SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
UPDATED 2014
The Port of Tacoma has completed an environmental analysis, including review of pertinent and available environmental information and preparation of an Environmental Checklist for the proposed project. This environmental checklist provides specific analysis and proposed vegetative mitigation for the North Lead Rail Improvements Project.
A. Background
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable
Port of Tacoma 2015 North Lead Rail Improvements Project
2. Name of applicant:
Port of Tacoma
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
Tony Warfield Environmental Programs Port of Tacoma
P.O. Box 1837 Tacoma, Washington 98401-1837 Telephone: 253-428-8632 Email: [email protected]
4. Date checklist prepared:
October 1, 2015
5. Agency requesting checklist:
Port of Tacoma
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
The proposed start date for the project is late Spring or early Summer 2016 and the project is expected to be substantially complete by July 2017 pending permitting approval.
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 1 of 25
Yes. The North Lead Rail Improvements are a component of a larger vision of rail improvements within the project corridor and extending onto the Blair-Hylebos Peninsula area, which is located between the Blair and Hylebos Waterways of Commencement Bay. Future rail improvements could include additional long tracks parallel to those included in the project proposal to provide additional capacity, and extension of the long tracks across Alexander Avenue to accommodate longer trains.
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal.
Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application (JARPA), June 2015
Environmental review under SEPA has been accomplished for prior actions that pertain to the project site and other actions in the area. The following environmental documents are hereby incorporated by reference into this SEPA checklist, per WAC 197-11-635, because they contain certain information applicable to this environmental review document:
Tideflats Area Transportation Study (TATS) Final Report. Prepared for Port of Tacoma, Washington State Department of Transportation, Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board, City of Fife, City of Tacoma, Marine View Ventures (an entity of the Puyallup Tribe of Indians), Pierce County, and SSA Marine. Prepared by Fehr & Peers. Seattle, WA. June 2011.
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, none are known at this time.
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known.
City of Tacoma
Grading, Excavation, Erosion Control Permit General Street Occupancy Permit (SOP) Sanitary and Storm Permit (New and Repair)
City of Fife
Drainage and Hydraulics Approval USCAE
Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 Individual Permit
Ecology
CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification NPDES Construction General Stormwater Permit
11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 2 of 25 this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.)
Project Background
The North Lead Rail Project is intended to construct rail corridor improvements required to increase the capacity and efficiency of the Port of Tacoma’s (Port) rail system which is operated by Tacoma Rail (TR). To address future Port intermodal and commercial rail capacity, new lead tracks are planned within a corridor beginning at Milwaukee Way and extending to Alexander Avenue. The project includes the design of new track and the reconfiguration of existing tracks to create five long tracks.
The current rail configuration in the corridor allows for only one train arrival or departure at any given time. The end goal of the project is to allow for the simultaneous arrival and departure of trains in and out of the corridor or the simultaneous arrival or departure of two trains. This goal will be met with the 5 track configuration proposed in the North Lead Rail Project.
Other project goals include:
Provide infrastructure that allows the Port and TR to manage impacts and protect Tacoma from regional and national rail network issues. Keep intermodal ramps fluid and increase the capacity for Inland Point Intermodal (IPI) business with availability of infrastructure, crews, cars, and engines. Build infrastructure around peak demand. Minimize work events/movements for rail, increase efficiency and speed of movements. Provide consistent, reliable rail service and improvements to network reliability and maximization of Class 1 railroad Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR)/Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) infrastructure and assets in the Pacific Northwest corridor. Provide infrastructure that provides a buffer against capacity constraints on the Class 1 network including infrastructure, crews, cars, and engines. Reduce the amount of time trains spend occupying at-grade crossings. Reduce the use of the Port’s Bubble Tracks near Port of Tacoma Road for arriving and departing trains (refer to Figure 3). The tight curvature and frequent use of these tracks results in expensive maintenance.
The project is a collaborative effort between the Port and TR. The Port owns the property on which the current rail corridor is located. TR is the control operator for nearly all rail movements in the Port, and a portion of the rail improvements are located within the Tacoma Rail Yard, which is situated between Milwaukee Way and Port of Tacoma Road. Project plans and sections are presented in Figures 1 through 7.
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 3 of 25
Project Description
The new trackwork associated with the project extends from just east of Milwaukee Way to Alexander Avenue. No improvements will be made to either Milwaukee Way or Alexander Avenue. The project is bounded by State Route (SR) 509 to the south and the Port owned Banana Tracks and the Pierce County Terminal to the north (refer to Figure 1—Vicinity Map). While the final long tracks will extend through the entire area described above, new trackwork is confined to the west end of the project site near Milwaukee Way, the central area below and adjacent to Port of Tacoma Road, and the east end of the project near Alexander Avenue where the existing tracks curve to the north. Existing tracks will be utilized to connect these three locations in the creation of the five long tracks.
The Tacoma Rail Yard is defined as tracks 1 through 17. Tracks 18 through 38 are Port owned tracks located just north of the Tacoma Rail Yard and are collectively known as the Banana Tracks (refer to Figure 2).
Long tracks are extended lengths of continuous track designed to hold full length trains without interrupting other rail operations or breaking the trains into shorter segments. TR utilizes long tracks to assemble cars into full trains before departing from the Port and to receive full trains arriving at the Port. In its current state, the TR yard is configured with three long tracks, designated as tracks 10 through 12, each with a clear length of approximately 7,500 track feet. By reconfiguring existing track alignments and adding track, the North Lead will create 5 long tracks designated as tracks 13 through 17, while reducing the length of tracks 10, 11, and 12.
Upon completion, the long tracks will have clear length ranging from 7,020 feet to 7,515 feet with a total clear length of approximately 36,470 track feet. Refer to Figures 2 through 4 for a complete Site Plan of the project.
Project Scope
The scope of the project is anticipated to include:
Selective site demolition and erosion control; Railway trackwork and special trackwork; Access roads within the rail yard; Relocation of fencing and other surface features; Track drainage and relocation of existing storm drainage infrastructure; Installation and use of 11 permanent StormFilter Catch Basin units and up to 4 Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System (MWS) for stormwater quality treatment. Relocation of existing utility infrastructure; Yard power and yard lighting infrastructure and relocations; AEI infrastructure and communications relocations; Installation of a culvert and backfill of the open channel portion of the Erdahl Ditch; Compressed air distribution piping and new air connection pits at the west end of all 5 long tracks, and dummy air pits on tracks east of Port of Tacoma Road.
