Swift II Bus Rapid Transit
Final Categorical Exclusion and Documented Categorical Worksheet
As approved by FTA on March 31, 2016
Prepared for
Prepared by Environmental Science Associates FTA Region 10
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION and
DOCUMENTED CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION WORKSHEET
Swift II Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) – Boeing to Canyon Park Project
Sponsoring Agency
Snohomish County Public Transportation Benefit Area Corporation (Community Transit)
Date Approved
March 31, 2016 Table of Contents I. Project Description ...... 1 II. NEPA Class of Action ...... 3 A. Will the project significantly impact the natural, social and/or economic environment? ...... 3 B. Does the project appear on the following list of Categorical Exclusions (CEs)? ...... 3 C. Does the project appear on the following list of potential documented Categorical Exclusions? .... 4 III. Information Required for Documented Categorical Exclusions ...... 5 A. Detailed Project Description ...... 5 B. Location and Zoning ...... 9 C. Traffic ...... 11 Existing Conditions ...... 11 Project Effects ...... 12 Findings and Conclusions ...... 15 D. Aesthetics ...... 16 E. Air Quality ...... 17 Existing Conditions ...... 18 Project Effects ...... 18 Greenhouse Gas ...... 19 Findings and Conclusions ...... 19 F. Coastal Zone ...... 20 G. Environmental Justice ...... 20 Existing Conditions ...... 20 Project Effects ...... 21 Outreach Efforts Targeted Specifically at Minority or Low-Income Populations...... 22 Findings and Conclusions ...... 22 H. Floodplains ...... 23 I. Hazardous Materials ...... 23 Existing Conditions ...... 23 Project Effects ...... 23 Findings and Conclusions ...... 24 J. Navigable Waterways ...... 24 K. Noise and Vibration ...... 24 Existing Conditions ...... 25 Project Effects ...... 27 Findings and Conclusions ...... 27
DRAFT DCE Worksheet i March 31, 2016 L. Prime and Unique Farmlands ...... 28 M. Historic & Cultural Resources ...... 28 Existing Conditions ...... 29 Project Effects ...... 29 Findings and Conclusions ...... 30 N. Biological ...... 31 Existing Conditions ...... 32 Project Effects ...... 32 Findings and Conclusions ...... 34 O. Recreational ...... 34 Existing Conditions ...... 35 Project Effects ...... 35 Findings and conclusions ...... 36 P. Seismic and Soils ...... 36 Q. Water Quality ...... 37 Existing Conditions ...... 37 Project Effects ...... 38 Findings and Conclusions ...... 39 R. Wetlands ...... 40 Existing Conditions ...... 40 Project Effects ...... 40 Findings and Conclusions ...... 42 S. Construction Impacts ...... 42 T. Cumulative and Indirect Impacts ...... 44 U. Property Acquisition ...... 44 V. Energy ...... 45 W. Public Involvement ...... 46 X. Mitigation Measures ...... 46 Temporary Construction ...... 46 Transportation ...... 47 Air Quality ...... 47 Hazardous Materials ...... 48 Noise ...... 48 Historic and Cultural Resources ...... 49 Biological and Water Quality ...... 49
DRAFT DCE Worksheet ii March 31, 2016 Coordination with Relevant Agencies ...... 51 Y. Other Federal Actions ...... 52 Z. State and Local Policies and Ordinances ...... 52 AA. Related Federal and State/Local Actions...... 52
Figures Figure 1 Project Area Map...... 2 Figure 2 Project Elements ...... 7 Figure 3 Location and Zoning Map ...... 10
Tables Table 1 Existing, Future Without Project, and Future With Project Intersection Levels of Service ...... 14 Table 2 Demographic Summary for Swift II BRT Project Area ...... 21 Table 3 Summary Results of Noise Measurements (dBA) ...... 26 Table 4 Applicable ESA-Listed Species ...... 31 Table 5 Unavoidable Impacts to the Baseline and Conservation and Minimization ...... 33 Table 6 Section 4(f) Resources within 1/8th of a mile of a Bus Station ...... 35 Table 7 Streams and water quality categories in the project vicinity (Ecology, 2012) ...... 38 Table 8 Potential Wetland Impacts ...... 41 Table 9 Mitigation Ratios Required by Local Jurisdictions ...... 50
Appendices Appendix A Preliminary Station Plans and Preliminary Layout for 128th Street Improvements at I-5
Appendix B Draft Air Quality Technical Memorandum
Appendix C Draft Critical Areas Report
Appendix D Draft Biological Assessment
Appendix E Draft Cultural Resources Technical Memorandum
Appendix F Draft Environmental Justice Technical Memorandum
Appendix G Draft Hazardous Materials Technical Memorandum
Appendix H Draft Noise Technical Memorandum
Appendix I Draft Section 4(f) Technical Memorandum
Appendix J Draft Stormwater Management Requirements Memorandum and Draft Preliminary Hydraulics Report – 128th Street Improvements at I-5
Appendix K Draft Traffic Discipline Report
DRAFT DCE Worksheet iii March 31, 2016 This page left intentionally blank. I. Project Description
The proposed project would construct approximately thirty-four (34) BRT stations, enhance the roadway at three key locations to improve transit travel safety and reliability within the corridor, and improve pedestrian facility connections between the Swift II BRT stations and the surrounding neighborhoods at five locations within the corridor (Figure 1).
Purpose and Need
The purpose and need for the project is to maintain mobility in Snohomish County by: (1) providing improved transit service between two of the Puget Sound Regional Council’s Regional Growth Centers, Bothell-Canyon Park and Boeing/ Paine Field; and (2) creating improved transit connectivity with the original Swift line (on SR 99) and other regional express transit routes that provide service to Downtown Seattle, Bellevue, and other parts of the region via I-5 and I-405.
Project Location
The project site is located in Snohomish County, Washington, and passes through the communities of Bothell, Mill Creek, and Everett (Figure 1). The 12.4-mile route would begin at the Canyon Park P&R and terminate at the site of the planned Seaway Transit Center, located across the street from the Boeing Everett Plant.
From the Canyon Park Park & Ride (P&R), the BRT line would travel north along the Bothell/Everett Highway (State Route 527) approximately 6.2 miles until it reached 132nd Street SE. On 132nd Street SE, the BRT would head west for approximately one mile until the road becomes 128th Street SE. The BRT would then continue west on 128th Street SE/SW for less than a mile, before turning north, at the point where the road becomes Airport Road. The BRT would continue three miles north on Airport Road until it reaches SR 526, where it would turn east. After one half mile on SR 526, the BRT would turn north onto Seaway Boulevard, using the SR 526 off-ramp. Once on Seaway Boulevard, the BRT would travel just over half a mile to reach the site of the planned Seaway Transit Center, on the south side of 75th Street SW.
Project Contact
Todd Jacobs Project Manager, Community Transit Phone Number: (425) 348-2367 Mailing Address: Community Transit 7100 Hardeson Road, Everett, WA 98203 Email Address: [email protected]
DRAFT DCE Worksheet 1 March 31, 2016 Swift II Project Map # E v e r e t t N EAWA S Y BLVD M u k i l t e o I 5
"" Seaway Transit Center B o e i n g BROADWAY SR 526 Airport Rd at Kasch Park Rd !!
AIRPORT RD 9 5 e Airport Rd at 100th St SW !! t Airport Rd at 100th St SW a o R 9 S t s n r o e t
t 19THAVE SE MUKILTEO SPEEDWAY f n i I Airport Rd at 112th St SW ! w Airport Rd at 112th St SW ! S I 5 Airport Rd at SR 99 !! 128th128th StSt SWSW atat 4th4th AveAve WW HWY 99 128TH ST SW 128th128th StSt SESE atat 3rd3rd AveAve SESE Airport Rd at Gibson Rd !! !! !! " !! 132nd St at Elgin Way/Dumas Rd " ! 13 "" !132nd132nd StSt atat 16th16th AveAve SESE 4TH Mariner P L S Park & Ride E !! SR 527 at Trillium Blvd McCollum Park Park & Ride LEGEND M i l l C r e e k !! Station Pair !! SR 527 at 153rd St SE " Transit Center " SR 525 164TH ST SW ! "" Park & Ride ! SR 527 at 164th St SE
!! SR 527 at 180th St SE L y n n w o o d SR 527 at 180th St SE
196TH ST SW
7
FILBERT RD 2 !!5 SR 527 at 196th St SE
R S
208TH ST SE !! SR 527 at SR 524/208th St SE MALTBY RD M o u n t l a k e B r i e r !! SR 527 at 220th St SE T e r r a c e Canyon Park Park & Ride "!"! C a n y o n
PI a405 r k
0 0.5 1 2 9 B o t h e l l R Miles B o t h e l l S
Figure 1 Project Area Map II. NEPA Class of Action
Answer the following questions to determine the project’s potential class of action. If the answer to any of the questions in Section A is “YES”, contact the FTA Region 10 office to determine whether the project requires preparation of a NEPA environmental assessment (EA) or environmental impact statement (EIS).
