone street. B. Accessing new development 1. The internal local residential street network for a subdivision should be designed to discourage regional through traffic and nonresidential traffic from penetrating the subdivision or adjacent subdivisions. Local residential streets shall not exceed 1,300 feet in length between intersections and shall not serve more than 75 dwelling units. 2. Where possible, streets will be planned, designed and constructed to connect to future development. 3. Dead end streets shall not be more than 600 feet in length. Dead end streets ending in permanent cul-de-sacs shall serve a maximum of 25 dwelling units. 82 4. Residential developments should be planned in a manner that minimizes the number of local street accesses to arterials and collector arterials. Residential developments with greater than 75 dwelling units, including single - family developments, multi- family developments or any combination thereot: shall have a minimum of 2 accesses to either a collector arterial or an arterial. C. Access to existing areas: To promote efficient connectivity between areas of the community, existing stub end streets shall be linked to other streets in new development whenever the opportunity arises. D. Acceptable traffic volumes: Projected trip generation shall be calculated based on the current edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual. TR-21 - The City shall continue to require developers of new developments to construct transportation systems that serve their developments. The City shall also explore ways for new developments to encourage vanpooling, carpooling, public transit use and other alternatives to single -occupancy vehicle (SOV) travel. TR-43 - Sidewalks/trails and other walking facilities should be extended throughout the City to allow for more convenient and efficient pedestrian movement. TR -44 - City street standards shall generally provide for sidewalks on both sides of the street. TR-45 - The City shall encourage sub-dividers of new plats to include pedestrian trails in new plats which link the development to nearby activity centers such as schools, parks and neighborhood shopping. TR-61 - The City shall consider the impact of road construction on the environment and natural resources (particularly on sensitive areas, wildlife habitats and water quality) as part of its environmental review process. Discussion applicable to both Alternative 481 and Alternative 700: The City of Auburn requires the extension of Evergreen Way easterly to Kersey Way so that the proposal can be developed in accordance with the Comprehensive Transportation Plan and Comprehensive Plan policies. The arterial corridor is capable of being designed so that no residential lots have direct access to the street itself. The Kersey III development will provide pedestrian links both within and to external sidewalk systems to provide for convenient and efficient pedestrian movement and for connection to nearby activity centers. The proposal will need to implement a circulation plan that provides access within and between divisions that does not rely on the sidewalk. The utilization of the PUD criteria for the development requires a more advanced pedestrian system beyond the traditional sidewalks. Additional consideration is needed to construct an internal transportation network in accordance with City policy and Title 17, related to subdivisions. The road system has not yet been designed in accordance with the City policies related to block length, the maximum number of lots served by a single access points or opportunities to coordinate access for better regional circulation. Environmental Element Policies EN-3 - The City shall seek to minimize degradation to surface water quality and aquatic habitat of creeks, streams, rivers, ponds, lakes and other water bodies; to preserve and enhance the suitability of such water bodies for contact recreation and fishing and to preserve and enhance the aesthetic qualities of such 83 waters by requiring the use of the current Best Management Practices for control of stormwater and non- point runoff. EN -4 - The City will regulate any stormwater discharges to creeks, streams, rivers, ponds, lakes and other water bodies with the goal of no degradation of the water quality or habitat of the receiving waters and, where feasible, seek opportunity to enhance the water quality and habitat of receiving waters. EN-6 - Where possible, streams and riverbanks shall be kept in a natural condition and degraded stream banks shall be enhanced or restored. EN-IO - The City's design standards shall ensure that post-development peak stormwater runoff does not exceed the pre-development rates. EN-I3 - The City shall consider the impact of new development on water quality as part of the environmental review process and require any appropriate mitigation measures. Impacts on fish resources shall be a priority concern on such reviews. EN-I4 - The City shall require the use of Best Management Practices to enhance and protect water quality as dictated by the City's design and construction standards and the Washington State Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin. EN -16 - The City recognizes the value and efficiency of utilizing existing natural systems (e.g. wetlands) for stormwater conveyance and storage; however, these natural systems can be severely impacted or destroyed by the uncontrolled release of contaminated stormwater. Prior to utilizing natural systems for storm drainage purposes, the City should carefully consider the potential for adverse impacts to the environmental review process. Important natural systems should not be used for storm drainage storage or conveyance unless it can be demonstrated that adverse impacts can be adequately mitigated to a less than significant level. EN -17 - The City recognizes that stormwater treatment facilities do not function efficiently unless maintained. The City shall strive to ensure that public and private stormwater collection detention and treatment systems are properly maintained and functioning as designed. EN-23 - The City shall seek to protect any unique, rare or endangered species of plants and animals in the City by preventing the indiscriminate and unnecessary removal of trees and ground cover by promoting the design and development of landscaped areas, which provide food and cover for wildlife and by protecting and enhancing the quality of aquatic habitat. EN-24 - The City shall consider the impacts of new development on the quality of land, known or suspected fish or wildlife habitats and vegetative resources as part of its environmenta I review process and require any appropriate mitigation measures. Such mitigation may involve the retention of significant habitats and the use of native landscape vegetation. EN-25 - The City recognizes the important biological and hydrological roles that wetlands play in providing plant and animal habitat, protecting water quality, reducing the need for man-made flood and storm drainage systems, maintaining water quality, and in providing recreational. Open space, educational and cultural opportunities. The City will consider these roles and functions in all new development. EN-26 - The City recognizes that wetlands provide varying degrees of biological and hydrological functions and values to the community depending on the size, complexity and location of the individual 84 system, and that the overall degree of functions and values should be considered when reviewing proposals which impact wetlands. In a similar manner, the levels of protection afforded to a wetland shall be consistent with its existing function and values. The City shall continue to promote policies and practices of enhancing the wetlands that are hydraulically connected to the river systems to improve fish resources and aquatic habitat. EN-27 - The City shall consider the impacts of new development on the quality of wetland resources as part of its environmental review process and shall require appropriate mitigation and monitoring measures of important wetland areas. Such mitigation may involve conservation, enhancement, restoration or replacement of important wetlands and provisions for appropriate buffering. The goal of the mitigation should be no net loss of wetlands functions and values. A permanent deed restriction shall be placed on any wetlands created or enhanced to ensure that they are preserved in perpetuity. EN-28 - Wetlands which are associated with a river or stream, or provide significant plant and animal habitat opportunities are recognized by the City as the most important wetland systems, and shall receive the highest degree of protection and mitigation through conservation, enhancement or relocation measures. Wetlands which are limited in size are isolated from major hydrological systems or provide limited hydrological or plant and animal habitat opportunities may be considered by the City for development and displacement in conjunction with appropriate mitigation. EN-32 - The City shall discourage unnecessary disturbance of natural vegetation in new development. EN-66 - The City shall seek to ensure that the land not be developed or otherwise modified in a manner which will result in or significantly increase the potential for slope slippage, landslide, subsidence or substantial soil erosion. The City's development standards shall dictate the use of Best Management Practices to minimize the potential for these problems. EN-68 - The City shall consider the impacts of new development on hazards associated with soils and subsurface drainage as part of its environmental review process and require any appropriate mitigation measures. EN - 72 - The City will require that a geotechnical report prepared by professional engineer licensed by the State of Washington with expertise in geotechnical engineering be submitted for all significant activities proposed within Class 1 and Class 3 landslide hazard areas. The City shall develop administrative guidelines, which identify the procedures and information required for the geotechnical reports. EN-73 - New developments within Class 1 and Class 3 landslide hazard areas shall re designated and located to minimize site disturbance and removal of vegetation and to maintain the natural topographic character of the site. Clustering of structures, minimizing building footprints and maintaining trees and other natural vegetation shan be considered. EN-84 - The City shall seek to minimize surface water quality and aquatic habitat degradation of creeks, streams, rivers, ponds, lakes and other water bodies to preserve and enhance the suitability of such water bodies as habitat for restoration of endangered species. Discussion applicable to both Alternative 481 and Alternative 700: The application of Best Management Practices and design requirements as defined by the City of Design and Construction Standards Manual, the review and asse ssment of stormwater designs on downstream wetlands, drainage corridor and streams as well as the analysis of impacts of new development on water quality have been identified in determining the appropriate project mitigation measures. 85 Fish and wildlife habitat impacts are discussed in more detail elsewhere in this DEIS. In summary, while the site is not known to have any unique, rare or endangered species, stormwater exits the site through existing drainage channels and will enter Bowman Creek, which is a salmon-bearing stream. The analysis of stormwater impacts to Bowman Creek and mitigation measures to address these impacts have been analyzed in this DEIS. The project alternatives are capable of being designed to maintain the existing onsite wetlands and proposed buffers as required by City regulations. In addition, opportunity exists to incorporate large open space vegetated areas and steep slopes within the project. Parks, Recreation and Open Space Element Policies PR-2 - New development shall contribute to the development of new parks at a level commensurate with their share of new facility needs as established by the Parks and Recreation Plan. If the City determines that the development does not include an acceptable park site, the City shall require the payment of cash in lieu of land. PR-4 - The City shall evaluate the impacts of new development on park and recreation resources through the SEP A environmental review process and shall take appropriate steps to mitigate significant adverse impacts. PR-7 - The City shall seek to retain as open space those areas having a unique combination of open space values, including: separation or buffering between incompatible land uses; visual delineation of the City or a distinct area or neighborhood of the City; unusually productive wildlife habitat; wetlands; floodwater or stormwater storage; stormwater purification; recreational value; historic or cultural value; aesthetic value; and educational value. PR-8 - The City shall seek to attain as open space areas where the soils have been identified as having severe or very severe erosion potential, landslide hazard or seismic hazard. PR-12 - Development within areas designated for open space uses shall, in general, be non-intensive in character. Development shall be designed and sited in a manner that minimizes or mitigates disruption of the most important open space values of the site. Appropriate uses within designated open space areas may include, but not necessarily be limited to: parks and other recreational facilities; agriculture; stormwater storage; and watershed. It is recognized that designating private property for open space uses does not establish or promote any public access rights to such property. Discussion applicable to both Alternative 481 and Alternative 700: The proposed project under Alternative 481 or Alternative 700 will require mitigation for park areas based on the City's park mitigation formula. In addition, the proposed project under both alternatives will also set aside open space areas for slope and wetland sensitive areas. The slopes along the easterly portion of the site and south of the wetland complex will be maintained in open space as well as the steeper slope areas along Kersey Way. A system of wetlands in Divisnn III will also be preserved and retained in open space. Other open space areas within the site include the power line corridor that runs north/south through the central portion of the site. 86 3.5.4 CITY OF AUBURN SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT The extension of water and sewer in Kersey Way will require review under the City of Auburn Shoreline Master Program and the issuance of a Shoreline Substantial Development permit. The water line will need to cross the White River where the sewer line will be installed in or parallel to Oravetz Road and most likely within the shoreline jurisdiction of the plan. The Shoreline Designation for this portion of the White River is "Urban." 3.5.5 CITY OF AUBURN ZONING ORDINANCE The purpose of the City of Auburn Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance is: . To implement the Comprehensive Plan (ACC 18.02.020.A). . Facilitate adequate provisions of utilities, schools, parks and housing with essential light, air, privacy and open space; to lessen congestion on streets and facilitate the safe movement of traffic thereon; to stabilize and enhance property values; to prevent the overcrowding of land; to facilitate adequate provisions for doing public and private business and thereby safeguard the community's economic structure on which the prosperity and welfare of all depends and through such achievements help ensure the safety and security of home life, fosters good citizenship, creating and preserving more helpful, serviceable and attractive municipality and environment in which to live (ACC 18.02.020.B). . Define the character for each zone and its particular suitability for specific uses (ACC 18.02.020.C). The Kersey III development site is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential District. The intent of the R-1, Single Family Residential Zone is " . . . to create a living environment of optimum standards for single - family dwellings. It is further intended to limit development to relatively low degrees of density. This district will provide for a development of single - family detached dwellings, not more than one dwelling on each lot, and for such accessory uses as are related, incidental, and not detrimental to the residential environment (ACC 18.12.010) Briefly, the purpose of the PUD district (ACC 18.69.010) is: " . .. to offer enhanced flexibility to develop a site through innovative and alternative development standards. A PUD district also allows for a greater range of residential development scenarios, provides for internal transfers of density, and may result in more dwelling units than may be realized by using the existing development standards. In exchange for this enhanced flexibility, the City will require the PUD to result in a significantly higher quality development, generate more public benefit and be a more sensitive proposal than would have been the case with the use of standard zoning or subdivision procedures. In order for a PUD to be approved it will be the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate, to the City's satisfaction, that the proposed PUD achieves or is 87 consistent with the following desired public benefits and expectations in whole or in part" Preservation of Natural Amenities: Pedestrian Oriented Communities: Land Use Efficiencies: Improved Transitional Areas: Implementation of the Comprehensive Plan: Enhanced Design Features: Creation of Public Amenities: Affordable Housing: Discussion applicable to both Alternative 481 and Alternative 700: The project site's geography and topography lends itself to use of the City's Planned Unit Development criteria associated with larger developments. While the site can be designed to accommodate a subdivision utilizing the traditional zoning district and development standards (of the R-1, Single Family Residential zone), the level of mitigation under either scenario is likely to be similar. The PUD criteria offer a better opportunity with greater flexibility to provide a subdivision that meets the needs of the applicant and is designed in the best interest of existing and future residents of the City of Auburn. No Action Alternative The No Action Alternative is capable of compliance with all applicable policies and regulations. 3.5.6 MITIGATION MEASURES Compliance with adopted City of Auburn policies and development regulations is a requirement of all projects within the City. The City cannot approve proposals that are not in accordance with all applicable regulations and as such, no mitigation measures are necessary. 3.5.7 UNA VOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMP ACTS No significant unavoidable adverse impacts to land use will result from the implementation of either Alternative 481 or Alternative 700. 3.6 TRANSPORTATION The transportation section is based on the "Kersey III Residential Subdivision Transportation Impact Analysis" by Transportation Solutions Inc. (TSI), dated "March 2004" which is attached to the DEIS as Technical Appendix F. 3.6.1 EXISTING ROADW A Y CONDITIONS The existing roadway segments in the study area range from urban in character in downtown Auburn to suburban or rural in character in the vicinity of the site. Table 2 describes the existing conditions of the roadway segments analyzed in this study and are shown in Figure 23 : 88 I'>) ~ ~ (I) m Sf 304TH ST ~ ~ fA SE 312TH ST m S 316TH ST ,?-O ~Q O~.R 0~ tl # .::; ..':J<l:1 ~'i'" fLllNGSON RD Hl 42 ~ 3RD Ave Sf 53RO ST SE ...-" -.- ~ - ~ _._~- ~_. -.. -. -.. - ~ - ...-.. - ~ -.-.-. -----. 8TH ST E 46 12TH ST e. 24TH ST E z o ~ m :z o ~ m 48 H ST E BONNEY LAKE BLVD E TSI. Analysis Intersections Kersey III Residential Subdivision Transportati~~Solutions, Inc. And Corridors City of Auburn ~:-'- Table 2 - Existing Roadway Segments Functional Speed Number Auxiliary Turn Edge RoadfLocation Limit LanesfMedian Classification (mph) of Lanes Treatment Condition "C" Street NWf "C" Street SW 15th Street NW to West Main Princi pal 30 2 Left-fright-turn Curb, gutter, Street pockets sidewalk West Main Street to 15th Street Left-fright-turn Curb, gutter, SW Princi pal 25 4 pockets, traffic sidewalk island 15th Street SW to Ellingson Left-fright-turn Road Princi pal 40 2 pockets, raised Sidewalks median 15th Street SW West Valley Highway to "0" Left-turn curb, gutter, Street SW Princi pal 40 4 pockets, raised sidewalk median "0" Street to Perimeter Road Princi pal 40 5 Left-fright-turn Sidewalk pockets only Perimeter Road to "C" Street Princi pal 40 4 Left-fright-turn Sidewalk SW pockets only Harvey Roadf "M" Street NEf "M" Street SE TWL TL, left- 15th Street NE to 8th Street NE Princi pal 35 3 fright-turn Sidewalk pockets, c- only curbing TWL TL, left- 8th Street NE to 17th Street SE Princi pal 35 2 fright-turn Sidewalk pockets, c- only curbing Auburn Avenue SEf "A" Street SEf East Valley Highway East Auburn Way North to East Minor 25 2 Left-fright-turn Curb, gutter, Main Street pockets sidewalk East Main Street to 6th Street TWL TL, left- Curb, gutter, SE Minor 25 5 fright-turn sidewalk pockets 6th Street SE to 41 st Street SE Princi pal 40 5 TWL TL, left- Sidewalk at turn pocket 41st St. 41 st Street SE to Lakeland Hills Princi pal 35 4 Left-fright-turn Curb, gutter, Way SE pockets sidewalk Raised median, Lakeland Hills Way SE to Princi pal 35 2 left-fright-turn Curb, gutter, Forest Canyon Road East pockets, traffic sidewalk island Forest Canyon Road East to Minor 25 3 TWL TL, left- Curb, gutter, Elm Street East turn pockets sidewalk 90 Functional Speed Number Auxiliary Turn Edge Road/Location Limit Lanes/Median Classification (mph) of Lanes Treatment Condition Auburn Way South East Main Street to 6th Street SE Princi pal 35 5 Left-/right-turn Curb, gutter, pockets sidewalk TWL TL, left- Curb, gutter, 6th Street SE to "M" Street SE Princi pal 35 3 fright-turn pockets sidewalk 17th Street SE/ "R" Street SE/ Kersey Way SE Auburn Way South to "R" Rais ed median, Princi pal 45 4 left-turn pocket, None Street SE traffic island 17th Street SE to 29th Street SE Princi pal 35 2 Left-turn pockets None Left-turn 29th Street SE to 53rd Street SE Princi pal 35 2 pockets, traffic None island Lake Tapps Parkway East TWL TL, left- East Valley Hwy E to Lakeland Princi pal 35 2 to 5 fright-turn Sidewalks Hills Way SE pockets, c- curbing Lakeland Hills Way SE Left-turn East Valley Highway E to Lake Princi pal 30 2 to 3 pockets, raised Curb, gutter, Tapps Parkway East median, traffic sidewalk islands Oravetz Road East Valley Highway E to Right-turn Curb, gutter, Millpond Drive Princi pal 30 3 pocket, traffic sidewalk island Millpond Drive to Kersey Way Princi pal 35 2 Left-turn pocket, None SE traffic island Evergreen Way SE Lakeland Hills Way SE to Princi pal 30 2 Left-turn pocket, Curb, gutter, Kersey Way SE raised median sidewalk TWL TL = two -way left-turn lane The following analysis intersections and arterial corridors fall within the above-mentioned roadway segments. Signalized Intersections 1. 