Site Preparation and Demolition
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 4 of 25
Approximately 15,000 track feet of existing rail will be dismantled; 6,000 track feet of which will be stockpiled and reused and the remaining 8,500 track feet will be disposed of off-site at an approved disposal facility. Track demolition/dismantling will include the removal of rail, ties, trackbed material and rail switches. Grading will be conducted to achieve suitable finish grades. Where feasible, existing rail, ties, rail appurtenances, and bedding material will be salvaged and reused.
In order to make way for new track placement, existing utilities and site features will be demolished or relocated. There will be minor excavation and trenching to prepare for the installation of new utilities. Utility trenching generally ranges in depth from approximately 2 to 5 feet. Deeper trenching may be required in select locations to match existing infrastructure. The graded areas will be left as exposed earthen surfaces for a limited amount of time with appropriate stormwater control best management practices (BMPs) in place. Temporary erosion and sedimentation BMPs will be utilized throughout construction.
Trackwork
The project includes 12,300 track feet of new track, 9 total rail crossovers, and 24 total rail turnouts. The majority of the new track will be new material furnished and installed by the Contractor. However, it is anticipated that some of the existing track may be salvaged and reused.
Utilities
Much of the project utility work includes removing or relocating existing infrastructure to allow for the placement of new track. Affected infrastructure includes electrical, telecommunications, sanitary, and water related underground structures, power and illumination poles, transformers, and storm drainage capture and conveyance features. Where necessary for strength and protection, a casing will be installed around utility pipes running below new trackwork.
Stormwater
Underdrains will be installed as a part of the section of new trackwork (refer to Figure 5—Trackbed Section). These underdrains will collect and convey stormwater runoff away from the track and into the existing onsite stormwater system. All stormwater runoff from the project site will be conveyed in much the same way as the current stormwater system configuration to match existing drainage patterns. However, the location of stormwater capture throughout the site may be slightly revised to allow for new track placement. A significant portion of stormwater from the site is directed to the Erdahl Ditch, which flows north to the Blair Waterway. That portion of the site adjacent to Alexander Avenue north of SR 509 drains to Wapato Creek which flows to the Hylebos Waterway; however, rail improvements proposed for this area are minor and do not require modifications to the current drainage patterns.
Replaced impervious surfaces resulting from new trackwork are exempt from new stormwater flow control facilities. Stormwater treatment facilities will be provided consistent with the Port’s MS-4 permit to treat stormwater runoff from new impervious surfaces and trackbed ballast.
The project includes the use of enhanced treatment due to the total area of new and replaced Pollution Generating Impervious Surfaces (PGIS). The project will result in approximately 5.44 acres of new and replaced PGIS. The installation and use of StormFilter Catch Basins and the potential four Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment Systems, as described below, will provide adequate treatment of the required PGIS acreage.
StormFilter Catch Basins
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 5 of 25
Enhanced treatment of stormwater will be provided in the form of StormFilter Catch Basins placed throughout the project site. The StormFilter Catch Basins use rechargeable, self-cleaning, media- filled cartridges to absorb and retain pollutants from stormwater runoff which include total suspended solids, hydrocarbons, nutrients, metals and other common pollutants. Water flows into the StormFilter through an inlet pipe or grate, passes through the filtration media and begins to fill up the cartridges center tube. When the water nears the top of the tube, a float valve opens and the filtered water is allowed to drain. Then a one-way check valve closes, activating a siphon that draws polluted water evenly through the filter media and into the central drainage tube. Filtered water is then discharged out of the system through the under drain manifold. When the water level outside the cartridge approaches the bottom of the hood, air rushes through the scrubbing regulators, releasing the water column and breaking the siphon. The turbulent bubbling action agitates the surface of the filter media, promoting trapped sediment to drop to the vault floor. This patented surface cleaning mechanism helps restore the permeability of the filter surface between storm events.
Two existing catch basins have been identified for replacement with StormFilter Catch Basins. StormFilter Catch Basins are larger than WSDOT Type 1 catch basins but will be installed in the same manner. Nine StormFilter Catch basins will be installed in new locations as part of the stormwater work (refer to Figures 2 and 3 – Site Plan).
Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment System
Enhanced stormwater treatment will also be provided by the use of up to four Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment Systems (MWS). A MWS is a multi-stage linear treatment device. Initial treatment is provided in an inlet chamber where trash is captured and larger suspended solids settle. A second stage of treatment is provided by pre-filter cartridges located in the settling chamber, which assist in removal of finer solids dissolved metals, nutrients and bacteria. The third stage of treatment includes a wetland chamber where flows are evenly distributed through treatment media and vegetation before being collected, using a network of perforated pipes. The system is equipped with an internal bypass chamber to allow excess flows during peak storm scenarios to bypass the system and proceed directly to the outfall.
Three locations for MWS installation are proposed on the middle and east portion of the project site, between the proposed south lead and SR 509 (refer to Figures 3 and 4 – Site Plan). A potential location for a fourth MWS is also shown on Figure 4. Installation of a modular wetland requires excavation, bedding, and backfill similar to that of other utility vault structures.
Erdahl Ditch Crossing
The Erdahl Ditch runs south to north under State Route 509 crossing beneath the east end of the Tacoma Rail Yard and the Port-owned Banana Tracks and towards the Blair Waterway (refer to Figure 3—Site Plan). The Erdahl Ditch is designated as a “Non-Jurisdictional Wetland” by the City of Tacoma, and is non-fish bearing. The ditch is made up of various buried culvert sections and open channel sections. An approximately 50 foot long open channel section with associated uplands is located within the project corridor just west of Port of Tacoma Road. The project proposes to pipe this portion of the ditch below the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) of +9 feet MLLW. The OHWM was delineated by the Port of Tacoma Biologist, Bill Rehe, during the week of November 4, 2014, in accordance with the methodology from the Washington State Department of Ecology guidance publication (Olson and Stockdale 2010). Once the ditch is piped, the remaining open area will be filed to allow construction of new track.
The Erdahl Ditch crossing is located in a particularly constrained portion of the site. The ditch is near the Port of Tacoma Road overpass. The overpass is supported by columns, which limit the location and quantity of tracks that may cross below it. Due to this constraint and allowable track
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 6 of 25 geometry, the track west of the Port of Tacoma Road crossing must be located to the north of the current rail location and directly on top of the open section of the Erdahl Ditch. Therefore, the filling of the ditch is an unavoidable component of the project.
