Loading...
1984, 07-13 Threshold DeterminationPlan #: 1178 THRESHOLD DETERMINATION PROPOSED/FINAL DECLARATION OF SIGNIFICANCE/NONSIGN1FICANCE 1. Proponet: Dean Grafos E. 10521 Ferret Dr. , Spokane 99206 Contact Person: Bruce AlbertusPhone: 928-7096 2. County's Action Requested: Building permit/Land use permit Pursuant to WAC 197-10-203, the Spokane County Department of Building and Safety, a division of Spokane County, has determined that the county, as an ACTING AGENCY, is the LEAD AGENCY for the followiny project: Mini —warehouse consisting of (76) individual rental storage units. This proposal has been determined to not, have a siginificant adverse impact on the environment. An EIS is not required under RCW 43.21C.030 (2)(c). This decision is made after review by the county of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. ****************************************************************************** if you wish to exercise your option to review and comment as provide in WAC 197-10-203(3)/197-10-340, please respond, if appropriate, at your earliest opportunity, noting particularly the due date for written comments. Due Date for Written Comments: 7/2 8/ 84 Proposed Declaration of Nonsignificance Issued: 7/ 13/ 84 ****************************************************************************** Contact: Spokane County Department of Building and Safety North 811 Jefferson Street Spokane, WA 99260 (509) 456-3675 Attention Kenneth E. Jeffrey PROPOSED DECLARATION Narne: p'r/e./V/NriJ / Mark Holman Siynature: Title: q'i/r /t/q'r/ Assistant Department: Building and Safety Date: MAILING LIST TO: WA State Dept. of Social & Health Services Spokane County Air Pollution Control Authority Spokane County Engineer's Office Spokane County Health District Spokane County Chief Civil Deputy FINAL DECLARATION Narne: James L. Manson Siynatur``e::II Title: Department: Building and Safety Date: - 2-5� Spokane County 208 Study Spokane County Utility Department Spokane County Planning Dept. COU+'. COU+T +OU1C ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FILE #: e ( 11 SEC/TWN/RNG: -74-Z5 -44- Introduction: The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, Chapter 43.21C, RCW, requires all state and local governmental agencies to consider environmental values both for their own actions and when licensing private proposals. The Act also requires that an Environmental Impact Statement be prepared for all major actions significantly (and "adversely", as per WAC 197-10) affecting the quality of the physical environment. The purpose of this checklist is to help the agencies involved determine whether or not a proposal is such a major action. Please answer the following questions as completely as you can with the information presently available to you. Please answer questions as "yes" or "maybe" if, in your opinion, even only slight impacts will result. The reviewers of the checklist will be aware of and concern themselves with the degree of impact, asking you for more information, if necessary. Where explanations of your answers are required, or where you believe an explanation would be helpful to government decision -makers, include your explanation in the space provided, or use additional pages, if necessary. You should include references to any reports or studies of which you are aware and which are relevant to the answers you provide. Complete answers to these questions now will help all agencies involved with your proposal to undertake the required environmental review without unnec- essary delay. The following questions apply to your total proposal, not just to the license for which you are currently applying or the proposal for which approval is sought. Your answers should include the impacts which will be caused by your proposal when it is completed, even though completion may not occ— until sometime in the future. This will allow all of the agencies which will be involved to complete their environmental review now, without duplicating paperwork in the future. No application shall be processed until the checklist has been completed and returned to the appropriate County department. State law requires explanations for every "yes" and "maybe" answer on the checklist. The person completing the form may be required to provide explanation for "no" answers, and in some cases, more detailed information to aid in a threshold determination. NOTE: This is a standard form being used by all state and local agencies in the State of Washington for various types of proposals. Many of the questions may not apply to your proposal. If a question does not apply, just answer it "no" and continue on to the next question. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I. BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proponent: 1�C-P C31 l2AFO' , Phone Number: " 622 -261 i2 2. Address of Proponent: , 1 O5ZI FER I' ,1 PawAi1/4l•e) I 9q// /j f;. 3. Date Checklist Submitted: v .:3' 4. Agency Requiring Checklist: tLIDI N(.-) C am 5. Name of Proposal, if Applicable: N/I N' I (Li }40( 6. Nature and Brief Description of the Proposal (including but not limited to its size, general design elements, and other factors that will give an accurate understanding of its scope and nature): Vi I N I- w At K o o-L ("vision n mo c (1 ) 1 N 01 u 1 IOU IFL 2 JTrat- srooNwt- ArtT 1 O (z' x g/) n' 1 (i ve- a i N 13w/;i? Bo1�-CDIPJC�`� >4un CO 1 14JCL-Xgo'I4OP L }I —�Mr�n 1c1 7. Location of Proposal (describe the physical setting of the Proposal, as well as the extent of the land area affected by any environmental impacts, including any other information needed to_live an ac ure understanding of the environmental setting of the proposal): t 0-.. -C (`; LCc -�T() �11 —atZA 6-6-Nil NC? SP/L✓- � ( r; U CI QSE 1 ci-10) 1 eDic-7 4 c 1 (/,,1J1 0:)i C) 1 lJJ1 N(I4 '0,1 1 1, C brc" o t' ( 2/ vc: p41 , 8. Estimated Date for Completion of Proposal: 9. List of all Permits, Licenses or Governor nt Approval Required fie/ the Proposal (f dera tate,, a local - including rezones): tI r�; ;� Lc (.,/®rm1J (;LD) / J1LrJ/ 7, ;r-r 1 1 JgC4 10a. Do you, or the owner in the event you do not own the subject land, have any plans for future addjtions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain: cc �rn o IJ N (('iva u) rJ CL114417 1 August, 1981 11` 2 lOb. Do you own or have options on land nearby or adjacent to this proposal's location? If yes, explain: O O L-A-No R-IJ.1 ar 1-rD 60 `- eiLoP 11. Do you know of any plans by others including the owner which may affect the property covered by your proposal or land adjacent or nearby? If yes, explain: ( T 12. Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the proposal; if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed at some future date, describe the nature of such application form: II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required) 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe No (a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? ✓ (b)'0isruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil?. (c) Change in topography or ground surface relief features' ✓ (d) The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? (e) Any increase in wind or water erosion or soils, either on or off the site?✓ (f) Changes in deposition of erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? ✓ Explanation: f f_-, �(�� �1 �y', �� l {- �(r1JT• �.1� �� 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe No (a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? V/, ,li/ (b) The creation of objectionable odors? (c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? Explanation: iD4 JD fv74,q 17" 41.4 'STAit/D401t, 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: (a) Change in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters' _ /L (b) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? (c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? (d) Change in the amount of surface water in.any water hody? (e) Discharge into surface water, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity' (f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters' (g) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? V (h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either through direct injection, or through the seepage of leachate, phosphates, detergents, waterborne virus or bacteria, or other substances into the ground waters' Yes Maybe No V V (i) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? 2 Explanation: eg-ae—LT w )(-L- Z€.Q L) 1 PAUI LJC1 t4- Pa lbri oL ►.a+a� cam- u.) I (_!__ ,D 12a4 ► J So 1 OM ;C1 1 �ZDS" tt'A_ rz, 4. 41"1ora."Ti 1 f4the propds� 11- W41'7 — Qa4derr (a) Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of flora (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora, and aquatic plants)? (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of flora? (c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? (d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? Explanation: Yes Maybe No 5. Fauna. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe No (a) Changes in the diversity of species, or number of any species of fauna (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms,insects or microfauna)? (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of fauna? (c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of fauna? (d) Deterioration of existing fish or wildlife habitat? Explanation: 6. Noise. (a) Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? Explanation: Yes Maybe No ✓V 7. Light and Glare. Yes Maybe No (a) Will the proposal produce new light or glare? Explanation: VGNIC.Llt..., LA LC— W2A,c'1 17- (AA F7,1-r , <,�.