15th Street NW and Emerald Downs Drive / "C" 6. 15th Street SW and West Valley Highway South Street NW 7. 15th Street SW and SR-167 Southbound Ramps 2. 3rd Street NW and "C" Street NW 8. 15th Street SW and SR-167 Northbound Ramps 3. West Main Street and "C" Street NW / "C" Street 9. 15th Street SW and Supermall Drive / "0" Street SW SW 4. State Route (SR) 18 Westbound Ramps and "C" 10. 15th Street SW and Supermall Drive / Industry Street SW Drive SW 5. SR-18 Eastbound Ramps and "C" Street SW 11. 15th Street S Wand Perimeter Road 91 Signalized Intersections Cont. 12. 15th Street SW and "C" Street SW 31. SR-18 Westbound Ramps and Auburn Way South 13. Harvey Road and "I" Street NE (SR-164) 14. 8th Street NE and Harvey Road / "M" Street NE 32. 6th Street SE / SR-18 Eastbound Ramps and Auburn 15. 4th StreetNE and "M" Street NE Way South (SR-164) 16. East Main Street and "M" Street NE / "M" Street SE 35. 29th Street SE and "R" Street SE 17. 4th Street SE and "M" Street SE 39. Forest Canyon Road East and Sumner-Tapps 18. 12th Street SE and Auburn Way South (SR-164) Highway East 19. Auburn Way South (SR-164) and "M" Street SE 42. Ellingson Road and Pacific Avenue North 21. 4th Street NE and Auburn Avenue NE 43. Ellingson Road and "C" Street SW / Skinner Road 22. 3rd Street NE and Auburn A venue NE North 23. 1st Street NE and Auburn Avenue NE 44. Ellingson Road and "A" Street SE 24. East Main Street and Auburn Avenue SE / "A" 46. 8th Street East and 136th Avenue East Street SE 47. Lake Tapps Parkway East Westbound Ramps and 25. 2nd Street SE and "A" Street SE East Valley Highway East 26. 3rd Street SE / Cross Street SE and "A" Street SE 48. Lake Tapps Parkway East Eastbound Ramps and 27. 6th Street SE and "A" Street SE East Valley Highway East 28. East Main Street and Auburn Way North / Auburn 49. Lakeland Hills Way SE and East Valley Highway Way South East 29. 2nd Street SE and Auburn Way South 53. Lake Tapps Parkway East and Lakeland Hills Way 30. Cross Street SE / 4th Street SE and Auburn Way SE South Unsignalized Intersections: Two-Way Stop Controlled 20. 17th Street SE and Auburn Way South (SR-164) 34. 21 st Street SE / Howard Road and "R" Street SE 36. Oravetz Road and "R" Street SE / Kersey Way SE 37. 9th Street SE and 182nd Avenue East 40. Forest Canyon Road East and East Valley Highway East 41. Puyallup Street and East Valley Highway East 45. 8th Street East and SR-167 Northbound Ramps 50. Lakeland Hills Way SE and Oravetz Road 51. Mill Pond Drive and Lakeland Hills Way SE 52. Evergreen Way SE and Lakeland Hills Way SE 54. Evergreen Way SE and Olive Avenue SE 55. Evergreen Way SE / 53rd Street SE and Kersey Way SE Unsignalized Intersections: Four-Way Stop Controlled 38. 16th Street East and Lake Tapps Parkway East Unsignalized Intersections: Non-Traditional 33. Howard Road and "R" Street SE Arterial Corridors 0 "C" Street NW / "C" Street SW: 15th Street NW to Ellingson Road 0 15th Street SW: West Valley Highway South to "C" Street SW 0 Harvey Road / "M" Street NE: I Street NE to East Main Street 0 "M" Street SE: East Main Street to Auburn Way South (SR-164) 0 Auburn Avenue SE / "A" Street SE / East Valley Highway East: 4th Street NE to Lake Tapps Parkway East Eastbound Ramps 0 Auburn Way South: East Main Street to "M" Street SE 92 0 17th Street SE / "R" Street SE / Kersey Way SE: Auburn Way South (SR-164) to Evergreen Way SE Extension / 53rd Street SE 0 Lake Tapps Parkway East: East Valley Highway East to Lakeland Hills Way SE 0 Oravetz Road: Lakeland Hills Way SE to Kersey Way SE 0 Lakeland Hills Way SE: East Valley Highway East to Lake Tapps Parkway East 0 Evergreen Way SE: Lakeland Hills Way SE to Kersey Way SE 0 Ellingson Road: Pacific Avenue North to "A" Street SE For Intersection 33, Howard Road and "R" Street SE, both the eastbound and southbound approaches are controlled with stop signs. However, the northbound approach is not controlled. This stop sign arrangement is not represented by either of the two traditional stop sign arrangements and cannot be analyzed using typical intersection level of service techniques. For the purposes of the DEIS, based on the relatively low traffic volumes observed for the southbound approach, this intersection was analyzed as a two-way stop-controlled intersection where the northbound and southbound approaches are uncontrolled. 3.6.1.1 EXISTING A V AILABLE TRANSIT The project site does not have transit service. The nearest transit service available is via Metro Route 151, which provides limited service along Mill Pond Drive. The nearest segment of this route is at intersection of Mill Pond Drive and 51 st Street SE, which when measured along the sidewalk, is approximately 4,000 linear feet from the project site entrance. Consequently, it was assumed that all trips entering and exiting the site would be via private vehicle. 3.6.1.2 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES Existing traffic conditions for this project were not assessed in a typical manner due to a number of factors, mainly the following: . The proposed project includes the extension of Evergreen Way SE from its eastern terminus at the western limits of the project site to Kersey Way SE in the proximity of 53rd Street SEe This connection has the potential to significantly change the traffic patterns in the area. . In addition, a number of unrehted capital improvements are planned to be constructed and operating prior to the completion of the project. Please refer to Section 3.6.2 for more information about these planned improvements. Because of these factors, existing conditions are not an appropriate basis for comparison of project impacts. The "No-Action Alternative" assumes all capital improvements have been implemented, and will be used as the baseline for analysis of project impacts. 3.6.2 PLANNEDSTREETIMWROVEMENTS Several capital improvements unrelated to the proposed Kersey III Residential Subdivision are planned to be constructed and operating prior to the completion of the project in 2005. These improvements include the following: . Oravetz Road at Kersey Way SE Signal: A new traffic signal will be constructed at the existing unsignalized intersection of Oravetz Road at Kersey Way SEe . Lake Tapps Parkway East Extension: Lake Tapps Parkway East will be extended east from its current alignment to 182nd A venue East at 9th Street SEe The existing segment of Lake Tapps Parkway East that is aligned from north to south opposite the northern end of Sumner- Tapps Highway 93 East will intersect the modified east to west alignment of Lake Tapps Parkway East at a "T" intersection. The intersection of 9th Street SE at 182nd A venue East with the new west leg of Lake Tapps Parkway East will be signalized as part of the improvement. . Cross Street SE and "A" Street SE Capacity Improvements: A second northbound left-turn lane will be added at this intersection. Cross Street will be widened from a three-lane cross section to a five-lane cross section. Signal timing and phasing improvements will also be included. 3.6.2.1 ANAL YSIS METHODOLOGY AND ASSUMWTIONS The year 2005 was selected as the horizon year for forecasting traffic. By 2005, the proposed project could be constructed, occupied, and the resulting traffic pattern changes would be established. Future background traffic volumes at the analyzed intersections were derived from forecasts using the City of Auburn 2005 traffic model, which forecasted estimated traffic growth unrelated to the proposed project in the study area. Examples of sources of traffic growth include new developments in the study area that are permitted but not constructed and a standard growth variable to account for other extraneous sources of traffic. All capital improvements listed in section 3.6.2 were assumed complete and the changes in traffic patterns resulting from these planned capital improvements were reflected in the model. The extension of Evergreen Way SE is also assumed complete for analysis of all alternatives. These future background traffic volumes represent the No-Action Alternative. The traditional PM peak hour occurs sometime between the hours of 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM. This two- hour period is then broken down into fifteen-minute intervals. The peak hour within this period is defined as the sixty-minute interval associated with the greatest four consecutive fifteen-minute traffic volumes. This period has been used for analysis of level of service (LOS) in this study. Level of service (LOS) is a measure of the ability of a given transportation facility to serve traffic using the street network. The Transportation Research Board developed the LOS methodology used in making this evaluation and it is summarized in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), 1997. Intersection LOS is defined in terms of seconds of average vehicle control delay. Control delay includes all of the time a driver is delayed at an intersection. At signalized intersections, the majority of control delay is generally associated with waiting during a red light. At unsignalized intersections, the majority of control delay is generally associated with moving through the queue at a stop sign controlled approach. Control delay at both types of intersection also includes the time to decelerate while approaching an intersection and accelerate after leaving an intersection. Seconds of control delay are divided into several categories ranging from LOS-A, which is very good, to LOS-F, which reflects a breakdown in traffic flow. Although these letter designations provide a simple basis for comparison, seconds of average vehicle delay should be used as the exact measure of comparIson. The LOS category breakdown by control delay is summarized below in Table 3. For signalized intersections, the LOS presented in Table 3 represents the average LOS for an entire intersection. For unsignalized intersections, the LOS for the worst movement only is presented. Table 3: Level of Service Criteria Intersections LOS Category U nsignalized LOS Signalized LOS Delay Ranee (sec.) Delay Ranee (sec.) A ::;; 1 0 ::;; 1 0 B > 10 and ::;; 15 > 10 and ::;; 20 C > 15 and ::;; 25 > 20 and ::;; 35 94 D > 25 and ::;; 35 > 35 and ::;; 55 E > 35 and ::;; 50 > 55 and ::;; 80 F > 50 > 80 Arterials LOS Category Averaee Travel Speed (MPH) Arterial Class I Arterial Class II Arterial Class III Arterial Class IV A ~ 42 ~ 35 ~ 30 ~ 25 B ~ 34 ~ 28 ~ 24 ~ 19 C ~ 27 ~ 22 ~ 18 ~ 13 D ~ 21 ~ 17 ~ 14 ~9 E ~ 16 ~ 13 ~ 10 ~7 F < 16 < 13 < 10 <7 All of the intersections analyzed fall under the jurisdiction of the City of Auburn, with the following exceptions: . Pierce County 37. 9th Street SE and 182nd A venue East 38. 16th Street East and Lake Tapps Parkway East 39. Forest Canyon Road East and Sumner-Tapps Highway East . City of Sumner 40. Forest Canyon Road East and East Valley Highway East 41. Puyallup Street and East Valley Highway East . City of Algona 42. Ellingson Road and Pacific Avenue North (Jurisdiction Shared with City of Pacific) . City of Pacific 43. Ellingson Road and C Street SW / Skinner Road North (Jurisdiction Shared with City of Auburn) 46. 8th Street East and 136th Avenue East . Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) 45. 8th Street East and SR-167 Northbound Ramps In addition to intersection LOS, arterial corridor LOS was also forecasted for selected corridors. Arterial LOS is defined in terms of average travel speed along a street corridor and is measured separately for each direction of travel. Typically, most, if not all, of the delay along a corridor occurs at intersections. The average travel speed is also divided into several categories ranging from LOS-A to LOS-F. Although these letter designations provide a simple basis for comparison, the actual average travel speed should be used as the exact measure of comparison. In addition to average travel speed, arterial LOS also depends on the arterial classification. Arterial classification is divided into four categories ranging from Category I, a high-speed principal arterial with strict access control, to Category IV, a low-speed urban arterial with minimal access control. The LOS category breakdown defined in the HCM-1997 for arterial LOS is summarized in Table 3. All of the arterial corridors analyzed in this study fall under the same jurisdictions as those of their corresponding intersections. 95 The Growth Management Act requires that all jurisdictions within the state ensure that transportation facilities have adequate capacity to meet current and future traffic demand. Consequently, before any future development is approved by a jurisdiction, it must be shown that adequate capacity exists or capacity improvements will be in place to serve traffic generated by the development prior to its construction and occupation. If a transportation facility is operating over capacity under existing conditions, future development cannot cause the facility to further deteriorate. These tests are termed traffic concurrency and can be measured a number of ways, including intersection LOS and arterial LOS. The City of Auburn uses arterial LOS to measure concurrency, and has set an arterial corridor threshold of LOS-D or better. Pierce County measures concurrency at intersections based on a change from future background (No- Action Alternative) conditions rather than a static threshold. Since future background conditions cannot be measured against itself: the three intersections analyzed that fall under the jurisdiction of Herce County cannot be tested for concurrency for the No-Action Alternative but will be for the other alternatives. The City of Sumner and City of Pacific both have set intersection concurrency at LOS-D or better. The City of Algona has a more stringent intersection concurrency threshold of LOS-C or better. WSDOT does not have any concurrency thresholds for highways that are designated as a "highway of statewide significance," which include SR-167. 3.6.2.2 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE (FUTURE BACKGROUND) Figures 24-26 illustrate the "No Action Alternative" PM peak hour turning movement volumes, and hence the expected traffic patterns under this alternative. The level of service for future background conditions at the intersections and arterial corridors identified as potentially impacted during the PM peak hour were examined. The "2005 No Action" column of Table 4 summarizes the intersection LOS under future background conditions. The analysis of the No-Action Alternative conditions concludes that over seventy percent of the intersections analyzed will operate at LOS-D or better during the average weekday PM peak hour. Fifteen intersections are forecasted to be near, at, or over capacity in 2005 with LOS-E or LOS-F conditions for the No-Action Alternative. Again, for those intersections forecasted to operate at LOS-E or LOS- F that are within the jurisdiction of the City of Auburn, intersection level of service is not used to measure concurrency. The "2005 No Action" column of Table 5 summarizes the Arterial LOS of the analysis corridors under future background conditions. Most of the directional arterial corridors meet concurrency. However, four directional arterial corridors do not meet concurrency for the No-Action Alternative. The directional corridors that fail to meet the concurrency standards include the following: . Arterial Corridor C. Harvey Road/M Street NE, Southbound . Arterial Corridor D. M Street SE, Southbound . Arterial Corridor F. Auburn Way S., Northbound . Arterial Corridor F. Auburn Way S., Southbound 96 , rSi' '1511 . r~-- 171 . rl45' 11 ., , ," ' i i t i :, \ i t i > i >,. ~:.' .. ' ~ ~ ," , · ~ ' o CC 0 t ' r" '0;,'- ~ ,... N M ~ d' I : a) co ~ " ".:. " I ~,~ ~ ~ ." ': f ? ; j iii . \ ... UJ I '" A;'~'I/ll/ ~ ~'f,~,~I:J~ 1"' ':'~'" " t ~'''>.",,:;'(;, ~ ^;'{, .:~ ,; " '-,',;;~' ~ I- " 'I .., ( ., , ~,;~:i;f:';~':~1 J\\"~""'~'il~ :>i~!) "./!tl'~O '/!-,,,,,:fii,; " ~. i ~ ,1;... Ii' o:~P,~}ll.Qcl' 1'"\ ~'-:\((M'-" \ ,j !. ,.l A t t if): ~n'i'l- ~ ' ,',Mr:':'j.l;\l/ };i\~l (/) ~' ~ '~;.)'<"1f\(~'W,^~' " , ;:,};; (/~I'<:' 11" .. ~, h , · ~;; ;~~;;: /, :,:MI,~j;i;/ : t;~:/;'~;t;4.,\ , I l~ ~ ~~ · .. .. I'~ N\:{:,';\': ..~, '- ,'YI~Q" lfH I ,x;:;;: L · .. " ;;: :?, /{t}~':\~~;k:r~.~':~ ~ ; ;rC~}~ r I> ~I ~ f . . ~ ,';/:n:: ,/ //t~; y 1 ~ ' ,:!,'\~ (\J ,1 \'i~ ( P m, t ~ ) Y,H!'\,. ,J,,\~ ,!1t r;-"'" ~ ~'!A ' ,~ · t /',,' ~ ,,~' ,~', ,?:,/,A~\"~ .;- ?, :;.; , oJ~ ' \ ',./,,- ~f-> :tf;J< (;'~~~;~\f;'[:'; ~i Ii' I .. ,. ~ I", I'" \'J ;.,,.;:,/.It'f1!( 'If' Jf ~ rn f UJ r.:{::'::(;~D:" ;~4\;;~\;lf:;;~/;\:::~' ~ . ~, _4 ~ 'tl} " . rJ"Al . ~I~;~.:.t(j,~(.,:~,~~,j~ ,.~" " '",~ ~ 'r , ;J~ I _ J.J ~i~c~l;r\~ I;>:\~~t:~(~\,~ " r / ~~ v '1J ,~';0'~ \, :;):/:</ ~~1.~ I f 'f) I'f '(.1' ,~\ <~'J,' f<;':~:~ '. . ! I ~I\ t:""l 1" \r~'>::\,.'il,:':'~ I, .. r I~. /I > .:rr",{/i ~'I)'ro · r ',1,' ~!I~ ~ · ,,~\ ,~I:;~~,;;?~,~~;:~~j~} ;:0/~':;;!f\: . "~ fi::~~~~t{E~::'S; ~ , 'l.r-. · Z ,;: ~/!:FS;'h\ll'~:;~'~~ · "I ~ '\J' · !Jj ~: ~:;;J~::;w,,' '~" ! , ' ~;, ':'~,( L ~ , : {J.j J f; , ;"," YJy , : ,'.~' l) , , · ,- '::::~ ,IZ'E t · (j~ y" '" ./ , ~~4ftlt '~ 1 ~ I , 0.4 ~.r,1 I ' ,,') !i~f~ ~ ~ .,oWl-' · · (J.J I ?;,:'C rl L/ 4 , V~: #:1. , I' . ' , * · S ~ i:$0r:~'@ t i j , ...:.... -I I ~:!':f,1~{.;0}~) I ~. !, ~,,\ ~......,..-- , :~~~~~:n;m:i ~ ~ , " r Lq , !': I : · ~~*:;i ,~gt!~ fJ:J\ ' , ~~l~ 0) ',", ~ '. ) , :i,\Y~;1l~ ij, : 'i.G r- I '. ~, . ~ t ' i)',; UJ ,I . ;;:t .' )\ Jill~; ~ ' , , " c /fic ,)tr ~~ III · ~h h 1J" " · ~~... t ',' , ' \ I ,0 , ) .\i. ~ ~~ 'I: f'I : '4: " I "\ 1\ Ui f 0 ~. :11$ Ii "~ ~ r. , : c ;~m,~1~i;i; : I " ' " : I " ~ ~. .. .. ",,~, ! f f'I' ';;~;;';,;r:~:,:~ t.~ t,l ~ · ~ If !~", '. ~~ ~ I 0 V l ~ t" ~ ....1:: I, C, , Z ' f f'\ :l,:d~(<~> 'J ---- M:S ----- ~,;!; t 0 ~",,\ i':'I.C/I':);H:. ' ' ". Wf1', ~~~,: ~ r.", \: , ~,(:' 182ND AI...." ~ , '~ . . i ( 'I \ l v ~,'l~;:~J ~~.E w ~t. I - r ,;,t;:;:iA~\)~ ' ;t~ij~)}?';~; - , , 0 , 'I'~li-:J~;\~;) '. lS@~~; tsti~;~t;' "'~> >ff~~11!:::~~~) ~ / ~t' ~ L1 AVC~ MEYERS RD , 0 ~. I <; \l/~:~/'::';UI!~~ VI ~ fj~ \ fl · I \ \ I I I, <^'~'t~:';r~'i-~~t. I '" t. ~ A~U l \, - :, ~ { 1&\'.".~\~'ii:"?11' ~ ' \ "- '" ) ",,,,(~( Ht':,' L ... ~ ... J ,,' I; I' j";!}t~t~~1 r "~-I:to/,!.t I' ", :' , ,\. ;" t;",. ~::?!Ir,~~ ' 'IMl' '" ,<J ;>j;::f~I~' "l ~~ . ~ .'" ;'f' (0 , n'\ ,<' I D ~" l"II~!h";I'.1 ,. I' ~ ~~ r> ~ ;~\l")~ .ht, " J' ';' ( . -...,....t, N ,'~ ".;~}.t' r, 1)i';J "I 1fo ! I ",,' , ;' '~ >;-I~'.. I' 'IJ'.,~ 'J ~ ,1," ,,_ \I J' f~J ' , , , '.. .! \11'r" I :), i ,'~ ! ' ~ c: \ t" .c lo'.\', f" I;' \' , f, 1.';\. ~ ('.p. IA ~ ,r \ , 'I 'I '/ 1\' ~" I V, \ t .~'" Co ~\' ],U,,, \ V ,', /" 0 , (y >" t' ,:" \ -I \ { . \ , ~ ff}, ., 1 I ,I P '-.; t~,' i\" ,::i : ,i::'Z) ,./' 'i' f,:; \ ,.Ii;: :\ ,i. 'J'~ '!1 '"',: {I",~ '->"'~IJ(I';;I;. su~,~\~R#1'AP SHWYE Ii ~~~~ f' i\ ff: II. '< ,\', \.",. I' 11Y r. ~ ':;; "'.,i!;. ,1.<)' 1,::\1 4 " ~ * " .f \ , ,(! f .: I ,? . '1 " [ l,.'it'iIL J l:.. "C~ ,,:\,.,'t ' r', ,j: (Wr '-f' i, :" \., I" ": ,:)' I, r ! ';' : f" I ~ :, '.~ :,,:;j I, ~ I. Y .,/,; ~'-/'," I' , " , ' , " 1,. I I' ;',.' ~,(~<,:,~ ?~ i':' :.:', '" I~ fft~ ,; I~ JO c I, t .'~ ;, 'J, " , [ \ I, " I .' I Y ~ ' . ,J 1/; ""Ii,;~ ' . ,.U, I iIIIII ". \::::t :j;;; f \r, ' " ' ~ t _ .'J 1\; I . ' I w, I, f ", \ ., 'I l! ,.~' 1 ' /, " ' ' A ! .:( ~" {, ~,;:J ' ' \ it" t.) (:1 .f' ., ^"I,t(^V , pfi!! fc\ .. :,~",,\lH ,( < .{y;;~ ,,~, l'.~'.~'" ~ ,,' 'I ,/-,1. "/,1 l' " &..I 1", I , , 1\ ' " ,.I , ' c . \ ,,:,", ^,' . IF, . :', j,l \ ;~': _, I' 1 i~,~ ' I.. , '\""' f" \ ' ::,:" "-:", /.;.:; I' ,I " ':';, ' ",:. ,; I,.' ,;, I, Y?':::' ',{!" " r ),' ,r ~:' 't);lt~:C'itr \ ;",'> ':11 . ) i" " i "'"' I ," '/ I ' .1,' \ ;::,' 1)':' I "-" , 'J! ~ i. . ... .. ~ ~ ., .....,." J ..,.. j ~ j ,,' y ~....... r ~ \... ;'Ie.' '",e~' : , "'. ?,~' \:':~~ ", 'IE :;""" \ '^;', .'!;~~~tN~ ,,10) ,;' &,:i 'i ',5';}, ~~;:'--'\,}:, ;\ ,,~ i,,' > ~ \ i_:, .", ;,"; ~ ~~ <l '.' :i \": I'" tl' 1 < (: ~ 1-:; , :\ ' , !' \'.)~I ~:,r~tt .~.Utlt. ~H:J' :;~~~ ' ~, I ~:'::;';'~/:':"'~"" " I' '" ' · I' ^' 0 ,,-', , , ," " (w~" , '- .' ''''''.'' >I' r ........... \ ~ W /' /1-. \ '-;','. , '\ 'I' , , " 'J t" ...... ' ";6;~'::Lt,:: c>> ,"' I Jo,'-J,,,',, ,;<: ",' , '" '." /',)0,' ), (, I' I .' II,"" " /1'\ ..i' / .-!; "1 '," '~-\1 ~:,: Sl1 NS"',' : '",~ I ; ,",'" ': ','/:1:, : ,; ~'; ',,~ ,: ( " · if) i' , , ' ',,' , /: " "I",~~"'}~\~,j'''",; ~l :: " " [f" 0. 166T1 :'\ ) '~.;:v '. ,"1 ,J, ;~\ " '1,J, :<; ~:,~ '.' . " ',,' ;~" i;:", i'.', :" \ ." , .~,:"' :':, '<'{'~:',!, P>:",,' ,~~~,~~~iL , " ,f.; ~ " ~ t ' l, f' t',. 1:' >'i '; \ 'I II" "'t I ,\ ,.\"0~ ,~r , iJ. "",/,.:),,' l,);i; '>;i'fI' !h~ , ~"j >;: I." .~/ ~:", ~ ,,I. u \'1 ~ / ;~./, i \;^"J ",/"" (~IJ' {.',~(,l>' f C"'i"Y' ~ ,< ' )/ '\\:, ,'." > \ ,;~;' 1 ,,~~~;~~,>:,rt'\:' '},4-.,i, I -r .'::~! .f? I ^!; j , i, I. ~" ..' 'I . "!'.. ~ '\ ",R"SI,,~E/+'I ,~Q of' ,,,< '" "." II,n;', "'f I i, I",' rll \, W W .,~', ";;~, ' ll;:>,.'\'/~ii:(r:I;)'~ ~~" > ~~"/\,:\".;:::~~,;,.I;':'~ ';\: ,: Q!I Y' '. ITI '_ 1,1' :'! ,i :<.V~ "' \\~i;:,{(::~,~"\ '}':':;I/\~l'l, '6;~~':i~,)\ ~ & t- t- · >v ,'. (, ':- )",' '\ I ,~':,~t '~(~ I fill ,. , \ I ~!, '10 . '1~.;.i,0'\:( '. " ",'"~ I' (r)' f P' ,~<, l:lJ! '" :,;{, :"~'\N~'~ ~I~ r " \ <,' ~ 'I. ~\~IY E ,ft'^ Y!" (,!, f. ".. , ~ . , ' y {t ~I ..''' ,{" , ,"" " , I' , · ' ~ '~'. ': \;~r:,~, ~ /~, ~ <. ~ S l~ If VI Vi "," I II " ,,",~ "~'f;:,.:i":,': ;~/~:I';-II' ;;"~' . '" j " ;\ ,'i,~ /. )I~~~ <,~<m 1 "I, '": " , /! 'f~'<: 1 " ~ ,,"i~"':'. ',{I,.;" 0\:1' "t ' ,'~I' I' I , ",::,';'~ I " f', , I '~ j 'I', I ~/" ) ". S NE.I v, ~~~.~" :;~!// M $] SE) / ^ I. "'! ,,1 M ST se;:" ~ '''r''\"" lV, d~,';,'.... I ',', I '"' , \' '~I '(~J \t:1,5* I " ( ()~ I I ,/ ..0\' . f ",""'" :',:~:, '~'I" 'I;o,',::~,,: :;.f'11 ~ ," ""') \'" \,", " I" , , ~ t'/'I I ~,~:I.. " '1'f\\ L L.. . ~'r '^ 01 .t"I'\ ,''.,Ii" X ~ ,)1 \ ';.1 1 If, ,_ t'~ /~{~::';\;:','k" V .lr' r r I, :~~;;~\~ {, " , .' I \ I" ) , "' r) ,~. ,~ '. , I'~ J , /Ii:;:~: } r 0 .. ^ ~ .;l i;. ~ ~ \' f ~ ..r! '(... K f . i,l !,f I. ! ~ i -I _ ... "'" I.