A large arch culvert will be installed in place of the open channel section and will tie into the existing culvert sections to the north and south (refer to Figures 6 and 7—Erdahl Ditch Partial Plan and Section). The project will analyze and design the proposed culvert to ensure no adverse downstream or upstream impacts result from the culvert installation.
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist.
The project includes an approximately 1.7 mile-long corridor from east of Milwaukee Way near the Tacoma Rail Yard headquarters at SR 509 North Frontage Road, Tacoma, Washington, 98402, and running along SR 509 to just west of Alexander Avenue. The project crosses 6 tax parcels (TPNs 0320031029, 0320034060, 0320023062, 0320024098, 0320013132, and 0320012066) all owned by the Port. The site is located in the NE 1/4 of Section 01, Township 20 North, Range 3 East W.M. Pierce County. (refer to Figure 1—Vicinity Map).
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth a. General description of the site
(underline or circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous,other
The ground surface topography within the site is relatively flat due to historic placement of fill material dredged from the Blair, Sitcum,and Hylebos Waterways on alluvial deposits from Hylebos Creek and the Puyallup River to form the Sitcum-Blair peninsula and surrounding uplands. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
The steepest slopes on the site are around the Erdahl Ditch opening and are approximately at a 100 percent (1:1) slope. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils.
A geotechnical report was prepared to present the results of a subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering design study for the proposed work within the project site. The project geotechnical report was completed September 5, 2015. Test pit explorations indicated that the majority of the railyard is underlain by variable amounts of granular surface fills overlying predominantly fine-grained native soils. The site was raised to existing grades by filling, using predominantly silt, sand and gravel. This historical fill generally consists of dense to very dense surface gravels (crushed rock of railroad ballast) over medium dense to dense, fine to medium
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 7 of 25 sand with some silt and occasional debris. There is not prime farmland on the property or in the immediate vicinity. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe.
There are no known indications of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity and none were identified during the geotechnical subsurface exploration referred to above.. e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill.
Excavation and grading will be required in areas of new trackwork. Much of the new trackwork will occur in places of existing track or asphalt/gravel pavement. Existing track and pavement will be removed and base and subgrade material will be excavated as necessary to reach the full depth of the new trackbed section. Depending on the depth of the existing trackbed section and pavement depths, which are generally unknown at this time, it may be necessary to excavate into soils below these engineered sections. In these cases, excavation may extended into the fill soil mentioned above in B.1.c or otherwise into native soils. It is anticipated that excavation into native soils will be no more than 1 to 2 feet in most places. Excavation will also be required in areas of utility demolition and relocation, including the installation of StormFilter Catchbasins and the Modular Wetland Stormwater Treatment Systems, and some overexcavation will be necessary in and around the area of the Erdahl Ditch crossing in order to remove soft soil build up and establish adequate compaction around the new culvert. Total project excavation is estimated to be approximately 21,000 cubic yards.
Backfilling primarily includes track ballast beneath new trackwork. Total ballast import is approximately 28,000 cubic yards. Additionally, filling the Erdahl Ditch crossing will require approximately 950 cubic yards of fill material, of this fill approximately 70 cubic yards will fill below the current OHWM of +9.0 feet MLLW.
All fill will be sourced from a commercial licensed pit or quarry. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe.
It is possible that erosion may occur as a result of construction. During track and utility construction there will be brief periods of soil exposure during excavation. Project drawings will include a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control (TESC) Plan. The TESC Plan illustrates and directs the implementation of project appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control any potential runoff from the site and mitigate the effects of possible erosion. Additionally, the project will prepare a Grading, Excavation, and Erosion Control Permit for approval by the City of Tacoma which will further define the TESC requirements for the project. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? [help]
100 percent of the site may be considered impervious surface after project construction. The current rail corridor is primarily railroad tracks, asphalt or gravel access road, small buildings, and hard packed earthen surfaces. The only existing pervious surface on site is the small vegetated area surrounding the Erdahl Ditch opening. This area is approximately 7,000 square feet (including the water surface area) and will be the only area to change surface type as a result of construction. Of the 7,000 square feet, approximately 1,190 square feet is located below the OHWM of +9 feet MLLW.
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 8 of 25 h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any:
Appropriate erosion and sediment control BMPs will be employed to prevent erosion. Likely methods to contain and control the movement of eroded soils include the following:
Stabilized Construction Entrance Wheel Wash Construction Area Stabilization Silt Fence/Straw Wattles Storm drain inlet protection Dust control
2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. [help]
Emissions would be limited to those associated with the operation of construction equipment. Dust and construction vehicle exhaust would be emitted during construction, pavement removal, filling, excavation, and paving activities. Such emissions would be subject to the requirements of the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency that reasonable measures be used to control any emissions to prevent impacts at off-site locations.
Anticipated emissions following completion are not expected to be significantly different than current operations. According to Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) SEPA guidance in regards to greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), if anticipated new GHG emissions from a proposal average less than 10,000 MT CO2e per year, the applicant is not required to address GHG emissions in the SEPA environmental checklist. A project is presumed to have non- significant GHG emissions and climate change impacts if the project is expected to result in fewer than 25,000 MT CO2e per year. The proposed project anticipates producing less than 10,000 MT CO2e per year. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe.
No off-site sources of air emissions have been identified that have the potential to adversely affect the present proposal. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: [help]
Construction
Although significant air quality impacts are not anticipated due to construction of the proposed project, contractors would be required to comply with all relevant federal, state, and local air quality rules. In addition, implementation of BMPs would reduce emissions related to the construction of the project. Possible management practices for reducing the potential for air quality impacts during construction include measures for reducing both exhaust emissions and fugitive dust. The Washington Associated General Contractors brochure Guide to Handling Fugitive Dust from Construction Projects and the PSCAA suggest a number of methods for controlling dust and reducing the potential exposure of people to emissions from diesel equipment.
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 9 of 25
Motor-powered equipment used for the proposed demolition and construction activities would be operated and maintained consistent with existing air emissions requirements. Fugitive dust would be controlled through the use of BMPs. The Port has an enforced anti-idling policy.
3. Water a. Surface Water: [help]
1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. [help]
The project site is located at base of the Sitcum-Blair peninsula which is located between the Sitcum and Blair waterways of Commencement Bay. The site does not abut either of these waterways. The Blair Waterway has been actively operated, managed, maintained and improved as an industrial and commercial navigable waterway since its initial construction. It is currently used for commercial cargo transport associated with Port shipping facilities and other private commercial and industrial users.