A. Will the project significantly impact the natural, social and/or economic environment?
YES (contact FTA Regional office) NO (continue)
A.1. Is the significance of the project’s social, economic or environmental impacts unknown?
YES (contact FTA Regional office) NO (continue)
A.2. Is the project likely to require detailed evaluation of more than a few potential impacts? YES (contact FTA Regional office) NO (continue)
A.3. Is the project likely to generate intense public discussion, concern or controversy, even though it may be limited to a relatively small subset of the community?
YES (contact FTA Regional office) NO (continue)
B. Does the project appear on the following list of Categorical Exclusions (CEs)? The types of activities listed below describe actions which, when the corresponding conditions are met, are under usual circumstances categorically excluded from further NEPA analysis under 23 CFR 771.118(c). Unusual circumstances may include, but are not limited to, the presence of wetlands, historic buildings and structures, parklands, or floodplains in the project area, or the potential for the project to impact other resources. (Descriptions of each type of activity, and corresponding conditions, are available here; this worksheet simply lists the name of each exclusion.)
YES (If checked AND there are no special circumstances, check the applicable box and briefly describe the activity in Section III. A; then proceed to the signature block on the back page.)
NO (continue to Section II. C)
23 CFR 771.118(c)(1-16)
DRAFT DCE Worksheet 3 March 31, 2016 1. Utility and Similar Appurtenance Action
2. Pedestrian or Bicycle Action
3. Environmental Mitigation or Stewardship Activity
4. Planning and Administrative Activity
5. Activities Promoting Transportation Safety, Security, Accessibility and Communication
6. Acquisition, Transfer of Real Property Interest
7. Acquisition, Rehab, Maintenance of Vehicles or Equipment
8. Maintenance, Rehab, Reconstruction of Facilities
9. Assembly or Construction of Facilities
10. Joint Development of Facilities
11. Emergency Recovery Actions
(Several conditions attach to this type of CE. We recommend you consult with FTA if you think this CE may apply to your action.)
12. Projects Entirely within the Existing Operational Right-of-Way
13. Federally Funded Projects
Must be less than $5 million in federal funding, or having a total estimated cost of not more than $30,000,000 and Federal funds comprising less than 15 percent of the total estimated project cost
14. Bridge Removal and Related Activities
15. Preventative Maintenance to Certain Culverts and Channels
16. Geotechnical and Similar Investigations
C. Does the project appear on the following list of potential documented Categorical Exclusions? Projects that are categorical exclusions under 23 CFR 771.118(d) require additional documentation demonstrating that the specific conditions or criteria for the CEs are satisfied and that significant effects will not result.
YES (Check correct box below and continue to Part III)
NO (Contact FTA Regional Office)
23 CFR 771.118(d)(1-8)
DRAFT DCE Worksheet 4 March 31, 2016 1. Modernization of a highway by resurfacing, restoring, rehabilitating, or reconstructing shoulders or auxiliary lanes.
2. Modernization of a highway by resurfacing, restoring, rehabilitating, or reconstructing shoulders or auxiliary lanes.
3. Acquisition of land for hardship or protective purposes. (NOTE: Hardship and protective buying will be permitted only for one or a limited number of parcels, and only where it will not limit the evaluation of alternatives (including alignments) for planned construction projects.
4. Acquisition of right-of-way. (NOTE: No project development on the acquired right-of-way may proceed until the NEPA process for such project development, including the consideration of alternatives, where appropriate, has been completed.)
5. Construction of bicycle facilities within existing transportation right-of-way.
6. Facility modernization through construction or replacement of existing components.
7. Minor realignment for rail safety purposes
8. Facility modernization/expansion outside existing ROW
“Other” actions which meet the criteria for a CE in the CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1508.4) and will not result in significant environmental effects. Actions must not: induce significant impacts to planned growth or land use; require the relocation of significant numbers of people; have a significant impact on any natural, cultural, recreational, historic or other resource; cause significant air, noise, or water quality impacts; have significant impacts on travel patterns; or otherwise have significant environmental impacts (either individually or cumulatively).
III. Information Required for Documented Categorical Exclusions If you checked “Yes” to any of the options in Part II. C, complete each relevant subject area for Part III. Sections B-AA and submit to FTA. Depending on the project, some of the subject areas may not be applicable. In such cases, no discussion is needed.
The list below is not all-inclusive. If your proposed project has the potential to cause impacts to resources which are not listed below, please provide supplemental information about those potential impacts.
A. Detailed Project Description Describe the project and explain how it satisfies the purpose and need identified in Part I.
The Swift II BRT project would maintain mobility in Snohomish County by linking a major employment site (Boeing Everett) with the Mill Creek Town Center, retail centers such as Thrasher’s Corner, and other population centers and urban villages in Snohomish County. The project would also improve transit connectivity via its intersections with State Route 99, Interstate 5, State Route 527, and Interstate 405, which would link the route to the original Swift line (existing on SR 99) and many of the regional express routes. The Swift II BRT route would
FINAL DCE Worksheet 5 March 31, 2016 serve Canyon Park Park & Ride, McCollum Park Park & Ride, and Mariner Park & Ride (see Figure 1). The project includes Swift II BRT Stations, roadway improvements, adaptive signal project upgrades, and pedestrian connectivity improvements (Figure 2).
Station Improvements: The proposed project includes construction of approximately thirty-four (34) BRT stations along the Swift II BRT corridor (see Figure 1 and Appendix A). The station improvements would include construction of transit platforms and associated site improvements, and installation of shelters and amenities. Associated site improvements are anticipated to include installation of concrete aprons in front of the stations; modifications to existing curb, gutter, and sidewalk; modifications to existing storm drainage; utility relocations; signing and striping modifications; traffic signal improvements and modifications; and retaining wall construction at some locations.
Fifteen (15) station pairs (northbound and southbound stops at same general location) are proposed, along with: a single northbound station at 220th Street SE; a single station with extended platform at Canyon Park P&R; two shelters and amenities at Seaway Transit Center; and a southbound drop only platform on 17th Avenue SE in the Canyon Park Business Center. The proposed project includes the relocation and/or modification of some existing local stops adjacent to the stations. It is estimated that eighteen (18) existing local stops would be modified and/or relocated.
To efficiently provide transit service to the greatest number of people, the stations are planned next to high residential and commercial activity zones along the proposed transit corridor. Stations pairs, one for north bound transit service and the other for south bound transit service, would be located at signalized intersections with pedestrian crosswalks to facilitate safe crossings, and near existing local bus stops to enable greater connectivity with other regional transit service.
The stations are designed to give transit riders a safe, efficient, and comfortable location to wait for and to quickly board and de-board the proposed Swift II BRT buses. To provide for efficient and rapid movement through the corridor, the stations would be spaced approximately one mile apart and are designed so that the Swift II BRT buses have minimum dwell times (approximately 10 seconds).
Roadway Improvements: To improve transit reliability, reduce travel time, and increase safety for Swift operation, roadway improvements are proposed at three locations within the corridor: 128th Street SE/SW at I-5, northbound SR 527 at 164th Street SE, and southbound SR 527 at SR 524/208th Street SE (Figure 2). These improvements would include roadway widening, curb and gutter improvements, sidewalk improvements, implementation of retaining walls, traffic signal modifications and relocations, traffic island modifications, storm drainage installation and modifications, and utility relocations.
The 128th Street transit improvements at I-5 would include construction of a westbound business access and transit (BAT) lane on the north side of 128th Street SE from 3rd Avenue SE to approximately 100 feet west of the northbound ramp intersection at I-5, and construction of an eastbound right-turn lane on the south side of 128th Street SW from approximately 50 feet east of 4th Avenue W to approximately 100 feet beyond the southbound ramp intersection at I-5.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 6 March 31, 2016 Proposed Seaway Transit Center Swan Trail Slough Text Snohomish River
Wood Creek Airport Rd at Kasch Park Rd Project Area
Airport Rd at 100th St SW p m a w k S e
e k
r e C e Airport Rd at 112th St SW
Marino Ave. Center Rd.
Airport Rd at SR99 North Cr
Airport Rd at128th E Gibson St SW Rd at 4th Ave W 128th 132ndSt SW 10thStatS at3rdit DrivekElgin aAveC SEWay/DumasSEreek Rd 132nd St SE at 16th Ave SE Larimer Creek 4th Ave. SW
128th Thomas Creek SR 527 at Trillium Blvd ImprovementsNorthCreek
Penny Creek l Creek Mil
Swamp Creek SR 527 at 153rd St SE k Bear Creek ree y C nn Lunds Gulch Creek Pe SR 527 at 164th St SE k e e 164th r l C Queue Nic ke Bypass
SR 527 at 180th St SE k e
e r
C
r ek
e e
v r l
i k C S r ba Legend Tam k ee Scriber Creek SR 527 at 196th St SE 196th St. SE Cr Bus Route gs in pr Paired Bus Station SR 524/ r S lfe Single Bus Station 208th Su Queue SR 527 at SR 524/208th St SE Pedestrian Improvement Bypass med Hall Creek nna BAT/Queue Bypass Lane U tary Tribu Improvements SR 527 at 220th St SE National Wetland Inventory 17th at 220th St SE Canyon Park P&R Stream
Lyon Creek 0 2
Miles U:\GIS\GIS\Projects\15xxxx\D150322_BRT_Station_Site_Phase_2\MXD\Fig1- Project Area MapElements.mxd and 12/30/2015) (jak, Project ProjectU:\GIS\GIS\Projects\15xxxx\D150322_BRT_Station_Site_Phase_2\MXD\Fig1-
Swift BRT . 150322 SOURCE: ERSI, 2015; ESA, 2015; WSDOT 2015, National Wetland Figure 2 Inventory, 2015 Project Elements This would allow the existing eastbound outside travel lane to become a transit/right-turn only lane approaching the southbound I-5 ramp intersection. The westbound BAT lane on 128th Street SE is expected to alleviate westbound congestion for Swift on SR 96/128th Street SE east of I-5. These lane improvements would allow transit to move more quickly and with increased reliability through this heavily congested area. The proposed BAT/queue bypass lanes would improve transit safety by giving higher priority to transit.
