Loading...
Environmental Review~~ STAT,c O~ o b ~v a S t ms's ~z ~y ~y'~ INPy a~ STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY P.O. Box 47775 • Olympia, Washington 98504-7775 • (360) 407-6300 February 26, 2002 Ms. Tami Merriman ~ Your address City of Yelm ~ is in the Community Development Deparnnent ~ - '- P.O. Box 479 _-_ =;-~11 watershed Yelm, WA 98597 Dear Ms. Merriman: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the mitigated determination ofnon-significance for the proposal to construct a 32 unit apartment complex (Prairie Run Apartments) situated in four, 8 unit, two story buildings, 1 single story community facility, parking/driveways, walks/patios with enclosed refuse and recycle, located at 205 Mountain View Road, as proposed by Prairie Run Association, AWLP. We reviewed the environmental checklist and have the following comments: Water Quality: Erosion and sediment control is a key to preserving habitat and preventing denudation of a developing area. The following practices are recommended: All exposed and unworked soils shall be stabilized by application of effective BMPs that protect the soil from the erosive forces of raindrop impact and flowing water, and wind erosion. From October 1 through April 30, no soils shall remain exposed and unworked for more than 2 days. From May 1 to September 30, no soils shall remain exposed and unworked for more than 7 days. This condition applies to all soils on site, whether at final grade or not. b. Clearing limits and/or any easements or required buffers should be staked and flagged in the field. c. Properties adjacent to the site of a land disturbance should be protected from sediment deposition through the use of buffers or other perimeter controls, such as filter fence or sediment basins. d. Provision should be made to minimize the tracking of sediment by construction vehicles onto paved public roads. If sediment is deposited, it should be cleaned every day by shoveling or sweeping. Water cleaning should only be done after the area has been shoveled out or swept. e. Source control best management practices such as plastic covering, mulch, temporary seeding, and phased clearing should be used to control erosion during construction. All storm drains within the development should be stenciled "Dump No Waste, Drains to Stream" or Groundwater. ~ 18 `~~ Ms. Teri Merriman Page 2 February 26, 2002 Management should provide a designated area for car washing. That area should be tied into the sanitary sewer where feasible. If this is not possible, then pretreatment, such as a grassed Swale, should be used before the runoff from the area enters a stonnwater management system. Separate receptacles should be provided for oil and antifreeze dumping. An effort should be made to recycle these wastes. Wastes must be disposed of in a manner, which will not adversely impact the water quality of the state. Solid Waste and Financial Assistance Program: We appreciate the use of the refuse and recycling program as suggested. If you have any questions or would like to respond to these comments, please call Ms. Kerry Carroll with the Water Quality Program at (360) 407-6294, Ms. Mikel Baxter with the Solid Waste and Financial Assistance Program at (360) 407-0067, or I be reached at (360) 407-6787. Sincerely, ~~r Kari Rokstad SEPA Coordinator Southwest Regional Office KR:os/lmc(02-784) cc: Kerry Carroll, SWRO/WQ Mikel Baxter, SWRO/SWFAP FEB-26-2002 TUE 03;50 Phi DOE SW REGIONAL OFFICE FAX N0. 3604076305 P. O1 t~'~`' br~rr a~, ~. ., ~, < - ~ ~~ yq~ ixn9 any STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPAIlTML-NT OF ECQLUGY P.U. RUx 47775 • Uiympia, Washington 9850¢.7775 • (.3G0) 4Q7'.6.300 1~'ebruaty 2G, 2002 Ms. '1'ami Merriman . City of Yelm s.:,_ . `~'~' ~- -:t- ~_,_., ~': •-..;sti=.,, ~ ~ ~ f Your address Community Development Department :~- .~ - 'I , ,' ; ~!' is In the . ~, s~ J ! .O, Box 479 .., ~.. Yeltn, WA 9$597 ~ i,. ~~;;', ~' ~~, i ;~ ~.::,~; :.: .:.....::. . . .k- ~~ i' -:~~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ watershed Dear Ms. Merriman; !'hank you fbr the opportunity to comment on the mitibated determination of non-sibnifieance for the proposal to construct a 32 unit apartment complex (Prairie Run Apartments) situated %n four, S unit, two story hui]din(;s, 1 single story Community lacilit.y, parkini;/dt•ivc;ways, walks/patios with enclosed rcluse and recycle, located at 205 Mountain View Road, as proposed by prairie Itun llssociation, A WLP. we reviewed the environmental checklist and have the following comments; 'Water Ouali~; ];rosion and sediment control is a key to preserving habitat and prcvent.ing denudation of a developing area. 'fhe followinb practices are recommended: a. All exposed and unworked soils shall be stabilized by application of effcctivo BMYs that protect the soil from the erosive forces of raindrop impact and flowing water, and wind erosion, lrrom October 1 through April 30, no soils shall remain exposed and unworked for more than 2 days. Front May 1 to September 30, no soils shall remain exposed and unworked for more than 7 days. This condition applies to all soils on site, whether at #'inal grade or not. b. Clearing limits and/or any easements or required buffers should be staked and flagged in the field. ~- Properties adjacent to the site of a land distut•bance should be protected from sediment deposition through the use of buffers or other perimeter cont~•ols, such as filter fence or sediment basins. d• Provision should be made to minimize the tracking of sediment by construction vc:hiclcs onto paved public roads. if sediment is deposited, it. should be cleaned every clay by shoveling or swCeping_ Water cleaning should only he done after the area has been Shoveled out or swept., e- Source control best management practices such as plastic covering, mulch, temporary seeding, and phased clearing should be used to control erosion during construction, All storm drains within the development should be stenciled "lluml No Waste, Brains to Stream" or Groundwater. _... ....... . FEB-26-2002 TUE 03 51 PM DOE SW REGIONAL OFFICE Ms. T~rl Merriman 1°agc 2 February ?6, 2UU2 FAX N0. 