Wapato Creek flows for a total of approximately 14 miles from its headwaters just north of the City of Puyallup to its terminus at the head of the Blair Waterway. The Wapato Creek corridor is used for residential, agricultural, commercial, or industrial land uses, which has resulted in degraded water quality and low quality habitat. Wapato Creek borders the eastern portion of the project site and conveys site stormwater and drains directly to the Blair Waterway. Uplands adjacent to the creek provide no opportunity for storage of floodwaters in Wapato Creek, as the creek is currently disconnected from the adjacent floodplain by steep banks and/or protective berms in the vicinity of the project area.
The Erdahl ditch is a man-made stormwater drainage system cut into fill that conveys stormwater from the I-5 corridor between Wapato Creek and the Puyallup River into the Blair Waterway. It is non-fish bearing, discharges through a pump station, is typically dry during summer months, and provides no significant aquatic habitat. The Erdahl Ditch is designated as a “Non-Jurisdictional Wetland” by the City of Tacoma. The ditch has a bed composed of cobble and sand/silt substrates. The bank of the ditch below the OHWM is composed of emergent species of vegetation including reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea) and smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora). Above the OHWM, vegetation is composed of Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius), reed canary grass, Sumac (Rhus species), red alder (Albrus rubra) and Douglas fir (Psuedotsuga menziesii).
There is also a manmade stormwater conveyance ditch that runs parallel to SR 509 along the southern border of the the project site. Stormwater from this conveyance ditch joins with Erdahl ditch.
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. [help]
The proposed project would take place in existing upland and nearshore areas built and committed to marine industrial use. Demolition and construction activities that will be conducted along Alexander Avenue East would take place within 200 feet of Wapato Creek (refer to Figure 4).
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 10 of 25
The Erdahl Ditch is designated as a “Non-Jurisdictional Wetland” by the City of Tacoma, and is non-fish bearing (Figure 6). Due to the location of the ditch and allowable track geometry, the track west of the Port of Tacoma Road crossing must be located to the north of the current rail location and directly on top of the open section of the Erdahl Ditch. Therefore, the filling of the ditch is an unavoidable component of the project. The unavoidable vegetative impact of filling the ditch will be mitigated through removing invasive vegetation and enhancing the vegetation of a section of the Erdahl Ditch to the north of the filled section or possibly through the use of the Port’s Advance mitigation credit.
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. [help]
Filling of the Erdahl Ditch crossing will require approximately 950 cubic yards of fill material, of this fill, approximately 70 cubic yards will fill below the current OHWM of +9.0 feet MLLW. All fill will be sourced from a commercial licensed pit or quarry.
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. [help]
No surface water withdrawals or diversions are proposed as part of the proposed project.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. [help]
Yes, the proposed project does lie within the 100-year floodplain, as shown in Figures 2, 3, 6, and 7.
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. [help]
No waste materials are expected to be discharged to surface waters. b. Ground Water:
1) Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. [help]
The proposed project does not include withdrawal of groundwater or discharge of materials to groundwater at the project site.
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals. . . ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. [help]
The proposed project does not include any discharge of waste material to ground water at the site. c. Water runoff (including stormwater):
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 11 of 25
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. [help]
All of the rail corridor storm water eventually drains through manmade conveyance systems discharging through several public and private outfalls to the Hylebos and Blair Waterways. Stormwater will be collected during construction in much the same way it is in its current state. Appropriate BMPs will be installed to ensure sediment laden water does not enter the conveyance system and final destination waterways.
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. [help]
Only minimal volumes of waste materials would be generated during construction activities. These materials would be confined and collected as they appear, with the objective of avoiding and minimizing releases of debris to surface water.
3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe.
All stormwater runoff from the project site will be conveyed in much the same way as the current stormwater system configuration to match existing drainage patterns. However, the location of stormwater capture throughout the site may be slightly revised to allow for new track placement. A significant portion of stormwater from the site is directed to the Erdahl Ditch, which flows north to the Blair Waterway. The portion of the site adjacent to Alexander Avenue, north of SR 509, drains to Wapato Creek, which flows to the Hylebos Waterway. However, rail improvements proposed for this area are minor and do not require modifications to the current drainage patterns.
A hydraulic analysis was conducted to evaluate the impact of the proposed culvert installation on the Erdahl Ditch and concluded that the installation will result in no adverse upstream or downstream impact. The analysis method and results have been summarized in a technical memorandum, the final version of which was submitted to the Port and the City of Fife on September 16th, 2015 for review and approval.. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any:
Temporary measures would be taken during excavation, grading and stockpiling to control erosion and the transport of sediment from the work area. The project would be managed under an Ecology NPDES General Permit for Construction Activity. The Port would develop a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) in accordance with Ecology’s Surface Water Management Manual and the NPDES General Permit for Construction Activity. In addition, the project will develop a Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control plan to be implemented during construction.
The existing drainage capacity of the Erdahl Ditch is not anticipated to be impacted by construction of this project.
4. Plants [help] a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: [help]
__X__deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 12 of 25
__X__evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other __X__shrubs __X__grass ____pasture ____crop or grain ____ Orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops. __X__ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other ____ water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other __X__other types of vegetation Scotch broom and Himalayan blackberry.
Erdahl Ditch is a non-jurisdictional wetland composed of reed canary grass and smooth cordgrass. Scotch broom and Himalayan blackberry are present in the uplands adjacent to the ditch. b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? [help]
Vegetation in the unpaved portion of the proposed alignment is primarily invasive shrub, including Scotch broom and Himalayan blackberry. No significant vegetation is present in the project area, with the exception of the Erdahl Ditch. Within the ditch the vegetation is composed of Himalayan blackberry, scotch broom, reed canary grass, Sumac, red alder, and Douglas fir.
No existing landscape vegetation is expected to be affected by the proposed project. c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. [help]
No threatened or endangered plant species are known to be in the project area. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: [help]
Impacts to Erdahl Ditch vegetation will be mitigated for by removing invasive vegetation and enhancing vegetation of a section of the Erdahl Ditch to the north of the filled section or possibly through the use of the Port’s Advance mitigation credit. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site.
Smooth cordgrass is present in the Erdahl Ditch and is on the Pierce County Noxious Weeds list. Invasive plants, including Scotch broom and Himalayan blackberry, are also present in the ditch uplands.