The SR 527 northbound transit queue bypass improvements at 164th Street SE would include intersection modifications and construction of an 800-foot BAT lane, extending the existing right- turn pocket south of 164th Street SE by 550 feet. This proposed transit queue bypass lane would reduce transit travel time, especially during peak traffic periods. The right turn lane would also save travel time for general purpose travelers turning right onto Mill Creek Road The related work at the intersection would reduce potential conflicts between transit and private vehicles, improve pedestrian safety, and would offer enhanced access to the proposed northbound Swift II Station.
The SR 527 southbound transit queue bypass at SR 524/208th Street SE would include intersection modifications and construction of a BAT lane through the SR 524 intersection, extending approximately 400 feet south of the intersection. This transit queue bypass would reduce potential conflicts between transit and private vehicles, and improve transit traffic flows (minimize transit delays). The related work on the intersection would reduce overall travel delays, improve pedestrian safety, and access to the proposed Swift II Station.
Adaptive Signal Priority Upgrades: Community Transit is working with Snohomish County, WSDOT, and the City of Everett on the Adaptive Signal Control Technology (ASCT) project for the Swift II BRT transit corridor. The Snohomish County-led project is a multi-jurisdictional effort to help Swift II BRT and general purpose traffic move more efficiently and to improve safety through the corridor. With $1.4 million in CMAC funds from FHWA, the project is currently being designed, will be bid in 2016, and is scheduled for 2017 implementation. When put into service, the ASCT system will give Swift II BRT buses priority through the signalized intersections to maintain speed and reliability based on schedule and actual headways and reduce travel time during peak periods or during other traffic delays. The signal upgrades will also include signal modifications to improve pedestrian safety.
Pedestrian Connectivity Improvements: Since all transit riders are also pedestrians at some point in their trip, the proposed Swift II BRT project provides pedestrian improvements at the Swift II BRT Stations and at key locations in the surrounding community. To improve connectivity between the Swift II BRT stations and surrounding neighborhoods, new pedestrian facility connections and improvements to existing pedestrian facilities are proposed at five (5) locations within the corridor (Figure 2). These improved connections include the installation of new sidewalk to complete gaps in existing pedestrian facilities at the following locations:
• 196th St. SE, east of the stations on SR 527 at 196th St. SE; • 10th Drive SE and 129th St. SE, east of the stations on 128th St. SE/SR 96 at Elgin Way; • 134th St. SW and 4th Ave. W, just southwest of the stations on 128th St. SW at 4th Ave. W; and • Marino Ave. and Center Rd. northwest of the stations on Airport Rd. at SR 99.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 8 March 31, 2016 Improvements to existing ADA ramps are also proposed in these areas and at Beverly Park Road and 112th Street SW east of the stations on Airport Road at 112th Street SW.
With project elements and characteristics listed in the preceding paragraphs, the proposed Swift II BRT improves transit service between Bothell-Canyon Park and Boeing/Paine Field and provides improved transit connectivity for the region.
B. Location and Zoning Attach a map identifying the project’s location and surrounding land uses. Note any critical resource areas (historic, cultural or environmental) or sensitive noise or vibration receptors (schools, hospitals, churches, residences, etc.). Briefly describe the project area’s zoning and indicate whether the proposed project is consistent with it. Briefly describe the community (geographic, demographic, economic and population characteristics) in the project vicinity.
The Swift II BRT corridor travels through the cities of Bothell, Mill Creek and Everett, and Snohomish County. The Boeing to Bothell‐Canyon Park corridor connects two designated regional growth centers: the Bothell-Canyon Park and Boeing/ Paine Field. Land use along the Swift II BRT corridor is a mixture of industrial, commercial, residential, park and institutional (Figure 3). The stations are proposed at existing signalized intersections with crosswalks and sidewalk access into the neighborhoods and business areas. The proposed Swift II BRT service will provide direct transit service to Canyon Park Park & Ride and McCollum Park Park & Ride, and is within one block of the Mariner Park & Ride (see Figure 1).
Crystal Creek, North Creek, Penny Creek, Mill Creek, and five unnamed streams/rivers cross the project corridor. In addition, Chinook salmon critical habitat, wetlands, and portions of the 100-year floodplain are located within the project vicinity (ESA, 2015c). Neighboring uses include single-family residential properties, commercial businesses (e.g., Fred Meyer and McDonalds), Mill Creek Sports Park, McCollum Park, Paine Field Airport/Boeing, churches, and the Cedar Cross Cooperative Preschool. Neighboring uses that are considered noise-sensitive receivers include multifamily residential structures within adjacent condo and apartment communities, townhouses, and single-family residences, as well as three nearby churches and the forest loop trail within McCollum Park (ESA, 2015h).
The project corridor traverses 23 census tracts. According to the 2010 demographic data collected at the census block or block group level, within 0.5-mile of the project corridor, approximately 46,953 people live in the immediate vicinity of the project corridor. The population is predominately white (63 percent). Minority populations include Asian (13 percent); Black (4 percent) and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (1 percent each). Five percent of the population identifies themselves as two or more races and 14 percent are Hispanic or Latino. According to 2010 ACS data, approximately 17 percent of households in the Census block groups within the study area are reported as being low-income (ESA, 2015f).
FINAL DCE Worksheet 9 March 31, 2016 Figure 3 The zoning designations for properties adjacent to the project alignment include the following:
• Business Park • Community Business • General Commercial • Light Industrial • Low Density Multiple Residential • Mobile Home Park • Multiple Residential • Neighborhood Business • Planned Community Business • Residential 9,600 Square Feet
The majority of the project lies within the area zoned for transportation use (i.e., the road right- of-way). The project would modify, or in some limited locations expand, the current road right-of- way, by adding a Swift Station with improved pedestrian facilities. Therefore, it is anticipated that the project would be consistent with current zoning designations and would be supportive of current and future land uses.
C. Traffic Describe potential traffic and parking impacts, including whether the existing roadways have adequate capacity to handle increased bus or other vehicular traffic. Include a map or diagram if the project will modify existing roadway configurations. Describe connectivity to other transportation facilities and modes, and coordination with relevant agencies.
Existing Conditions
Capacity of Existing Roadways: Presently, high congestion and a lack of through roads make east‐west travel within southwest Snohomish County difficult. Commutes to and from Boeing each day translate into high congestion and high traffic volumes within the study area during the extended peak periods. In addition, with high travel demand on I-5 for connections to regional employment centers, the I-5 interchange acts both as an access point to the freeway and as a barrier to east-west travel, restricting mobility throughout the corridor and amplifying traffic issues (Parsons Brinckerhoff, 2014). Several intersections along the Swift II corridor currently operate at or near capacity of the intersection and there is heavy congestion along the corridor. During the AM peak traffic hour on 128th Street SE approaching the I-5 interchange, there is a high level of delay for general purpose and bus traffic heading westbound. During the PM peak, there are congested conditions in both directions (Casseday Consulting, 2015).
Connectivity to Other Transportation Facilities and Modes: The Boeing to Bothell‐Canyon Park corridor is a key east‐west transportation corridor, linking population centers east of I-5 to a major employment site: Boeing/Paine Field. The Swift II BRT project alignment also serves as an important north‐south corridor, connecting two designated regional growth centers (Bothell- Canyon Park and Boeing/ Paine Field) and intersecting several principal roadways (i.e., SR 99, I‐5, SR 527, and I‐405). The Swift II BRT service would connect to three existing Park & Ride lots: Canyon Park, McCollum Park, and Mariner (see Figure 1). The corridor also provides
FINAL DCE Worksheet 11 March 31, 2016 connectivity to larger population centers via links with key transit services, such as the SR 99 Swift line and multiple regional express and commuter routes that traverse I‐5 and I‐405 and provide service to downtown Seattle and Bellevue (Parsons Brinckerhoff, 2014). The new Swift II BRT route would provide linkages to other local and regional public transportation services, including SR 99 Swift; local routes 101, 105, 106, 115, 120, 201 and 202; Sound Transit Regional Express service; Community Transit Express Commuter services; as well as to future Sound Transit light rail service currently being planned (Parsons Brinckerhoff, 2014).