3604076305 P, 02 Manat;emc;nt should provide a desig~lated area for car washing- 1~aC area should he tied into the sanita sewer where feasible, If this is not possible, then pretreatment, such as a grassc;d swale, should be used before the runoff from the area enters a storrnwater managc;inent system. Separate receptacles should be provided for oil and antifreeze dumpinb. An effort should be made to recycle these wastes. Wastes must be disposed of in a manner, which will not adversely impact the water. quality of the state. Solid Waste and Fina~tcia) Assistaa~c:e Pro rani: We appreciate the use of the refuse and recycling program as sug};este;d. If you have any questions or would like to respond to these comments, please call M:s, 1'~err with the Water Quality Prngrtni at (36U) 4U7-6294, Ms, Mikel Baxter with the Solid Wa to and )) Fina~~cia! Assistance Program at (36U) 407-0067, or I be reached at (36U) 4U7-687• Sincerely, ~~~ Kart Rokstad SEPA Coordinator Southwest Regional Office KR.'os/lmc(02-784) cc: Kerry Carroll, SWRO/WQ Mikel Baxter, SWRO/SVVFAI!' City of Yelm Community Development Department P.O. Box 479 Yelm, WA 98597 (360) 458-3835 (360) 458-3144 FAX Memorandum To: SEPA Center Dept, of Natural Resources ,J From: Roberta Al1en,'Administrative Assistant Date: February 13, 2002 Re: SEPA NO: 8300 On Tuesday, February 12, 2002, the City of Yelm mailed a Mitigated Determination of Non- significance for Prairie Run Association, a 32-unit apartment complex, at 205 Mountain View Road, Yelm, WA. However, we enclosed a copy of the Environmental Checklist for Yelm Community Services expansion, in error. Therefore, enclosed is a copy of the correct Environmental Checklist for the 32-unit apartment complex, along with another copy of the Mitigated Determination of Non-significance. We apologize for this error and any inconvenience it may have caused. C:!:Community Development`,Project Files\SPR Si[e Plan Review\g300 Prairie Run Apartments~EnvCheckMemoCorrect.doe O~ ?>~ TO: WILLIE FAX #: 360-407-6904 FROM: ROBERTA ALLEN FAX TRANSMISSION CITY OF YELM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PO BOX 479 -105 YELM AVE W YELM WA 98597 (360) 458-3835 FAX: (360) 458-3144 DATE: FEBRUARY 13, 2002 PAGES: 13, including this cover sheet. SUBJECT: PRAIRIE RUN ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST COMMENTS: The following is the Environmental Checklist for Prairie Run, a 32-unit apartment complex at 205 Mountain View Road. The City of Yelm apologizes for inadvertently sending the Environmental Checklist for Yelm Community Services Expansion with the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance for the 32-unit apartment complex. * * IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL COPIES, OR ANY COPY IS NOT LEGIBLE, PLEASE CALL (360) 458-3835 AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. C:\Community Development\Project Files\SPR Site Plan Review\8300 Prairie Run Apartments\DOE Fax Transmission.doc SEPA NO: 8300 MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Proponent: Prairie Run Association, AWLP Description of Proposal: Construction of a 32 unit apartment complex. Location of the Proposal: 205 Mountain View Road, west side of Mountain View Road, approximately 600 feet North of Yelm Highway. Section/Township/Range: Tax Parcel # 75730000600, Section 24, Township 17N, Range 1 E. Threshold Determination: The City of Yelm as lead agency for this action has determined that this proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. Therefore, an environmental impact statement (EIS) will not be required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. Conditions/Mitigating Measures: SEE ATTACHED Lead agency: City of Yelm Responsible Official: Shelly Badger, City Administrator Date of Issue: February 12, 2002 Comment Deadline: 5:00 P.M. February 26, 2002 She y Badger, ity dministd for This Mitigated Determination of NonSignificance is issued pursuant to Washington Administrative Code 197-11- 340(2). The City of Yelm will not act on this proposal prior to 5:00 p.m., February 26, 2002. Comments must be submitted to Tami Merriman, Community Development Department, City of Yelm, 105 Yelm Ave. W., P.O. Box 479, Yelm, WA 98597, by 5:00. p.m., February 26, 2002. You may appeal this determination to the Yelm City Council, at above address, by submitting a written appeal no later than 5:00 p.m., March 5, 2002. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact Agnes Bennick, City Clerk, to learn more about the procedures for SEPA appeals. This MDNS is not a permit and does not by itself constitute project approval. The applicant must comply with all applicable requirements of the City of Yelm prior to receiving construction permits which may include but are not limited to the City of Yelm Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Title (17), Critical Areas Ordinance (14.08), Storm water Drainage Design and Erosion Control Manual (DOE), Uniform Building Code, State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Title (14), Road Design Standards, Platting and Subdivision Title (16), and the Shoreline Master Program. DO NOT PUBLISH BELOW THIS LINE Published: Nisqually Valley News, Friday, February 15, 2002 Posted in public areas: Tuesday, February 12, 2002. Copies to: -Dept. of Ecology w/checklist February 12, 2002 All agencies/citizens on SEPA mailing list and adjacent property owners. ATTACHMENT SEPA CASE NO.: 8300 This Mitigated Determination of Non Significance is based on the project as proposed and impacts and mitigation reflected in the following: • Environmental Checklist (dated November 23, 2001, Prepared by R.G. Vigil, Architects) • Traffic Impact Analysis (dated November 1, 2001, Prepared by The Transpo Group) • Geotechnical Report (dated August 15, 2000, Prepared by Terra Associates) • Environmental Site Assessment (dated February, 2001, Prepared by Shannon & Wilson, Inc.) And the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall contribute $750 per new PM peak hour trip generated by the project. The Transportation Facility Charge (TFC) shall be based on 19.2 new trips. 