5. Animals a. List any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. Examples include: [help]
birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 13 of 25
fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other ______Due to the lack of suitable habitat on the project site, fish and wildlife presence is limited. Hawks, herons, eagles, songbirds, Canada geese, transient coyotes, and small rodents likely occur on or near the site. b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. [help]
There are no known threatened or endangered species on the project site. With respect to near the site, the following table summarizes species listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) that may be near the site. All of these species would only potentially occur in the marine waters of Commencement Bay.
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 14 of 25
Species Name ESA Listing Status Critical Habitat Common Scientific Name ESU or DPS1 Name Chinook (Oncorhynchus Puget Sound Threatened Designated Salmon tshawytscha) ESU Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Puget Sound Threatened Proposed DPS Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus) Puget Sound Threatened Designated DPS Southern (Orcinus Orca) Southern Endangered Designated Resident Resident DPS Killer Whale Humpback (Megaptera N/A Endangered Not Whale novaeangliae) Designated or Proposed Marbled (Brachyramphus N/A Threatened Designated Murrelet marmoratus) Bocaccio (Sebastes paucispinis) Puget Sound/ Endangered Designated Georgia Basin DPS Yelloweye (Sebastes ruberrimus) Puget Sound/ Threatened Designated Rockfish Georgia Basin DPS Canary (Sebastes pinniger) Puget Sound/ Threatened Designated Rockfish Georgia Basin DPS Pacific (Thaleichthys pacificus) Southern DPS Threatened Proposed Eulachon 1 ESU =Evolutionarily Significant Unit; DPS=Distinct Population Segment c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. [help]
The Tacoma tideflats is part of the Pacific flyway for migrating birds. The project site consists of upland areas that do not abut marine waters. Adult salmon migrate from Commencement Bay into the Puyallup River, Hylebos Creek, or Wapato Creek systems to spawn, and juveniles migrate downstream into Commencement Bay as smolts. These migration routes are not expected to be impacted by the proposed project. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: [help]
The rail alignment was selected to avoid impacts to aquatic environments and wetland areas. The design criteria and construction methods were selected to avoid and minimize effects to wildlife and habitat. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site.
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 15 of 25
No invasive animal species are known to be on or near the site. Erdahl Ditch is not on the list of aquatic invasive species infested waters in Washington (WAC 232-12-016).
6. Energy and natural resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. [help]
Electrical power will be used to operate the completed project’s compressed air system, rail switches, and yard power and illumination. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. [help]
The proposed project would have no effect on potential use of solar energy at adjacent sites. 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: [help]
Fuel-efficient electrical and motorized equipment would be used to the extent possible throughout the construction and operation of the proposed project. A Port enforced anti-idling policy will reduce fuel consumption. The Project facilitates the use of rail transport over less efficient surface transportation means (e.g., trucking).
7. Environmental health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. [help]
Environmental health hazards that could occur as a result of this proposal include those associated with typical construction projects (i.e., medical, fire, or spill).
Motorized equipment used for construction activities may include materials in the form of fuel, lubricants, or other motorized equipment materials or liquids that may cause environmental health hazards. These materials would be subject to local, state, and federal controls and regulations pertaining to use, handling, storage, and disposal. The risk of chemical exposure to construction workers via absorption, inhalation, or ingestion is considered to be low for this potential source
1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses.
There are no contaminated soils as defined by Model Toxics Control Act on the project site. Rail ballast often contains greases and oils and will be reused or properly disposed of at a licensed facility off site.
2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity.
An existing fuel pipeline traverses the project adjacent to the west side of the Erdahl Ditch. The pipeline is located within a utility easement between the Port and the McChord
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 16 of 25
Pipeline Company. The easement agreement allows the Port to construct roadways, parking areas, landscaping and railroad tracks within the easement area. There are no known fuel tanks or contaminated soil on site. Overhead transmission lines are located at various locations around the project site. The existing lines provide adequate clearance for current rail movements and maintenance and are not expected to impact construction.
3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project.
No toxic or hazardous chemicals will be stored, used, or produced during construction or operation of the Project.
4) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
No special emergency services are anticipated or necessary due to the proposed project other than typical emergency services for medical or fire emergencies.
5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
Potentially hazardous fuels, lubricants, and associated materials used for operation of motorized equipment as part of the proposed demolition and construction activity would be subject to existing local, state, and federal controls for use, handling, storage, and disposal, with the objective of avoiding potential environmental health exposure and hazards. The Contractor will be required to keep a spill kit on-site. Work will be conducted following a site safety plan prepared by a competent person. b. Noise
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? [help]
The project site is located in an industrial area. Existing sources of noise at the site include rail operations, motor-driven vehicles, particularly heavy container yard equipment, and cargo hauling trucks. Adjacent sources of noise include vehicle traffic, and adjacent industrial facilities.
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. [help]
Short-term noise levels would be affected during construction from working equipment.
Rail operation resulting from the proposed new lead tracks will be consistent with surrounding industrial land uses. Future rail operations are anticipated to occur throughout the day. These operations would be consistent with the industrial nature of the tideflats.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: [help]
Construction
All motorized demolition and construction equipment would be maintained and operated consistent with prudent measures to control potential noise emissions.
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 17 of 25
Operations
The rail operations are not expected to be different from current conditions across the tideflats or at levels that would disturb neighboring areas.
8. Land and shoreline use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. [help]
The project is bounded by State Route (SR) 509 to the south and the Port owned Banana Tracks and the Pierce County Terminal to the north. The Port owns the six tax parcels that make up the project area. The proposal will not affect the current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties. b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use? [help]
The site has no historic agricultural use.
1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how:
The Project will not affect or be affected by farm or forest land normal businesses operations, due to the lack of such operations in the area. c. Describe any structures on the site. [help]
The site is primarily composed of railroad tracks, asphalt or gravel access road, and small buildings. The Port of Tacoma Road overpass is also on the site. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? [help]
Approximately 15,000 track feet of existing rail will be dismantled; 6,000 track feet of which will be stockpiled and reused and the remaining 8,500 track feet will be disposed of off-site at an approved disposal facility. Track demolition/dismantling will include the removal of rail, ties, trackbed material and rail switches. Where feasible, existing rail, ties, rail appurtenances, and bedding material will be salvaged and reused.