The Swift II BRT corridor has bicycle lanes along much of the corridor with striped shoulders serving as bicycle facilities in some locations. The Interurban Trail crosses the Swift II BRT corridor just east of the I-5 interchange area, with the trail connecting to 128th Street SW/SE on both sides of I-5 plus extending along the north sidewalk from the I-5 northbound ramps intersection to the intersection at 3rd Avenue SE (Casseday Consulting, 2015). The North Creek Trail crosses the Swift II BRT corridor, near 214th Street SE at SR 527/Bothell-Everett Highway, and there are multiple locations where existing roadway and sidewalks will connect the Swift II BRT corridor with the North Creek Trail which predominately lies to the west and parallels SR 527. Both of these trails are used extensively by commuters and serve primarily as transportation facilities.
With capacity to carry three plus bikes on the inside of the Swift buses, bike riders currently make up approximately seven percent of SR99 Swift ridership. The percentage of bike riders on proposed Swift II is anticipated to be similar.
Safety: A total of 2,788 vehicle crashes in five years were documented along the corridor from 2010 through 2014 extending along Airport Road, 128th Street SW/SE, SR 96 from I-5 to 16th Avenue SE, and SR 527/Bothell-Everett Highway from 16th Avenue SE to the I-405 interchange area. The roadway corridor experiences about 1.5 accidents per day, on average, and this is an additional cause of congestion (nonrecurring) and delays in the corridor. About 40% of the corridor accidents were reported at the intersections with proposed Swift II stations. The dominant type of accident near the proposed Swift II stations is rear-end (49%), reflecting the high levels of congestion at the major arterial intersections in the corridor: Airport Road at SR 99; SR 527 at 164th Street SE, at 180th Street SE, and at 208th Street/SR 524; and on 128th Street SW/SE (SR 96) at the I-5 interchange ramps. The combination of right-angle and left-turn accidents represents 27% of the accidents at the proposed Swift station intersections.
Of key interest in this review of corridor safety is the incidence of accidents involving pedestrians, since most transit riders are walking to access the bus stops. One pedestrian fatality accident has occurred at Airport Road & SR 99. Of the serious and evident injury accidents which have occurred in the corridor, pedestrians and bicyclists were involved in over 20% of the accidents. Pedestrian accidents occurred throughout the corridor, primarily near the intersections but not always at the signalized crossings.
Project Effects
The project is made up of five general elements: Swift II BRT Stations, buses, transit service, additions of BAT/queue bypass lanes, and the supportive ASCT project.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 12 March 31, 2016 The Community Transit BRT Corridor Planning and Route Definition Study Final Report suggests the project would reduce transit travel times between Canyon Park and Boeing by 15 to 38 minutes during peak commute periods and 51 to 56 minutes mid-day (Parsons Brinckerhoff, 2014). If the project were in operation today, the report projects that 3,300 riders would utilize the new transit line daily. It is anticipated that by the year 2035 ridership would increase to nearly 4,000 daily riders. The report also predicts that the new Swift route would attract 600 new riders on the existing SR 99 Swift route, which would increase ridership by 12.5 percent (Parsons Brinckerhoff, 2014). The Swift II BRT corridor will provide service to and near three park-and-ride lots: Mariner P&R, McCollum P&R and Canyon Park P&R (Figure 1). Canyon Park P&R lot is over capacity while Mariner P&R and McCollum P&R currently have parking capacity. All three of these P&R lots serve commuter routes. The current SR99 corridor Swift BRT service, which opened in 2009, has no reports of transit related parking problems near the stations and parking impacts are not anticipated due to the proposed Swift II BRT stations or service. Additionally, once the Swift riders arrive at their destination, they arrive without a vehicle to park, so they create no additional parking demand.
A 2040 traffic forecast was developed for the Swift II BRT corridor based on year 2035 travel demand modeling for the four county Puget Sound regions. Future year 2040 PM peak hour traffic volume growth was estimated based on Sound Transit’s Highway Model (a version of the PSRC regional travel demand model) from the Lynnwood Link Extension project. Future traffic operations with Swift II (year 2040 with Project) are expected to be comparable to the 2040 baseline conditions with a traffic and transit improvement for westbound travel with BAT lane construction on 128th Street SE. When the associated ASCT project is completed in 2017 and its benefits are taken into account, travel time through the proposed Swift II BRT corridor would become more reliable and be reduced for transit. Other modes of travel through the corridor would likely experience similar, although reduced, travel benefits.
SR 527 is an arterial roadway within the three mile buffer around the most heavily traveled freeways (i.e., I-5) and is identified by WSDOT as a Tier 1 route where the LOS standard is LOS E/Mitigated. This means that congestion should be mitigated (such as by the inclusion of transit) when PM peak hour LOS falls below LOS E. Aside from the traffic improvements resulting from the 128th Street SE westbound BAT lane implementation, no measurable change in intersection level of service (LOS) or average delay at the intersection is expected with the project operating in the corridor with in-lane stops at the station (Casseday Consulting, 2015). Table 1 shows the intersections assessed along the proposed corridor, their projected levels of service (LOS) and delays in 2040, and their projected LOS and delays if Swift II were implemented, prior to the ASCT project implementation, which is currently in design.
The project includes transit improvements on the north side of 128th Street SE, from 3rd Avenue SE to approximately 100 feet west of the northbound ramp intersection at I-5, to construct a westbound queue bypass/BAT lane. To construct the improvements on the north side of 128th Street SE, approximately 900 feet of the Interurban Trail would need to be detoured during construction for safety purposes. Construction re-routing will not be required for the North Creek Trail as the trail alignment is not impacted by the proposed improvements. Both the Interurban Trail and the North Creek Trail, as regional trail systems, serve first and foremost as transportation facilities. They meet the criteria for a Section 4(f) exemption as defined in 23 CFR 774.13(f) and as such, are not considered Section 4(f) resources.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 13 March 31, 2016 Table 1 Existing, Future Without Project, and Future With Project Intersection Levels of Service AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Operation Intersection Operation Operation Operation (2040 (2040 with Swift II (2040 Baseline) (2040 Baseline) with Swift II BRT1) BRT) Airport Rd at Kasch Pk Rd LOS E, 74 sec delay LOS E, 76 sec delay LOS F, 130 sec delay LOS F, 135 sec delay Airport Rd at 100th St SW LOS C, 21 sec delay LOS C, 21 sec delay LOS F, 82 sec delay LOS F, 85 sec delay Airport Rd at 112th St SW LOS C, 22 sec delay LOS C, 23 sec delay LOS E, 58 sec delay LOS E, 59 sec delay Airport Rd at SR 99 LOS F, 157 sec delay LOS F, 158 sec delay LOS F, 142 sec delay LOS F, 144 sec delay Airport Rd at E Gibson Rd LOS B, 19 sec delay LOS B, 19 sec delay LOS B, 17 sec delay LOS B, 18 sec delay 128th St SW at 4th Ave W LOS D, 43 sec delay LOS D, 47 sec delay LOS F, 161 sec delay LOS F, 151 sec delay SR 96/128th St SE at 3rd Ave SE LOS F, 83 sec delay LOS C, 27 sec delay LOS F, 112 sec delay LOS C, 35 sec delay SR 96/128th St SE at Dumas Rd/Elgin Way LOS C, 32 sec delay LOS C, 32 sec delay LOS D, 37 sec delay LOS D, 37 sec delay SR 96/132nd St SE at 16th Ave SE LOS B, 12 sec delay LOS B, 17 sec delay LOS C, 34 sec delay LOS D, 37 sec delay SR 527/Bothell-Everett Hwy at Trillium Blvd LOS B, 17 sec delay LOS B, 17 sec delay LOS C, 20 sec delay LOS C, 21 sec delay SR 527/Bothell-Everett Hwy at 153rd St SE LOS B, 12 sec delay LOS B, 12 sec delay LOS C, 23 sec delay LOS C, 23 sec delay
SR 527/Bothell-Everett Hwy at 164th St SE LOS E, 64 sec delay LOS E, 66 sec delay LOS F, 118, sec delay LOS F, 119, sec delay SR 527/Bothell-Everett Hwy at 180th St SE LOS D, 41 sec delay LOS D, 42 sec delay LOS D, 55 sec delay LOS D, 56 sec delay
SR 527/Bothell-Everett Hwy at 196th St SE LOS C, 32 sec delay LOS C, 33 sec delay LOS C, 47 sec delay LOS C, 51 sec delay SR 527/Bothell-Everett Hwy at 208th St SE LOS E, 75 sec delay LOS E, 75 sec delay LOS F, 92 sec delay LOS F, 94 sec delay 2 SR 527/Bothell-Everett Hwy at 220th St SE LOS D, 42 sec delay LOS D, 43 sec delay LOS D, 51 sec delay LOS D, 53 sec delay
Total Delay (Seconds) 746 708 1179 1118
Total Time Savings (Seconds) -38 -61
1 Traffic analysis was conducted without taking credit (or reducing traffic volumes) for 132 autos replaced per hour, each direction with Swift BRT serving an average of 22 riders per bus.