~ ~ t .. ~ d, ;; " I;)'};'I r. )",1'1,\ ~"/I' ,"/M,~/.",< !f1.: Y~~,L'>j,rll'~. W" I IJ ) ;<\: ;'r<'" ') <) 'i ~ , (0 CO /: '.'~j I, " '\ . '~,9'I";'I'~'/r r' ~~; i,i;;"l,,~" , I ,It' ",' ~:{. ("I\,.~ ~ } "/' ,/rl"V, I ~ .~ ''; ,r,. , ;>~; :\:1';( ';:,' tij,: UJ~! ;:,:!h.,:~< 'h, ~c ,~" \00 Y"~;,;dJJ ., ~.~~Ii'i'''i II ,d' '~" ~ , pre-:V;. ~J;" p W, \0, /~I ,~ ur C/r ~~,':(:<~~~'?, ,; :~:;'~:,'~ ~ \ ' t;.\", ;1;>;, ,"', It, q /,,"<~~<':,:,(:i~\ "\J )~ {\1',P" '~\~,< .<(/ {'~J,.f:~1 ,,"\C;<~I " \.W I \(\:\'::vt '.~~ L2 : 'A. v /~?"I\?n"~' '; l;;~-,~ h!/ ^ l'i\;;r.E <II;" \il:,:;;~/j;'I'.,\';;.j,:i~'\:"l~' 0 JJ~;\ ,t:tt.; ):')j\Wt,,~~:r.(',"~'f,i'i:t~1 ~ r__ '~,;" :,,\, t, f7'.": l ; " \,,\{ c' ':' ') 1 t ~':,'; :. '~I. : ,~\~\I~' ( \, "t:', l' "> ' ':)!/fC>j, ~:J ,~/; c ...V!" , J ,. >;,".';" ~ ,,' ), ){; I, ,~' 0 .., W ;,,,,,~, '{{j ~ :,.", ;::,}..t\.S fl!"i'~w;r;/ \"YL}\W~' ~\ "","',':u~"Y~;\~' <~%:;a I ~:r.i )1;",-,/", ,\;,\,;P/{j't:[~, ,,:OiJ;~i!!t1~Ft.~'~~?:I~f}fr I,' 160THAVE E ~; <:,~:,Y!" ~" ,/~;{~!r," l~~'&~ ~~:~J ,,>'t: ~" :';~/;I\}>\:'Wt~;"~'k~\;:*~ :; '1ft' :~:'::::rj"ll\(~;;'~~; '" ~pfXt~:,/~.~stl;f::~:;I:;!y~'i'^: " "" ,," 1,'/' ~ I':'I'~' ,';, I (10- ,:-I gj'~'?1 ~;;:~~ YJ: :.{;>,! L the /,;i~, :'i)lt~~ h" ~~ '! "\.:",~ ' " /' ~~ X':'/ "!, 'f';:,' ',\ ;" \ ~~ \ I ~ I "\' ....-.1 ~,! +;,d,"~" W \~,' i~\ ~',~"'" I." ,~I:!i'\ r I"~ ,; " VI. ,.~;{; ";~Ii;~': \'~, ~':' ,I \':~<'.-I': I; 1 '1!l'i'~~',~~/.i' : \ P:'~'v < ,"" ,"7.', ~, "\~:t~ ):.'~ .~:~, 1!'\,tZ;'\!,L.:Jv j'~,'f'Jk't! (I" ,"". ;:(", ~\"JIft. .",ri\ ~;~i'; ."/:"''''' I' i' , ,\,.\11,,: , W W ,fl' ',"~. ~ '1*.1; ~~. ~", ~ N. ~,::-:~" IY/:" \' r7. I;;~>"'\' .'1\" ' A': ~ t / .,~)",!,I;\' (IV; ;t"~C\ Y:";i~~;:!: ~(..',>",,;~:;:f4;l:~ ' "r ~ ,~, <~ ,,' , (! W VN'" "'\ ~ I <'t, ' 'I J ' ". " )It I , r,. , Ilh~ h ~k' ~I \.. ;t. I \ t~'1r,~"'~\;::,,1/-i N ";" \H,: ~ "x;\ 'I ':;l)nr\,~,\,,~!, ;, "t ;.'; > :, ~ . i '!:!D~?' ,,,I ~' J:';'i" (~.'~,\ ",{V IW. 'l;;X~ 'I(V/I ~"""' ~ I, .},~tf';P[:~, I ':,'1,,) ~i' '/' c ~t ,J ,,{,'i)f"i\\i I- 0 · " . <,}> ,r,':, r <' '., '<', q"" \' , · - ,~ , J ,.' ;(.;.".', ("~il~ '"(1 L.. ix, ~ I " "" VI, i\,\ ,\{,~':i,:q ',' I, " .n ,I ~, 't: ,., I '/ "t ' i t\~d,;C9r' . ,^ r N ~ i~_' ~!\?t j t '". ~ .I t \}' \~ :~'I~,~ i ~'l,~ y ~ 7.., .I 1,,~ ;~~ .f /' {" ') I if - ; ..~ ~ ,-IJ, ~ \, '" t i\ ^ ~ ~ (( ~ V ~ U. ~>' I:~~~?,\.i; W '",:, t,. , (IJ,. ~ 1, {'~' \ I, ~I-";' !' " i., .~ ,0 :~,U),i; :t]mt....Q, " ( I'< ',-, II t '\ tJ} I :;~:'\:':>':;~;'?f' ,lEv, i,S ( :~~I>~' >I~;/' I J"j~~::F's't:SE"~;'~ :',il":Ylt1 :'<('I~'r" "H' I)' ,'" . \~ ~ a::' y \,,;!' S1}'; ,g' , 1, 1(,,\'," t,;: ~ . J 1 .' '; \ 1:' .?;i~)l I '~r. J~ 11,.; I- /:Ji;:i./:,;'\;;;i,~, I , .:::; z ". ,,:~;,:-)- ./:"1"11 <" \\:',:('" In I',;__' lojjlM1 \ · \' I ~ " ' ""/'" '"",.c J W ~ ~~~.(",.!~,J;,~,'.I,,,W ,,:V' t ~).jV/.... d\,,:,:,,^...,,-I.~~',...,~~ Il I f~~ ~ ~\\:('i<;,~}{it~i.;..-"l c ~ "l'-.,~IIAI'-I}..."'~tr'i l ~s >>\1 - I ,~~ 1/lj,Z :/ \ .~ /:~ vo~: ';\ ' 'I, [>': ,II ~l ; 'n,l, "1 <~{<(~'~:~j-,,::; I 't I :\- Of~ ""' W .If M ~,,~ r:;x '- rV"~ , ,;; )(JI ~ " ~. 1 ,( 'I"'''' :.",,1,';: kff, '\ . WI "',I ! \\'"n "" 1.&.1 ji: ~ ; ri\r )/Q~ r ~ ~~.. _~'-JH.t",;. {\., (~ '\~~( ,~ ~"il \ ~I"({ , '0", V I' I ~" '" ' 'J ~~ \; '0 :,..'!~'~, < 1\' "r ,'~1" ./,' "~, 'b\I"'V'[; '.' '''1~ . j, ~ ''. l \~ : ~ 2 ~ \1. : ~ " ,,{ ~, ,/ \::~::j8 F l'<~" y,:: ' . \ 1"/ ~:)_,i:,:?I~:" y; ~7', t ,': :):(~,\v)1 ~ , \ el/------, , ., ",I' \ "" " N l\-c{\,,' . ' < "J", I' II',~/;,""'I'(,' ,c\ ,'I; ,I c" ,,\ {}(L€ :J . r I Ii .j, \' , ',> ~ \ ,:\'.', "', I, '. ,r,".: ""'I",' , , ' I, t ~ I,,' " I ,) , J ' 1'1 Y ___ () j \!' > 'v '\ " Y -I' \" "" ",. ' , ~ ' I,,', \;X t ' " " \ 'l' hlw.'~ l' \ --, ',~ ~ \.' fI, " ': t I ""-(' '~".,' 1 ,',<, '," "' ~ "', ? , ~\ ( : \' j ~ ,~\ c:~ \ I Ie;;: (;: .,:, ,. , ~.~ " " " ."., , " ,A S1. 56 '. N </.' '" .;, " · " ", ' .',.,. .- ,~; E VAlLEY t VE E () ':;; . Z \ r" . , \,' , I \,,:,;,;, c J ,'v", d I ,J \ ,I ~ :{,::' / I . I) , ....:. 1~:: ~":~i;: ~ \ . fJ) '" . . ' ,\ 1"/ v ,{ 0- ~ ,'J '..' ,/ I , " ('" :,," . , ;~r:/:) · 'I ,.,' \' '" I ; \ J. ", \ 'y ~ '" , j' ,\ , \ . 'i ., "I:'>':, 0 . ;:'~' ':...~ '",:, ... ,:" ,,',.', ,..': ' . .:. " :',:,;;;'. :::,..':.'1." ".:.' '; ; "", · ".,.,.... ",,' ':' -E \lALLEY HWY E i 'ii"~ <( ",:.,:~!t ,WI, ~". .1 f. I"" \'t:,:(" :'", '" . . /'>;-"" I Vf"\ W :'(M ,,' '. \, ~ J" ~ . , ,:.;.'''", ',c';' . ',"> ~ ;;;.:9 ""AI " ' ~," .... ,.... ".,,' ' ',' ,... ,.,.;.>,/<>> 1'\ ~ I /':~ . 'JIll I 0 '\ I ' ) I '\':,\'1 +,',. I' \1, ;",":": ;,, t G \"f... ,.' " >>1 II'::, ' " , . ' , ~ ' · ,I L > .. \,V ~} \ ',J;;' '" "J " J ~ . ~ . I!' r &. ~ :t:::;; .,.. I ~ \ ,t :: '" f , ( A' ii, , ' . f , . t/) ., l- ^ l " > ./, ~ ~~, : O',e" I. ~ : I : . ~ , Ii ' , / \ , . . . , . , , ~ ~/,:': 1 I (f, ~ ~ " , , , "'. : ~ 1&, '. ' t , a. Q f/) 0 ';"~!<. ;(',,1::' I.' ,~ !~'", I,~,'", ")' \\\' "f._. I ~:f :';"".>:./"'~ "1 ", l' o"h,.,. " ~ \ ,i, I". 't_, W .J Q Z :';Ij~ I, .'; I \/\ ," ) ;)/ '1":' 1"'\' ;'., ", f I, "."." J ~A - "<t",,,:'; I ,,/, \ '-'1:\ \ ~y '. .' ,:' ~, I 4,.. L ~ ?&;,L' :.-'~' I /J ~ \:v , 1(... , · . r ..:::J ~r!:i :':"{ \ 1 ;:. F J '. ('~(, )' ' , \ ~ " I' P \' , , .;. If. . t~., \~~' ~.~~ ',: ' : ;', ' , : :,," " ,;'". ~'. t " · ,.,::: ;r ,: :,l ,,', ~, PACIFI( AVE N .'1/). '" 142ND AVE E >- ~ J:S\~ ~:~;;\;" h, \.-' : '/ ! I., II I,. ^', l,,: ; "'~' \ ' I ,>' l' ~.. ~ .;. . '/ r, I I' f , .. ~... i-.-l ',:~::'.k <<.,., ~ '. > , i I!" ^ '\' "t,~ 'I;~" \ ,," 1,/ ,. I ' ..' . & I- · f ' ~.., )' 't':"" "t'- " "'~, \ ~ I r' 1 } '- '" 1'" ' . j. . .. Y'I~:}i,~\','/r' '"" \\ ,:"'r' \ :,\\ <'. ,.,/-,\ '1<'\:.\; [4:.- 1 i I:lf,t~ ..... ~ 'CO r. a. C ,,', '>,j'<<;,;':<< '''~, >; ~ "l; 'I , ' \ ,~~ ~ "1;1 ~ " ;; I \~~tr~~t/! {~.<;~; j' ~/:~'i t i.. t ' · f . . I .'! \g;';f,' ~ L "... i I Ii'" , ,,. ,t., a ' , : '4~;::1:?~<I~~\:k)~~;' "t/',:t:~> ' , . wi, J . W \ ~ ~1_t'i2~:;'~' " !~j, ~/):,<,I/.(:1>';;: 'I '/~,,;~':J~';\"I~:'\~';:!.-"J,ni~;':tf/). ..'...~, -'I. " ~ ':.~ 'i ~ (t /'; \' ' , "~ '! \,,'1 I < I', > '.: "",,;\ ::'~;':~ ,- /~';~;>;:K\ i!{'i't/S',~ ',f:,tt Z 'W, · . t- ~ ~ :s r. -, ,~~ "',;. 1.1 ".1 \\./ ~~ \ .... ~ ~ I ~,.. ~ .JY\r,;r. ~.,I{ J. . "I ,':(i'l:;III,":~"~ "1"'1 \. I, liP ~ .J I,/:~i:::."\,';;" (~<;:h,~,. ~,:,e'j", ,I';',i< W~I 0 W ... I . '^ ~~YARAVE ~ "<:'01" f' >',- ,; \ : f-,}I,~ ',<~ . 'i'<:',:' M' n ";;~~;,:'; ~'~?::\~;O'(:'~;\;" ll\--f'~ :'::; ~'" · , . VI :':;Nl; , 1"'". '~ " " 1, /',:":,, '-'0:,; ':'i CD 11! ~ fi,\ K",/;-)~ ?'~ I, ! ~ 1 'If'I f .. . ' . ;:~.j;:'> ), .;," :'/~;","; ''';, ( ,\.0, ,\ : "'. ,:';~:;:\~{S\;I:}Ii ';N':\,,/:1~)\~"~!, · t VJ > ' f ~ · J I ' , << A ;~:;;f;~1 ' ,v" \,,{I i I.; ,\/,,::.!~ \... ';~.':tF~,~I;:.::/e,;;i. /;;~:~',2:~'> '..,n <( · f , ~ ~ I \' : " ,'I" :i;:~ I)':',;;'~ r . ,v. '~;<I.' ) .:/: ,>~w t;:.; · f V ' L . ,<~.-'I"\\'j" <.' l,d:> 11,,; (J) F,I ~"I:')ji"(X'~:;;Y:'Y~'0~\I'"'r:'> f,.., , 't. r ". l 1. 'r "\,) '::, 'r " ') I ,"" ,u. j ":~~~<;.i/f/ ,~ ilty · , "" C" f 't · . P' 'I Y I t ,l~,' ,1~," ::"~I~/ ". ! I '.' : ( Vi ~ ' '. I · t tN' · to ~ U 'I '\ ":/77' I,';, 'rH'; . 0 ~.J · ", . 0: . 136TH AVE 6. -. t. '\ ~ rv (. ,( ')< 'J'"~' ,^, Z '. ('f). ~ ., v.vv~ ~ ..\ .. ~~;: ~hJ, {rrt"~i j. W "' __ I.. VJ ',) if: II! .' \\ -'(~ (""" · , , · ~ · . v .. C ~ , 110 ';'p("( wi f,... t_. 't ~ r . ~t" " J J '. 0 · , ~ . . . , , . I, . ~ t 'I ,\,,<" I 'c \', j v co · f · t · f.. . i I . MILWAU (EE AVE ' ) · t _ · · · f. f" . /, 'I ft. . ~Z ). - .. L . t . " ,,, ,[ .; '\ ~;;M..J:~',I ' J > r , . ' . . t . t ~: "\ : ~:(C?'::i;;';;,~:: W · t · . . . (/). t · . . · . O~ V )\' , } t): ALGON'i1 > · ~ , , . lU I 4 · · --- · '" , I \ "" ' v :\~ " 01 ill ' , lV , .;:: . , ' )," ' ,. , ' ;' 4J"1..s ~ \ ! r .... ..... _ . , . , . t VD N I \ .1. "f. """ , , I' ,I · · . in O' · "E" " ", / , ~,I · f . . , VI 'Al~ I. I . . . . " ,I, "" 4V' . , . · ~ ,,'I' f . · t ' ').'; ! I '1,/. ' .; " , , ----- .... ~Gt"-.t- ~" '. · f fA UJ \ 1''' ! I g ," '-;. v! ' ",'1 ~ ~" "~ ~ '." · . t t ' Q~ n- ""'i' /"; t';", C ",0; < ,}, '\ f .......,., IIIi'L.. n t' ~ ~ t to . · ~ ""- IH \ ' , \ ." j J" ',' ~ - , tN. if 0 ~ " I 'j' " ::;" · . ~,. ~ .<V,.. \1'",,1/;,,:1 ,,' }(~ /:~ :;'\",\':< WVALLCYHWYS~. .....(0 t 'Ii ;.~ 't ~ ('f ~ ,,' "J ,'\ ,~ ,"I ' "~'i/ L,. II f ~ J t: I,. · . , ~ ' , .:i( I (,}, ( ) \, I, if: ," ,.. . ..:',: '>',;' ~ :: . . . ____ ~ ...."",.. . ~ '^ V'. f , '^ )., . , 'v ' ! ~ ! ,/.',:: ': \ i r , . . . V f.. N ' . . ' .. . · . ~ · OJ \ \ :" ,\.. >~ , ' . · ~Io...... ~ · , ' \'" , ,!' . ------ ..., ~ ,~ ~ t""':'\ti,/~ U') · . V'. ':tJ , i , W t ~ '. ;:' }'~li,; l'l (Il ", ~ " ~ ~ ", III ", g~~ " ..~ 't / "':~';S"\~i)~ ~ ~ f . ~ · '. (0 ~r' .. . ~m 0) '. (Y)C') ~ · t ~ or- ~ J L 1 .! J1L J1L _ !L ~r ~ 896J A L61 441J a a L108 79J ... L22 \ 393J A l425 I a L28S n A I ...t017 I AiR... 1&1 ~'7? n.... __ _ +-0 ?Q-+ _ +-17 1A.... _ ....19 , iii 542-+ III +-284 I ...... ~ . . . .. .. " .. . · . '. c 3 al:n::l38~n~~ 'e::;, t/) '. 3 1S H1V9 0::: '0. w .'. >- . . w . ~ · · · · . · . . 3 1S H.i09 w 3 1S NI'VW >- " w '.. W ..J '. ~ ~ :c 6 '. (0 .~ .-- . " ... 3 1S H SiT w w ~ o Z N :t ~ ~ Q Z N 3 .1S HIiTZ ~ 3 .is HIS w w ~ ::c: t; ~ ._._._._~--_._._._.~. 3S3^Va~E a~ NOS8NI113 , ~Q . <"oIL ....... . . . !tl L 9L6 . . . . · . . · . . ~ r09 i I""" ~c.:, . . . . . · 0 . . · · ~ <b~ .... ,. 'It) ~. .' ;.... ,..# L ....... ! ... L", _.n " -':'.1 .. ;~ w )- (f) I l- ,ON ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~~ oJ ~b ~ ~~ 0 ~ (j ~ '; ,i. "' ) ';/. . . t . .. .. . f .. .. , , .. t , .. t , J . . t .. . , t .. , '/1 " . t f , .. to , . t . t . .. . i , " , /, { . . , .. . t ~1 t I " I J0? · W f . '~ ...... ~ ... MEYERS RD ! .. ,; , ' t t I .. ( , I ~ i , ~w . ~ , t ~~ f · <0 .. . ' / ;'1j" : ,.. ,f ,r,,< .. ,f ~~\ \ + f f ' " , . , , 2~"' I", ' f t t \ \; +~ ( I ~ I f: ~\ , f.. · 1" " i '" t\: (; : .. , f ' o. ! \' 'j I . \ , 'i \ '~, \ \ f f , ~ . ' ,. 1ft ~ Ii: I' ~ : ," , '" I ,;' ~" ~ .~ ~ . . t I' Pl.',;);' \ ~: I' ' \ 1 ~ t t r t . '/ { ~~t t I . t · . . ;. i , . ' , , {. I( (. ' ~! , · t · · ' (),/ '~. .' ,1' " / ' :;, "' i ' I . ' , ' t ' . . .. I < II , jI., f:~ ' i j \1 <j . · . " t . . ' .., l)I ..~ y' jI-... iii . f', ,f; 1,." ,', (~ ,,' W W " J ~ ' ! . ' / \.,"V \ .) . . t f tw- r- f " f ,.". (f) (f) , ," I I ~ t- " 0 ~ " to (0 1 ~\ 160TH AVE E w w "...lli.r; ",'I.&f'fl"~ .,..",.0 . . . , ~ . . , .. . , . I .. .. I · · · I In ~ N , , . . . . t . . f ~ · v; w u. ,.,.,. ~ 0: J ~ W W <( CO ~ ~ :J U () E VALLEY HWY E i" · · . , . + , ",'. , ~ 0 ~ It. " i'; 1/\ "{ ", '(,/ I: I).'" . I. t~ ;~ ~<," ,.,11 \1 I ", 'fl . " . .. ' , \' . · f . t t (I ~ ,I .. It, ~ .. '.t ~(, . W 't', '\ ,. It' , .: " r) " · It-' . · .. " '::' "~I PACIFI AVE N ',,', I III .... I ' · , · , . 142ND AVE E ,q ,i . I I "" I ,I;" " L. f "lit q . r '. I .. (tJ t. ! ft/I.' I · '. Ilt. . W · uJ " Z '" · t ,I . (jJ L.. f . · fir I , ~ 0 ' j t^ · . t t · · W . , VJ. " ,\ ) " · (j) , > ' I I 4 t ) t In · A . I ~ · ~ (~ tV, ..... , r-. · , · _ · Z ~ Q · · "t " .., '" :' 3 :~ 'I! 136THAVEE N"" ,'W if '" . I If' -'t,., '. t . . If . . 'f · . I j .. ~: 1", '. >>. 'It 'f ". I. " t If . . ,", ?,':;:, : \ "'W,YALLEVHWy ". ". f' , 1 . .~ I . ~ . . .~ ~ . , . i " 4. . . of, , . I. ~ ' !I, ' '" . · .. , W VALLEY HWY.S I. , , . . .... . ". . , .. , co, f\ · .. '~, ,n 9 f . " . ',.. \" '.. I If All three Pierce County intersections are forecasted to operate at LOS-C under future background conditions. The intersection of Forest Canyon Road East at East Valley Highway East in the City of Sumner and the intersection of 8th Street East and 136th Avenue East in the City of Pacific are both forecasted to fail concurrency for the No-Action Alternative. TABLE 4: PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE, ALL ALTERNATIVES Intersection 2005 No-Action 2005 Alternative 481 2005 Alternative 700 Delav a,b LOSa Delav a,b LOSa Delav a,b LOSa Sie:nalized Intersections 1. 15th St. NW and "C" St. NW 25.9 C 25.6 C 25.6 C 2. 3rd St. NW and "C" St. NW 13.2 B 12.9 B 12.9 B 3. W. Main St. and "C" St. NW 86.8 F 89.1 F 87.9 F 4. SR-18 WB Ramps and "C" St. SW 28.2 C 27.7 C 27.5 C 5. SR-18 EB Ramps and "C" St. SW 30.0 C 29.9 C 29.3 C 6. 15th St. SW and W. Valley Hwy. S. 63.1 E 73.4 E 76.3 E 7. 15th St. SW and SR-167 SB Ramps 21.4 C 21.3 C 21.0 C 8. 15th St. SW and SR-167 NB Ramps 11.0 B 11.0 B 10.8 B 9. 15th St. SW and 0 St. SW 22.2 C 22.3 C 45.1 D 10. 15th St. SW and Industry Dr. 22.7 C 23.3 C 23.3 C 11. 15th St. SW and Perimeter Rd. 6.7 A 6.8 A 6.8 A 12. 15th St. SW and "C" St. SW 22.7 C 29.1 C 32.2 C 13. Harvey Rd. and "I" St. NE 20.8 C 22.9 C 23.4 C 14 8th St. NE and "M" St. NE 72.6 E 72.8 E 73.0 E 15. 4th St. NE and "M" St. NE 12.7 B 15.8 B 1631 B 16. E. Main St. and "M" St. NE 82.7 F 92.5 F 93.5 F 17. 4th St. SE and "M" St. SE 7.8 A 8.0 A 7.9 A 18. 12th St. SE and Auburn Way S. 13.0 B 13.3 B 13.5 B 19. Auburn Way S. and M St. SE 117.6 F 123.8 F 124.4 F 21. 4th St. NE and Auburn Ave 4.2 A 4.2 A 4.2 A 22. 3rd St. NE and Auburn Ave 7.1 A 7.2 A 7.2 A 23. 1 st St. NE and Auburn Ave 7.9 A 7.9 A 8.0 A 24. E. Main St. and "A" St. SE 14.8 B 15.4 B 15.4 B 25. 2nd St. SE and "A" St. SE 16.4 B 16.7 B 16.8 B 26. Cross St. SE and "A" St. SE 29.7 C 29.4 C 30.0 C 27. 6th St. Se and "A" St. SE 21.1 C 22.1 C 22.5 C 28. E. Main St. and Auburn Way S. 22.4 C 23.5 C 23.4 C 29. 2nd St. SE and Auburn Way S. 6.8 A 6.8 A 6.7 A 30. Cross St. SE and Auburn Way S. 18.6 B 19.1 B 19.3 B 31. SR-18 WB Ramps and Auburn Way S. 41.7 D 43.2 D 44.3 D 32. SR -18 EB Ramps and Auburn Way S. 122.2 F 123.5 F 123.6 F 35. 29th St. SE and "R" St. SE 29.9 C 32.1 C 31.6 C 36. Oravetz Rd. and "R" St. SE 7.9 A 8.1 A 8.6 A 42. Ellingson Rd. and Pacific Ave. N. 13.0 B 13.2 B 12.8 B 43. Ellingson Rd. and "C" St. SW 52.6 D 54.4 D 55.0 D 44. Ellingson Rd. and "A" St. SE 82.3 F 86.9 F 88.4 F 46. 8th St. E. and 136th Ave. E. 144.7 F 172.3 F 186.9 F 47. Lk. Tapps Pkwy. E. WB Ramps and E. Valley 10.3 B 11.3 B 11.8 B Hwy.E. 48. Lk. Tapps Pkwy. E. EB Ramps and E. Valley 5.3 A 6.0 A 6.0 A Hwy.E. 49. L akel and Hills Way SE andE. ValleyHwy. E. 225.8 F 243.0 F 247.4 F 39. Forest Canyon Rd. E. and Sumner-Tapps Hwy. E. 20.2 C 20.2 C 20.4 C 53. Lk. Tapps Pkwy. E. and L akel and Hills Way SE 13.4 B 13.2 B 13.5 B Unsignalized Intersections: Two-Way Stop Controlled 20. 17th St. SE and Auburn Way S. 60.3 F 70.1 F 80.5 F 34. 21st St. SE and "R" St. SE * c F * c F * c F 37. 9th St. SE and 182nd Ave. E. 27.7 C 27.6 C 27.8 C 40. Forest Canyon Rd. E. and E. Valley Hwy. E. 754.4 F 429.7 F * c F 41. Puyallup St. and E. Valley Hwy. E. 10.0 B 11.3 B 11.5 B 45. 8th St. E. and SR-167 NB Ramps 83.2 F 81.6 F 84.5 F 50. Lakeland Hills Way SE and Oravetz Rd. 17.6 C 19.2 C 19.9 C 51. Mill Pond Dr. and Lakeland Hills Way SE 9.4 A 9.6 A 9.7 A 100 TABLE 4: PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE, ALL AL TERNA TIVES (CONTINUED) 52. Evergreen Way SE and Lakeland Hills Way SE 184.2 F 465.3 F 592.0 F 54. Evergreen Way SE and Olive Ave. SE 8.6 A 11.0 B 11.9 B 55. Evergreen Way SE and Kersey Way SE d - - 12.6 B 15.0 B Unsignalized Intersections: Four--Way Stop Controlled 38. 16th St. E. andLk. Tapps Pkwy. E. 21.7 C 20.9 C 20.5 C U nsignalized Intersections: Non - Traditional 33. Howard Rd. and "R" St. SE 39.9 E 51.7 F 52.0 F NOTES: An increase in traffic volumes due to trips generated by this project does notnecessarily mean an increase in volumes at every intersection evaluated. In fact, due to distribution shifts that would be created by this project, some intersections may experience fewer trips and less delay. a Level of service and delay represents inter~ction average for signalized intersections and worst movement for unsignalized intersections. b Control delay expressed in average seconds per vehicle. C Asterisk (*) indicates one or more intersection movement exceeds capacity and delay cannot be calculated. d This intersection would not exist for the No-Action Alternative. TABLE 5: PM PEAK HOUR ARTERIAL LEVEL OF SERVICE, ALL ALTERNATIVES Arterial Corridor Class Dir. a 2005 No-Action 2005 Alternative 2005 Alternative 481 700 Speed LOS Speed LOS Speed lOS A. "c" St. NW / "c" St. SW II / III NB 23.2 C 27.0 C 26.9 C SB 24.1 C 24.9 B 24.6 B B. 15th St. SW I EB 18.6 D 18.6 D 18.7 D WB 17.9 D 17.2 D 17.1 D c. Harvey Rd. / "M" St. NE II NB 20.0 D 20.9 D 21.6 D SB 16.6 E 16.8 E 16.8 E D. "M" St. SE II NB 26.2 C 20.4 D 20.1 D SB 16.4 E 17.5 D 16.8 E E. Auburn Ave / "A" St. SE / E. Valley II / III NB 21.7 D 22.5 C 22.3 C Hwy.E. SB 24.0 C 22.5 C 23.6 C F. Auburn Way S. II / III NB 16.9 E 16.9 E 16.9 E SB 12.9 F 12.9 F 12.9 F G. 17th St. SE / "R" St. SE / Kersey Way II NB 34.9 A 34.9 A 34.8 B SE SB 34.5 A 35.9 A 35.7 A H. Lk. Tapps Pkwy. E. I EB 43.0 A 43.4 A 43.4 A WB 35.6 A 35.1 A 35.0 B I. Oravetz Rd. IV NB 26.6 A 26.5 A 27.9 B SB 27.3 A 27.1 A 29.4 B 1. Lakeland Hills Way SE II NB 36.7 A 35.8 A 35.7 A SB 37.4 A 37.4 A 37.4 A K. Evergreen Way SE III EB 25.8 B 22.3 C 21.4 C WB 21.9 C 12.4 E 6.9 F L. Ellingson Road III EB 19.2 D 19.2 D 19.2 D WB 19.5 D 18.3 D 18.4 D NOTES: An increase in traffic volumes due to trips generated by this project does not necessarily mean an increase in volumes along every arterial corridor evaluated. In fact, due to distribution shifts that would be created by this project, some corridors may experience fewer trips and a greater average travel speed. a Direction of travel. 101 3.6.3 ALTERNATIVE 481 3.6.3.1 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION The trip generation estimate for this alternative was based on data summarized in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual. Furthermore, factors were lBed to separate trips by purpose based on the methodology published in National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 187. This resulted in a slightly lower rate than that found in the Trip Generation manual for the single - family residential use. Based on these calculations, Alternative 481 is projected to create 428 new trips in the PM peak hour: . 428 Total Trips . 274 Trips Inbound . 154 Trips Outbound Please refer to Figures 27-29 for the assignment of project-generated trips during the PM ~ak hour for this alternative. Turning movement volumes at some intersections analyzed in this study would actually decrease with the additional trips generated by the project. This unintuitive reduction can be attributed to two major factors. First, substantial changes to the surrounding street network would be introduced along with the construction of this project, including the addition of the east-west connection between Lakeland Hills Way SE and Kersey Way SE along Evergreen Way SEe Second, some background traffic volumes would redistribute to alternate routes in anticipation of increased traffic volumes resulting from the proposed project. Figures 30-32 illustrate the expected total traffic volumes and patterns under this alternative. 3.6.3.2 FUTURE LEVEL OF SERVICE, ALTERNATIVE 481 A level of service analysis was performed for each of the analysis intersections and arterial corridors for future conditions with Alternative 481 during the PM peak hour. Please refer to the "2005 Alternative 481" column of Table 4 for a summary of the Intersection LOS and the "2005 Alternative 481" column of Table 5 for a summary of Corridor LOS under future with project, Alternative 481 conditions. The City of Auburn uses corridor level of service, which is based on a combination of running time between intersections and the delay experienced at each intersection of the corridor, to measure traffic impacts. As shown in Table 5, one directional corridor is forecasted to operate worse than the No Action conditions. This corridor is Evergreen Way SE in the westbound direction. The low average travel speed is caused by delay forecasted at the intersection of Evergreen Way SE and Lakeland Hills Way SEe No additional intersections are anticipated to fail or operate at a decreased level of service beyond those identified in the existing conditions analysis. 3.6.4 ALTERNATIVE 700 3.6.4.1 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION The trip generation estimate for this alternative was based on data summarized in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual. Furthermore, factors were used to separate trips by purpose based on the methodology published in National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 187. This resulted in a slightly lower rate than that found in the Trip 102 , r IV M1,. r I ., " r2 V., " ' i iti .. iti i ~ ~~ W t ~ · 0 : I '. ~ ~ · tON , · · It' 1"" O~ : ). , &~ :' ~ ~1b · .J 'i" \f~ 4 ( . ) ~ : > ~~ : ~ :' ~ . (j . : ~ . . . f ' . t t . . .. f f , . . .. . Ii I - , t _ f . I , , . . . ; ~: ' ' I ,::' r, . " , \ t l ~ W .' , :: ,:' ': ~ MEYERS RD I' / ,/r ~ I i~,' i-' >: : CO ; ~ '\ ~l /t'i .~), ":~, (,,~i · ":; "', ~;, I ,(" , ~; . y " ,\ I ' ~ 1\ . 'J:' ''i t 1 ,! ~ J \ \~ ~'I ;{:jf ., "'. ' ~ . " " , I: ~ . ;{'Il "' . ii' I ';:~f · ,~ '~ .f ; ~ ,::; \ I : '\ ~ i ~ ~~~ <;'.1' ,~ h ft I ~ ... 'r? ~ , '. ;., " , ::~, :: I;"' 166n '. '1.;' 1 i, . . > ... W W I " ~ I \ ' ~ , t- t-- ~ .:, "I ~~, ^", (jJ rn Y, . I I , ,l~" I ~ t- t- ,/~ , ','~ \ 0 -.::t \ (0 (0 ,. ' '.: \, ';j., ", 160TH AVE E w ill W ~ t- rtJ f/J ~ Z J - W ( .. ~ . . \ "\ ",;/' " './ .".';.::': f E VALLEY HWY E I . I I ~ t I w > · · a.. \ p ;.: ',:, ! ~\;~ ( .. I ~ . '\- \' ;.. , , -1 " / ~ <' · · . w .; " ,.\ j , , ~11 ~., · , J. , I ......, J- J ) ,:',' PACIFI AVEN I ",~ "," 142NOAVEE ~ :! '" I L '." :J. 1\ "'1,.. ~ . r tt, a. .', (J) I,. . ~ I 't Q. I,. W " W .,, 't > Z jI I I , .,,,' · , ~ VI. It. l- .J 0 UJ t'i~rt 'If/) OJ (j) > '.. · "t '- 'i".a 11\ A ttr",J I "i, r 't v '" '. L It N a'f 7 i 't r I u.. .""' 0 'f , " L _1 I · · · N' . ~ J ~' I I, 0 .J ' . {'i I 136TH AVE 6. t · · t '. Z W ....., · f " , J · " ~' i . . . · . . I 0 i't t · Ihtt,. I t, " (Q ..... . *. . ,,\ "> /1 · · , t , . . · . . ' ' , · J . .......Z ~ ft l ". t. I.' f } .. · r . t '> ., '. It tf'r. .. . . VI 'I · W "" ~ I, I ~ I".. .....,~VALLEYHWy \'" ,~ I It E , '.~ . t I" I , · , ~, . I · '~ < ", · · · I 'W ~ey HWY S · · , · . \ 1,\\\(1'. · . I . . I , Ii . " , . . "^ '. \IV " 't, ,.. I (^ '1, , .)'( I' i \ . a. 'IjI ~ ,. .. t 1 L_~ ~A A: ~~_A~~ . . .. . .. .- . . . . . . . · · · · · · · .5! (f) "" a:::: · · . W ". iii ..... ~ '. 3 1S NI'f~ . . . w . . . . w ~ :c E; '. U) .~ 4 . . . .. 3 1S H St:' w w ~ 0 Z C\I :t ~ 3 1S Hlvl 3 1S HIe w w ~ :r: to ~ --.-------.---------- 3S 3Nv Q~~ w ~ w w a~ NOSElNI113 ~ :...J ~ . ..... ..... ......... ,>>0 ............. \\ ~ ..' ~ ..' , .....,;t. l ...... l' ... + . t"'\ II"' { ,rl W Q ~ en ffi ~ ~ ~ ~ 3~NW~ J G 1 ~ IJ 3 1.S ~'3 w w ~ CI Z N ~ 3 !S. HIlT' 3.LS H!Z~ : 3 IS HIS . . I!i :~ .oJ: .l- .co . M . Ii- ..,- . . .~._.-.-~_._._._.~._. . . . . 3~ 3^'V a~t .: ........ ~c., ~ >:-~ ......... ;\0 .;!' ....... L.. A>>. ...... · . . .. LOfT . · . . . . ."n"..l5. , r14 641 ., r1 ., I i ~! iti ~\t ~ 'I " 1 ~ <<)r-t ,.. ~ . . I i f ) , f , , , .. - f . ~ ", . , . I . ~&w. , f . , f . , ; , " ' . ~o . . I : 1&1b . , . . . , . · ~dI . .. . ~ . . t J . II j a . " I . t . . . t . . :W . . .- t , . ~ . , . . . . It , " . . f . . f ~ . . , , . , I .II .f .. W t . . . l- I " i MEYERS RD . I.fJ . t I . -:. , . ~ ~ . . ,. . :i I : 't' , \f , ;) .. 111/.' >, .1 :! ...~ . , !" '.f ,~I "I' " ;( \ t I, > rl 'Ir~ l', ;" "I "'~ Ii ~' \1, t ,I ~ . ~~ w 3 1S NI'tV\l w ~ J: r- 0 : ~ 3 .L:S W13 : : w w ?( : Cl Z N : ~ 31S H1Z~ 3 lS HiS w w ~ :r:: ~ ~ ._._._._._.~._._._._. ............. . . . . . 38 3A'v a~€' .............. .. .. .. . of Generation manual for the single - family residential use. Based on these calculations, Alternative 700 is projected to create 622 new trips in the PM peak hour: . 622 Total Trips . 402 Trips Inbound . 220 Trips Outbound Please refer to Figures 33-35 for the assignment of project-generated trips during the PM peak hour for this alternative. Figures 36-38 illustrate the expected total traffic volumes and patterns under this alternative. 3.6.4.2 FUTURE LEVEL OF SERVICE, AL TERNA TIVE 700 A level of service analysis was performed for each of the analysis intersections and arterial corridors for future conditions with Alternative 700 for the PM peak hour. Pie ase refer to the "2005 Alternative 700" column of Table 4 for a summary of the Intersection LOS and the "2005 Alternative 700" column of Table 5 for a summary of Corridor LOS under future with project, Alternative 700 conditions. No additional corridors cr intersections are anticipated to fail beyond those identified in the Alternative 481 analysis. 3.6.5.1 SIGNAL WARRANTS Signal warrant analyses were performed at all unsignalized intersections that were forecasted to operate at an intersection level of service of LOS-E or worse for the No-Action Alternative based on Signal Warrant 3, "Peak Hour," as presented in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Millennium Edition. No-Action Alternative Based on the signal warrant analysis, signals are warranted for the No-Action Alternative at the following 1 ocati ons: 33. Howard Road and "R" Street SE 34. 21st St. SE and Howard Road 45. 8th Street East and SR-167 Northbound Ramps The City's Traffic Division is monitoring the following intersections for appropriate traffic engineering solution, which when defined will be programmed by the City and placed on the six year TIP. Alternative 481 In addition to the intersections identified under the existing No action alternative, based on the signal warrant analysis, signals are warranted at the following intersections: 52. Evergreen Way SE and Lakeland Hills Way SE 55. Evergreen Way SE and Kersey Way SE The intersection of Evergreen Way SE and Kersey Way SE warrants a signal based on the observation of the 85th percentile vehicular speed along Kersey Way SE, which exceeds 40 MPH at this location. Measurements conducted by the City of Auburn along this street at approximately 53rd Street SE show 109 , .. w r 1 r4 i iti '" o~ , ~ UJ " ~ . (/) , I I ~ , ~ ~: 'I) ~ ~O\~ Jo \.\~ " ~1& , . 1 . \1.\ ~~ f ~Il\ . ~ . . , . I , . . , . . . f . . . . . . . f , . II l- ~I.''l. .. . . ( ~~ ^ \ . N! f>-' . . . r : ~~~ ; w ," ;/, \' f- MEYERS RD I . ,I -..,'- l -.... j ~ -..-...... ~ ,,,,. --- ~ ; ... - .. ... .. ... - .. _ .. :3 ...LS H..L09 u.J 3 LS NI'cfV\l iU is NI ~W / ~ - .. .. .. - .. LU --I - '3 3A'L-.I .. - - ow _ .. ~ ~ , - V" ,.(37?V/" . _ :;cc -;:::;> ..... I ... ..;=r ~Cl S~~._ -- ... .. .. ::x:: ~ ~ ,-- -.... --V'~ S" ... .. .. 5 UJ", ~..$> ~. .. ... .. ... .. ... c:t::) ___~ ~ 0. ~ a ~ C'1>z ~ ~, ~-.. 0: u.J ~~- .. .. .. - rod'-- ~ 000 ~.~ ~"'"'c> ~ ~ = :_ ~ >-:1 is-I/..\I:-I3 ::TA""O: ~ ",}; ~~-~ u.I ~ -. ~ ~ p - ~ ~ --4 ^ ~. . Q"~ ",~ -'. ~ ~ ~ ~ is c::IOTIVAOd ~ .+ 4? ~.. ~ ~ CL ... :I ..LS H 'Bv l.. - 4 = - . ~L ~ .d; . ~ ""'~ - - .. - .. .. - ~ ~ ez:,.....:::>~~ fill' ~ "'<.; "" -00- I ..- .... -.... .. - ~ ~ ~ -- I ~ ... ~... ... ~ -~, "'- "" -- .. .. - ~ ~~ , : . ... ... .. .... ~ ) "~""" ""~;: ~ ... .. - .. ~ ~ ~ ,~. .. - .~ "_.. ~ ......--.... OJ ~ ~ ~ - -"... <-~ ~ ...... i;; ~ l.U ~ - ~~ / ~i"~~~~~ - .. .. ..:z:- ~ ~ - -;y. ~ ~ ~"'"~.... .. .. .. .. C -.r- ~ .. --- .>- "" ~-'~ ~~~~ u....- _ .. ... ... ::::::t l..U . ~ "' -"'$ >- _ - "'-.... ~ :::::: UJ fill' 'ti ~- ~~ - ~ '3 o.~ -c Nvo ..LS3~.::f ... .. ... .. ... L.rJ ~ ~ .~ ^.., ~ .. ~~ ~ · I 3= ~ :II : : ~ ~ ... ~ ~ i ::: ~\--~ > :3 is H..L VZ r:; . . ~ ~ ^ -" ~~ ~l! ' it ~ ~ ~ _~ y';~ ~ >';>< ~~ ~ - 3i _ _ '... .. - .. .. ... ...- _ .. "'... ...... ~i;~_..- ~-"-""G " .. .. .. ~ r"--/ ~ ~ :--' ~ ~ ~ ~~,,"O~~_~6' ! L ' · · . - · · · . - · -. '~~~'J (';', ; "".0;" .... ,:: - - ;>~~'-N ... -,~,,- "3 is H.L9 I-- '-- :;:,s;:q-;;'0:~~Y::~"~Z;:]::::-;--~~0-::'L -::~ ""'.0-. ~ ~. "" 'I[~~!!~i ~ "--- ... =- ""'- '" ~ I ;'-:~,-; -1-';'-~(-"'-f ~~"?:~-~-:- - - .:~"("~ Scl<ijjl:J"...:L-:~ .:-:,-:~;:~-~t;, .. - · · - - - - - · . · - - -:.a -' ~''''k ~ '., 'a.: .:,fi,c.,;""iii:,.'c.- ". .' ~&.~ ' .. ~ J .- is HiZ I- · - - · . - iP' · · · ~_, w. . . . '. .,; - . ~ ;~; '): ,~.~-~? rt~~. ~:; ~ :::~~~:.):~~, ' y::- '" " .~:~. "< L ~ OJii' _ ~ l...lJ - . ~,' , ~., _:; . ',," .. ., ~"- ~-~ <~ ~ ,v 4 ~ ~S-LS \-U-B .. ~ ~\?:~~~~~'t:,~<~< ~~~>,'~~~~.<~_~?~~~:,^d' ~~~ ,~ ~~"~,L~y_ .~ ~:<' ,/'::"---~~~. ~<' ~ :.:t::(>.\- '_' :3.LS H..LS LU r c::>> .,..C".,:..... ,v.....:. 'C',," '-. ~.. ~,.', . .'. , .' . . - - - ' ..'-.. LLJ ~ ; L . ~~. ~ ,:~: .~.=__~~.:.~;.~.':' ..,-:'_~.~h:._...~1:;~.~;:~::'~:~~1~.::-~:~~..~~~~.:..<~:~t .:~:~:1\~~}~>.,_:~. < _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _. . _ _ . _ ~O'7~~~~~~ _' ---- .~ ~~?"" -~ . - '~. ~~......<oC^ ~=~, ~:1r;2111;~"I~'~; · ....:;;-:fr<~ <~ < ~/ ~}~;V ~':> '-'. ~, - ~~:;"-'-<' ~ U9 J,~ .-;;"" ~ </ ,;,. .~ .. .,C':f~ "~."::.::.~~ti~t}/~~~;~{ :~J---j~.', j:~. ' ~~ ".;,;r'~~ :~/', ~<; ::.~'::..~~~/:- i, ' ~ ,~ t I ~ '"" _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' " ~. ~ ~ _ .. r ~ ~ :~\~~ .~ =- ~ ! ~~ ~ ,,~~. ~ - ~ ':. ~ ~ . ~ '.'f ~ ^^S 3A V H...L S : -:>. ;, .' . /; :.', ::,," '~~'~.i:~~'~" ' ~ ': ::' ~~i.~:::~~~~:~~( ~ \ ~ ':~< '~., '~" - ~~_,;;;: /,~ ',' _ ,'; 0>; ~ ~ ? _. ~ l l J " '. 0') ~~jf~ y,:X:; ':i'i> '..: ..: c.t ,':'. ,.... ~~. >. . .:;. '>,:.':' " ), Ai.. If,' '" ' ., '"" ':,' ".:-,:;;:.;., -' I 3S 3^ v a~e <= r ~ > .- .-. ' . ~" ,>,;\, :~. C:. ,,::. [.::" ~ .,:, < ., ,: ~ -,~~. ,::~:.~ :~~ " ;:~.,<:~~;.., '~!~,~,~.~.~5.~ ':;~".'~: - >.~ ~.~, ',,' . . ~::. .::,~: ~ " ., III ,. . .. .., .' . - ',c,,' ..... '," ;'. ~S? :a:;~ H~j:;,. ..,..... .. '. ,c ' · > " l.. ~~fi ~ ::'7;~ - .' ~i':,:-- - ~-- >~J~' 3S ~S-l5tl6a - -,.'-.- e~ - " ~ - '" ~ U>~;':'~ ~ ~~~~- f~ ,,, v ";.-- ~;-< <"~ >- ~ J ~ - '7t;S ~~~t~; ~:f~I:~I;&~~m ~,~. ~ ~~ ~> ~':~LiI~~~~'1 ~:ill~ ~;;:-;~~~~ ~ ~: ~~~~l~~~i:>~~ ~~ f' <:clJ/- ~1~ ~ -~~~~: ~~., ~~~: ~ ~-~ b;j}~~~~~<~~~=i'~~~ ~ -~ ',~ ~~;~ ~ ~~._ ? ~ ~ ~ ... c; Jy~~i ~~~{~Zj; 1~~i1 ~~:~&-i:~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~<~ ,,'~ .,~~ ~~~-'~:;:;~:'" ,~- ~ ~;c ~~ ~~~ "~. "'~ ~ ~~9?~ . -. ~ -~.. ~_<r> ~ ~ <:.;:) - ''7;':: , "'~~ ~ - - ~' ';~)<.:y eo';;:t 1-- CI ", ------ _ ..' ~$ t~~~~~I~~1 ~ -:, ~~ ,; ,';: - -; , a ~- ~ ~ ~ ~ U?" ~::. ~i: ~:~ ~ :;:' ~ ;~ i~:~~::-;~ ,:f ~- ? ~~ : ~ ~:~ ~ ~.~' t:i '.:: <;~ ~,' -~:rf-'i:~4:<~ -: -~. -.:. :i: ~~~t~D~~ ~ ~;;> ..-- ) .. * ... .. .. ... ... ,'-, 9 ';; ~~ ~.~ .'~ ~ . . <-,~:.; .,-~:; t3:tj";_ ,;. ~ ..-;-:>~ 1- ,~7 "~<"~ '- ~ _ ~ - ' - "-C:C :- ~'~ -,~ ~ / -~;;,?;;; I::'> ~ 3= --.. - .. ... .. .. -- :t', ", c_ '-- ~ ~ L - "~,:,~_:~_---; '- ~ ,,"." ," - , - . ~ d -.," ~ ~::- ",'. J ~ . > . ---:. C~"'::7"~ - 1 ~ -.. .. - . " . .~"7,; ~ ~ - ,,- " ~ " ~~ ~ ~"' _ , - :::<-,--.:'," >. ~ / ..::::;,~ :-" <::> ~ I ~ -' . . ~- ":_, 'c' ~~_, -..-;d:~>~~ ~- .::: -:_:~ =~, ":.; f ~ ~::t~~~:f,"'~-::';:;~~-( -' :~~J ~ " -~_ ~ ~> . ~ _ - ~~' :> -4 _ .. -.. . . I ~ A3"V^ N5r..::y-~ ... .::-..-...;-~-___ ~ . ~ ~ , ~ ~~ ~~- ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ . - '. -.. -~ ~, . ~"~ ~ <I:.. · ~ o ~cPl' :.- ' ;'::. .. . : "h ',: .;' " ~ .' ~~~:~~"L~~~~: c: : .~~ ,~., ..' ..~;:':.; ',~>', <. " ~ . . . :':'. .<> .;' _ . .' .' .." ,q...,.._;~ ~ . "" -. ~ ';:r v~ z:' ~~~ -~'- -:. ^. ~ ::, ~;, Jc OA'8 Al:::IVONn08 · .. J \ . ... ~ 1.6 - .....; ~ - -~ ~ ~ tij< fW~:uJT:?:~;~ ~~~ >~ ~"$~iliS J+l2L~ t: ~ ~', ~ :' "'~ -, ~--<:; -<c ~~~~t;J~ -' / ..~ . - -,. ~ ~'-;;-;~" e~ ~ " .- ~ - >:0 '.'. .. .. '" .~ < . <:'. .' ,,' ~ :~~~(?~~~~~f~: :'..:~'~. :<~: ~.,; . ~~ ~'-' /i:;:~, ~,~ ~ ,..:,.~.:,~.:,<', '.. " ..~t:~;~.: ,_.;~'~/~~i~!~~;' ~. ." .' ~'" _ ,.- .:~ .. ; .: ::::~ ~'::.- \. ~.. .. a~ ONOV\lVIO >f,;J~a ~ ~<-,~ o~ ,,~.;.~'::'~... ..(".-... ;. -""'~,;:.., ~~--. ~-'3,~1),i:lp;:~k ~ :;~ ,,~~ <' ; _~ -. 1 ... ~ --.,....<::> - j ~ ~ -'-",. ... 0{qti~" '- C:D ,>o?;:<~, ...;~- "CJ:). ';'-':' '"' "" , 3N :::L--~:t~l9'~~ ~~ n: "~. .;,g7:;:~..." ~~:,_-:'.,<--- -- e - . < - < -. ~i~ ',:e _~ _~ <or. ... ~ .. " -r= ~ ~..o .: .' , __. .~: :,' ~ :.. " <<..i::~::: %'e, :~; ~ ~:, '~:..~ -.~: ~~~~5~~;:~~!:~ ~.~. ~ : ~-,~. :~.:... :'. ~~~t ,~ ~ ~1::~~:: ~ " ~ ,'; , '>. ,>:~;' f:~ '~,~. ~" ~ ," '.:, ~ ;4~~~;fk~-~i ~::',: : '::=, };i:~~~.:~:, ': ~'~ ~ .. .- I · · · . .... ." .. '... ..; .' ~;;<.,:'"'. - ,. aN.,'[:LS ALs;J .... . "':"'~.. <::;r" .. ..' ~. ~ " · ."',, .......,: "r ;QoM'" -, 1 · . . .' . _ . . .. . · · · · · · · · . '.. .-~~~. ..... '. ~;~:,:~ '., .... .'.;." ~~... ,~::."~ ...<~~_~;~ .I~~~ c ~'''::c::~~'~~~~7~;i~~t.~~> ':'''~~' . , ;~.:..:~:~, ." : ~~'.~~;;~!; ~))~~ '::<~:;~.~~::~~~~:~:~~~"'.' "' . · " ..... .. [J;li!/: ~ - ,,,,,.,, .'...s- .."'" ~ G "'.' '... .-., -'<'-c, . , _ v ..... .. . .. . . ' .. " ,.. .:;'"""c'~' _ : ...' ~ ~am;p.LS, ..143.. 9 J. e s _ ... . _ -. ~ c ~ ~ ~,~ ,_.- ,:.:0'" ~ "'..iII ' d , ~, ~_-'.c_-_-C~ ',- ~ . <<c~-:' ~'c~ . ~,~ ~ ~ ~"_'. __ "'00-' ~ -.Y ~ ~ _" _ ~ ~-_,~~ :,_,~~_,,_.,'~ ~ > - f' _ f ~~ UJ r- oo I o ~ , ~ ~ ~~ ~ " ~~~ .J I' &1p. ~ ' ' ~U' ~ ~ (j {JJ , ~ . . . , /I . I . , . . . . f , t t . , t . . . . ., ,! . . . ~ j, . 'i, . . . , . . :W " , , .... ~ ... MEYERS RD . : I . · }- ,. , \ ~' , + (,D . ' ' \ "" . ; '('I' t' \' i , . I ~t ,,' J ~. , , , t . · "" \ /I . ; , ,. If 't:-:.-" " , · ~,f) \~, "' "i: I ' ) j /I · , ' · I "'.. . I . . ~ . t · . . . , l\l' . '. . . , , . I~)' I .. t ~ '; , ' . · J '/1' 1'~ " " , . . · 'I I r . ~',: I . ). . . . . I ' . w:' ::. , J}, i . ' 1 · ,; l: 'gJ ~(, /\:,l; "j,. "J'l1~\ " . . ' ~ . . ' · · ~ I:, ~,~;, It '4 Vi . . t f' ~~ t I '"l. f (; 1 , . . ~ 'y 1\ , ~ .. · · I W W "f~, ,(I .'~ , I~ ", 1ft I i 1;' , (I" , I ' · ~ ~ ': f, , ., -r .,'J ~,' .', t~ ~., . ~ ' , \ ' · (/J f/J .'f '/ r. ' :' " ,y , h , ' ~ ~. ' , ~: .l ~ ; I). ';"1 · · I I , , :. I.,' d, ^ ~ :., r.1 ~ t- " < , 0 '\f fl ~ ~ vI ;, 160TH AVE E w w ."tl.r: I,..."I.II.,U .,II...iO ;.....I'.i....,...... (fJ f,;; 0: . I , . , , · i ~ ; · VI ,."..,. ~ (t .J ~ W W <( m ~ ~ J () U ;I~,' .~" J" I I l ,a , I,. . I '\ · .j . , ) . I , . , " < . r . " . . . , I Ih . . '\ '" f . . . " ' . ) \1' "c ~' ~ . .. . t- , IY '. I. "t (fJ ;.1; ';. ,. · . . .. ^ ". . ,(" . , U. ,,,I " ' . . ""'\ flY, , I.y '\~.~ " ill', .~, ..J ;: '" , ~ . I 'I' ' . .J , " ' "( . <\ , . ' . .,\", l--' · , ' , , ~ 1(" ~fl :",1 :i~J')t)!\ )1.< ~<!,! PACIFI AVENt.. .. (f) f" t't. 142NDMJEE '- ~ . v r. r.' .' N · I . iI rw r .;' , " \ , · f r- .. · ~ :J 1\ '\ ,.., . t CO " '. 0. ~ t . · f ;: w.. .. W · ul t ", \- t .. , t !t ~ \ ' It t:. f (/') , r- · . , : 0 .. w '. (f) I. .f/J ;>" I .. >- . tn i A . I . . N I V t""- . ~ , ~r U. ' Z ' C . ~ " ; ; <( ~,::i: ~ . 136TH AVE E l'l"" /' 0 J.~ . ~ ~ 1\ Z : w. t :J · II'. "'ft . O .' It · I ~ · · '. '. . CO I' It,. " . i , , , 1 't · '. '. 't " I 1 , , ; , . . \ , .. 1 ' .. : < , ,.:, 'd'; ',1 : ': · , · W. VALL ~" · ... \ .' ,,; .. t ~ ~ r LtWy f {~ · + q C · , '., , . " ,\ I .. . ", l i:'" ,\ ~ · . / ~,', ' \ tli ~''^ '. j .. , J I' '\ , , . , , (\ "~JI ,J. I" 't i' , ' ,\ ~) ,L, W VALLEY HWY,S .. , . ' · .. ~ t-f., To ~ . ' . ; , \:; > ,\" I . . CO '. " '! \ t t ' r I r } r .,K · ~ t' ',', ,',; '" v , ~ ~ / .' . · . 1'~ ,~\, l , " ~ UJ e::: w >- w :E 3 is HI09 w 3 is NIVV\I w ~ J: 6 co ~ 318 L^J13 UJ w ~ o z ("\( ~ 3 1S' HlvZ 318 Hl~~ 3 1~ HIS ui .~ .<( , :::1: ) . I- ~ . (0 .: ~ . . ._._._._~_._._._.~.~. . : 'j )~ ) , ~ 3~ 3Nt/ a~c .: Q~ NOS8~'13 . . . ......... '>> C, tD ~~ ....... ..(0 .~. ..... :lit) ~ ...... ll. 0 ".j'. ....,," - .... .....- , m to ~ l() -: '(0 ,... ~ ' co T" v a) ~ 0 ' or- (') 't.;u ~t It) (7) N to t') (\J 0') , "t'- to- N r-.. t'J !.... q/;Ji Ol 't" 11tfi ~ N f'" (') ''''~ ' i '-..J pi;*~:e;<~,~' ~ ~ t. . · ~ '. ~ .,\h1'_l,'l;~.;, ~"i:!:l :~~ );" I'~I ~~~;{~VXI2~ l- . ' j( 'l> ,. '&> 4f.. ~ ~ '" .. , . ;1{i1t~~ (?W?:~;2,~~i1' :,P}K~1')s~'^ '1\' , '" ~, i · ~rl! .~" 'S{~~;.:Si'}t:~' '-""'''''''il VI · ' << . ~ .~, I ' · ~ ~ 1J, N~ ,. · 't- I '" , ' · @::;?#,~:~ ;;&\~fC1i~:'~ . r t ~ ' ! ' · ' ',:':#M~1~ \S~~h 2}'in<~:i1'tti?i%~~, r- . \ ~ ?J , · 0 i N f:W t. . A 0: ' ~ · , ~~ '\ l;1: , r, )&... · '\. · · k t 'it~ f. ' , " '&'},'; : W : 1;;r,'.c'~~ :..,; ", , " ~rl \ - ''1)J 11 .J · · I \fJn · I · .. ~~ / ' X .. ,I.' '~J'\ · .ill · ,rf~t~;~j>l; , ~ . t~/, . '" I f . ~~ : > : I, ;~~ :'~"'" ,. ":, ',' · ~ i Z ~ 1 ,:.~. ,t ~ · 705i · · J'ff · I.r,. l' ,i" Ii ' t j · · ~ ' ;" ," .' f. f \ " .' U 1061 . j\; .J.!f:. ~." ;/ ~ (4 " ' . · ,'1: )'ft!} f ' / '4' rl: :ij . 4 · V It ~ ,~ · ~ It i ,I' t:, "~4fI M ~ I · t f~' I (, i . (j/ . S -I. .~ :"It"{ ~ · '.1 . i!I! '" f . .....-...... ..I 11 · *' ".",.-- ~ ~ ~ to IJJ '. I , · t ~~~ ~ '" ' "" " I \, . f :~2l '^ :;: ll'M ;';I i>!I ~. . VJ ' ' n 1~~ ~I ~ : 1:; .. f' ~ L..' i ~ :.t, ' , 11 :P;~":'ib;:,j:i,: r , ~~ "'#: , \~!,.~ " r. , '" ' · , (J):;"1 '"M · t · f ?Q;3*,~>;t~'.-,~!.:'?~L':\):~;;:! ~:.Stf~~~1j';0\l iO ., · ~l j ;.1 · . · ~ i;~1%~:~:r:~x:ms;~Yj;~':~~~ " ~ f t '. .: ;'~:::(;:i:: ~i~~~}t;;~l~fi :'. i' 1 . ' W t . ~'.'. . . \., : · I I ~ ~~ f ~ ~ . Q: , · , j1,!$ ~ l . · Q , to J' . '" i f , I' '\ ' · ~rJJJ; " , f4 . ": YJ .. : 0 "';:, ' , ' :l< , ' ~ 'I" ~, ~ , , 0: \\ ID:~~~I ~~;~(!~~f ~i~~1~Jitg , f , ' ~ ".. Q, · ,',;::: i ~ ~ ~. ~ .- . 0 ".. '\ ' . <!I\i. ,~, ~ I' · Z" " · . ' .... fA ,/"\ ~;}\\ r" A ,1 or" , ,\11\" t 0 \W;;;;~;, cl "' fe't ---, r- I · ~ ~ I , . · " \ ~>;JX:i I -;/1 ~ ~ , 'f." ' I " ' · ~ j J ,.. I~:~ <:~ 1 82ND A \II ~ · ,~ I 1{ J:i · · ::1 f (' /::.; " -il ~ f ,. .. , · I ' ,~i}<,;, U 1 , . 4 . ~," , --.'.',,:., ',~1~ri:::~1i2} , ;' \"/~ ~,~ E W. f~ . i it Cl '.'".,~:j\":;'. 1\' ~~.;,~,I,,, L.. I 4 \ \ ~ I U,i"\:;;"fl'~l r ' t ~ · fl · 0 \ I :' ~ ; ,~J}~i~~l;1~:~ f/) · . ~ · ~ fj~ ~ A~ MEYERS rID , " ," \ e hi),}(,,~.y;~,}:,~ · 'I;' A g \ , · !' . <:'~\'/".!I.if;~il I · f' \,. '" t t , J r I ":1;1 ~Yf t:A t" ~ j r f ~ ' \ ~ . , " 'H ,I ~f W j ~ \ 4 \(~ fv'~f J.,' if' to . !Ii. '&. · · '" I \ !", · M ' " ~:<.' \~:~a.l~ ,I ,.... , ~:." A " · · I 'I' ,I, . ~ .r' / .):;;~ \ J v\ll' ~j. j ) ~"I , ('I",;, ." ~ \', .:'\", ~ \1 "'. ""I ,r r , I, " I, ,\ .'i ~,,~.il. ~".. · ~ ' t' . , ,,\ " i t:t' ,( , (' ',' i 'i" '~ ./ ~ ", ''0 ;',.., I f1 ~ . t '" .~ i;I,,, I ~ \ \ ,i , , ,.) . - t .- j " : '-' f' ': I, " ' , ' ;! ' ' .. << ' , \: .,' : 'q,:. / t1 Y. .- '" ~ 1'1'1 \ ~j" . UI'I ~ . ~ QP , ,~:; . ~': 'J ( \ ') , / ' . v.., . j .;!<".~~":>I . t-.' . 1!'::!4. , ';r/~'1',>~, ". d"'" ;'." ", t~!.~ I' ';.J '0 (; ~~';,,; -lof ( " 'nj.... ..,. \',., II ~\i" )::~i, I '/1," t 'i!g ,~, (,?' I 'n , " :, ' . ..7.~ift :}::~! I. · ~ i 'f:.II;;~~'~') ;;',,1\" "'" :' ,r'\ :, I;' / ,: ~:0;":}1 .;:{:jl .' ~ 1,-,::: . ~r. ,'/ >' __,. '. f , ~ I' !,^,::,~ ~ '\ iJ'-" \> , " " " , . , , ,1 ~ n, , . . ~"" · \ i I ',~, r.i~ i ".. I . \ I ~" \ "'\; i / 'i) v,, I"'.' . .t':!::, -/ !1"'''~ ' · , ~i. ~ I " ;> " ' , 1m!. -ft "I, .. Y !~} If-1;~I"<<, l '" ~ . I, . :;::',:::1 \ ~ l' v ( ,,' ;! ; , - ,. , '.~ ";:'i:" '; ~ . \*,\1. / "") ill.;.: 11 · ."", . ,In 1'), ,f 1 , c ..1 \ 'J I \ .' \' , ,f t , . t , !i! '.','1 ; t f I' ( 1/\" ' , ~ c t' n ;, \'(1: ~ f', >;, I ','i', , . ~\'!(i;:~ ~ ;.; ,e' ~<::'~" ,,' ~ '".1' 1\\' '(,'~,'1\~~ <~ r':t~ ,.~ {t:'~ 01 v'; w')' · ~,,: /~ <;.:'; /:" P M.'\ ,( ~ ,:< j ~\ I, IJ': 'N1}~:A.~y.,~,)::.h'~.; :~ i:: ,J I * ' ~' , .}J~;I .J ;;. j ;., " , , \.~ J"C~ ~ ' ' I '::;;'J~;,e/: ~:"~'I' (:~I;;-~::i,~g'{~:'~\'J)li,!J 1',- I \\) W' · . l!':'?'/,;'~, Ii \ d , ~ j ~\ " .1 ~. c~ ' I . I' I l ::,,', :t <,~"U. ,;,ji.:/(:t, '-"i! . .,,:~ '" :, t:"~';:}t t .. ,rNE~:~D;:<" ~it ' ~,(f: ,~"~\:)',M~:t, ':;;,!f'l \~i~~;~~~%';:'I,~~,.~~~,'ti ~~) '~':i~;!l:';i \ 1'1' · 166TH :,:!I\~:,::.,:.1"" /",' ~f w, ': ~ )'y,!,<,~' i;7;;,r:f~\.~,1"><I~"/~~\~"'!.~)/~' ):<:<::;,;~~Xi~'+ ~t' ,t : I '7, i '.. ,. ''', '" ,iI I. ' . ,;t, ,,"~ I \0 I .; ~ 'ii'.: ,;,,:: ."~I* .#'-j ? I~ AI, .}',:. x>:-,: to ':':('ti I' ~~<::/~, (..' . ~ rljl , r ,( /"'~"''''~C::',\f ill \'" " 'Ii ,"\ ",I ,,\1, \x:jsLt., fj<i;>:=;"~((~~~,,t'i{ \ f';;~]:,u11:,,~\/,'}:(r'I\"~;~' ':'~>," ,.:f"'\' ~,,(>~ (.A, '1/ ,~~! t ' : ({",/,' : ~ \ t\ I' !~\'i' !y';':.~ ,!("h'. ( " ,~ 0 /tl c; ;1'/1,1 ;7,~"t;~, ':{I;':;'i'~"" .~:~~";' ~<f: '~, :/ ~{~"\~io ' , i/";"I;~ ~~I:;~Hi.\:;:::_~:..:/" a. ;{>.;, r.' ~.' , " o" .<, \. R SI SE~ ,"" "~"" 0 'f . ,Ip:,i,,\ ,J\ 'iA~" ~'<i'H::;;'~,;<';' \ih /.. ~(. :' \ 'i' "/I/;) I~';r,\v rl;-;N1. \ ~i" (, r,J!::~'~?!i?:~:'~f;!i~ (Ie \ '1;8-;;~ o'J: , J. >, 1\, ~}>/, /, :~>':'x\.;';~ / '1"1" ~"~'d~/')~, ,~1: ~ i "~~h~IP/~i<-,~g\)P:f! 1\,\:,', \'..Iflt;\ /^ & i"i'~ ,p~h\y(.~-~\~'i;'; ./",,,j:.i,;;;?,...,:~;3i;<1~'''}rll.')~~ {;,', 'e ~. W W i~ 1 '..!;-l,''> I I I' J'" ( n~;' '.~ ~.'X~':'if. :. , ,~ " , '), ,-," I 'r{~ Y!" l' ,'~"'w f(l\, 't ,I :'IJ~ff')f ):~ I~ ': ~1:~1r:} \j"':~ ".);'~-". I ~,,,,,Iew ",t:,\V~;"1 ' ,I , · tD f',".' I)~'.~./ 'll ! I" '1 , I-(Y-' ,'\; ~t~)t'}i,~/;";> ");'-;'(;:,"\\,,) (\, \" j, r ~~~::::) ~':;,'\0'0\-,:]I J,;I'\' t:k " '~;,'\e ),'/1, 'c,\ J " ""\'/::/\""$ ,,'U:-;;;. : j ,',.", ELL... ,\:".~:,;,t'i:<r', , [}';'.r.~,JI':I~/:/t~\V1.0\2~:r~~(C;'.(\')~ ,~ ~r~I.'Yt,,>,/I,{,:~"~'Jr.J\';~(j'") f'Y(/"II~,.0!,~,~'/'~"<(:(J ";'~:);;.~~tf..",F/ " 'I. \MY ~ r r \f,tts\!I/eV1\r:.:'I\ . \$':'i"I.",h~":}I\~;'~~'~~:'Y~i}>"~i~t:~~~;;~:~"^" .l-c' ( '(/'1/1' ~,:.~I!i;) l' "f\~, 1'&("-li' ,",' 'tY~~;f "iq"J\~' ~\ ii_ ~If~~!:;'f: ~n~ " ~ · \ Sd:~1 · (fJ (f) ~'I ) ..V: ' , :t!t~\~;t.~~i~ !~,~~{, {I~M' ";;S~<'~'S~" \gn;:, II '~'. l'!!;\~'f I '-'; J~ :~; \ ',r,! '\' /:.~'.1 ,~I,,\, I ""~"'I Ii'" ~ " ()\(":~' t~!"t!. J'},>. y.~ r( '{.;~, ~~~>L;:/:"!' !-I '" f r'. " ;; \:.' :,Ql:'i:'~>~~ ':; ;;;'.1> ~:I; !~\", 'I' '. (, \\~'" ,f ",), " '2"" ,\ 'tv.,." l", ':<' '~,\", l\ f, l~V:::il~ ~v 'W.:t'v (, ...~y'.~' ~~.,: t!i:>/4;ij:~~'~%(~~;ji;1~i "\. ()~. I I \'." . , " I ,,\' ~\};~'(W I \~';K%~;;:,,'~;f\ ;.?~;//~I:,~~, ( "'~" ~:>~W"~~~I ,\~,t<;~~K~:~):~t:"~~7'~::;;~~ ~ ~ ~~,~:~~t. ,{' ~\'!t", ,f' '~~'\"(::i),\;~~),/,,~~:, 'Y~f(X:::;7: 0: .~, ~ ~ , '/.1. ,I' ,.,,: '; , " ." ". \I;~f\',' c7"/I' \;;P5";:,:,';} ;.< ,1.r;.~'\ 11 ; ;) ,,~ti' ~t~:t}~{ ~ ,:y" '1-':' { / \ . 1/" \ ;: N7' '~,',~>':'" I I~) ,.1:," ~I; t J0;;f;~;,~' ,;';" \... * ' t-O ~ " , J ";,, 1,"',\" > J.',!\ },~ \\'/<1' ,\<.J ", :~h ~l'0!;>tt ';',\ '., A/(()I:~:::;'":< "~"~I\'.'~ /":'C, I, ',~.> ') >:I~ r~\1 If>> c;-." . ). r.' i :1 ~~t'::::~ - I ~ W :;;Ul, ~H~,\j l"'E~~I'\;'II", l ~ )~: ~~,}~t~,';Ilt> iJ:>_i I", "'!'I/l.~\' I !~A/ft.\$,'(c; Ji">\'./~ / t : ~p I '~ \ ;,:" I , \ jYo ,\ J I :".,f\'O; 1 , In. f t.O ,.. l\~ ~.;.'" ~.:-' '~,';,t! J Yo i",,~:~, ,~ ,/~':t",;'~,~ 11M ,a-:- ~ h,( .,J ...,.,!~,II( J. \.'/..~ f....~ ~ f ~ t'\ jw (J \. ~ \I' . .' .t;\~t~:::I~j;i\~ ,1/\ t,:r~ ;~:~}~( J~~~~J',Y;H,v ~:~r'~'r"~4~~j0;:ttlillll~;~~~{~~ :[~%i'~tV! I"~ .,;'':{'7 "'~'," ")....., 'l' ,,~'I fl' . JfQ ,.' , ", I; ',', y, 'I"".",!" ;,1 I ~~ :,:' ':~';;'!i;}'.FJ VI \ ,'!t\ :( ~"c;'~~;::~;\:~~1\,:l;;\\.:, ~(~"I'J.~i' ~\11~ (;::1~:~ ~.I, tlb ~r1~~.%t~i, !~;I;':'!JU: $\1;1 1 ~,-",;\', ,,\:~~;} \:<> ~ f /" " ,:< r , I " , , < " ~~ ''';',.' "'/ '{ "~t,~~/ ~. , / 'f',k:~'/{iK )11 .fP '~\~~;0i~;)'~~~~~~~/I. '''I~4J!;W;;N:'~ :?~)~\\i~~}ll '<:':: " \ I, ,r "";",\'\ .~;;:! \'\,&~' 'M ,/,' ':. i~ I ~}\", " , . ,\/"( ", o~~:II: ~;, m" ff .. , J :;~t~Ar::' r::-:'t,s~", '\'{\i(,:\J~):;l,~\\1 L;\dP~/:;\; 1)~\:~,\;y,,' t J, I ~'" ,.:;~;, I ..,J. " ' '~:,,:'"" ~~\:(~;..^' >;" ~'. '1 ~ J 1 . · ~ U ~t1iJ[/: ,,,.'S ,(/):,:;(fJ~~,.y\ " :'~:~~:t~~:i.v/,b,;.1 (~~, ';'~;':;~,-l"~ W ;f)::~j{: ~ ~ II ,'i-,'v" · < ,o" i'"' ;;'JH""., ,;-."'\ :.~, ~. ", Oa <b';":; /j /".r':~'V'(.~~:e \ ,\ t j. ) 0 f ' !. ,;; ':..,~ '~ '160TH A\ IE E ~ .. \'LV,f;' v)," .':'-.":'_' ~ ';i:;""';wi'.'d::rl~1 ~~.:,.. ;~\<""", J '1'1)f.:il: I.' \ g&~:::::(("')( ~.. , {l I' ),1,r'" I' ',', "~,I' "\'~~ I. , r\V 'I 'T--<";'(',":,;,; :,~,j'{!; ",f i "',~~, ,'(;'1 '?j "1~li"Jt:. \ '\ /(:0 ('I d "' \"~"'.', \ ;)r'" \ '!' J ~ ' I' \ ~ '-.:l ,:i~ 1 I", . .. .t. ,;~.~r,,:ao l (j~A~/'" of 'I :; J :tJ~r1l-1.., .O/:~ ~y .. r(' );"?". '~.'.'..' ~~\.- -i.f "1II,~1.-.:i 1I'~" ~i ~ .;r ". ~ 11 ~~ t , -;:'; ,~gti:rlZ,;: .0, *:n~ {M)i:td/'~r I)t :,([;,~ }fJ:~ ;){;:::~\~;/'w t1\lf ~'''' f ".1, ,,'d'C/TlA I 'I. ~ '\"', ,f g:,:,:". ~_ ~. "i/~~': .:.;:' "", ~~;. ;~f(li~'i'81'~~\ / j r<\" ',.li:'i ~{l' \{ .r f 'h ):...~ ;>,;< J · ,-,' "~::,,;' ~: I_~~ : .} · . I"~ ~:~ !:ill-I t t n\';': :i'.;: 'i>.~,<f;:" .~, "~f~t;:~~,, ,/ /~~:t' ,1/' ,I ,,~/. ,<~I>! ~,~. :;'.'r 'I:t 1..','1 '~~Y.\,;,:.} , "," " '.v 'I ", I ~ ii,' ~ .\. W · W f ~'- (A'.': ' , · ';" f!<r' \ (VV' r' f^:'" '\ ~ F "l\t " ID ,,--':(";:;; '" . r' 1\;' , \ ~" (,-; ":~{' I:: ~\ ~'< : J " 1<' H ~ 1,,' v/:')' .\';J~]} 'U" " -l ,I, T \, I ",I. \[ 4,' 1:)1. (A\' \\::: 1 " w ;r:,; ,0.>('(~.;,>~;,:t \;i: ~>~r .,"") I,' Uf 'I, L . ')' f'~ ,"~, C! ~ \ ~ "I .' . ";.,' ~~ "l'l" 1"1. I \' "."''''1 " . ~ ~J . 4' 0 ~ ~~~:t;(.;o',41" (ti(;, ~ \,;;: '10 ,,,/ I'J:~~ .,. '" 1'1' '.', , ,,,' , '- \ \l'Jd)' \ f~~:;:;i! ~J.! I; ,"''', \ ~, ~ I r ' ;:. H' .. f-. L... .. ~/~~::{ Id - r. i, V, 1'>'~ V"" , ) \' '" '; '';<,~, ,_, ,};:~{ :<" 1\< , ,'j~ I> ; /, I \ 01:' f" .;;, In r III !/, li/i:/\M ;J,'\ II .' ", E " I J" ,. /1 lit 110 (, " ! ~ ~\ <<:I} {:':". 14,', J \ " , . r{,~ ~ ';"::,,1. VI r.n u. ~'r'~);~:i:,~: f :~~)~~/F" ,t!'S~Sen';1' >>f i~~~q!" A<}'\J"'~ ',\ 1! II, , .'./ j'"r,;.-,~,./I:~"'.' · ,:?: · Wi.".'; ,",,1 tJJ :/. ~ : r,:l '1:':' I \1' ~.t I" , ~,v ";'" . ,! ''1;t''''i'I,~;,'' j . ~ Z N ~ .l-::.~:: f. ~ 1- !J ~ ~~ 1 ~ t.... ~ ~ J i \". {oJ, ... r'. ,I~, ~~/:.l ,'/: c: LLt. (.\: "',' k'. v~'. !' \"\~\il.i< ,^ r;~ -> ,I \, :'1 I\\\\J;; A; i,,,*', ' lie f'l v'\ -.r " I,'" "ji' ,,1 \\:"}\."\~' ::'~,;) ~ .J W ; '>,'" Z } " ~ .' 'I" , ':'; , : "" , i ' ' . , 'I 1"; J~ , ' :,," f, < ", \. " , " J ~\,. I. '/~' I" "- . (( /1, d,.;,'1 'I' tI't ,1 },:'I hS^(,.", ::;,1, i\ ~",_~I' ~.' · 'I.: ((~j'> . " :' 'f '- I I' t, \ f'\" ,'.", ~.............. ,W to ;, '-" ,,! ,L...: " I, ..