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? [help]
The site is zoned Port Maritime Industrial (PMI) within the Industrial Districts designation of the Tacoma Municipal Code (TMC, Chapter 13). The District is intended to accommodate marine and industrial uses, including shipping terminals, container and intermodal yards, chemical manufacturing and distribution, forest product operations, warehousing, cargo storage, and ship building/repair uses. According to the Code, the Port’s operations are a large part of this District and the area “is characterized by proximity to deepwater berthing; sufficient backup land between the berths and public right-of-ways; 24-hour operations to accommodate regional and international shipping and distribution schedules; raw materials processing and manufacturing;
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 18 of 25 uses which rely on the deep water berthing to transport raw materials for processing or manufacture, or transport of finished products; and freight mobility infrastructure, with the entire area served by road and rail corridors designed for large, heavy truck and rail loads (TMC 13.06.400.B). f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? [help]
The site is designated as “Manufacturing/Industrial Center” (M/IC) on the Generalized Land Use Plan Map in the City of Tacoma Comprehensive Plan (amended December 2007). g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? [help]
The project site is not located within a shoreline master program designation. h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. [help]
City of Tacoma Critical Area Maps indicate that the site is within a moderate Volcanic Hazard zone. The Erdahl ditch is designated as a Non-jurisdictional Wetland and is also zoned as a Steep Slope critical area with a slope of 25 to 40 percent. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? [help]
No residential uses are present at the project site and no residential occupancy is proposed. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? [help]
The completed project is not expected to result in displacement of residents or workers. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: [help]
No displacement of residents or workers would result from the proposed project; therefore, no measures for avoiding or reducing displacement impacts are included in the present proposal. l. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: [help]
The proposed project would be consistent with local land use plans calling for marine industrial and terminal development in the area. The proposed project is also consistent with the 2012 Port of Tacoma Strategic Plan.
The proposed project would result in a continuation of the existing maritime industrial character of the site which is anticipated by City of Tacoma use plans. Land uses in the vicinity of the site may experience slight increases in traffic, noise levels, and air pollutants associated with the proposed construction. However, these conditions would not substantially differ from the character of existing urban industrial uses. Thus, surrounding land uses are not expected to be significantly impacted by the proposed project. m. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with nearby agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any:
No measures are proposed to ensure the proposal is compatible with nearby agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance because the Project is not expected to affect these resources.
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 19 of 25
9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, mid- dle, or low-income housing. [help]
No housing units are included in the proposed project. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. [help]
No housing units would be eliminated due to the proposed project. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: [help]
Since no housing resources would be affected, no measures to reduce or control adverse effects on housing are included in the present proposal.
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? [help]
No buildings are proposed. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? [help]
The project site reflects the visual character of a developed, urban industrial area dominated by Port maritime industrial activities. The site topography is relatively level/flat. No adverse effects on views of adjacent water and shoreline areas are expected to result from the proposed project. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: [help]
No significant changes in view conditions at the site are anticipated and no offsetting aesthetic measures are included in the present proposal.
11. Light and glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? [help]
Existing yard lighting will be slightly relocated to make way for new track installation. Pole locations and heights, as well as fixture counts, may be altered to maintain current lighting levels. Overall lighting levels are not intended to be significantly altered as a result of the project. The lighting system will be finalized during final design.
Temporary lighting may be needed during the early morning or evening hours during the construction period. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? [help]
No light or glare from the finished project is expected to be a safety hazard or interfere with views. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? [help]
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 20 of 25
No off-site sources of light and glare in the area of the project site are expected to adversely affect the present proposal. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: [help]
Existing yard lighting will be slightly relocated but it will be altered to maintain current lighting levels so there should not be any need for measures to control light and glare.
12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? [help]
Recreational fishing and boating occur in Commencement Bay and nearby waterways. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. [help]
The proposed project will not alter or displace public shoreline or recreational uses in the project area. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: [help]
No disruption or displacement of existing public shoreline access or recreational uses in the area of the project is anticipated, therefore no measures are proposed.
13. Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers located on or near the site? If so, specifically describe. [help]
A review of the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservations web portal WISAARD, and City of Tacoma Register gave no indications of buildings, structures, or sites over 45 years of age listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation records located within or near the site. b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. [help]
Historical Research Associates, Inc. (HRA) reviewed WISAARD, the Pierce County Parcel Viewer and the Tacoma Register. No landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural features of importance are known to be at the project site or potentially affected by project actions. The site is currently located on an area that consists of several feet of fill. It is unlikely that the excavation required to install new track and utilities will extend below the fill and into native soils. The railroad tracks were installed in the late 1960’s but have been changed several times since then. The Erdahl Ditch is less than 45 years of age. c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 21 of 25
department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. [help]
No potential adverse effects on historic or cultural resources are anticipated and no measures are proposed to reduce or control such effects. The Port has a standing unanticipated discovery plan and works closely with the Puyallup Tribe of Indians cultural resource experts when an artifact is discovered.
An EZ-1 form for the project was submitted to DAHP in December 2014. State Archaeologist, Rob Whitlam responded that he concurred that the project would have no effect on cultural resources on January 5, 2014. d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required.
The Port will follow the unanticipated discovery plan noted in “c” and consult with the Puyallup Tribe of Indians and DAHP as necessary.
14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. [help]
SR 509 is a divided highway from downtown that runs parallel to the southern border of the project site. The roadways in the vicinity are described below:
Port of Tacoma Road consists of a four lane roadway that runs north/south. Port of Tacoma Road crosses the project site on an existing overpass approximately mid-way along the corridor between the project site Milwaukee Avenue and Alexander Avenue. The site does not have an entrance along Port of Tacoma road.
N Frontage Road consists of a two-lane roadway that runs in a westward direction and runs parallel to the southern border of the project site, just north of SR 509. N Frontage connects with SR 509 via onramps to the east and west of Port of Tacoma Road. N Frontage also connects with Milwaukee Way. There is access to the site off of N Frontage Road on the southern border of the site.
Milwaukee Way is a four lane roadway that runs along the western border of the project site and connects with N Frontage Road. Rail tracks cross over Milwaukee on the western end of the project. There is access to the site off of N Milwaukee way on the western border of the site.
Alexander Avenue consists of a two-lane roadway with no sidewalks that runs along the eastern border of the project site and connects with SR 509. There is access to the project site at the northeastern corner of the site where Alexander Road connects with E 4th St. b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? [help]
Pierce County provides transit service to the project vicinity but not to the project site. There is one regular route that circulates within the Port (Route 60) and several routes that pass near the Port on SR 509 or through Fife.