2 As currently proposed, Swift II BRT implementation includes dynamic lane group and signal phasing modifications based on traffic demand, which would improve PM peak operation to LOS E with 73 seconds/vehicle delay.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 14 March 31, 2016 The proposed Swift II BRT project would add six (6) buses per hour in each direction through the corridor intersections. During the morning and afternoon peak periods, times which are most congested, Swift II BRT service will introduce little to no change in future traffic operations at intersections adjacent to the Swift II BRT stations. When the proposed BAT/queue bypass lanes, the ASCT project upgrades, and the reduction in the number of vehicles in the corridor due to the mode shift from single-occupancy vehicle to Swift II BRT are included, travel time through the corridor would likely become more reliable and possibly be reduced for all modes of travel, but especially for transit. Other modes of travel through the corridor would likely experience similar, although reduced, travel benefits. The impacts from the ASCT project would be beneficial. No likely significant adverse impacts have been identified with the proposed project.
Findings and Conclusions
Swift II BRT is proposed with frequent headways throughout the day along a highly congested urban corridor in Snohomish County. With six BRT trips per hour in each direction during the peak periods, Swift will, in effect, be a component of mitigation for difficult travel conditions in the congested arterial corridor where future traffic operation (2040) is anticipated to be LOS E/F at multiple intersections along the corridor. Intersection operation at LOS E/F is expected with traffic backups that indicate breakdown conditions near the key crossroads along the corridor, such as at the Interstate 5 interchange ramps, the intersection of 164th Street SE at SR 527 and the intersection of 208th Street SE/SR 524 at SR 527.
While there is no corridor-wide program for roadway widening to address the recurrent congestion, WSDOT, Snohomish County, local cities and Community Transit are partners in the implementation of ASCT to manage traffic in the corridor with coordinated signal systems, transit signal priority treatments and sophisticated and adaptive signal operation. Swift II BRT will deliver all-day two-way reliable transit service to serve travel between the Boeing Everett plant and the Canyon Park Park-and-Ride lot. Future traffic operation in 2040 (the project horizon year) is expected to range from LOS C at isolated intersections to LOS F at key crossroads intersections. The implementation of Swift, adding 6 bus trips per hour in each direction, is expected to add a very small delay (1-5 seconds per vehicle delay on average) to the intersection operation; however with the average 22 riders per Swift bus, this would replace an estimated 132 auto trips per hour in each direction.
The Swift II BRT project will include traffic modifications at 12 intersection locations adjacent to the Swift stations to enhance pedestrian safety at the signals and to enhance transit operation and reliability along the corridor. Based on the WSDOT LOS standard for Tier 1 routes described above, the Swift II BRT project is mitigation for the high levels of congestion in the corridor that would result with or without the project. No additional mitigation for traffic operations and conditions is proposed.
Community Transit is also coordinating with Snohomish County for improving the portion of the Interurban Trail that intersects with the proposed project. Snohomish County Parks and Recreation has been involved in the identification of the rerouted trail corridor and would continue to be involved during construction of the project and the rerouted trail. Two suitable options for rerouting the trail have been identified (one preferred and one alternate). Both
FINAL DCE Worksheet 15 March 31, 2016 options would provide a detour during construction that would be published in the Traffic Control Plan for the project and would include adequate signage to ensure the trail is easily accessible.
The proposed Swift II BRT stations and operation of the service are not anticipated to introduce any likely significant adverse impacts to traffic or parking. The Draft Traffic Discipline Report for the project is provided in Appendix K. The Preliminary Layout for 128th Street Improvements at I-5 is provided as Appendix A.
D. Aesthetics Will the project have an adverse effect on a scenic vista?
No
Yes, describe
There were no scenic vistas identified within the project corridor.
Will the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?
No
Yes, describe
The visual environment of the project corridor is a mix of commercial, industrial, and residential buildings, parking lots, and parks. Fronting the roadway are many different building styles, setbacks, configurations, building conditions, business signage, and land use types. The roadway in the project corridor has a cross section which varies from six lanes wide to four lanes wide, has vehicular speeds from 35 to 45 miles per hour, and very heavy traffic volumes for much of the day and into the evening. The public right-of-way includes sidewalks, street signs, street lights, traffic signals, landscaping, and overhead utility lines. These features are readily visible from the roadway, sidewalks, and abutting properties. In general, the existing visual quality of the corridor is low due to the lack of intactness and unity.
The proposed Swift II BRT project consists of two main visual elements: the Swift II BRT Stations, and the 128th Street improvements at I-5. Viewers in the project corridor would see the new transit stations located at signalized intersections, one station on either side of the state route, about every mile along the 12.4 mile corridor. The station shelters are 40 feet long by 10 feet wide with a single blue structural steel frame and a translucent roof. Each station includes two clear windscreens that run parallel to the street, two informational kiosks, two ticket vending machines, and two benches. The station has downward and inward facing lighting designed to minimize the potential for glare. Each Station also includes a taller, internally lit iconic marker, or a way finding sign, located just outside of the shelter to help the community identify the station location. The station design was developed with Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles in mind to minimize hiding places, so each station tends towards being visually transparent/easy to look through from either the street or abutting property. CPTED principles also discourage creating bright spots and/or shadows, so the
FINAL DCE Worksheet 16 March 31, 2016 lighting is relatively consistent with the surrounding environment without abrupt lighting variations.
The stations themselves will have a high degree of unity due to being located near the most active intersections which have traffic signals, increased street lighting, pedestrian walkways, drive ways, and traffic control signs. In addition, the new stations are proposed at or near the sites of existing bus stops. The Swift II BRT Stations are not anticipated to diminish the existing or future visual character or quality of the corridor or the individual intersections.
The proposed 128th Street Improvement project will add a single BAT lane, approaching the I-5 interchange. This area is predominantly commercial adjacent to the I-5 interchange area and has a much harder and noisier (transportation-oriented) feel for pedestrians. The additional lane proposed near I-5, will not be out of character with the surrounding commercial and high- density residential settings. The proposed street improvements are not anticipated to degrade the existing or future visual character or quality of the site or its surroundings.
Will the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
No
Yes, describe
Lighting proposed for the new bus shelters would be a new source of light in some locations; however, the lighting is diffuse and directed downward and inward toward the shelter. The roadway corridor where all shelters are proposed is currently lighted by street lights and lighting from the surrounding commercial buildings and signage. Lighting from the shelters would not create a noticeable increase in ambient lighting, nor will it affect any day or nighttime views. Lighting modifications are also proposed at the Roadway Improvement locations where the proposed improvements will require the relocation of existing street lighting and/or new street lighting will be installed to maintain existing pedestrian light levels. Street lighting modifications will be consistent with the existing street lighting throughout the corridor.
The proposed Swift II BRT project is not anticipated to create any new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.
E. Air Quality Does the project have the potential to impact air quality?
No
Yes, describe
See description below.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 17 March 31, 2016 Is the project located in an EPA-designated non-attainment or maintenance area?
No
Yes, indicate the criteria pollutant and contact FTA to determine if a hot spot analysis is necessary.
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Ozone (O3)
Particulate Matter (PM10 or PM2.5)
If the non-attainment area is also in a metropolitan area, was the project included in the MPO’s Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) air quality conformity analysis?
No
Yes; Date of USDOT conformity finding: Transportation 2040, last amended June 2015
Existing Conditions
The Puget Sound Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) is currently designated as a CO and
PM10 maintenance area. However, individual projects in maintenance areas are still subject to air quality conformity to ensure that they do not cause or contribute to any new localized carbon monoxide violations. The project corridor is outside of the PM10 maintenance area; therefore, projects in this area are not subject to PM10 conformity (USEPA, 2015).
Based on local air quality monitoring data and Ecology and the Puget Sound Clean Air Association (PSCAA) analysis, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has determined that Snohomish County is either in attainment or unclassified for each of the criteria pollutant National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). However, since Snohomish County is classified as attainment – maintenance for CO, a CO hotspot analysis is required for the project (USEPA, 2015). The need for a Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSAT) analysis is based on the type of project and project facility. A quantitative MSAT emissions analysis is required for projects on roads with average annual daily traffic (AADT) greater than 140,000 vehicles or where there is the potential for the project to increase substantially (10 percent or more) the number of diesel vehicles using a roadway. Since AADT in the project corridor would be substantially less than 140,000, a quantitative MSAT analysis is not required for this project.
Project Effects
Federal transportation conformity regulations only require that construction emissions be estimated if construction is slated to last five years or more. For the proposed project, construction would be less than five years. Consequently, a quantitative estimate of construction emissions was not conducted for this project.
Based on the existing and projected traffic conditions with and without the project, traffic operations and intersection delays are expected to remain approximately the same at intersections adjacent to the Swift stations (see Table 1), with some improvement for travel time
FINAL DCE Worksheet 18 March 31, 2016 and reliability with the 128th Street Improvements at I-5 project. Baseline conditions in 2040 show seven intersections adjacent to proposed Swift stations that would operate at LOS F. With Swift implementation and the 128th Street SE Improvements at I-5 project, six intersections would still operate at LOS F in 2040. Consequently, a quantitative CO analysis was conducted for the project. The analyses found that the project would not cause or contribute to violations of the state or federal CO standards.