2. OAPCA and City Demolition permits are required for the demolition of the existing structures. Existing wells, septic tanks, and septic drainfields are to be abandoned as per State, and County regulations. 3. The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the Yelm School District to mitigate project impacts to the school district. Tami Merriman From: Nisqually Valley News [classfds@nisquallyvalleyonline.comj Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 8:09 AM To: tmerriman@ywave.com Subject: Legal ad Received legal ad SEPA NO: 8300 Publication date: Feb. 15, 2002 Thank you, Janice Graves Nisqually Valley News 458-2681 NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC OF REQUEST FOR RELEASE OF FUNDS Applicant: City of Yelm February 1, 2002 105 Yelm Ave. W, P.O. Box 479 Yelm, WA 98597 (360) 458-3244 TO ALL INTERESTED AGENCIES, GROUPS, AND PERSONS: On or about February 20, 2002, the above named City will request the state of Washington Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development (CTED) to release federal funds under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (PL93-383) for the following project: Yelm Community Services: Remodel and addition of 1600 sg. ft. to the Yelm Community Services Childcare Center. Remodel and addition of 2,500 sg. ft, to the Yelm Community Services Thrift Shop. Remodel and addition of 900 sg. ft. to the Yelm Community Services Food Bank. Remodel of existing buildings, and addition of 7,600 sq. ft. gymnasium. It has been determined that such request for release of funds will not constitute an action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment and accordingly the above named City has decided not to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (PL91- 190). The reasons for such decision not to prepare such statement are as follows: The proposed action will have no significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Review Record respecting the within project has been made by the above-named City which documents the environmental review of the project, and more fully sets forth the reasons why such statement is not required. This Environmental Review Record is on file at the above address, and is available for public examination and copying upon request, between the hours of 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM. No further environmental review of such project is proposed to be conducted prior to the request of release of federal funds. All interested agencies, groups, and persons disagreeing with this decision are invited to submit written comments for consideration by the City of Yelm, to the Community Development Department, P.O. Box 479, Yelm, WA 98597. Such written comments should be received on or before February 15, 2002. All such comments so received will be considered, and the City of Yelm will not request the release of federal funds or take any administrative action on the project, on or before the date specified in the preceding sentence. The City of Yelm will undertake the project described above with Block Grant funds from the state of Washington Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development (CTED) under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended. The City of Yelm is certifying to CTED that The City of Yelm and Shelly Badger, in her official capacity as City Administrator of the City of Yelm, consent to accept the jurisdiction of the federal courts if an action is brought to enforce responsibilities in relation to environn~entai reviews, decision making and action; and that these responsibilities have been satisfied. The legal effect of the certification is that upon its approval, City of Yelm may use the Block Grant funds, and CTED will have satisfied its responsibilities under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. CTED will accept an objection to its approval only if it is on one of the following issues: a) that the certification was not in fact executed by the certifying officer or other officer of applicant approved by CTED; or b) that applicant's environmental review record for the project indicates omission of a required decision-finding or step applicable to the project in the environmental review process. Objections must be prepared and submitted in accordance with the required procedure (24 CFR Par 58) and may be addressed to CTED at 906 Columbia SW, P.O. Box 48300, Olympia, WA 98504-8300. Objections to the release of funds on bases other than those stated above will not be considered by CTED. No objection received after March 12, 2002, will be considered by CTED. Shelly A. Badger, City Administrator Published: Nisqually Valley News, February 1, 2002 FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (NEPA) AND DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of Proposal: Remodel and addition of 1600 sq. ft. to the Yelm Community Services Childcare Center. Remodel and