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 22 of 25 c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non-project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? [help]
There are no public or currently used parking spaces currently at the project site. No parking spaces would be eliminated. d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). [help]
Other than private access roads, the project does not include improvements to existing roads or public transportation facilities. The project proposes to cross the existing Port of Tacoma Road, but does so underneath the road’s overpass and does not impact the layout or traffic of the road. e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. [help]
The project will occur in the immediate vicinity of water transportation and is being proposed for the benefit of rail transportation.
The project is located at the south end of the Port of Tacoma, a regional center for water-related transportation as one of the largest container ports in North America. The Pierce County Terminal (PCT) is located just north of the project site and at the south end of the Blair Waterway, refer to Site Plan Figures 3 and 4. Similar to the other terminals at the Port, large container ships berth along the PCT’s wharf and quay cranes are used to on or off load the ship’s cargo.
The North Lead Rail Project is intended to construct rail corridor improvements required to increase the capacity and efficiency of the Port rail system. Rail service is provided to the Port area by two mainline trans-continental rail services: BNSF and UPRR. A short-line rail provider, TR, operates nearly all train movements at the Port and provides terminal and switching services. TR’s operations are headquartered at the west end of the project site. Rail facilities on the project site consist of TR’s classification yard, long tracks, sidings, maintenance and storage yards and intermodal ramps to the various terminals within the Port (refer to Figures 1 through 4).
Containers and other cargoes are loaded on to rail cars at the shipping terminals or other locations on the tideflats and brought to the project site by TR. Blocks of rail cars are sorted by destination and are assembled into a “full” train by TR and are pulled onto long tracks. The full train is staged on the long tracks until it is pulled by TR locomotives to Bullfrog Junction where the train is then switched from TR locomotives to BNSF or UP locomotives and pulled onto the mainline for transport to its destination. Trains arriving to the Port follow the reserve pattern and are pulled onto the long tracks where TR locomotives disassemble the train and deliver rail cars to their destinations at the Port. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and nonpassenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? [help]
In addition, a transportation study was prepared in 2011 and included some project elements of the proposed project including reference to the lead rail track. The study is: Tideflats Area Transportation Study (TATS) Final Report. Prepared for Port of Tacoma, Washington State Department of Transportation, Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board, City of Fife, City of Tacoma, Marine View Ventures (an entity of the Puyallup Tribe of Indians), Pierce County, and SSA Marine. Prepared by Fehr & Peers. Seattle, WA. June 2011.
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 23 of 25
Construction
Construction traffic would generate temporary, short-term increases in traffic from construction vehicles. The general construction traffic impacts would be caused by the arrival, departure, and parking of construction workers’ vehicles; and the arrival, departure, and maneuvering of construction material and construction equipment delivery vehicles.
The construction traffic impacts would be caused by the arrival, departure, and queuing of both loaded and empty dump trucks. Of the construction vehicle traffic, soil-hauling trucks are expected to cause the greatest short-term impact during the construction period. Typically, trucks with a capacity of 20 cy are used to haul soil. An estimate of the number of trucks entering and departing the site is based on the construction schedule and total project estimate of filling, grading and excavation. During construction it is expected that vehicle use would include truck trips necessary for material hauling (including removal of materials and delivery of construction materials) and construction employee trips. The total number of construction vehicle trips would not be expected to exceed 25 trips per day.
Operations
Rail improvements constructed to support the proposed project area are intended to improve vehicle traffic in the area and reduce the future need for trucks. g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe.
The Project will not interfere with, affect, or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: [help]
The proposed project is intended to encourage the use of rail service as opposed to truck transport. In this instance, the use of rail service has several primary benefits. The first public benefit is the reduced impact to road facilities. If the new lead tracks are not permitted, new tenants on the subject properties would utilize roads and road based vehicles to transfer goods. The road based vehicles would provide a greater level of impact and wear to existing road, would increase road use and congestion, and may increase costs to the cities of Tacoma and Fife and WSDOT for street/Highway maintenance.
The second public benefit is that of safety. The availability of rail transport is likely to reduce the overall increase in road traffic that would occur if a rail line were not available and as such would result in a proportional overall decrease in the probability that a vehicular collision may occur in the area.
In addition, reducing total vehicle miles by truck vehicles is expected to result in a reduction in associated air emissions and diesel consumption because of increased use of rail transportation.
No long-term negative effects on transportation in the area are anticipated as a result of the proposed project. No additional measures for reduction/minimization of potential adverse transportation effects are included in this project. Future development projects will evaluate impacts at the time they are proposed.
15. Public services
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 24 of 25 a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. [help]
No increase in public services is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. [help]
No measures for offsetting, reducing or controlling negative effects on public services are expected to be required.
16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: [help]
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. [help]
Construction
Utility impacts during construction activities may include removal, replacement, or abandonment in place of some existing onsite utilities, including water, sanitary sewer, electrical, and compressed air lines. No substantial interruption of utility services to existing users would be anticipated during the ongoing construction activities.
C. Signature [HELP]
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision.