The existing intersections along the proposed bus route would have a LOS ranging from B to F during existing (2015) and future (2040) PM peak hour conditions. To assess the Project’s contribution to region’s CO emissions, five intersections along the bus route with an LOS of F were analyzed:
• Airport Road/Kasch Park Road • Airport Road/SR 99 • 128th Street SW/4th Avenue W • SR 527/Bothell-Everett Highway/164th Street SE • SR 527/Bothell-Everett Highway/208th Street SE
The CAL3QHCR model was used to estimate CO concentrations at sensitive receptors located near these intersections. CO concentrations were estimated for existing (2015), and future (2040) conditions using PM peak-hour traffic volumes (Casseday Consulting, 2015). The USEPA MOVES2014 model (version 20141021) was used to estimate CO emission rates for traffic traveling through these intersections. The sensitive receptors used for the analysis include sidewalk and associated pedestrian areas adjacent to the intersection. The CO modeling results indicate no violations of the federal CO 1-hour or 8-hour ambient standards under any of the scenarios.
Greenhouse Gas
According to the Community Transit BRT Corridor Planning and Route Definition Study Final Report (Parsons Brinckerhoff, 2014), it is anticipated that 3,300 riders would utilize the new Swift II BRT each day if the line were to operate daily and by the year 2035 ridership could increase to nearly 4,000 daily riders. The Project would reduce future vehicle trips by providing public transportation to residents of Bothell, Mill Creek, and Everett. This would result in fewer vehicle miles traveled, which would reduce road congestion and thereby lower GHG emissions when compared to no build conditions.
Findings and Conclusions
Although project construction would generate localized air quality impacts, mainly in the form of fugitive dust, these impacts would be temporary. Proposed BMPs would minimize the generation of GHGs and dust during construction.
Project operation would not result in significant CO impacts based on the results of the hotspot analysis. Consequently, the project would not cause or contribute to violations of the federal or state ambient CO air quality standards.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 19 March 31, 2016 In addition, the project would likely result in beneficial, long-term impacts to air quality within the region due to transit riders shifting from single occupancy vehicles to public transit. This projected shift would reduce congestion as public transit becomes more heavily utilized and there are fewer cars on the road (ESA, 2015b).
For more information, please see Appendix A: Draft Air Quality Technical Memorandum and Section X for minimization and avoidance measures.
F. Coastal Zone Is the proposed project located in a designated coastal zone management area?
No
Yes, describe coordination with the State regarding consistency with the coastal zone management plan and attach the State finding, if available.
A Certification of Consistency with Washington’s CZM Program form along with supporting documentation is currently being prepared for the project and will be submitted by Community Transit to the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE). Community Transit will send the DOE response letter to FTA once it is received.
G. Environmental Justice Determine the presence of minority and low-income populations (business owners, land owners, and residents) within about a quarter-mile of the project area. Indicate whether the project will have disproportionately high and adverse impacts on minority or low-income populations. Describe any potential adverse effects. Describe outreach efforts targeted specifically at minority or low-income populations. Guidance is here.
Existing Conditions
Table 3 summarizes the presence of minority and low-income populations within 0.5-mile of the project alignment. The population surrounding the project corridor is predominately white (63 percent). Minority populations include Asian (13 percent); Black (4 percent) and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (1 percent each). Five percent of the population identifies themselves as two or more races and 14 percent are Hispanic or Latino.
In order to understand the languages spoken within the project study area, the “Limited English Proficiency Population” 2010 Census is examined. The data reveals that 21 percent of the population within the study area speaks English “less than well” (Table 1). The Mukilteo, Everett, and Northshore School Districts report that twenty-three (23) percent of students attending schools identified as being within the project study area are transitional bilingual. Community Transit performed an analysis to determine the languages spoken within their service area. The analysis, as described in Community Transit’s Title VI Program 2013-2016, determined that the most significant population of limited English persons spoke Spanish. Other languages spoken include Korean, Vietnamese, Chinese (Mandarin), Tagalog, and Russian.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 20 March 31, 2016 Approximately 17 percent of households in the Census block groups within the study area are reported as being low-income (ESA, 2014f).
Table 2 Demographic Summary for Swift II BRT Project Area US Census Bureau data for WA State Report Card data for Swift II BRT Swift II BRT
Total Population 46,953 3318 Minority Population by Race (%)1 Hispanic2 14% 24% Black 4% 6% American Indian 1% 0 Asian 13% 16% Pacific Islander 1% 1% Limited English 21% 23% Proficiency (%)3 Low-Income (%) 17% 47% NOTE: All demographic data is collected at the census block or block group level, within 0.5-mile of the project site. Source: US Census Bureau. 1 The total population also includes a small percentage of people who reported their race as “Two or More Races.” 2 The US Census Bureau reports the Hispanic population as a separate and distinct category and may include other races. Consequently, the population numbers may be double-counted within other reported races. 3 Reported in Census data as speaks English "less than well."
Project Effects
During any construction project within and adjacent to the public right-of-way, there is potential for minor, temporary negative effects. These construction effects may include construction noise, dust, and minor restrictions on access to properties immediately adjacent to the project. These potential temporary impacts would be minimized through implementation of mitigation measures such as construction traffic control, limit hours of construction, and other best management practices identified in the bidding documents, building and ROW permits, and state and local regulations. Temporary construction impacts on air quality, noise, and transportation would be minimal and do not warrant more extensive mitigation measures.
The project will have long-term effects from the acquisition of frontage strips from three properties to widen the road right-of-way in order to accommodate business access and transit (BAT) lanes. The project will also require the acquisition of easements on 10 properties for the new stations as well as the BAT lanes. Station locations have been chosen based on distance between stops, traffic patterns, and the proximity to higher population and more active commercial centers. The station locations were chosen prior to determining existing ownership or property values.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 21 March 31, 2016 All right-of-way and easement acquisitions would include a rigorous process that includes appraisals to set fair market value and would be completed in accordance with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act of 1970 (as amended).
The proposed property acquisitions would not be disproportionally borne by any low-income, minority, or LEP population.
Outreach Efforts Targeted Specifically at Minority or Low-Income Populations.
Three open houses were held specifically to present the project and answer questions from the public. These open houses were held in the Cities of Bothell (6/22/15), Everett (6/23/15), and Mill Creek (6/24/15). Open house locations were chosen based on their proximity to existing transit services, as well as by the new Swift II line, in order to make the open houses convenient to those without vehicles. In addition, translation services were available at each of these meetings; however, no translation services were requested. A summary of Community Transit’s public outreach efforts to date is shown in Appendix F: Draft Environmental Justice Technical Memorandum.
Findings and Conclusions
Significant adverse impacts are not anticipated as the project will not displace or relocate any homes or businesses and will not change existing or planned land use patterns.
The proposed Swift II BRT stations and service are Community Transit’s premier transit service. The Swift II BRT stations provide weather protection and are well lighted, have ticket vending machines, ORCA readers, informational kiosks, and dynamic signage. The project would improve ADA access to the stations and intersections, as well as improved bus access. The Swift II BRT service, when compared to Community Transit’s other transit service, offers more frequent headways, faster travel, extended hours of operation, newer buses, easier boarding and de-boarding, easier bicycle loading, and improved ADA access.
The Swift II BRT project improves transit service throughout the corridor. While improvements to transit service have the potential to benefit everyone in the project area, low-income persons who may rely solely on public transportation represent an environmental justice population that would specifically benefit from the project. Additionally, although it is speculative, individual business owners at or near station locations may benefit from the potential increase in transit users near their business, which could result in increased patronage.
The proposed Swift II BRT project would not introduce disproportionately high adverse impacts on any environmental justice populations.
For additional information on this analysis, see Appendix F: Draft Environmental Justice Technical Memorandum.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 22 March 31, 2016 H. Floodplains Is the proposed project located within the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 100-year floodplain?
No
Yes, describe potential impacts, indicate if the project will impact the base flood elevation, and include or link to the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) with the project location identified.
Approximately 330 feet of the project corridor crosses the 100-year floodplain; however, no project construction is planned in those areas:
• 128th Street SE/132nd Street SE on the northwestern border of McCollum Park • SR 527 0.2 mile north of the SR 527 at 220th Street SE bus station.
I. Hazardous Materials Is there any known or potential contamination at the project site? This may include, but is not limited to, lead/asbestos in existing facilities or building materials; above or below ground storage tanks; or a history of industrial uses of the site.
No, describe steps taken to determine whether hazardous materials are present on the site.
Yes, note mitigation and clean-up measures that will be taken to remove hazardous materials from the project site. If the project includes property acquisition, identify if a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for the land to be acquired has been completed and the results.