-_ I, .' l , , I \ " ! '.o.!'. \. " r f . , ", --.....,- - 4" ~ (',r;-, '+ ,} r ,i ~,,:,., ,':' r Q of ~ ~ ~ ~O'\ I.: i' "" ~ +.~ ~},.. -I ....f I .. f ~ r ~ ~ ~ I-' 1. f-/ ,;y:', , ~? ii' ~ ~\"': .. ~} -:.. ~ i' I'-, j (~;r ~ ~ ( ~ r" "1 {. .v i"I. ~ ~ ,. r I ~ "'f d / ~ ~ of! I II b _ ...... i ... ~ I ~ ~ ~ \,0 \10 ~ fLl ~ ""' I' f.. ~ y.:{ ~ (. Jr ~ ~ ~c . >" . :'." (\/ ,~('" " 't ".'i, < ",' , 'ii ' -";," .! , "I \ \ . ,I.' , ' " "' € V}LL & ::l ~ ~,:,'~, I>: \ 1''; r "';~ ";-',' ""/ ; ,{ I. \ ;~,,\!~ p"" N ~~'^",' ,;' \I : -' ,I i',' " " ~'J ____ " '"r " '," \1, AST'S~:"'" ;< } ~~/<;.,.," , " ,"" j ~ "r MIA, ~ y () ,I~l ~ .,,;0 " . ,:o' I '. ....., 1'\,_:. .;: <',' " .",' ~. ',., ,,' " .' :>\ .: ';o.~' ; :,>': " '. ':'::~' "VVYE VAlLEY }~E E 0 Z ''', ,1\' , j \ ,,'.:" V '1 \ \:.-.' \, It" ,,/-W ~ .,":"1,:;':.:.".'.:"., ,:'; /,../ ''/';..;::, , m .>:,1:',1" : .':," ' ,; ~I:U! '''', _ ~' A ".' ~ C'. t:.-,f I.:," "':.-t. ~ "<, , j } . ", ~ r l ,:1,.,,, /'\"(":'. ., ____ i ,.,>".' ~ .t n ":'-,1 · I.':. .. ." ','.,. \ ~ /':, ' , 1,'-::" ,_>,' \ , I " : ' r " , ,I d '. '.,. 1",;,1':',': lJ\AN E ',:,::'. C · {f) 't.t:tJ) F,~, " " t . ',~,., \<'(~ ~,,~,,: " " . ,1:;_. '0,\' :" . ," I" ' --- E \I^LLEY nn I \:, <( of... ~ .: " I ~t ' , , ' ,1 'i" > 'I ' I""," , f \ V n, 'Vff' "y; 1'-.\ ,! oJ ,i " \ ,. 1 , ':i. ,::,;,-: LU .,.... \'I~' i',~:,\ \ , \ V, " i i ~,~' ' 1 '::,/,~~ I r , ]\ ,. ^ , ,'. j </ :",:!.' llJ '" ." l' ~ : > t " w' " '" I '; L t JlI 1'01, ~ ~ I ~ ~' I I, > ;''.-1 . '\'11" ~ r "J ~ ,II!' ' II ( ,r , '., , ((J "" L l- i(:,~/ .,\~" ,,' ~.{! 1:" ~ . ,,I! ~, " , r ~ rr { (.I l'- ~t (,~", ' { ". ''',I Ii,," " tl. C/) 0 ~ 1 \ ^' < II \ · 0 t I I', '~\' ': I \t'~ ii, W :> jt\ z fi ,) ,~' ,'" /. ' I V', ~ ~' ,'i i ~ ' J U~ ....\V f':;"':;":,,'J-Olt; 'H' " I, 1'/,11', e,l; j".' ,I 'A L. - \\" :.;"/ " .. n t' "I 'I ,,~. r ..I ~ ~,:i!:i" ~(IJ. :;. ',.", ,j,; > ' " ~ ' ' ,. " " ',' "l PACIFI( AVE N (IJ 142ND AVE E ~ ~ O,VI',:;!~~ z: '1; , > · "II' I ~ Ai..J l,kt>;~~" ," ~ ,:' " 1 \~: \ y "I ,; t- ,.J ,.C~-, 'I !;~'>,l 'it \ ! I' " ,'1' , > \ II, \i ., ' , .' ,0 CO 0- !l':;;::~~, ,.,-==:. .~: ,1;;-, / ,! ,/ (. ",I.; I 11:,\,<' '" . f' \' . "."~' . 1 " 'i/" I 'I I' ~. , < ~ I Q I' \ "i ," ," L4. W UJ ,.. ':;J\V,J "{">j' / ' \ I, i ! ;,\~ 1\ ,1 '.., ~ ': > ) ,(/'1 t^ y~<:. " r ;': ;r 1\' >:\ " . "' \\'.,/f f, .( ~~;!~ ~ j ~::; " ,r uf Z (j) I ~ ~VAR ^' Ir:: ~ \ " ,t ,f., " ! ! ~ ,~t':,;:.'! ~;~ J t~ 0 W ,^ ~ f. I1Yt; ~~ 1; :,~. I' \" ,,',,0 II ?...;'{ ,-" M K' j VI , ' ~ j ", ' F I Vi y.j , , . '. " ,~ i'. ~"~" ; \! ~:/'\\' 'I r t::: ,,:' " I < 'JIi; (J) > I I ,I" II? ,,1 t,,: ~,(<::::;~< ~ r:: ,\ > 'i,' .~ I" K ',' ~ \ ;,' II VJ _ WI'" IT ",I{ 1 ";:. I'... '1..>" \ ,.~. "'" ~.J (\J ~ \, ": })" (";,'\~'1'f\ 0 .J ~ ' 136TH AVE E ~ I v~ lJ ::~~ ~~ ;, I : \ :<,: ,i>~, ~':::" Z w.. r: , ~ \It ~~ ,1 r;; \ t ,<" , (, :" \ , ~ "WI" ~ ~ ~ ~ ,;.~ ' \ t<;;, 1.'.\ ~ ~.. :;< , .J t ( .\ ; I,' ."'1, ;'" · 0 I , , A:,,: ::;,%f; ~ \: ", ' / ,CO MILWA! IllEE A\lE ' ~ ~ !:Y .'li' Y \" tb' Z ~ \\1 r\t /'\v ( J:'\~ ;" ' , ' ~, , > I .. ^ " , ,i > '. ' ":;. '," . . . ,~ : 'I ", AlGON. ~ I/J i - O~ ~ ': ,,:...' ~" ',; h , ~8J. VO N ( W . OQ , ;';,:' ,,\' :,',) ,.,', " i " I- 1 ~'" ~ I W VALLcYH .~ 0 I .,' ':,' · "~," i,: '. ~ r 'ro~ I' W}-E ~ ':":1' 'I " " ..... ~Q I- I ~ (q ,,01 ,," , f, j!I' ",\ /.,; ~ _ ~~ 1.0", ~ 90 ~ w. I ' , ,", <....--- r" l'Ir.. ' ...- " III' ,;,~:; · · ~?, , -" . · V I' ~ · \~ I ~ ,~,~ J y' I ~,' , ~ ~ , lIJ ~ '\ t f i )'" <, , ..........-~ ,.. ^ ~ · , 'f " l/:' , " t ~ U ~v ~ l.U 00,/ if'~' ---.- J ~ w ~ ~ ~ It) ~ ~ · 9j If .J ..~~ '~" ,,' ~ U'l I 0~ I- ~. ~ . J t ~ J LiS ,.- - 122ND AVE E ~ ~ . , ~ L74 1J A l34 59J ... L364 I ~ ~ ....?~n i111.-. _ .....1L:? ~A~'~ __ ......711:. J ~ 'O;tc . ...~ w 31S NIV'V\J w ~ : ::c 6 <D ~ : 3 J;S V\J13 : : w W a. ;?( 0 Z N ~ 31S H1Z~ 3 1S H1S w w ~ :x: ~ ~ .~._._._~_._._._._._. ............ . . . . . . 38 3^\f OelB ................ ......... .. . . f O~ .~?SE>N 1113 oCt) ~.... :c ).. w -l ...J ~ ~ the 85th percentile speed to be 48 MPH in the northbound direction and 45 MPH in the southbound direction. This speed study was conducted on April 3, 2003, during the weekday PM peak hour. This intersection was assumed constructed and signalized as part of the project and was analyzed as such for this study. Traffic improvements such as a signal or roundabout are warranted for the intersection of Evergreen Way SE and Lakeland Hills Way SE based on the increased traffic volumes that will result from the construction of the development and the completion of Evergreen Way SE that serves the development. Alternative 700 No additional signals are warranted under this alternative other than the intersection previously identified. 3.6.5.2 SITE ACCESS The existing dead-end street of Evergreen Way SE east of Quincy Avenue SE / Evergreen Loop SE will be extended through the site to Kersey Way SEe This project requires the construction of the new intersection at Kersey Way SE and Evergreen Way SE to current City standards, which will require the realignment of the 53rd Street SE approach to construct a four-way intersection. 3.6.5.3 SIGHT DISTANCE Available sight distance was measured at the proposed Evergreen Way SE / Kersey Way SE intersection. Both stopping sight distance and entering sight distance were measured along Kersey Way SE in accordance with the City of Auburn Design and Construction Standards. The results of the sight distance study are presented below in Table 6. As shown in Table 6, there is adequate stopping sight distance at the proposed site eastern access along Kersey Way SEe Additional measures are required to meet the entering sight distance in the southbound direction. Table 6: Sight Distance Summary Direction Standard (ft.) Measurement (ft.) Stopping Sight Distance Northbound 400 > 600 Southbound 400 > 600 Entering Sight Distance Northbound 250 > 600 Southbound 250 0 3.6.5.4 FORECASTED TRAFFIC SAFETY WITH THE PROJECT The number of traffic accidents generally increases in direct proportion to increased traffic volumes unless there is a major change in traffic control or road geometry. Therefore, there may be a slight increase in the number of traffic accidents within the study area due to additional project-generated traffic but the accident rate should remain constant. 3.6.5.5 MITIGATION MEASURES COMMON TO ALTERNATIVE 481 AND 700 To mitigate transportation impacts resulting from new developments, the City of Auburn collects a transportation impact fee. The funds collected through this fee are intended to fund programmed 116 transportation capacity improvements identified on the City's adopted six year Capital Facilities Plan. The poor level of service calculated at the corridor of Evergreen Way SE between Lakeland Hills Way SE and Kersey Way SE can be improved by constructing a signal or a roundabout at the discretion of the City engineer at the intersection of Evergreen Way SE and Lakeland Hills Way SEe A traffic signal at the intersection of Evergreen Way SE and Kersey Way SE has been included as part of the project description and the nstallation of the selected traffic improvement must be in place prior to the opening of the Evergreen Way SE extension to Kersey Way. Entering sight distance requirements in the southbound direction along Kersey Way SE at the eastern site access should meet or exceed City of Auburn standards with the construction of the Evergreen Way SE extension. Care should be taken to ensure that vegetation is removed to allow sufficient visibility. If the proposed intersection of Evergreen Way SE and Kersey Way SE is aligned with the existing intersection of 53rd Street SE and Kersey Way SE, the 53rd Street SE approach would need to be realigned to create a traditional four-way intersection with appropriate auxiliary lanes as determined during the intersection design process. The construction of appropriate bus shelters may be required should the transit agency determine that additional or expanded routes into the project area are warranted. 3.6.5.6 MITIGATION MEASURES FOR THE NO ACTION AL TERNA TIVE Transportation impacts are not expected to result from the no action alternative. 3.6.5.7 UNAVOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMWACTS Unavoidable significant adverse impacts to transportation are not anticipated from Alternative 481, Alternative 700 or the No Action Alternative. 3.7 PUBLIC SERVICES 3.7.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT FIRE Fire protection is provided through a contracted service agreement with the Auburn Fire Department. The emergency service equipment currently consists of five fire engines, one Telesqurt and four Basic Life Support (BLS) units. The daily staff consists of fourteen paid personnel. In order to provide sufficient protective services with the City of Auburn, the Fire Department cperates around the clock in 24-hour shifts. The average response time for calls within the service area is approximately four to six minutes. The primary route identified for service to the site would be via Kersey Way. The Department responded to an ffitimated 7000 calls annually, with approximately 70% of these calls classified as medical aid responses. The City's current Fire Insurance Ratings are based on Insurance Services Office (ISO) criteria, which ranges from 1 (the best rating) to 10 (unprotected). The City of Auburn's current rating is four (4). The rating is based primarily on the factors; fire alarms and communication (10%), fire suppression and 117 response time (50%) and water availability and location of fire hydrants (40%). A homeowner's insurance premium will change if there is a fluctuation in the City's ISO rating. Tax revenues generated by the project would be available to the City of Auburn to finance additional staff and equipment needs. POLICE The Auburn Police Department would be responsible for providing services to the Kersey III Residential Development site. Police headquarters is located at 101 North Division and is scheduled to relocate to 320 East Main in 2004. The Auburn City Police Department consists of 115 full time employees, serving a population in excess of 46,000 citizens. It has at its disposal more than 40 law enforcement vehicles. Response time for the City of Auburn Police Department is maintained under 4 minutes for Priority One Calls and extending to under 36 minutes for Priority Four calls. Current staffing levels indicate a level of service (LOS) ratio of approximately one Commissioned Officer per 541 residents, or 1.83 Commissioned Officers per 1000 residents. Industry guidelines define a ratio of one Commissioned Officer per 500 residents optimal and one officer per 1000 residents acceptable. The City has not adopted a standard ratio for staffing, but endeavors to staff as close to the optimal level as possible. Tax revenues generated by the project would be available to the City of Auburn to finance additional staff and equipment needs. Funds for police services are part of the General Fund. SCHOOLS The Kersey III residential development site is within the Auburn School District. There are three schools in the area of the proposed site that would serve as elementary, middle school and high school for those living in the development. The 2002 - 2003 school year enrollment for each school is summarized in Table 7. Table 7 Student Enrollment 2002-2003 School Year Auburn School District Name of School Number of Students Gildo Ray Elementary School 479 Mount Baker Middle School 806 Auburn Riverside High School 1,862* *Over capacity of 1,860. All predictions for the next few years show increases in the number of students in all three schools, with increases at the high school level being most significant. However, by 2005, a 3rd High School with a capacity of 1,500 students will open in the District. 118 PARKS AND RECREATION Existing Facilities Park facilities proximate to the project include; Lakeland Hills Park at Evergreen Way and Olive Avenue, Mill Pond Park and Roegner Park on Oravetz Road and the newly developed Sunset Park at the intersection of Lake Tapps Parkway and Lakeland Hills Way. These parks have been dedicated to the City for public use. The City of Auburn uses the following guidelines to provide park lands for City residents. Table 8 - Park Land Dedication Guidelines PARK TYPE RECOMMENDED PARK LAND STANDARD (ACRES/I, 000 POPULATIONS) NEIGHBORHOOD PARK 0.76 COMMUNITY PARK 4.5 LINEAR PARK 0.77 TOTAL 6.03 GENERAL FUND In addition to the specific services such as schools, fire, police and parks and recreation, the general services cost are financed through the City's General Fund. 3.7.2 SIGNIFICANT IMP ACTS FIRE The increased population has the potential to impact the fire department's ability to perform its services; as service calls to this area would most likely increase. Service calls to the area could place added demands on response time to other parts of the City. The overall level of service could decrease by an unknown amount. Design guidelines could require the use of acceptable building materials, sprinklers, alarms and properly spaced hydrants to serve the project site. Development of an adequate water source will ensure the fire flow requirements as specified by the City of Auburn are met. Adjacent roads and road connections will maximize the potential to respond in the minimum response time. POLICE Based on the projected population, in order to keep the current officer/citizen ratio, another three (3) officers would need to be hired in response to Alternative 481 and four (4) additional officers would need to be hired in response to Alternative 700. The fourth officer is required when the population of the project reaches approximate 1,563 persons or one (1) officer is needed for every 541 persons. The ratios indicate less than optimal levels of service, therefore overall response time and protectio n services could possibly decrease by an unknown percent. Without the addition of 3 or 4 officers, depending on which 119 alternative is chosen, there is a potential that overall response time and protection services decrease by an unknown percent. However, the typical nature of new construction and new development does not necessarily lend itself to the typical per capita equation. While it is likely that service calls will increase as a result of an increased homes and residents, a new development is can be expected to have less of an overall impact to public safety that the City in general The potential for criminal activity and the demand for police services can be impacted by the design of single family homes and subdivisions. Improper design of subdivision layouts and the single family home design may reduce the ability for residents to prevent crime within their neighborhoods. GENERAL FUND The estimated population for the Kersey III project can be approximated utilizing the persons per household (PPH) for the Lakeland Hills PUD. Estimated Population: Persons per households vary relative to the type of housing. In the Lakeland PUD, single family units it is 2.86 pph and multi-family is 2.52 pph. Using those current pph figures the project alternatives produce the following: Alternative 481 Alternative 700 Single Family: 409 du 628 du Multi- family: 72du 72du Population: 1351 persons 1978 persons Impacts to the General fund can be estimated by calculating the population that will be generated by a residential project. Utilizing the estimated population and the existing General Fund impact of $338 per capita the total General Fund impact for the year 2010 can be determined. From the General fund impact, the valuation of the homes in the Kersey III project that will offset the impact can also be determined. Table 9 provides the calculations. Table 9 Estimated General Fund Impact Lakeland (2003) Alternative 481 Alternative 700 Population (2003) 1,465 0 0 pph (single family) 2.86 409 628 pph (multi-family) 2.52 72 72 pph (total) 2.58 2.81 2.83 total (du) (2010) 1,772 481 700 Pop (2010) 4,571 1,351 1,978 General Fund Impact (per capita) 338 338 338 Estimated General Fund Impact 1,544,998 456,638 668,564 Mill Rate (1 % inflation) 3.15 3.15 3.15 Total Assessed Value 490,475,556 144,964,444 212,242,540 120 Average PriceIDU 276,792 301,381 303,204 DU/ Acre 4.59 7.25 Both the general fund impact per capita and mill rate were adjusted for inflation (1 % per annum). The current mill rate is 2.94 mills. Based on these assumptions, the assessed value will need to be approximately $300,000 per parcel in order for the development to generate sufficient General Fund revenues to pay for the increase in governmental services caused by it. With 34 single family homes, the population generated under this alternative would be approximately 97 persons. The overall impact on public services would be significantly reduced when compared to Alternatives 481 and 700. This alternative would generate a total of 20 new students. The Alternative would most likely not require any additional police officers or firemen; however, access and availability of water for fire fighting could create ancillary problems for these services. The overall impact to the General Fund would be greatly reduced with the 2010 estimate of$32,867 at a mill rate of3.15%. Ifpark area were required, approximately 0.7 acres of park land would be needed. SCHOOL The Kersey III development will generate additional students that would utilize area schools. Table 10 shows the approximate numbers of students that would add to enrollments at local schools. Table 10 Projected Students in Kersey III Development School Students per Unit Alternative 481 * Alternative 700** Elementary 0.15 72 105 Middle School 0.19 91 133 High School 0.25 120 175 Total 0.59 283 413 *Based on 409 single-family units and 18 4-plex multi-family units **Based on 628 single-family units and 18 4-plex multi-family units PARKS AND RECREATION Both Alternative 481 and Alternative 700 will generate the demand for increase use to public parks and open space areas. As adopted from the City's Park Plan and Lakeland Hills Master Plan, a rate of .00603 acres of park land per 1,000 persons, assuming the persons per household identified as the typical amount of land needed to address increased park demand. In determining the amount of land that will be required by the Kersey III development under Alternative 481 or Alternative 700 it must be taken into account that a portion of the Duty property was included in the mitigation measures for parks for the Lakeland Hills North Development. At the time the parks were developed for Lakeland Hills, a density of 180 units was allocated to the Division III property. Therefore, the land within that Division would be required to provide park land for only those units in excess of the 180 units accounted for previously. 121 Alternative 481 For purposes of park impact analysis, Alternative 481 would yield 229 single family and 72 multi-family units (assuming a credit of 180 single family units in Division III). Based on the population per household figures, this would yield 836 persons. Using the City formula of .00725 acres of park per 1,000 persons, Alternative 481 would require approximately 6.1 acres of park land. Alternative 700 With the 180-unit (assumed to be single family) credit in Division III, Alternative 700 would yield 448 single family and 72 multi- family units for purposes of park impact analysis. Based on the population per household figures, Alternative 700 would yield approximately 1,462 persons. Using the City formula of 0.00725 acres per 1,000 persons, Alternative 700 would require approximately 10.6 acres of park land. 3.7.3 MITIGATION MEASURES POLICE AND FIRE Taxes and fees applied to with development and operating costs would offset the majority of the costs associated with supplying Police, Fire and emergency services to the completed project. Utilizing Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) as defined by the National Institute of Crime Prevention can achieved additional mitigation to lower the costs for police services. CPTED is an approach to subdivision design and house design that reduces crime through the use of principles such as Natural Access Control, Natural Surveillance, Territorial Reinforcement and Target Hardening. Each of the principles increases the ability of homeowners and neighbors to observe conditions in the neighborhood but also creates a sense of territory that helps deter potential offenders. Examples of the CPTED are listed in Appendix L. SCHOOLS The City of Auburn has adopted a mitigation fee program to provide for future school facility needs generated by new development. Mitigation fees for schools will be assessed at the time building permits are sought for the individual homes in accordance with the adopted fee schedule. PARKS AND RECREATION The proponents of the Kersey III project under both Alternative 481 and Alternate 700 will be required to meet the park dedication requirements in accordance with the adopted policies of the City, 6 acres and 10.6 acres of new park land, respectively. Additional the Parks and Recreation Department may consider alternatives to land dedication at the discretion of the Director of Parks and Recreation that accomplish the same intent and level of service to residents. NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE The No Action Alternative will not result in impacts to public services. 3.7.4 UNA VOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMP ACTS The proposed action would result in an overall increased need for public services; however, no significant unavoidable adverse impacts to public services are anticipated as a result of the proposal. 122 3.8 UTILITIES 3.8.1 SEWER This section is based on the "Sewer Alternative Analysis" by Apex Engineering dated "March 2004" which is attached to the DEIS as Technical Appendix H. 3.8.1.