Signature: ______
Name of signee ______
Position and Agency/Organization ______
Date Submitted: ______
D. Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions [help]
(IT IS NOT NECESSARY to use this sheet for project actions)
SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) May 2014 Page 25 of 25
PURPOSE: CONSTRUCT RAIL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT: NORTH LEAD RAIL IMPROVEMENTS TO IMPROVE CAPACITY OF THE PORT'S RAIL FIGURE 1 - VICINITY MAP ADDRESS: SR 509 N. FRONTAGE ROAD SYSTEM. TACOMA, WA 98401 PARCEL#: 0320031029, 0320034060, 0320023062, 0320024098, DATUM: VERTICAL PORT DATUM 0320013132, 0320012066 PROJECT SPECIFIC OHWM = +9.00' LAT/LONG: 47.248128N, -122.394608W MLLW = 0.00' SECT/TOWN/RANGE: SEC01 & 02, T20N, R3E COUNTY OF: PIERCE STATE OF: WA ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: APPLICATION BY: PORT OF TACOMA PORT OF TACOMA, ASC PROFILES INC, CITY OF TACOMA - TPU, WSDOT, CITY OF TACOMA SHEET 1 OF 7 OCTOBER 2015 MARSHALL AVENUE
MILWAUKEE WAY
MARSHALL AVENUE AUTO FACILITY
LOWER SLUG YARD MATCH LINE - SEE FIGURE 3
TACOMA RAIL CLASSIFICATION YARD TACOMA RAIL YARD
N. FRONTAGE ROAD
PURPOSE: CONSTRUCT RAIL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT: NORTH LEAD RAIL IMPROVEMENTS TO IMPROVE CAPACITY OF THE PORT'S RAIL FIGURE 2 - SITE PLAN ADDRESS: SR 509 N. FRONTAGE ROAD SYSTEM. TACOMA, WA 98401 PARCEL#: 0320031029, 0320034060, 0320023062, 0320024098, DATUM: VERTICAL PORT DATUM 0320013132, 0320012066 PROJECT SPECIFIC OHWM = +9.00' LAT/LONG: 47.248128N, -122.394608W MLLW = 0.00' SECT/TOWN/RANGE: SEC01 & 02, T20N, R3E COUNTY OF: PIERCE STATE OF: WA ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: APPLICATION BY: PORT OF TACOMA PORT OF TACOMA, ASC PROFILES INC, CITY OF TACOMA - TPU, WSDOT, CITY OF TACOMA SHEET 2 OF 7 OCTOBER 2015 MATCH LINE - SEE FIGURE 2 MATCH LINE - SEE FIGURE 4
SR 509
PURPOSE: CONSTRUCT RAIL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT: NORTH LEAD RAIL IMPROVEMENTS TO IMPROVE CAPACITY OF THE PORT'S RAIL FIGURE 3 - SITE PLAN ADDRESS: SR 509 N. FRONTAGE ROAD SYSTEM. TACOMA, WA 98401 PARCEL#: 0320031029, 0320034060, 0320023062, 0320024098, DATUM: VERTICAL PORT DATUM 0320013132, 0320012066 PROJECT SPECIFIC OHWM = +9.00' LAT/LONG: 47.248128N, -122.394608W MLLW = 0.00' SECT/TOWN/RANGE: SEC01 & 02, T20N, R3E COUNTY OF: PIERCE STATE OF: WA ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: APPLICATION BY: PORT OF TACOMA PORT OF TACOMA, ASC PROFILES INC, CITY OF TACOMA - TPU, WSDOT, CITY OF TACOMA SHEET 3 OF 7 OCTOBER 2015 ALEXANDER AVENUE MATCH LINE - SEE FIGURE 3
SR 509
PURPOSE: CONSTRUCT RAIL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT: NORTH LEAD RAIL IMPROVEMENTS TO IMPROVE CAPACITY OF THE PORT'S RAIL FIGURE 4 - SITE PLAN ADDRESS: SR 509 N. FRONTAGE ROAD SYSTEM. TACOMA, WA 98401 PARCEL#: 0320031029, 0320034060, 0320023062, 0320024098, DATUM: VERTICAL PORT DATUM 0320013132, 0320012066 PROJECT SPECIFIC OHWM = +9.00' LAT/LONG: 47.248128N, -122.394608W MLLW = 0.00' SECT/TOWN/RANGE: SEC01 & 02, T20N, R3E COUNTY OF: PIERCE STATE OF: WA ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: APPLICATION BY: PORT OF TACOMA PORT OF TACOMA, ASC PROFILES INC, CITY OF TACOMA - TPU, WSDOT, CITY OF TACOMA SHEET 4 OF 7 OCTOBER 2015 SECTION A
PURPOSE: CONSTRUCT RAIL IMPROVEMENTS FIGURE 5 - TYPICAL TRACKBED PROJECT: NORTH LEAD RAIL IMPROVEMENTS TO IMPROVE CAPACITY OF THE PORT'S RAIL SECTION ADDRESS: SR 509 N. FRONTAGE ROAD SYSTEM. TACOMA, WA 98401 PARCEL#: 0320031029, 0320034060, 0320023062, 0320024098, DATUM: VERTICAL PORT DATUM 0320013132, 0320012066 PROJECT SPECIFIC OHWM = +9.00' LAT/LONG: 47.248128N, -122.394608W MLLW = 0.00' SECT/TOWN/RANGE: SEC01 & 02, T20N, R3E COUNTY OF: PIERCE STATE OF: WA ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: APPLICATION BY: PORT OF TACOMA PORT OF TACOMA, ASC PROFILES INC, CITY OF TACOMA - TPU, WSDOT, CITY OF TACOMA SHEET 5 OF 7 OCTOBER 2015 A
B
PURPOSE: CONSTRUCT RAIL IMPROVEMENTS FIGURE 6 - ERDAHL DITCH PROJECT: NORTH LEAD RAIL IMPROVEMENTS ADDRESS: SR 509 N. FRONTAGE ROAD TO IMPROVE CAPACITY OF THE PORT'S RAIL PARTIAL PLAN SYSTEM. TACOMA, WA 98401 PARCEL#: 0320031029, 0320034060, 0320023062, 0320024098, DATUM: VERTICAL PORT DATUM 0320013132, 0320012066 PROJECT SPECIFIC OHWM = +9.00' LAT/LONG: 47.248128N, -122.394608W MLLW = 0.00' SECT/TOWN/RANGE: SEC01 & 02, T20N, R3E COUNTY OF: PIERCE STATE OF: WA ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: APPLICATION BY: PORT OF TACOMA PORT OF TACOMA, ASC PROFILES INC, CITY OF TACOMA - TPU, WSDOT, CITY OF TACOMA SHEET 6 OF 7 OCTOBER 2015 SECTION B
PURPOSE: CONSTRUCT RAIL IMPROVEMENTS FIGURE 7 - ERDAHL DITCH PROJECT: NORTH LEAD RAIL IMPROVEMENTS ADDRESS: SR 509 N. FRONTAGE ROAD TO IMPROVE CAPACITY OF THE PORT'S RAIL SECTION SYSTEM. TACOMA, WA 98401 PARCEL#: 0320031029, 0320034060, 0320023062, 0320024098, DATUM: VERTICAL PORT DATUM 0320013132, 0320012066 PROJECT SPECIFIC OHWM = +9.00' LAT/LONG: 47.248128N, -122.394608W MLLW = 0.00' SECT/TOWN/RANGE: SEC01 & 02, T20N, R3E COUNTY OF: PIERCE STATE OF: WA ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: APPLICATION BY: PORT OF TACOMA PORT OF TACOMA, ASC PROFILES INC, CITY OF TACOMA - TPU, WSDOT, CITY OF TACOMA SHEET 7 OF 7 OCTOBER 2015