Existing Conditions
For purposes of this analysis, the area located within approximately one-half mile of the project alignment was evaluated. The federal and state contaminated site databases (USEPA and Ecology) were consulted to identify potentially contaminated sites near the project. No USEPA Superfund sites were identified. Forty sites with known contamination were found in Ecology records within approximately one-half mile of the project site (in some cases, more than one of these ‘sites’ occur on the same property or overall site). The complete list of these sites is included in Appendix G: Draft Hazardous Materials Technical Memorandum and can be used by Community Transit once design and right-of-way plans are advanced to confirm likelihood of encountering contamination.
Project Effects
Project construction itself is not expected to generate any type of hazardous waste, although pre-existing contaminated material may be encountered during site grading or subsurface work. To avoid potential effects related to site contamination, Community Transit would use information about likely contaminated sites to ensure the construction contract properly addresses management of hazardous materials, whether anticipated to be encountered or not.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 23 March 31, 2016 A number of sites where hazardous materials have been identified are located directly along the proposed alignment (ESA, 2015g). Depending on the nature and extent of previous contamination and the status of remediation actions, contamination could be encountered in two ways: either through purchase of property or temporary construction easements; or the possible migration of contaminated groundwater or other media from adjacent sites into the project area.
Findings and Conclusions
In keeping with FTA standard procedures, Community Transit would conduct due diligence to limit liability in accordance with USEPA’s “All Appropriate Inquires” (AAI) rule prior to obtaining any contaminated properties, beginning excavation, or starting any structure demolition or modification. Community Transit would undertake a Phase I environmental site assessment to determine potential presence of Recognized Environmental Conditions (REC) within the proposed project. The site at 214 128th Street SW, Everett (PDQ Oil; see Appendix G: Draft Hazardous Materials Technical Memorandum) would likely require the acquisition of an easement to facilitate widening the roadway along 128th Street SW between 4th Avenue W and the I-5 southbound on-ramp. This is the only site within the project boundaries where property or easement acquisition would be required on a suspected or known contamination site. Because of this, a Phase 1 environmental site assessment is planned to be conducted during final design, prior to acquisition.
For more information, please see Appendix G: Draft Hazardous Materials Technical Memorandum and Section X for minimization and avoidance measures.
J. Navigable Waterways Does the proposed project cross or have the potential to impact a navigable waterway?
No
Yes, describe potential impacts and any coordination with the US Coast Guard.
There are no navigable waterways within or adjacent to the project corridor. The project will not impact any navigable waterways.
K. Noise and Vibration Does the project have the potential to increase noise or vibration?
No
Yes, describe impact and provide map identifying sensitive receptors such as schools, hospitals, parks and residences. If the project will result in a change in noise and vibration sources, you must use FTA’s “Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment” methodology to determine impact.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 24 March 31, 2016 Existing Conditions
The Swift II BRT corridor passes through Bothell, Mill Creek, Everett and unincorporated urban areas of Snohomish County. These areas are characterized by a mix of urban uses, including commercial/retail, industrial/warehouse, public parks and facilities, single family residential, and multi-family residential properties. Land uses along the corridor are classified as Categories 2 (all residential uses) and 3 (several churches or other places of religious gathering; and a nature trail within McCollum Park) per FTA methods.
The predominant noise source along the entire project corridor is motor vehicle traffic traveling on area roadways. The southern end of the Bothell-Everett Highway (SR 527) carries the highest traffic volumes (over 50,000 daily trips). Airport Road at the northern end of the project corridor carries nearly 45,000 daily trips. Directly east of the I-5 crossing, 128th Street SE carries over 48,000 daily trips, and all assessed points along the corridor carry over 20,000 daily trips.
FTA screening distance criteria were used to identify land uses in proximity to the Swift II BRT corridor that may be considered sensitive to noise. Land uses within 200-feet from the outer travel lanes along the proposed BRT corridor were examined. Numerous potential noise- sensitive receivers were identified within 200 feet of the project roadways:
• To the west of I-5, Category 2 uses that are potential noise-sensitive receptors include a Motel 6, 23 multifamily residential structures, 12 townhouse structures, and 11 single family structures. The Everett South Church of Nazarene is the only Category 3 use to the west of I-5. • To the east of I-5 along 128th and 132nd Streets SE, Category 2 uses that are potential noise-sensitive receptors include The Quality Inn, 8 multifamily condominium structures, 4 townhouse structures, and 16 single family residential structures (including 11 mobile homes on several lots to the north of McCollum Park). The nature trail associated with the western side of McCollum Park is the only Category 3 use within this portion of the project corridor. • Along Bothell-Everett Highway (SR 527) to the south of 132nd Street SE and to the north of 164th Street SE / Mill Creek Road, Category 2 uses that are potential noise-sensitive receptors include 31 multifamily condominium and apartment structures and 68 single family residential structures. There are no Category 3 uses within this portion of the project corridor. • Along Bothell-Everett Highway (SR 527) to the south of 164th Street SE / Mill Creek Road, Category 2 uses that are potential noise-sensitive receptors include 13 multifamily condominium and apartment structures, 16 townhouse structures, and 23 single family residential structures. The North Creek Country Church (18415 BOTHELL-EVERETT HW), Northview Community Church (18303 Bothell Everett Hwy), St James Lutheran Church (19510 Bothell Everett Hwy), and Canyon Hills Community Church (22027 17th Ave SE) are the only Category 3 uses within this portion of the project corridor.
In order to characterize ambient noise conditions at each location, long-term noise measurements were conducted (48-hour measurements) at four locations using precision sound
FINAL DCE Worksheet 25 March 31, 2016 level meters (SLMs). Measurement locations were chosen to measure outdoor environmental sound levels along 128th Street SE/SW to the east and west of the I-5 crossing (areas where some roadway widening will occur to re-channelize traffic flows and enhance the proposed BRT service), as well as representative areas within McCollum Park and along the Bothell Everett Highway (SR 527).
Short-term noise measurements were taken near long-term measurement locations during daytime hours1. All short-term measurements were observed by ESA staff, and were completed to document environmental noise sources along the project corridor.
Table 3 Summary Results of Noise Measurements (dBA)
Long Term Hourly Leq Short Term Location (and long-term Ldn (24-hr 15-min Leq (and monitoring site setback from AM Peak PM Peak day/night monitoring site nearest travel lane) Hour Hour exposure) setback)
West of I-5 near Motel 6 (220 68.2 dBA 60.2 dBA 62.3 dBA 65.5 dBA feet) (27 feet)
East of I-5 near The Quality Inn 70.3 dBA 70 dBA 67.5 dBA 74 dBA (42 feet) (24 feet)
McCollum Park (208 feet) 62.7 dBA2 62.2 dBA -- 66 dBA
Bothell-Everett Highway south 74.5 dBA of 164th Street SE / Mill Creek 76.5 dBA 75.5 dBA 79 dBA (24 feet) Road (29 feet)
The noise measurements collected along the project corridor indicate that existing noise levels are typical of what would be expected in urban areas with high traffic levels along major arterials/state routes. In summary:
Recorded noise levels during the peak hour of transit activity were highest along the Bothell-Everett Highway/SR 527 (75 – 77 dBA (Leq (hr))), and range from 62 – 70 dBA (Leq(hr)) at the other monitoring locations.
Noise levels at sites with nighttime sensitivity (the hotels and the numerous residences) range from 65 to 79 dBA and are typical for urban commercial areas along heavily used arterials/state routes;
1 No short-term measurement was taken adjacent to the McCollum Park long-term monitoring site. Short- term measurements were focused primarily at sites along the project corridor where some widening of the roadway is proposed. 2 Peak hourly Leq at McCollum Park occurred during the 5am and 6am hours, likely due to use of the parking lot adjacent to the noise meter as a park and ride location.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 26 March 31, 2016 The noise levels observed are generally above what is considered desirable for noise- sensitive uses, particularly where people sleep (e.g., levels at or greater than 65 to 67 dBA). However, when residential uses are introduced to more dense urban or commercial areas, exterior noise levels can be reduced to acceptable interior levels (approximately 45 dBA) through the use of design measures. As many of the Category 2 uses appear to be relatively new (constructed within the last 15-20 years), it is likely that reductions in noise levels of 20 to 25 dBA at these locations is realized when windows and doors are closed.
Project Effects
According to the State and local noise standards, construction activities are exempt from regulation during daytime hours. The periods of noise-exempt daytime construction hours are set by each jurisdiction, so vary accordingly along the project corridor. Within Bothell, noise generated from construction activities is exempt from regulation between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on weekdays, 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays, and prohibited on Sundays (BMC Chapter 8.26). Within Mill Creek, the exemption occurs between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. on weekdays and 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. on weekends (MCMC Chapter 9.14). Within Everett, the exemption (as applicable to all residentially zoned areas) occurs between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on weekdays and 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekends (EMC Chapter 20.08).
Within unincorporated areas along the project corridor, Snohomish County’s Noise Control regulations (SCC Chapter 10.01) exempt construction noise between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on weekdays and 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on weekends.