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT The proposed Kersey III site is undeveloped and within Auburn's sanitary sewer "South Hill" service area. The sewer system in the adjacent portions of Lakeland Hills is connected to the existing King County Department of Natural Resources, Wastewater Treatment Division (King County) Lakeland Hills pump station located just north of Oravetz Road and south of the White River. Sewage is currently treated at King County's wastewater treatment plant located in Renton. The pump station is operated by King County. The pump station is resigned to serve the greater South Hill service area. The current pump station capacity is approximately 2.16 million gallons per day. The calculated December 12 through December 16, 2002 flows were approximately 0.3 million gallons per day or about 14% of the capacity. The Kersey III project, assuming Land Use Alternative 700, would contribute approximately 0.7 million gallons per day. This would bring the tributary flows to 1.0 million gallons per day which is approximately 46% of the capacity of the pump station. The 2001 City of Auburn Comprehensive Sewer Plan, (Comp Plan) identifies future improvements necessary to service the South Hill area including a future gravity sewer in Kersey Way proceeding north to Oravetz Road and then west on Oravetz Road to an existing system within Oravetz Road. See Figures 39 and 40. This system envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan would serve Auburn's PAA located south of the White River along the Kersey Way corridor. The existing sewer service within the Lakeland Hills Development is provided by the City of Auburn. A sewer main is located within Evergreen Way, which lies along the westerly boundary of the Kersey III project site. 3.8.1.2 SIGNIFICANT IMP ACTS Potential impacts of providing sewer service to the proposed Kersey III project are evaluated by looking at two options for each of the development alternatives. 1. Providing a gravity sanitary sewer conveyance system within Kersey Way as proposed by the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Providing an interim sanitary sewer pump station and the appropriate force main piping system at the south end of the Kersey III project site, collecting sewage flows from the Kersey III project and pumping to the existing gravity system in Evergreen Way and discharging to the existing sanitary sewer mains within Lakeland Hills. Alternative 481 Option 1 - Comprehensive Plan/Kersey Way System This option was the planned route for servicing the eastern portion of the South Hill service area as identified in the Sewer Comprehensive Plan. That proposal is for the installation of a gravity conveyance 123 ~ ~ ~ )1 I , j GRAJ .. 0 , ............. .U f .. ( 1 . l~ 1M lJG:l .. / l ."""l .,~~.. :; j/' 'J'" ~.. \ ' ~ :r ~.)" t l 1 ~ ~ '; t ~ "cO, 1 i , ','.". i \ 1 J ~ \ I ~~ fI.~ t~ ( \ "",~....", { , ' ? ...../!'(" . ~ . ~ , 1 ! q , \ I \ . · ....r . ~ j , , f " I IIr ,\-, rt f " " J'.. .. ? . J'. ~ 1f.,tJ' .p , !< ' "".,r ,; -"", ~ \, 'I ,.~, " ...... , '. \ \ f . 't-\ll' .... "" ' . 1- ~. : . , .. \ ., \ . . . \ \ . ~ . .' " \ rif " .. ~ 10 f-"r 011I /I... , ~ .. l. . . ,'" ~ . . . , IIll.rW.ft./ .."" . VW' .. ""+ ~ oil...... ~~ "" ,~ T:II' ~ .~.. l' , " ,It", ," + . . , ;,," ""',.... '" " l \. I \ \ . . , .,.", . iO" I " J ~ ~..... ,J " .t' f I' '" . ~ "~'" i ~~ ~ Ii.' . " , , f t....... "'li" . lUI# 0 " . ~ , .... \ .! : ~ il .,."t:f'........r \ \ I ~ , \1Wt r :' d I " . '. t \." '\ \1;~ , ' . II t '; ; \~',~ . ~".. ......,. (' .. "'\ '\~ t, i r~ ;' / \. ; "', Z t/ \::~ & ~!i O~Q:: ~z~ .g: (1j ~ ~ I '~-;:~ .~:~~.;: .' .- f I ,~~ ~~;(., ,) ", :, -. .' ""., I J / /",.). l' ~~ I.. I 1..1 / /1 ,: ~' ~ ,. U' ,.' / ..,' /1 ~/ / /! / /" \ ~"""''''~'''''''''''""o,...........,.~",,..... ........-........ ...........~~__""'_ "'"*.., --- ...._f~...... ,.,...... '- - , " -. . '. - ..~ .~- -" "~"",", ........ . \ \ \ """-'~~~.-+'-'" "". . '"'' -." -.-.. , ,.,--'-'" '-'.. .".....--.. , ~ . ~ -'. -'.... _._...~.~~, -.. .-.~..~.-- .~, ,.'" ~'-:.~~:~ ~~: .~.: .' . ~ - '.'~ .~:'..::.'- ~. . .:~'::, ~~.~ '. ".. ,_"..__. '.___. :::. ... " . ' .:~:~'.~ . .:. ~ ,__ :.<::_.' ..i:~:,: '~:.~:...' """'" - .~~, '.,~ -, -.~. -...- . ~ ..-~.,~ ....- " " .: ::- . .: ...::::.J ~:..:.: ... ~~~ ~ -: :.: q,." .~::~ '.:, ".~.: .. ~ - '.. '~~-'.. -.. ...... ""'~.. ~,. 0,-"", ... ~...... ........... iO ... "", . ........-......... ! .. " ~~~ r "" ..l~r.". 5 ~'il"':" -- - : (t , i ( r , l,' ! system along Kersey Way and along the south side of the White River, connecting to the existing manhole and/or sewer stub northeast of the Lakeland Hills lift station in Oravetz Road. A conceptual alignment of these sanitary sewer improvements is included in Figures 39 and 40. The schematic design is based on providing sewer service to the tributary basin identified in the Comprehensive Plan. As part of this option, the pipes constructed along Kersey Way and Oravetz Road would be sized to accommodate future flows from the South Hill service area. Sizes of pipe under this scenario are found in Appendix H, Kersey III Sewer Alternatives. This sanitary sewer alternative analysis also assessed the potential impact for the future possible increase in number of dwelling units within the Td Street East sub-basin. If the maximum number of dwelling units within the 2d Street East sub-basin were developed per current zoning, a slight increase of 1 pipe size would be required in the gravity main as it proceeded north on Kersey Way and west on Oravetz Road to the existing connection. In either case, the proposed sanitary sewer improvements, as required by the Comprehensive Plan, would be sized to accommodate the dwelling units for the Kersey III project site, lots within the Td Street East area, existing or built out per current zoning, and the maximum dwelling units for the remaining area of the South Hill basin per current zoning. Option 2 - Interim Sanitary Sewer Pump Station The second option is to install a public sanitary sewer pump station within the Kersey III project. This option for providing sewer service would require the installation of a gravity sewer main along the project's frontage on Kersey Way. A public pump station would be installed to direct wastewater flows westerly via a force main to the southwest corner of the site to connect to the existing gravity sewer system in Evergreen Way. See Figure 39 for approximate lift station location and force main route. This option was proposed by the proponents of the Kersey III project as part of the original preliminary plat submittal. This alternative would possibly require an amendment to the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan unless it is considered an interim system, as it would not be able to accommodate the service area as envisioned by the Sewer Comprehensive Plan. The analysis of this alternative shows that pumping to the Lakeland Hills system appears feasible for a limited number of sewer connections. An analysis shows that the majority of the Lakeland Hills system would be adequate to serve the Kersey III project with the exception of the first two sewer lines within Evergreen Way S.E. The capacity of the Lakeland Hills mains will be reached with an additional 109 lots within 24 acres from the adjacent tributary areas. These first two lines would have to be bypassed or the two lines would have to be reconstructed to allow for the increased volume of flow. The bypassing of the first two segments of gravity sewer line along Evergreen Way and connecting the new force main to an existing manhole (Manhole 1410-67) is shown on Figure 39. Lakeland's downstream gravity sewer system was also evaluated to determine the location and capacity restrictions associated with the existing sewer system and this pumping alternative. Approximately 109 lots in addition to 481 lots from the Kersey III project could flow into the Lakeland Hills system under this scenario. Alternative 700 Option 1 - Comprehensive Plan/Kersey Way System This option would be generally the same as that discussed for Alternative 481, Option 1. The sewer line would follow Kersey Way and Oravetz Road as proposed by the Comp Plan and connectto the existing system in Oravetz Road to the north. The system would be sized to accommodate 700 proposed units 126 \vi [h ~ n t h~ Kersey III dcve lop men t as \VC (I as the rem a 1 nder 0 f the So ulh Hi lJ serv ice area. Analysis \vas made of the pipe sizes~ which \vould be needed to accommodate this option~ and h ,"vas found it would req U lre the same pipe sizes as those 0 f Al tCrn at5vc 481, Option 1 p I) [ease See Append ix }I~ Kel's ey III Sewer Alternatives date Mareh 2004. Option 2 - InleritJl....~alli tarv Sewer Pu mp StHtion The option is to provide an interim sanitary se\V"er pump station for the 700-lot al terna ti ve is generally the sanle as 0 ptio n 2 for Alternative 481, The impact of th is project is that in addition to rhe 2 exis.t] ng pi pes at E verb:rreen \\~ ay that \V'ould be u psized Or bypass ed, ther~ are several additional pipes ,vi thin ~he Lakcland Hills rlcvelopmcl1t, which would n~cd to be increased in sizc. These pipes, as ident~fied) have n remaining capacity to accommodate approximately 638 units. The pumping: shnlon could be designed to discbarge at a rate nor exceeding the existing capacily~ This option would limit ~he numb er 0 f regidenc cs./ units to a t1 ow ra l c no t ~Acecd ing ~he exisdng system capac ~ ty. 0 therv{ise~ these pipe runs wo u ld need to be reconslructed and inc reased in s tze in order ~o accOITUllodate the 700-lot option, Under th is op tion, no other port~on 0 f ~he South Hill service area bas i n clln be accom nlodated w ithi tl the pump statio II an d fDrce mai n fac il iti es. The C lty willlike!y requ ire servic e to areas outside 1he proj ect. This pump station force main ortlon shal) be considered an interim facility and would be remov~d at \vh [ch eime the remainder of the gra vi ty se\ver )] ne on Kersey Vl ay and Ora veil Road were comp letcd to serve the Soulh Hili service area. .... 1\10 Action AlternaEive The No Actio n A Itern at i ve aSSlunes lha~ the deve lopnlen t \VOU [d use ons ite septic/draintleld systems. Lot size requ iremen ts woul d be ba.sed on the feasi b i ~ ~ty of tbe soils to sup po rt ons tte san itary se\Ver systems. TIle use 0 f ons l te drai n [tel ds along with onsi te we'ls COli [d reduce the number 0 fun l t~ In the proj ect to less than 34 houses. This alternative is in conflict with Gro\vth ~1anagement Constn,ction Impacts. The t\Vo sewer .a I tel'llati yes COll ld be Ll t i [ize d fo1' either A Itemative 481 or a ~ arge portion 0 f Al ternati ve 70n~ therefore~ the constructi on [mpact~ would app Iy to both a I ternatives. Option i - Kersev ~T ay Th~ Kersey 'Vay corridor is located adjacent to Bowman Creek from the project site to 1be Whhe River. Ag prop osed, the new s ev.rer line \VOU Id be installed ~n the Kersey Vt,' ay right- of-\vay in the paved sectton. l\t Oravetz Road the sewer would foUow Oravetz Road or parallel tbe road behveen the road and the Wht te River if addi tional grade is needed for gra vi ty fio\v, The constrllct~on process would have several potential impacts inc luding:~ 1 p Po tenli a( erosion from excavation actl vities an d storing and transferring 0 f exca vated materials Or fi lUbackfi 11 malcrials~ The prox ~ mity 0 f the construction (0 Bowm~n Creek creates the potential for sediments from constmction activities to reach the creek and affect the water quality and hab L tat. 127 2. Construction vehicles could deposit mud and sediments on Kersey Way with the same potential impact to the creek. 3. Dust generated from sediments, excavated soils materials and filllbackfill materials. 4. Oil and/or solvents from leaking construction vehicles and equipment. 5. During construction, at least one side of the road will need to be closed. Traffic may need to be routed around construction activities with potential of traffic delays during construction hours. 6. Potential impacts from the depth of the sewer trench are addressed in Section 3.1. 7. Additional discussion regarding wetland and stream impacts is addressed in Section 3.4. Option 2 - Interim Sanitary Sewer Pump Station The pump station and force main portion of this option would take construction away from Bowman Creek but would have potential impacts on the onsite and offsite wetlands and onsite stream that feed into Bowman Creek. While the actual alignment of the force main can be located to avoid the stream and wetlands, similar to the Kersey Way option, construction activities have the potential to increase erosion and sedimentation impacts to the wetlands and the connecting stream. The location of the pump station appears to be close to the stream corridor and could create an impact on the stream buffer by reducing the effective buffer around the stream. The force main option will also require the construction of approximately 250 lineal feet of pipe within the existing Evergreen Way. This may require the closure of that portion of the streets during construction. Without erosion control, sediments could enter the Lakeland storm system. One additional impact of this option is the PJtential for odor impacts on surrounding properties due to the wet well utilized in the pump station design. The City will be burdened with higher costs related to power, manpower and maintenance costs associated with the pump station, in addition to the costs associated with maintaining the infrastructure common to each sewer alternative. Drainfields As noted in Section 3.5 - Land Use, the policies and objectives of the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan indicate that public sewers and water service should be provided to areas which are designated for urban development within the City of Auburn. In addition, King County Health Department codes associated with septic tanks also have a policy preference for utilizing public/urban utilities for areas that are designated for urban type densities. With the designation of the Kersey III site as a moderate density site, i.e. utilizing urban densities, the use of septic tanks within this area would be inconsistent with the objectives and policies with the City Comprehensive Plan and the King County Health Department codes. Furthermore, any use of septic tanks, which is an area that has been shown to be sensitive to septic tank infiltration impacts on groundwater supply based on hydrogeologic studies prepared by the Pacific Groundwater Group commissioned by the City of Auburn, and drainfields in connection with a lower density development would need to conduct additional geotechnical and/or hydrogeologic studies to show that the proposed development would not have an impact on the groundwater supply in this area. 128 3.8.1+3 !\'111~JGA l~(ON rt1EASVRES The A I temat~ ve 431 and A I tcmati ve 700 proposals \v]]] result t n the need for sim i ~ar mi tiga tion rtleasures re lated to san i tary sewer serv tee. Op ti(l n I ..... K ersev ~r ay rYIitigation Ineasures [or Option 1 of Alternative 481 WQuld be the forlQwing: 1, Sizing of pi p elines in order to accom nlodo. te the Kers ey I II d~'e lopment an d th (: rcrnai rtder of the South HiB service area. 2. Incorpo rati 0 n of Best Jvlanagcmcn t Practices fo r the control 0 f eros ion during construction of the sewer tna~ n in Kersey \V a y, which is locate d adjacent to Bowman Creek~ O]Jtion 2 - Pump Station The fo] lo\ving mi li ga tio (1 mCU:}urCS v,lO uld be neces.snry with th is option ~ I. Prov ide Bes t Man a:gemcn[ Practicet; for control of el'osio n sed i mcnts to prevent impact to Bowm an Creek. 2. Locate the force main piping from the pump station (0 Evergreen Way to avoid bnpacts to exis6ng drai nage \vays and \vetlands. .... 3. Locate the pump stat[on to avoid creat[ng impacts on the strealn buffer by reducing the effective bu [fer arou rtd the strean1, 4. B ypass th~ 0 rst t\~,ro pipes in Evergreen Way and co t1 n~ ct to a man no lc \vith se\ver ma in s havi ng .su ffici en t remain j ng capacity. 5~ Design and install the gravity ] ine syste~n along the Kersey W ny frontage such that the Ii ne9 serve t h ~ project using the interim pump station \vhen tn e pump stati On is deco tnm i ss iorted~ 6r The nunlber of uni ts served by this altern a ti v~ wou) d be limited to the do\v nstreatn capacity. 7, A dedicated back -up power generator is rcqui red to ensure that sen.' ice \vill not be in~errupted. 8. The Ci~y will require compensation for the addi tiQna~ costs associated ,vi th rhe op erdtfng and mal n tai n ing the interinl facili ty. The app 1 ic ant shall define the incremental cost incre~se asso~ialed wi th th~ operat] on of the ] n teri m faci I i ty ov~r a 25 year period and a nleans for guaranteeing the funds w j Il be ava ilab Ie including a paynlent sc hedu le, to the sati~facti on of the Ci ty Engineor, for the ~] fe of tbe projoct No Action Alternative No mitigation measures are anticipated for No Action Alternat[ve. 129 i i Construction Mitigation Option 1 - Kersey W ay 1. Best Management Practices must be utilized including: a. Silt fencing along both sides of the Kersey Way and other roads where work is anticipated. b. Check dams and hay bale dams and water collection dispersal points. c. Regular cleaning of the road surface and dust control. d. Creating travel paths for trucks bringing and removing material that would avoid the mud and dirt of the construction process. e. Good housekeeping practices during construction. Perform equipment maintenance at a properly permitted site away from the project areas. f. Implement a spill control plan. Provide spill kits and absorbent materials within the work areas. g. Immediately cover disturbed areas. Cover all material stockpiles. 2. The construction of the sewer line should be moved to the non-Bowman Creek side of the road in order to create an additional separation from the creek and its buffer. 3. Construction should avoid a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic. 4. Construction should be planned to allow the covering of the work to allow road use after the day's construction. Option 2 - Force Main Option 1. Mitigation measures include those described under Option 1 above. 2. For the force main portion of this option, the following additional mitigation measures should be utilized. a. The proposed lift station and force main should be located outside the wetlands and stream and their buffers. b. The 49th Street access road should be utilized for the extension from Kersey Way to utilize an existing disrupted area. c. Best Management Practices should be utilized along this alignment to prevent sediment entering the onsite wetlands and streams. These practices should also be utilized in the Lakeland Hills/Evergreen Way portion of the improvement, including sediment protection for existing catch basins in the area of construction in Evergreen Way. 130 d. Geotech n lea 1 recormnendu6ol1 s for the force main as it proceeds to Lakeland fl ill s should be observcdr e, M i6gatj on rn ~as urf;S a ddresse d un der 3.l - E arlh and 3.4 - Vl ell ands ~md Stream Co rrid OrS sho uld be ~ncorpora ted into constI1Jchon practices, 3.8.1..4 UNA VOID..i\.BLE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IiVlPACTS Under Al tern ali vc 700t ~he sanirnry sewer system canuot ace onln~oda tc other areas in the South Hit l se["i{i ce area beyond the project util] zing the pUlnp statEon opti un. 3+8.2 \v.^\ TER '.his see ti 0 n is based on tIle L~\V ater Al ternatives Analysi~~' by ..4.pex E tl g incering1 dated ~ .~~.{ arc h 2004 ~t v.rhich is aUachcd to the DEIS as Techn[cal Appendix G. 3+8+2+1 AFFECTED EN\'IRONMENT The K ~rsey 111 si te w il ~ need to be served fron1 exi sti ng water connections 1 oc ated e] ther nOlih at the Wh i te River or fronl East V n lley High\vny through Lakeland H i1 i 5~ Two al ternal i v~:s are Jvailab l e fo r eac h Land U se ..~l ternative. These are idel1ti fied as th e Ken;cy Way Co n nection nnd the East Valley Connectio n~ Kersey \Vay Connection To prov ~ de add itional supp ~y and scrvic e for the I(ersey TII proj cet~ tbe City of A ubum Conlpl'ehetl sive \Vatcr System Plan depicts the following improvements: l~ A booster pump fac~liry schematically located along Kersey Way between Oravetz Road and Stuck River Ro ad~ Thi s wi II supp!y the s [te \\r(th wate r from the C onnectio n to the existing mains at 3 JIiI Street SE an d ~~R" S Lrcct SE, 2. InsmU a new IG-inch pipeline \vi(hin Kersey Way t]'om 37Lh Way SE afong thc site frontage to 1he King County line~ 3, A 12~inch pipeline wirhin the Kersey III s~(e, 111is main will connect to the referenced [6-inch p lp e within Kersey Way, extend wesmrard an d connect to an ex isting 12- inch pipe wi thi n E vcrgre~n Way SE at Lakelanrl Hi [Is Park. The existi rlg 12-inch p [pe is a portion of the Lakelan d Hins development, East Va~ley Connection Ill] s alte rnative \.va uld require a co nncct ion to the ex[st ing m a ins along East V a~) cy Higlrw'ay ~ near the Lakeland H HI \Va y intersectio n and the [nstallation of a booster pump fac ility near the North Ac cess Ramp and Terrace VtC\V Drive intersection to get her \vitb the fo Uo\vi ng Lmprovernen ts ~ I r Install a new 16-inch pipeline fonn Lakefand Hills Way to apprOXlmate'y 41h Street E. A po{lion of this p roj ect was comp l~ted by the Terrace Vi C\v develoPlnen t ~ 131 2. Install a new 12-inch pipeline from Terrace View Drive and connect to an existing 12-inch pipeline with Elizabeth A venue SE 3. Install a new 12-inch pipeline within Elizabeth Avenue SE connecting to the existing pipeline within Elizabeth Loop SE to the existing water main on Elizabeth Avenue SE at the County line. Supplying the Kersey III, project and surrounding areas solely from the East Valley Highway system could also require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to allow for the interim use of the East Valley Highway system to supply the Kersey III project. If this option is used, the piping system within the adjacent areas to the Kersey III site would be adequate to supply the project. With either option, water to serve the Kersey III project would come from the Valley Service Area. There is sufficient water in the service area to provide for the project. 3.8.2.2 SIGNIFICANT IMW ACTS Water Demand Impacts Alternative 481 would require approximately 200 gpm to re supplied to the site for the residential peak day demand. Alternative 700 would require approximately 292 gpm to be supplied to the site for the residential peak daily demand. Construction Impacts Construction impacts associated with the construction of any of the water system improvement alternatives would involve the construction of booster pumps and water service mains. Construction impacts due to installation of water service mains along rights-of-way would include the management of excavation and filllbackfill materials and possible disruption of traffic during construction. Impacts would be similar to those for the installation of sewer along Kersey Way. See Impacts section of the sewer section. To reach the existing water system on the north side of the White River, the water main will need to cross the existing bridge. Construction activities will need to provide for protection of the White River from erosion and sedimentation. 