addition of 2500 sq. ft. to the Yelm Community Services Thrift Shop. Remodel and addition of 900 sq. ft. to the Yelm Community Services Food Bank. Remodel of existing buildings, and addition of 7600 sq. ft. Gymnasium. Location of Proposal: Yelm Community Services, (UCBO) 624 Crystal Springs Road Yelm, WA 98597 Jurisdiction proposing action: City of Yelm The jurisdiction proposing this action has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21 C.0302 (O) (c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. X This DNS is issued under WAC-197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date below. Comments must be submitted to the City of Yelm, Community Development Department, 105 Yelm Ave. W, P.O. Box 479, Yelm, WA 98597 by February 15, 2002. Responsible Official: Shelly Badger Position/Title: City Administrator Phone: (360) 458-3244 Address: City of Yelm, 105 Yelm Ave. W, P.O. (Box 479, Yel/m~, W/A 98597 Date: February 1, 2002 Signature: `,'',~~ ~ f'; - L( /~~'~1C , -- J ~~.}. PUBLISHED: Nisqually Valley News, Friday, February 1, 2002 January 7, 2002 Ronald Vigil Prairie Run Association 1200 112th N E C-163 Bellevue, WA 98004 Re: Prairie Run Apartments, Environmental Review Dear Mr. Vigil: The Site Plan Review Committee has reviewed your Environmental Checklist and supporting documents, and requests further information. The project is a USDA funded project, providing !ow and median income housing. How many units will be low income, and for how long? There are a couple of items in the Limited Traffic Study that will need further clarification. T he City of Yelm cannot accept the use of the City of Seattle report relating to parking. The report is a proposed amendment, and if only proposed, it is not a regulation of the City. City of Seattle multi-family housing is very different than housing in Yelm, in regards to traffic, transit service, and location of facilities. if you would like to use this study as a basis for a reduced Traffic Facility Charge, the City of Yelm will need detailed analysis, and proof that the information in the report applies to characteristics of the City of Yelm. The City also cannot accept the information regarding the median income in the Olympia area. The income levels for the City of Yelm are different than the City of Olympia. Again, if you would like to use this information as a basis for a reduced Traffic Facility Charge, you will need to provide detailed analysis, and proof that the information is applicable to the City of Yelm. Other than these items, the City is prepared to issue a Mitigated Determination of NonSignificance (MDNS) for the project. The Traffic Facility Charge is a mitigating requirement of the environmental review, and if you wish to pursue the facility charge reduction, we will wait to issue the MDNS. If you choose to accept the City's determination of the traffic facility charge, we can issue the MDNS, and continue the project review. Please call me to let me know your preference, or if you have any questions. I can be reached at (360) 458-8496. Sincerely, Tami Merriman Planning Technician cc: Cathie Carlson CITY OF YELM ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Instructions: %^~ v ,~ ~~- -' _ ~~~~ __ The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help identify impacts from your proposal, to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal if it can be done, and to help the City decide whether an EIS is required. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for any proposal with probable significant adverse impacts on environmental quality. This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. The City will use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant and require preparation of an EIS. You must answer each question accurately, carefully and to the best of your knowledge. Answer the questions briefly, but give the best description you can. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need for experts. If you do not know the answer, ,or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply . Complete answers to the questions now may avoid delays later. If the space provided is too small, feel free to attach additional sheets. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the city staff can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. You may be asked to explain your answers or provide additional information for determining if there may be significant adverse impacts. Nonproject Proposals Only: Complete both the checklist (even though many questions may be answered "does not apply") and the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions (part D). For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "pro ert or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," p y respectively. CITY OF YELM ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND CITY USE ONLY FEE: _ $150.00 DATE RECD BY: FILE NO. 1. Name of proposed project, if any: Prairie Run Apartments, a 32 unit family housing funded the USDA, Rural Development. 2. Name of applicant: Prairie Run Assoc, A Washington Limited Partnership 3. Address and phone number of applicant and of any other contact person: 1200 112t" NE, C-163 Bellevue, WA 98004 (425) 454-8205 4. Date checklist prepared: November 6, 2001 5. Agency requesting checklist: Planning ~=~ ~ ~~ ~ 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Construction to begin January 2002 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment by Shannon S~ Wilson, Inc. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No z A:\PRARIE RUN SEPA FORM.DOC 8/01 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Grading & drainage, on site ~ off site sewer ~ water, building, plumbing electrical, street improvements. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. Thirty two units of family housing situated in 4- eight unit, two story Buildings, 1-single story community facility, parking ~ driveways, walks & Patios, enclosed refuse 8< recycle, common facilities: atot-lot, sports court, outdoor sitting area, together with landscaping per the City standards. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the sites}. Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. You need not duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. 205 Mountain View Road, approximately 600 feet north of Yelm Highway. Lot 6, Sprague Subdivision, Thurston County, Section 20, Township 17 N, Range 1 E, WM. (Tax lot 7573-00-00600) B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other Covered with rass and a few small Douglas fir trees b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 3% c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Sandy-gravelly with a soil bearing value of 2,500 psf. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. A:\PRARIE RUN SEPA FORM.DOC 8/01 No e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Building excavation for footings 8~ floor slabs; Parking lot excavation Approximately 1750-2000 cy. Top soil will be stockpiled and reused. The remaining soil will be used for berms through out the project And around the perimeter of the detention pond. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Yes. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction such as asphalt or buildings? Buildings, sidewalks, patios, paving & refuse areas-47% h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: A temporary erosion control system @ site perimeter will be installed to prevent damage to adjacent properties. Percolation of the site soil is very good. There should not be any runoff onto adjacent properties. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile exhaust, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. During excavation there will be some dust; exhaust emissions from On site construction vehicles; There will be some odors when paving of the parking lot 8~ driveways. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: The grounds will be watered down as necessary during excavation And backfill. Construction will be limited and staggered with morning 8~ afternoon commuting traffic. 4 A:\PRARIE RUN SEPA FORM.DOC 8/01 3. Water a. Surface Water 1) Is there any surface water body or wetland on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds)? If yes, describe type and provide names. State what stream or river it flows into? No. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 300 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. No. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note elevation on the site plan. No. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Groundwater: 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 2) Describe the underlying aquifer with regard to quality and quantity, ,~v" sensitivity, protection, recharge areas, etc. ~ ~ S`~ NA ~ L ~ ~~ 3) Describe waste material that will be discharged into or onto the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (such as domestic sewage; industrial byproducts; agricultural chemicals). NA A:~PRARIE RUN SEPA FORM.DOC 8/01 5 c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. There will be runoff from parking 8~ driveway areas . An on site Drainage system will collect, filter vehicular oils and detention pond That will allow runoff to percolate down through the gravel subsurface. There will be runoff from the roof surFace. Roof runoff will be discharged into drywells at various locations at the perimeter of each building. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: On site grading 8~ drainage system that will collect runoff or parking 8~ driveways, collected with catch basins w/ oil separators and discharged to a detention pond at the rear (west side) of the property. At the base of roof downspouts there will be tight lines leading to drywells located 5-10 feet away from buildings. 4 Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: _x_ deciduous tree: alder, maple, oak, aspen, other _x_ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs _x_ grasses pasture crops or grains wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, water plants: water lily, eelgrass, other types of vegetation bulrush, skunk cabbage, other milfoil, other b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? All grasses and low ground cover will be removed form the site. Existing trees will be retained where possible. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. A:\PRARIE RUN SEPA FORM.DOC 8/01 d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: All new and replacement trees, shrubs groundcovers, grasses will be native to the area. 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals that have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, ducks, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, shellfish, other: b. List any priority, threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Not known. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Plant materials used will be native to the vicinity and will provide habitat for birds, etc. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, gasoline, heating oil, wood, solar etc.) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, transportation, etc. Electric resistant heating. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: The project will be designed to comply with the Washington State Energy Code in effect in the City of Yelm area. A:\PRARIE RUN SEPA FORM.DOC 8/01 7 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spills, of hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. NA 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: NA b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment operation, other)? During construction there will be traffic from construction vehicles ie: Excavation equipment S~ trucks. In addition, there will be noise from construction tools ~ equipment. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Short term: Noise levels are not know, however the construction time can be limited to times that do not affect adjacent property owners. Long term: There will be noise from occupants that will be living in the proposed complex. The project's on site manager can control noise from tenants. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Short term: Limit construction hours. Long term: On site project manager will set rules for the Noise requirements. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? North- duplexes South- single family West- commercial East- vacant (across the street) b. Has the site been used for mineral excavation, agriculture or forestry? If so, describe. No. 8 A;\PRARIE RUN SEPA FORM.DOC 8/01 c. Describe any structures on the site. Carport ~ shed d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Yes, all will be removed. e. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? R-14, Multifamily high density. f. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Same as above. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? NA h. Has any part of the site been classified as a "natural resource" "critical" or "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? 100-120 persons. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: NA Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Design of the proposed project is using materials, colors compatible with adjacent properties, 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Thirty-two units for low & moderate income occupants. Owner is Providing 7 barrier free units which is 5 more than required by the State of Washington. All common facilities will provide barrier free Access. A:\PRARIE RUN SEPA FORM.DOC 9 8/01 b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: NA 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Twenty-five feet. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Design, scale, material choice and colors will be considered In the development of the project. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? There will be light emitted from the occupants; exterior lighting on The buildings ,general site lighting and vehicles of the occupants. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not known. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Lighting from adjacent properties, which is insignificant. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: The only controls can be made is the choice of exterior lighting. Building & site lighting will be designed to eliminate light 8~ glare directed away from the perimeter of the project. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? School playgrounds 8~ Parks. b. Would the proposed projec displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. ~ \~ n mile to'/z mile from site. \~ 10 A:\PRARZE RUN S 8/01 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts or provide recreation opportunities: There will be enclosed recreation room in the community building. A fenced tot-lot ,mini sport court , lawn ~ sitting area are provided in the complex. Within the community building there will be a room with computer connections available to the occupants. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. NA c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: NA 14. Transportation a. Identify sidewalks, trails, public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Mountain View Rode serves the property. There are no sidewalks. b. Is site currently served by public transit? By what means? If not, what plans exist for transit service? No. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? 64; including 6 handicapped & 1 van space. None will 6e eliminated. d. Will the proposal require any new sidewalks, trails, roads or streets, or improvements to existing sidewalks, trails, roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Yes.'/z street surface( 16 feet asphalt), 5 foot sidewalk, curb 8~ gutter e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. A:\PRARIE RUN SEPA FORM.DOC 1Z 8/01 f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. ~~i~~ ~ ~~ Morning ~ afternoon traffic. ~~1(.~j ~~l g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Encourage sharing vehicle trips. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe: Yes. Additional children will require school bus access. The project has been designed to provide maneuvering space for fire 8< refuse collection vehicles. There are two (2) on site fire hydrants spaced so that the 150 ft radius covers all structures on the property. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Encourage fire safety, minimize trash & encourage recycling. On site manager has strict rules regarding living, storage of junk and use of all facilities. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Water- connect to existing 8 inch service in Mountain View Road San-sewer- collect sewer adjacent to each building (total 5) and pump to new 4 inch forced main installed by contractor across the property frontage ~ extending approx. 600 feet to forced main in Yelm Highway. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the City of Yelm is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: ~vaa~cl~' ~Qi~ Date Submitted: 11/23/01 A:\PRARIE RUN SEPA FORM.DOC 12 8/01