� N,9 w r) Cam' a 8. Land Use. (a) Will the proposal result in the alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? Explanation: Yes Maybe No 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe No (a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? ✓�1 V' (b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? Explanation: 3 4 10. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? Explanation: Yes Maybe No 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, Yes Maybe No or growth rate of the human population of an area? Explanation: 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for Yes Maybe No additional housing? Explanation: 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe No (a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? (b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? (c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? (d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? (e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? (f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians? Explanation: (,ei T\ t] 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result Yes Maybe No in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: (a) Fire protection? (b) Police protection? 1/ (c) Schools? ✓/ (d) Parks or other recreational facilities? 1, / (e) Maintenance of public facilities, including reads? �f V �I V (f) Other governmental services? Explanation (a,e, QJ U 1 k•-t Ylla-(J T2.11 L (e.: 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe No (a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? J (b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? Explanation: 4 Yes Maybe No 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems. or alterations to the following utilities: (a) Power or natural gas? (b) Communication systems? (c) Water? (d) Sewer or septic tanks? (e) Storm water drainage? (f) Solid waste and disposal? Explanation: 1 C-, 4 t2,) ()`mot- 1 Jo-(.4Tr-i--1--) ( Urn -I- 1)/70 1-11 ti 0-1Z r rJ i 1 :. LC) 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in the creation of any health hazards or potential health hazard (including mental health)? Explanation: Yes Maybe No 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? Explanation: Yes Maybe No Yes Maybe No 19. Recreation: Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? Explanation: 20. Archeological/Historical. Will the proposal result in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical site, structure, object or building? Explanation: Yes Maybe No III. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, swear under the py of perjury that the above responses are made truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that, should there be any will- ful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part, Spokane County may with- draw any declaration of no g 'fica that it might issue in reliance upon this c ec.list Date: Propon Phone: Person completing form: 0, A-(, Z j US Phone: L - 7oq�p FOR STAFF USE ONLY Proponent: rint or Type) Address: Staff Member(s) Reviewing Checklist: 1` /vj;" Q¢PTA_ 3411golowy Based on this staff review of the environmental checklist and other pertiment info i. /05'2/ 1C Date: '7 ation, "e a f: Concludes that there are no potentially significant adverse impacts and recommends/issues a proposed declaration of nonsignificance. Concludes that potentially significant adverse impacts do exist and recommends/issues a final declaration of significance. Concludes that there are no potentially significant adverse impacts and, because of the nature of the proposal, recommends/issues a final declaration of nonsignificance. Revised: August, 1981 5 OFFICE OF COUNTY ENGINEER SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON 19— Date O Inter -office Communication j0 1� UIL,D I&ICT CoLcS From Cr /\( E L S O Subject 161 )q E 7t+REsHO&_D DE ot Z-rE M 13 —TRA" S foo RT flT )o" / P R ( U L_,gT/40 f%l /A/ 1)1 C 14T E -S /`l 0 1 M P A CT p/\l T}E E EX! S T/ N ea - S ESTE m . We alz A¢kE �= . \A/F, XEcpc/�5S7 TNAr /N,=Otm X -r/ 0 A SVP&I E Z 7-40 &E_/�F R M i nl E H0 \,-,/ TA -//S //I/ C k45= AS i5 .D T 4 A I /M, PAC -r 4.C_ c3� Form 327-C.R. W 1-7 l 67- A77E1D OFFICE OF COUNTY ENGINEER SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON Date , 19 Inter -office Communication To. (/1.... From Subject Form 327-C R. /610Lb Spr, ite 2 i-yclmifs 669 By c�yd& l'lt6%1 Pitore, lam*# r -46 411LL) Pss rtic+ No. I 3 r4 Nydrsnt ha+ new.