3.8.2.3 MITIGATION MEASURES Alternatives 481 and 700 Water supply For both Alternative 481 and Alternative 700, water supply and possibly storage will need to be provided to serve proposed development. This can be provided by installation of the Kersey Way Connection or the East Valley Connection. Sufficient water is available to serve the Kersey III project from the Valley Service Area. Water Demand The Valley Service Area has sufficient water to provide for the water demands of the Kersey III project. 132 Construction Mitigation Construction mitigation measures for the connection of the water line in Kersey Way will be similar to the connection of the sewer line. See the Sewer Section Mitigation Measures. Additional mitigation measures will be required for the crossing of the river, including erosion protection of either end of the bridge and protection of the water quality from any equipment utilized for the hanging of the waterline on the bridge. No Action Alternative The No Action Alternative would have a reduced water usage as compared to Alternatives 481 and 700. Well locations and water withdrawals are regulated by State Department of Health regulations including well radius protection areas and restrictions on maximum withdrawals from a domestic well. Compliance with existing State regulations would mitigate potential impacts from the use of wells under this alternative. 3.8.2.4 UNA VOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMW ACTS The proposed project alternatives will unavoidably increase the use of water with the change in land use from undeveloped to residential development; however, with the mitigation measures as proposed the project should not have unavoidable significant adverse impacts. 3.9 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.9.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT Archeological Resources An "Assessment of the Archaeological Resources and Traditional Cultural Places" was made of the Kersey III site by Larson Anthropological/Archaeological Services (LAAS) and is found in Appendix J. The Kersey III project area would probably have been available to the first hunter-fisher-gatherers by around 15,000 years ago, when Glacial Lake Bretz dropped in elevation, exposing most ground surfaces in the Auburn vicinity. The Osceola Mudflow shifted the White River channel north, from the South Prairie Creek channel to the Green River channel, around 5,700 years ago. The White River occupied this channel until 1906, when the river was diverted into the Stuck River channel. The Kersey III project area is between 200 and 400 feet (61.0 and 121.9 meters) above the contemporary White River, on a north- sloping bluff at the northwest end of the Enumclaw Plateau. The bluff was most likely created by the meandering White River, which eroded Osceola Mudflow and glacial deposits. The White River channel most likely eroded hunter-fisher-gatherer deposits prior to 5,700 years ago. After 5,700 years ago, hunter-fisher-gatherers probably did not utilize the project area intensively because of the steep gradient and lack of a constant water source. Hunter-fisher-gatherers may have utilized more level landforms as they crossed the project area hunting game, or traveling from temporary fishing camps on the White River to hunter gather berries and roots in higher elevations on the Enumclaw Plateau. Although salmon may not have been available in the project area, salmon probably ran in the former Stuck River, the White River, and near the confluence of Bowman Creek and the White River. Archaeological materials in the project area might include low-density lithic scatters in more level areas, including ridges in the south portion of the project area and a flat in the northwest corner. Most of the Kersey III project area has a low probability for significant ethnographic period and historic Indian archaeological resources based on the topography of the landfam and ethnographic and historic 133 data. However, level portions of the project have a moderate probability for significant ethnographic period and historic Indian archaeological resources. Historic maps showed that an Indian trail, less than 900 feet (274.3 meters) east of the east edge of the project area, extended from the White River to the Enumclaw Plateau, and was most likely used to access resources near historic Lake Tapps. Groups may have crossed level portions of the project area to hunt land game or to access higher elevation plants and animals. Significant ethnographic and historic Indian archaeological deposits would probably be similar to those of hunter-fisher-gatherers, and may include low-density lithic scatters, fire modified rock, and/or hearths. The Kersey III project area has a moderate probability for historic period archaeological resources that may be significant based on historic maps that showed residential and farming buildings had been in the northwest corner of the project area since 1924. Most of the project area was probably burned and in a state of regeneration during the late 1800s and early 1900s, and therefore, the project area was probably unattractive to early settlers. Significant historic period archaeological deposits may include farming- related tools, foundations and/or domestic household items with a spatial context. Traditional Cultural Places LAAS did not identify any traditional cultural places in the Kersey III project area through consultation with the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. Field Methods One historic period archaeological site, the Williams Farmstead Site (45KI549) was identified (Appendix J), on a grassy, northeast sloping bluff: in the northwest corner of the Kersey III project area. The site consists of the remains of the base of one wall of a poured aggregate house foundation, apple and plum trees, and a low -density historic artifact scatter. Soils on sloped, densely forested areas consisted ofa five to 10 centimeter (2.0 to 3.9 inch)-thick layer of forest duff above glacial till, a dry, brown fine sand (7.5YR 4/3) with naturally broken cobbles and round pebbles. Pebbles and cobbles averaged greater than 50 percent of the screened matrices. Charcoal was common in many shovel probes, but was not associated with burned soil, fire modified rock (FMR), lithic tools or other artifacts. LAAS archaeologists identified isolated artifacts, including a clear bottle glass fragment, and opaque, white plastic fragment, and a small, unmodified rodent bone in shovel probes in the forested upland areas of the project area. LAAS also identified modern refuse, including amber beer bottles and food wrappers, and illegally dumped refuse, including abandoned cars, electronic devices, and other miscellaneous items, along the edge of dirt roads that traversed the Kersey III project area. Williams Farmstead Site The Williams Farmstead Site consisted of the remains of the base of one poured aggregate foundation wall, approximately 70 feet (21.3 meters) long, between six and 12 inches (15.2 to 30.5 centimeters) wide. It is located approximately 50 feet (15.2 meters) east of a dirt road that extends through the site boundary as shown in Figure 41. The foundation was beneath a thick root mat and was oriented northwest/southeast. Artifacts adjacent to the foundation included orange brick fragments, clear bottle, window and chimney glass fragments, a large iron bolt and an unidentifiable metal object. An eight-foot long railroad tie and a large flat section of poured aggregate, possibly a sidewalk, were adjacent to the foundation wall's west side. An angled corner stone was at the northwest end of the foundation wall and was the northwest corner of the house foundation. No additional foundation walls were identified. 134 ~ ----. --+-. . '''~/r''f '.'~:. ~.--+. ....~.-. .... ".~ 0):::- ~~ : .i.:)o!) ,..j \' . .,-,.,":,-,> . ',. L.,.' . . . 'lII:t \0 ."t$.;.1;: ", . ., . "'; (...~, . . ," Q) 0\ I (,7' !,'< . '.' ',/"""}},*,?;' .... ~ . j '.': '.\' ' I,,,~,... . / ' ' C ! 'f ~ !, ! 'L,.~ .s "'0 ""'~""I ....J.J..;;..;,.. \ ~ ~ , , "I (J) j;.;c \ /',1 i ~ e- II ~ 0 · Jt c: g u ~~ M U ~ ~ (Y") It CV U'J \t ~ ' , I. . /' r ::J &:'i ". ' " . <.... ""?'" ,,~. : E ~ . J- .....--........ :::J , I .0 ,......... ~ ~"--.~ :::s rJ:J " : . . . .. _ I" ,."..... <C ~ . · -. ". '(.. cr).~ ,'_ _/< ~ fa //~~:::. . I Q) /. ~ -< /, . ~~:...,____ c: ' ,- -1/1 .---- --- . '.- ::> 0 _ ,1 ....J E~ I."'" c: _e .... \ 0 ~O , /" .- C\$ .,/, ~ <O~ I .- "" ~ E 'v Q) · r. I. . en ~ en \0 ,. . c: <C ~ ~ I ~ ts...... I .~] ": ',: ,. /' . a. ~ ~": Q) ~....'..'.'........ ~ ~ ., . m -.....-. --....--.:.-....... 0 ~ -v~' '- Cl) ..,~--_.~':~~ <'~ ~ c; , ): '-'" ./~/. r' .0 '.....Cil....... ... / \. I · a ..0= .0 '~ .... ;~ > \~. U ~' ". '.' Q) ~:~~\ '.' .'='l /--:~_.;... 8 ......'~.... /....,..7 r:~ ~ "'~...., (/.... " ~ ~-) ." '\ == I J( ~,. .......... 1./ ,-" ~ ~ "..~" ~ ,. . -.. .... I-c I . . ,.) · U') Q) .. . I ci ~ .s d . ... ( '; L() Q) Cl) tq N = en o ~::s "0 . S ..... "CI o .9 . I-c Q) c... (,) . ""'" $...c '0 ...... ~ z.~ . I ..... .,--., ,- "N"liRT H ERN ill ::c: IJ i.U 11.-11 // ~ ~ I " I I.: _ /,/ '. .,. , j J .t., l. \r , ~. " FlGURE41 .. --'''7'--.~..v,~~-,~:~~~~=:==,~.::::::::::?~.::;~,?~:~::;::~~~,A~< ~. ~~ ~,.~,.._,M".. O+C-". ~.,." '~~~~W#;'k ~~B i#Wri~1:~~'"f.~,~~~~~~~u2~:;~~;;~~~~~.'*~~~;.::::::::::;~=~::,;~i:;:::~:;m;f'-;;;~:;;;;;;;;.~~~~~~~;,~~~:r;,~~~~,~'~~n!;;~;.~:;;;~;~;:..~~~~:~~~~~~~~a~.b~~'U~~""~~.~~0~~;;,ti#*=h~~"~c~.~.'-~,',.~~'~' ... Four apple trees, five plum trees, and a willow tree were recorded as part of the Williams Farmstead Site (45KI549), and were most likely associated with the former residence. The apple trees were within 200 feet (61.0 meters) of the foundation wall, and a large willow tree and five plum trees were approximately 100 feet (30.5 meters) northeast of the foundation wall. An aerial map (Pacific Aerial Surveys, Incorporated 1961) showed two buildings; probably the hay barn and the chicken coop described in parcel assessment records (Puget Sound Regional Archives 2002), approximately 200 feet (61.0 meters) south of the farm house, adjacent to the dirt road that extends through the project area and site boundaries. 3.9.2 SIGNIFICANT IMP ACTS The archaeological resources and traditional cultural places assessment consisted of archival and literature review, tribal and agency consultation, field reconnaissance of the project area and production of this technical report. Archaeologists reviewed environmental, ethnographic, historic and archaeological data for the proposed site and vicinity, and determined that most of the project area has a low probability for significant hunter-fisher-gatherer, ethnographic period, and historic Indian archaeological resources based on the availability of the landform for hunter-fisher-gatherer use, documented ethnographic and historic land use in the project vicinity, and the results of previous archaeological resources studies conducted in the project vicinity. More evellandforms, including ridges in the south portion of the project area and a flat in the northwest portion of the project area have a moderate probability for significant hunter-fisher- gatherer, ethnographic period and historic Indian archaeological resources. The Kersey III EIS project area had a moderate probability for significant historic period archaeological resources based on historic records that indicated a farmhouse and associated buildings had been in the northwest corner of the project area. The proposed Kersey III Project, under Alternative 481 and Alternative 700, has a low probability on either historical or hunter-fisher-gatherer ethnographic period archaeological or traditional cultural resources. The field reconnaissance of the site ildicated a low probability of significance, for both historic period archaeological resources and significant hunter-fisher-gatherer ethnographic period resources. The Kersey III project could affect several areas on site which are relatively level, including a ridge and flat areas which may have a moderate probability for significant hunter-fisher-gatherer ethnographic period and historic Indian archaeological deposits. Hunter-fisher-gatherer historic period archaeological deposits and/or human remains could still be found on the site, particularly in the five areas mentioned within the archaeological assessment. 3.9.3 MITIGATION MEASURES For the five areas of relatively level areas, including ridges and flat areas, as shown in Figure 42, it is recommended that a professional archaeologist monitor ground-disturbing activities through topsoil and into the upper layers of glacial deposits. Monitoring would be terminated when the archaeologist determined that soils would not be associated with archaeologcal deposits that may be significant. While the historic and hunter- fisher-gatherer ethnographic period, archaeological deposits are considered of low probability, there is still the potential for inadvertent discovery of deposits of the hunter-fisher- gatherer or historic period archaeological resources and/or human remains during construction excavation of any portion of the proposed Kersey III EIS Project. Ground-disturbing activity should be halted immediately in an area large enough to maintain integr ity of any deposits found, and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, the Office of Archaeological and Historical Preservation, the City of Auburn and a 136 . ~ C7) c: .C .e .2 o ~ L- 2 '"0 co Q) :E '"0 CD c: (/} Q) <<J E m E o o 0:: co ~ c:( . ~ ..... () Q) .~ e ~ co == ~ ~ <( g> ~ .... .C ~ Q) (.) co 0 ~ .!l!. Q) a. C1) e 0 c: ~ c.. fJ) c:.2 G..) '"C 0 (/) .c - co :;:;.~ ~ >.oSE ~ m 0:: Q) fJ) .;;C '- t::= C> c: t)I) Q) .- ~ (!! c:; ~ C ,., F .C I. 0 I : I · -I o a; o .~ o on -c- 0 ....... o Q) ~ (.) a ....... ..... m cS LL. ~ ~ d u e e o o t) ~ en Cd ... z e < 'E!9-~~t6J;-,!~ I professional archaeologist should be immediately notified. Treatment of archaeological deposits or human remains would be coordinated through consultation among these parties. 3.9.4 UNA VOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMP ACTS Due to the lack of significant archeological resources on the site, unavoidable significant adverse impacts to archaeological resources are not expected to result from the proposed project. 3.10 AIR QUALITY The air quality section is based on the "Air Quality Analysis" by MFG Consultants, dated "March 2, 2004" which is attached to the DEIS as Technical Appendix B. 3.10.1 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT Typical air pollution sources in the project area include vehicular traffic, commercial enterprises and residential wood-burning devices. Residential wood burning produces a variety of air contaminants, including large quantities of fine particulate matter (PM10 and PM205). The major air pollution concern associated with Vehicular traffic is the contributions of carbon monoxide (CO). Other pollutants generated by traffic include the ozone precursors: hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides. Fine particulate matter (PMlO and PMo5) is also emitted in vehicle exhaust and generated by tire action on pavement (or unpaved areas). Pollutant emissions from residential wood burning (RWB) devices including fireplace and wood stoves could represent a large potential emissions source from the proposed development. Federal (Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)), state (Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology), and local air pollution control authorities have long recognized the potential threat to air qua lity from this emISSIon source. R WB represents a potentially significant source of fine particulate matter (PM205)' carbon monoxide (CO), and various air toxics. The developer has proposed that gas-fired heating units in lieu of wood burning units will be used, if provided. If this proposal is implemented, there would be no adverse air quality impacts expected in accordance with these appliances. 3.10.1.1 Existing Air Quality Air quality is generally assessed by determining whether concentrations of air pollutants are higher or lower than ambient air quality standards set to protect human health and welfare. Three agencies have jurisdiction over the ambient air quality in the project area: the EP A, Ecology and the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency (PSCAA). These agencies establish regulations that govern both pollutant concentrations in the outdoor air and contaminant emissions from air pollution sources. Although their regulations are similar in stringency, each agency has established its own standards. Unless the state or local jurisdiction has adopted more stringent standards, the EP A standards apply. To measure existing air quality, Ecology and PSCAA maintains a network of monitoring stations throughout the Puget Sound region. Generally these stations are placed where air quality problems may occur, and so they are usually in or near urban areas or close to specific large air pollution sources. Other 138 stations in remote areas indicate regional air pollution levels. Based on monitoring information collected over a period of years, the state (Ecology) and federal (EP A) agencies designate regions as being "attainment" or "nonattainment" areas for particular air pollutants. Attainment status is therefore a measure of whether air quality in an area complies with the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). Carbon Monoxide Carbon monoxide, the product of incomplete combustion, is generated by transportation sources and other fuel-burning activities like residential space heating, especially when solid fue Is like coal or wood are used. Carbon monoxide is usually the pollutant of greatest concern related to transportation sources because it is the pollutant emitted in the greatest quantity for which there are short-term health standards. Using dispersion modeling, existing conditions for CO in the project area were analyzed at the three intersections where traffic would have the greatest potential to generate high CO concentrations: the intersections of Auburn Way South and "M" Street SE, 41 st Street SE and "A" Street SE and ~ Street E. with 136th Avenue E. Because the intersection of Ellingson Road with "C" Street SW is located within 1,000 feet of the intersection of 41st Street SE and "A" Street SE these intersections were modeled together, however, results are presented separately for each intersection in Table 11 for a more detailed examination of results. Near these four intersections, dispersion modeling indicates the existing (2002) worst-case 1- hour CO concentrations are less than the NAAQS of 35 ppm. Applying the EPA-suggested persistence factor of 0.7 to the I-hour CO concentrations reveals that 8-hour CO concentrations near these intersections would exceed the 9ppm concentrations standard under worst-case conditions at one of the intersections examined. Table 11. Calculated Maximum PM Peak-Period CO Concentrations (ppm) 2005 Opening Year 2020 Design Year 2002 Action Action Averaging Existing No Alt Alt No Intersection Time Year Action 481 700 Action Alt 481 Alt 700 Auburn Way I-hour 12.1 11.9 11.9 12.0 6.6 6.7 6.7 South with ........................................ .................................. ............................... ............................ ............................ ............................... ............................... ............................... "M' , Street 8-hour 8.5 8.3 8.3 8.4 4.6 4.7 4.7 ~p 41st Street I-hour 11.3 8.9 8.8 8.8 5.7 5.7 5.8 SE and "A" ........................................ .................................. ............................... ............................ ............................ ............................... ............................... ............................... Street SE 8-hour 7.9 6.2 6.2 6.2 4.0 4.0 4.1 Ellingson I-hour 13.2 9.9 10.0 10.0 6.2 6.3 6.4 Road with ........................................ .................................. ............................... ............................ ............................ ............................... ............................... ............................... "C" Street 8-hour 9.2 6.9 7.0 7.0 4.3 4.4 4.5 SW 8th Street E. I-hour 6.6 6.0 5.9 5.9 6.0 6.0 6.0 with 136th ........................................ .................................. ............................... ............................ ............................ ............................... ............................... ............................... A venue E. 8-hour 4.6 4.2 4.1 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.2 Notes: Eight-hour concentrations were calculated from the modeled I-hour CO concentration using a 0.7 persistence factor. Bolded entries indicate a result that exceeds the NAAQS for CO. Source: CAL3QHC dispersion modeling by MFG, Inc. 139 Ozone Ozone is a highly reactive form of oxygen created by sunlight-activated chemical transformations of nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds (hydrocarbons) in the atmosphere. Unlike CO concentrations that tend to occur very close to the emission source(s), ozone problems tend to be regional. During the last three years, none of the Puget Sound region ozone monitoring stations have recorded any ozone concentrations that would comprise a violation of either the I-hour or the 8-hour standards (PSCAA, 2004; EP A, 2004). Inhalable Particulate Matter (PM1ol Federal, state, and local regulations set limits for particles less than or equal to about 10 micrometers in diameter. This fraction of particulate matter, called PM10, is important in terms of potential human health impacts, because particles this size can be inhaled deeply into human lungs. Because the proposed project is not located in a PM10 nonattainment area, a conformity evaluation for PM10 is not required under current air quality rules. Particulate Matter (PM2051 Effective September 16, 1997, the EPA adopted a new federal standard for particulate matter less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers (microns) in diameter (Table 11). This fine fraction of particulate matter mass is called PM205' a subset of PMlO. Such small particles (e.g., a typical human hair is about 100 microns in diameter) can be breathed deeply into the lungs and have been found to represent the most dangerous risk to human health. 3.10.2 SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS 3.10.2.1 IMPACTS DURING CONSTRUCTION No Action Alternative No impacts are expected to result from this alternative. Insignificant amounts of dust from excavation and grading would be added to ambient concentrations of suspended particulate matter as a result of development but is not anticipated to create any measurable impact. Action Alternative During construction of the various phases of this development, dust from excavation and grading would contribute to ambient concentrations of suspended particulate matter. Construction contractor(s) would be required to comply with the PSCAA Regulation I, Section 9.15, which requires taking reasonable precautions to avoid dust emissions. Construction would require the use of heavy trucks and smaller equipment such as generators and compressors. These engines would emit air pollutants that would slightly degrade local air quality. Some construction phases would cause odors detectible to some people near the project site. This would be particularly true during paving operations using tar and asphalt. The construction contractor(s) would be required to comply with the PSCAA regulations requiring the best available measures to control the emissions of odor-bearing air contaminants to prevent emissions in sufficient quantities and of such 140 characteristics and duration as is, or is likely to be, injurious to human health, plant or animal life, or property, or which unreasonably interferes with enjoyment of life and property. (Regulation I, Section 9.11). Such odors would be short-term. In addition, no slash burning would be permitted in association with the development of this project. Construction equipment, material hauling and detours for excavation and grading could affect traffic flow in the project area. If construction delays traffic enough to significantly reduce travel speeds in the area, general traffic -related emissions would increase. 3.10.2.2 LONG-TERM IMPACTS As discussed above, because the proposed action includes a transportation component that would affect one or more major roads in the vicinity, the project is subject to review mder the state and federal air quality conformity rules. The dispersion modeling conducted for this analysis constitutes a project-level conformity study. Table 11 displays the results of the CAL3QHC dispersion modeling for existing conditions (2002) and the Action and No Action alternatives for the project's opening (2005) and design (2020) years. Modeling results are discussed following the table. No Action Alternative 2005 - Opening Year: The No Action Alternative would not change the existing roadway or configurations of the intersections considered, but traffic in the area would increase due to population growth. Increasingly stringent emission reduction requirements and a continuing Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program cause the Mobile5b predicted 2005 vehicle emission rates to be lower than current emission factors. These lower emission rates offset the expected increases in CO that would be caused by larger traffic volumes and increased congestion by 2005. As a result, maximum calculated CO concentrations with the No Action Alternative are lower than predicted CO concentrations with existing conditions at all four of the intersections examined. The modeled I-hour CO concentrations near these intersections are much less than the 35-ppm ~andard. In addition, the calculated worst-case 8-hour concentrations with No Action in 2005 are less than the 9-ppm standard at all four intersections. 2020 - Design Year: In the design year, the configuration of the intersections examined would remain the same as with existing conditions, with the exception of the intersection of 8th Street E. and 136th Avenue E. At this intersection, dedicated left-hand turn pockets would be constructed as a result of developments not related to the Kersey III Development project Owing to continuing improvements in vehicle engine efficiency and emission control programs, 2020 emission rates calculated by Mobile5b are much lower than current rates. So in spite of expected increases in peak-hour volumes by 2020 with the No Action Alternative, the maximum calculated CO concentrations near the examined intersections are also less than existing levels at all four intersections. In the design year, the modeled I-hour and calculated 8-hour CO concentrations at the four intersections are far below the respective 35-ppm and 9-ppm ambient air quality standards. Action Alternatives 2005 - Opening Year: Modeling indicates worst-case CO concentrations near the four examined intersections would be equal to results observed without the project at two of the four intersections examined. There would be a small decrease when compared to the existing conditions at 8th Street E. and 136th Avenue E, where three additional left-turn pockets would be constructed. At the intersection of Auburn Way South and "M" Street SE, there is a slight increase in the CO concentration for Alternative 141 700. Nonetheless, all predicted future concentrations are less than both the I-hour and the 8-hour CO standards. These results stem primarily from the expected continuing decreases in vehicle emission rates due to regulatory emission control requirements and continuation of the ongoing vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program. This analysis indicates that neither Alternative 481 nor Alternative 700 would be unlikely to result in significant air quality impacts in the opening year. 2020 - Design Year: Modeling indicates worst -case CO concentrations near two of the four intersections examined would be only slightly higher with either Alternative in place when compared to the No Action Alternative in 2020. However, all predicted CO concentrations are well below both the I-hour and the 8- hour CO standards. Again, these results stem primarily from the expected continuing decreases in vehicle emission rates and continuation of the vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program. This analysis indicates that neither Alternative 481 nor Alternative 700 would be unlikely to result in significant air quality impacts in the design year. 3.10.2.3 INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Because the transportation modeling that provided the data used in the air quality analysis considered expected traffic increases that would be caused by both the proposed project and other planned actions and growth in the area, both the traffic data and the air quality analysis effectively include consideration of the potential cumulative impacts of the proposed project. 3.10.3 CONFORMITY WITH STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN The Federal Clean Air Act requires States to take actions to reduce air pollution in nonattainment areas so that federal health-based standards are not exceeded. States must also provide control measures in maintenance areas that will assure attainment for at least ten years. The framework for meeting these goals is the State Implementation Plan (SIP). As required by the Federal Clean Air Act, both Ecology, and the PSCAA submitted the ozone and the CO SIPs to the EP A for review; the plans were approved. The proposed project, under either Alternative would not, create a new violation or worsen the current situation. The project conforms with the purpose of the current SIP, and to all requirements of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 and the Washington State Clean Air Act of 1991. 3.10.4 MITIGATIONMEASURES 3.10.4.1 MITIGATION MEASURES DURING CONSTRUCTION The following is a list of possible mitigation measures that could be implemented to reduce lDtential impacts from vehicle exhaust and fugitive dust during construction of the project. This list was developed from control measures and best management practices suggested by the Associated General Contractors of Washington (AGC Guide to Handling Fugitive Dust From Construction Projects). . Use only equipment and trucks that are maintained in optimal operational condition . Require all off road equipment to be retrofit with emission reduction equipment . Use bio diesel or other lower-emission fuels for vehicles and equipment . Use car pooling or other trip reduction strategies for construction workers . Stage construction to minimize overall transportation system congestion and delays to reduce regional emissions of pollutants during construction . Implement restrictions on construction truck idling (e.g., limit idling to a maximum of 5 minutes) 142 . Locate construction equipment away from sensitive receptors such as fresh air intakes to buildings, air conditioners, and sensitive populations . Locate construction staging zones where diesel emissions won't be noticeable to the public or near sensitive populations such as the elderly and the young . Develop a dust control plan during project planning to identify sources and activities that would be likely to generate fugitive dust and the means to control such emissions . Spray exposed soil with water or other suppressant to reduce emissions ofPM1o and deposition of particulate matter; include dust controls on paved and unpaved roads and in site preparation, grading and loading areas . Cover or use moisteners or soil stabilizers to minimize emissions from storage piles; minimize drop heights involved in creating storage piles or haul-vehicle loading . Cover all trucks transporting materials, wetting materials in trucks, or providing adequate freeboard (space from the top of the material to the top of the truck bed), to reduce PMlO emissions and deposition during transport . Pave or use gravel on staging areas and roads that would be exposed for long periods, and reduce speeds on unpaved roads or work areas . Use quarry spalls (rock entrances), vehicle scrapes, or wheel washers to remove particulate matter that would otherwise be carried off site by vehicles to decrease deposition of particulate matter on area roadways . Remove particulate matter deposited on paved, public roads, sidewalks, and bicycle and pedestrian paths b reduce mud and dust; sweep and wash streets continuously to reduce emISSIons . Cover dirt, gravel, and debris piles as needed to reduce dust and wind blown debris, and avoid dust-generating activities during windy periods . Route and schedule construction trucks to reduce delays to traffic during peak travel times to reduce air quality impacts caused by a reduction in traffic speeds. 3.10.4.2 LONG-TERM MITIGATION MEASURES Provided residential wood burning stoves are not implemented the air quality modeling analysis did not indicate the need for potential additional mitigation measures. 3.10.5 UNAVOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS No significant unavoidable adverse air quality impacts have been identified with this air quality analysis to result from the proposed project 143 CHAPTER 4 DISTRIBUTION LIST 144 CITY OF AUBURN SHELLEY COLEMAN DIRECTOR 25 WEST MAIN 8T FINANCE AUBURN WA 980014998 PETE LEWIS JOE WELSH MAYOR PUBLIC WORKS - TRANSPORTATION PLANNER DUANE HUSKY CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS (8) PUBL[C WORKS~ ASSISTANT C[TY ENGJNEERJUTIL[T~ES DENNIS SELLE PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS (7) PUBLIC WORKS CITY ENGINEERI ASSISTANT PW OlRECTOR DAN HElD ClTY ATTORNEY LAURA PHILPOT PUBL1C WORKS r-TRANSPORTATlON ENGINEER DARYL FABER DAVID OSAKI D[RECTOR COMMUNJTY DEVELOPMENT'ADMINfSTRATOR PARKS AND RECREATION P~NNING DENN IS DOWDY AL HlCKS D~RECTOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COORD INA TOR PUBLIC WORKS PLANNING JIM KELLY SEAN MARTIN POL'CE CH I EF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COORDINATOR PLANNING AND COMMUN1TY DEVELOPMENT PAUL KRAUSS D[RECTOR PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RUSS VAN DOVER FIRE CHJEF 146 CLARK TOWNSEND GREEN RIVER COMMUNITY COLLEGE L0CAL ANDRE:C310N;A-LAC3IENCIES C/O PRESIDENT'S OFFICE 12401 SE 320th 5T AUBURN WA 98092-3699 FRED SATTERSTROM PLANNING DIRECTOR KATHY MCCLUNG, INTERIM DIRECTOR CITY OF KENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIR 220 4TH AVE S CITY OF FEDERAL WAY 33530 15t WY S KENT WA 98032-5895 FEDERAL WAY WA 98063-9718 JEFF GAISFORD SECTION MGR GARY KRIEDT, SR ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER RECYCLING AND ENVIRON SERV SECTION KING COUNTY SOLID WASTE DIVISION METRO TRANSIT 201 S JACKSON ST STE 701 201 JACKSON ST, MS KSC-TR-0431 SEATTLE WA 98104 SEATTLE WA 98104-3856 RHONDA STRAUCH MIKE NEWMAN, ASSOC SUPERINTENDENT KING COUNTY ROADS DIVISION AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT #408 201 S JACKSON 5T KSC- TR-0231 915 4th 5T NE SEATTLE WA 98104-3855 AUBURN WA 98002 GREG BORBA - CURRENT PLANNING SHIRLEY MARROQUIN KC DEPT OF DEVELOPMENT & ENVIR SERVICES ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING SUPERVISOR 900 OAKESDA.LE AVE SW STE 1 00 KING COUNTY WASTEWATER TREATMENT DIV RENTON WA 98055-1219 201 S JACKSON ST, MS KSC-NR-0505 SEATTLE WA 98104-3855 PAUL REITEN BACH, SR POLICY ANALYST CHARLIE SUNDBERG KING CO HISTORIC PRESRV PRGRM KC OEPT OF DEVELOPMENT & ENVIR SERVICES OFF BUSINESS RELATIONS / ECO DEV 900 OAKE5DALE AVE SW, MS OAK-DE-0100 5163RC AVE RM 550 RENTON WA 98055-1219 SEATTLE WA 98104-2307 GALE YUEN, RS DAVE CLARK, RIVERS SECTION MGR SEATTLE/KING CO OEPT OF PUBLIC HEAL TH KC DNRP / WTR AND LAND RES 1404 CENTRAL AVE S STE 101 700 5th AVE STE 2200 KENT WA 98032 SEATTLE WA 98104-3855 ISABEL TINOCO, DIRECTOR ANDREA MYNTTI ENVIRONMENTAL OEPT FISHERIES OFFICE KC DNRP/ WTR AND LAND RESOURCES DIV MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE 39015172nd AVE SE 201 S JACKSON STE 600 AUBURN WA 98002 SEATTLE WA 98104 GERRY PADE DARYL GRIGSBY, MANAGER PUGET SOUND CLEAN AIR AGENCY KC DNRP/ WTR AND LAND RESOURCES DIV 110 UNION ST STE 500 201 S JACKSON ST STE 600 SEATTLE WA 98101-3423 SEATTLE WA 98104 PERRY WEINBERG, SEPA RESPONSIBLE OFCL JOE SCHOLZ, MAYOR SOUND TRANSIT CITY OF ALGONA 1100 SECOND AVE STE 500 402 WARDE ST SEATTLE WA 98101-3423 ALGONA WA 98001 146 M EL I SSA CAL VERT. WI LDLI F EI CU L TU RAL D I R MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE CUL rURAL LOCAL AND.REG10NAl AGENCIES cant 2 PROGRAM . 39015172ND AVE SE AUBURN WA 98092-9763 HARRIET BEALE STEVE TAYLOR. PLANNlNG Of RECTOR PUGET SOUND WATER QUALITY ACTION TEAM MUCKLESHOOT TRIBE CUL TURAL PROGRAM PO BOX 40900 39015 17Znd AVE SE OL YMPIA WA 98504-0900 AUBURN WA 98092-9763 ADONAIS CLARK, AICP NORMAN ABBOT SEPA RESPONSIBLE QFF!CJAL SEN lOR PLANNER PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNC~L PIERCE COUNTY DEPT OF PALS 2401 SOUTH 35TrI STREET 1011 WESTERN AVE srE 500 TACO MA! W A 98409-7460 SEATTLE WA 98104 147 STATE AGENCIES NANCY WINTERS ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SECTION DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY POBOX41112 PO BOX 47703 OL YMPIA WA 98504-1112 OL YMPIA WA 98504-7703 SEPAlGMA COORDINATOR ANNE SHARAR DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES POBOX 47600 POBOX 47001 OL YMPIA WA 98504-7600 OL YMPIA WA 98504-7001 JOHN ADEN LORINDA ANDERSON DEPT OF HEALTH DIV OF DRINKING WATER INTERAGENCY COMM OUTDOOR RECREATION POBOX 47822 PO BOX 40917 OL YMPIA WA 98504-7822 OL YMPIA WA 98504-0917 SEPA RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL BILL WIEBE DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES SEPA CENTER DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION POBOX 47015 POBOX 47300 OL YMPIA WA 98504-7015 OL YMPIA WA 98504-7370 ELIZABETH MCNAGNY REX DERR DEPT OF SOCIAL AND HEALTH SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION POBOX 45848 POBOX 42653 OL YMPIA WA 98504-5848 OL YMPIA WA 98504-2653 WASHINGTON STATE OFFICE OF OFFICE OF URBAN MOBILITY ARCHAEOLOGY & HISTORIC PRESERVATION STATE OF WASHINGTON 1063 S CAPITAL WY STE 106 401 2ND AVE S STE 300 PO BOX 48343 SEATTLE WA 98104-2862 OL YMPIA WA 98504-8343 TERRY MICHALSON FACILITIES/ORG SPVSR STEVE PENLAND SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE STATE OF WASHINGTON POBOX 43155 POBOX 47200 OLYMPIA WA 98504-0315 OL YMPIA WA 98504-7200 IKE NWANKWO LARRY FISHER WA STATE OFFICE OF COMMERCE DEV WDFW C/O DOE POBOX 42525 3190 160TH AVE SE OL YMPIA WA 98504-2525 BELLEVUE WA 98008 , RAMIN PAZOOKI KING COUNTY AREA DEVELOPER SERVICES WSDOT NW REGION POBOX 330310 MS 240 SEATTLE, WA 98155 148 FEDERAL AGENC~ES NON-GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES US ARMY CORPS OF ENGI NEERS JfM DIPESOJ CONSERVAT(ON CO-CHAIR SEATTLE DiSTR[CT REGULATORY DIV 4735 E MARGINAL WAY S RAlNlER AUDUBON SOCIETY POBOX 3755 POBOX 778 SEATTLE WA 98124-3755 AUBURN WA 9:8071 SEPA RESPONSIBLE OFFIC~AL US SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE 935 POWELL RENTON WA 98056 KRISTAr-RAVE PERKINS WETLANDS SPEC[ALIST MlKE MORRfSETTE US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AUBURN AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 1200 ei'H AVE 106 S DIVISION STE B SEATTLE WA 98101 AUBURN WA 98001 JEANETTE MULLIN FEDERAL EMERGENCY MGMT AGENCY 130 228TH 81 SW BOTHELL WA 98177 MARKET ANAL YS(S STAFF OASM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR US DEPT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEV AUBURN DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION 909 FIRST AVE STE 200 16 S DlVISION ST SEATTLE WA 981 04~1000 AUBURN WA 98001 US DEPT OF INTERlOR. FISH AND WILDLIFE 510 DESMOND DR SE STE 102 LACEY WA 98503-1263 NOAA FISHERJES 7600 SAND POINT WAY NE SEA TTLE WA 98115 149 ~ ME 0 ~A L!BRAR[ES AUBURN REPORTER AUBURN REGIONAL LIBRARY POBOX 1 30 1102 AUBURN WAY S I KENT WA 98035-0130 AUBURN 98002 i K~NG COUNTY JOURNAL P 0 BOX 130 KENT WA 98032 SEA TILE TIMES SOUTH BUREAU 11620 23 AVE S #312 FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 I SOUTHEND NEWS SEA TILE POST-I NTELL1GENCER POBOX 1909 SEATTLE WA 98111 L1SA LANNIGAN DAJL Y JOURNAL OF COMMERCE POBOX 11050 SEATTLE WA 98111-9051 THE NEWS TRIBUNE 32050 23 AVE S FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 150 PARTIES OF IN"TERESr (A NOTICE OF AVAilABiliTY OF THE KERSEY III DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAl [MPACT STATEMENT WAS SENT TO EACH PARTY OF !NTEREST) JOHN HARRISON ERIC NORDLOF PAUL AND TRACEY SKORN IAKOFF HELM AND GRETCHEN LEHMANN KEVIN AND JEAN MARTlN JOHN AND JEAN CHAFFEE ANDREW C. AJETO SCOTT AND SUSAN MCKAY JAMES W AND KATHLEEN M AMIS WIlL1AM BAND CHAPDELAI ALLOWAY NANETTE 0 AND HAMMOND JA BARNES DAVID AND KIMBERLY ARNOLD DARRELL G AND CAROL YN S BLALOCK ROBERT J AND DIANE J BATH SHANE R AND AMY M BUTCHART LOUIS A AND DARCI ANN BREWER 151 PARTIES OF INTEREST, CONT. ROBERT L AND LISA MATKINS LEIF ANDERSON DELORES FAYE BEST BARRETT FAMIL Y TRUST WAYNE A BROCK MYSHEL 0 BRANDENBURG JOHN R A NO CHARLENE B CADRA NICHOLAS A BUTCHART JAMES E AND ELLA V CHAMBERS MARC LEE AND LISA M CAIRNS MICHAEL J COX ALEXANDER L AND MILDRED CORDERO TODD DUTY PHILLIP R DURBEN CLIFFORD J AND DAVIS LO FREGIEN GREGG A AND MICHELLE A FANDRICH THOMAS A AND PATRICIA J GRAVEL WOODROW 0 AND DONNA GATLIN ANDREW R CLAPP 152 PARTIES OF JNTEREST~ CONT. CHERYL LAND MART!N KARE DEBUCK TODD E AND TINA A COVEY BRIAN A EMBERY GARY J DURHAM CHRISTOPHER K AND THER GARR~SON JEFFREY T AND CYNTHIA A FLEMING CHAD M GUISfNGER KELL Y RAND MCGIL TON NJ GRAMPS RANDALL R AND CINDY L HOFFERT JAMES P AND KATHRYN HENNESSEY MELVIN JOHNSON NORMAN E AND .L1NDA K HOWARD MICHAEL P AND ELIZABETH LAPLANTE TODD P AND KL~NETTE A KNEER DANIEL SAND SEVERINAA L~M KlERSTIN L YN LEPIQUE PAUL F AND CARINA B MANULAT MARK C LUNDE ERIC K AND KATHERINE A HOLCK 153 . PARTIES OF INTEREST, CONT CLINTON ALAN AND MARLENE 0 KAKU KEVJN V AND TAMARA D JOHNSON JEFFREY M AND DANETTE L LOOK MARK J KOPCHO DONALD 8 AND LAURA L MARSTON ARNE K AND CHERYL A LEWIS GERARD M AND GREGORY MASTERS - FRANKLIN F AND SHERYL L rvtANSElL DAVID T AND llSA C NEHREN PERRY AND SHEILA MARTENS LilliAN K NIM~CK KERY J MCFADDEN WARREN RAND llNDA M OAS BRADLEY J MOSER PA TRICK S MCCURDY TOM L NGUYEN WILLIAM E AND OBERLANDER MCLEAN MARTI N C AND JACQUELYN J NORDBY GRANT S AND NAOM~ T NEISS 154 PARTIES OF INTERESTJ CONT HEIDI EVELYN NOLTE MICHAEL THOMAS MCGINLEY JOHN P PALlCKA MASOUD AND KELLEY 0 NASSIRIAN JEFFREY M AND KA TRINA C PRICE : CARL LAND GlNA E NIELSEN BOYD 0 AND MARTHA N ROBERTS SCOTT M AN D LISA J NORELL MARITA SANIDAD AND ROBERT A WILL!AMS L YN ETTE PEARL KENNETH E AND PAMElJ\ L SMITH HAROLD M SAND DUANNA RICHARDS ROBERT 0 AND K!MBERL Y PETERSEN LARRY TRUDA MARY M RICHARDS HEIDI A AND JOHN A SHOEMAKER WILLIAM AND DEBORAH RUPERT STEVEN RAND DEONNA J STEFFY RANDY S AND TERESA M SIDLOWSKI 155' PARTIES OF INTEREST, CONT JOHN C AND KIMBERLY L STANPHILL MARK D AND KATHRYN A ROBISON MARK A AND PATRICIA STUART CHRISTOPHER AN D T ARAH SEEHAFER ANDY I AND ELLEN T JANDRA JIM C AND DONNA SMART PATRICK J SWENSON HENRY 0 STORTENBECKER ANGIE NGOC TO KEVIN J MICHELLE L TERRY JUSTIN M AND HElD] L ABBOTT ROBERT S ULEN GARY A AND JULIE E BRUNO CAROL AND MARK THOMAS YU~CHI AND SHU MEI LIN HU B GREGORY AND DEBRA L WENKER ER!N JA NO GRETCHEN F FORST LANE R AND TAMARA L HALE THOMAS J AND KI M JILANELLA 156 PARTIES OF INTEREST, CONT JERRY K AND JENNIFER SMILES LAKELAND COMPANY STEVEN E AND ERIN M RICKENBACHER JEFFREY G AND MARDI T WIENS NEIL J AND RONDA J SIMMONS THERESA E AND A W RICKARD WELSH JASON L AND KRISTINE MAYERS ROY C AND NANCY J THAUT SHELBY I COCKE KIDDER JA NO CAROLYN A ANDERSON TIMOTHY G DELUCA GARY A AND MARY C BAKER JAMES HATFIELD BRUCE D AND MELINDA CONGER MARK W AND PATTI HOLCOMB MICHAEL W HERMAN MARK W COLLINS DONALD M AND MARILEE BYKONEN CURTIS R FRYE 157 PARTIES OF INTEREST, CONT ROBERT C AND SUSAN G JOHNSON f TOMMY LAND KATHY' F DEHART ROGER A AND ELIZABETH A LEE ANDREW P AND DARCIE D HANSON JACK D MCKINNEY CARL D AND HELEN P TTEE HILL DARREN L AND DIANNE L PORTER RICK L AND PATRICIA D KEPHART GARY T AND MARGARET A STAPLES EDWARD AND KARL YNE MCGINNIS DENNIS AND MACHELLE KIEHN FRANK I AND NANCY A PARSONS LINDA B AND GARY W MORRIS DAVID AND SHANNON RICE REYNOLDS STANLEY M PURDIN JAMES J AND PATRICIA L THOMAS RONALD B AND RONDA L THOMPSON PAUL V AND TAMARA A SLUSSER MR AND MRS DONOVAN 158 PARTIES OF INTEREST~ CQNT ROGER GILETTE ALLITO LLC MIGU EL AND OFEL[A E HlDALGO JOHN CNOSSEN GEORGE MICHAEL D[EDE WESLEY D AND MARY LOU FLORY MARK L AND DIANE M GABOUER GOULD RESlDENCE DAN B AND DEANNA L JOHNSON BARBARA KINDSVATER BRUCE L AND JANET E KOCH M~CHAEL WAND IREN E D BROWN MALLORY SUE PETERS LAWRENCE A FASSBJND RUSSELL J AND BEVERLY G WELCH FRANK AND KRISTI KNOTT LARRY A MORRISON LA PIANTA LP TOM L TRACHT 159 l. I I I I i . PARTIES OF INTEREST~ CONT FRED AND JOYCE G ZAMNUIK STEPHEN AND RONNA SANDERS SCOTT A AND JANELLE HITE DAVID L WELLS REAGAN RESIDENCE PERRY RAND TRINA L PETERS JEFFREY J AND MICHELLE D CRAYTON MARK HANCOCK KIRK W ANDERSON NANCY M CARRINGER WJLL~AJv'[ B AND STEPHANIE HEDRICK REBECCA AND BRlCK LOOM1S VICTORIA BERGQUlST 1/172i5/d{)IJ~-rpt::l~]::i2{J03 .. j-dm.O 6:2 l04 160