Use of FTA methods and the 24-hour (Ldn) metric is considered the most appropriate measure of cumulative noise impact for residential and nighttime sensitive uses (including the numerous residential structures, as well as Motel 6 and the Quality Inn). Use of the FTA methods and the maximum daytime hourly Leq metric is considered most appropriate measure of noise impact for Category 3 uses, as these institutional land uses and associated activities generally occur during daytime hours and should therefore be assessed for potential impacts during the nosiest period of environmental noise. Direction to complete project noise assessment using the FTA noise impact methods and criteria was verified by FTA on November 3, 2015 (voicemail from John Witmer, FTA Region 10 Community Planner).
Using the methodology and criteria set forth by the FTA and described above, noise levels from transit sources (e.g., buses) were predicted using the Noise Impact Assessment Spreadsheet (NIAS) for potential noise-sensitive receiver locations along the Swift II BRT corridor. Cumulative noise levels (i.e., ambient/existing measured noise plus new BRT transit noise) were predicted using the NIAS. As described above, noise impacts are classified under FTA methods as “none,” “moderate,” and “severe.”
Findings and Conclusions
The results of the FTA noise impact assessment indicate that operation of the Swift II BRT Project would not result in noise impacts and no mitigation is recommended. The existing noise
FINALT DCE Worksheet 27 March 31, 2016 levels and distance to the noise source (e.g., the distance between a home and passing buses) are the key elements the NIAS model considers when assessing impact. Results of the NIAS model show that there are no areas of impact that are expected as a result of the project. There are no areas where even slight increases in noise exposure are expected, according to the NIAS model. This is likely due to the relatively high existing noise levels and the comparatively lower levels of noise that will be associated with future Swift II BRT buses.
Sounds originating from temporary construction sites as a result of construction activity are exempt from the requirements of City of Bothell, City of Mill Creek, City of Everett, and Snohomish County noise regulations, as well as WAC 173-60. In general, noise generated by construction of the project would occur between 7 a.m. and 8 p.m. during weekdays; however some weekend and nighttime construction activities are anticipated to be necessary in order to avoid impacts to traffic along the congested project corridor. Several potential measures to control evening, weekend, and nighttime construction noise impacts are provided in this report. Final construction noise abatement measures for all required nighttime construction and other non-exempt weekend construction will be determined through the noise ordinance variance processes with the respective jurisdictions.
The proposed Swift II BRT project would not significantly increase noise or vibration. No additional noise mitigation is recommended.
For more information, please see Appendix H: Draft Noise Technical Memorandum and Section X for minimization measures.
L. Prime and Unique Farmlands Does the proposal involve the use of any prime or unique farmlands?
No
Yes, describe potential impacts and any coordination with the Soil Conservation Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
There are no prime or unique farmlands within or near the project corridor.
M. Historic & Cultural Resources Impacts to cultural, historic, or recreational properties may trigger Section 106 or tribal consultations or a Section 4(f) evaluation, requiring consideration of avoidance alternatives.
Does the project involve any ground disturbing activities?
No
Yes, provide the approximate maximum ground disturbance depth. Also provide information on previous disturbances or where ground disturbance will occur.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 28 March 31, 2016 Are there any historic resources in the vicinity of the project?
No See also the Draft Cultural Resources Assessment in Appendix E.
Yes, Attach photos of structures more than 45 years old that are within or adjacent to the project site and describe any direct or indirect impacts the project may cause.
Existing Conditions
The APE consists of proposed station locations along an approximately 12-mile long road corridor. The APE also includes those areas where street or sidewalk improvements may be required. Many of the proposed stations and roadway improvements are located either on existing paved sidewalks/roadways or on previously disturbed vegetated areas along the road corridor. DAHP concurred with the proposed APE on August 13, 2015.
The records search conducted for the project resulted in the identification of 42 previous cultural resource surveys (4 within the APE) and 5 recorded sites within a one-mile radius of the proposed project. None of the recorded archaeological sites are located within the APE. Two of these are located on property adjacent to the APE. One is historic debris and lithic scatter associated with the Johnson Dairy, and the other is a buried corduroy road segment beneath modern 196th Street SE. Neither site has had a formal National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligibility determination.
No previously recorded historic properties are in or adjacent to the APE.
Project Effects
The primary ground disturbance for each station will be associated with installation of the four foundations—each approximately four feet by four feet and up to six feet deep. Each station includes a concrete platform, similar in cross-section to a sidewalk. Excavation for other site improvements will be approximately two feet in depth, with utility trenching up to six feet in depth.
The primary ground disturbance of the roadway and pedestrian facility improvements will be associated with utilities, stormwater facilities, and traffic signal foundations, with depths up to six feet. The street and sidewalk work will involve similar excavation to the station construction, with depths approximately two to four feet, but will extend to cover the full width of the proposed widening areas of the additional travel lane and sidewalk.
Archaeological Resources. ESA visited each of the proposed station locations and conducted a subsurface survey at the 128th Street SW station location. Material recovered from shovel probes consisted of either fill material or fill overlying glacial sediments that has been graded, likely during road construction or utility installation. ESA did not observe any evidence to suggest the presence of intact cultural resources. The results of ESA’s survey, in concert with the known history of the area and conclusions drawn from nearby cultural resources surveys, suggests that there is a low likelihood of encountering intact subsurface cultural resources during construction of the proposed project.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 29 March 31, 2016 Sidewalk improvements proposed for Swift II stops at the intersection of SR 527 and 196th Street SE would occur over a recorded archaeological site (the 196th Street Corduroy Road). The sidewalk improvements have the potential to impact this site. As part of the Swift II Project, the 196th Street Corduroy Road was evaluated for its potential eligibility for listing in the NRHP using criteria defined by 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 60.4. ESA recommends the site is not eligible for listing in the NRHP for the following reasons:
• Criterion A - The 196th Street Corduroy Road is not associated with important historic events. It was likely constructed to fill a marshy area. • Criterion B - The 196th Street Corduroy Road is not associated with historically significant people in history. • Criterion C - The 196th Street Corduroy Road is of expedient construction and is not engineered. The road does not hold any distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction. • Criterion D - While the 196th Street Corduroy Road maintains integrity of design and materials, its ability to provide previously unknown information about the past is limited. The road does not appear to possess information that cannot be obtained through the documentary record.
Historic Resources Assessment. Six properties in or adjacent to the APE were assessed as historic resources. Historic Property Inventory (HPI) forms were completed for each of the six resources recorded and are included in Appendix E Cultural Resources Assessment. None of the structures are recommended eligible for listing in the NRHP.
Findings and Conclusions
ESA did not observe any evidence during subsurface surveys to suggest the presence of intact cultural resources. This is consistent with previous cultural resources assessments conducted in the APE. Therefore, the potential for encountering archaeological resources is low for this project. None of the historic resources are recommended eligible for listing in the NRHP. The project is not expected to have any adverse effects on archaeological or historic resources.
FTA initiated consultation with DAHP and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, the Sauk-Suiattle Tribe, the Snoqualmie Nation, the Stillaguamish Tribe, the Suquamish Tribe, the Tulalip Tribes, and the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation. The Stillaguamish Tribe is currently the only tribe to respond with a request to review the Cultural Resources Assessment.
Community Transit is working with ESA to complete a draft Inadvertent Discovery Plan (IDP) to outline protocols and procedures to be followed in the event of construction encountering cultural resources. The IDP will be submitted to FTA for review.
For additional information, see Appendix E: Cultural Resources Assessment and Section X for minimization measures.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 30 March 31, 2016 N. Biological Are there any species located within the project vicinity that are listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act? Determine this by obtaining lists of threatened and endangered species and critical habitat from the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service.
Table 4 lists species that are listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). See below for additional discussion.
Table 4 Applicable ESA-Listed Species Scientific Name Common Name Status Location in Project Area Birds Brachyramphus marmoratus Marbled Murrelet Threatened Unlikely to Occur Eremophila alpestris strigata Streaked Horned Lark Threatened Unlikely to Occur Eremophila alpestris strigata Yellow-billed Cuckoo Threatened Unlikely to Occur Fish Salvelinus confluentus Bull Trout Threatened Unlikely to Occur Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Chinook Salmon Threatened North Creek and Penny Creek Oncorhynchus mykiss Steelhead Threatened North Creek
Mammals Lynx Canadensis Canada Lynx Threatened Unlikely to Occur Source: USFWS, 2015; WDFW, 2015; NMFS, 2015
Within two miles of the project impact areas, there are several bald eagle nesting areas documented by WDFW as a “priority habitat or species.” These areas are predominantly closer to the Puget Sound shoreline and average between 0.75 to 1.5 miles from any anticipated construction. Another “priority species” the little brown myotis is also mapped as occurring approximately 1.2 miles north of Wetland E. The little brown myotis is not listed as a threatened or endangered species, but roosts are being protected as part of the Washington State Bat Conservation Plan (Hayes and Wiles, 2013). Two osprey nest sites have also been documented within 2 miles of the project area (WDFW, 2015).
Information on threatened and endangered plant species and plant communities from the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Plant Natural Heritage Database indicated that no threatened or endangered plants are known to occur within the Project vicinity.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 31 March 31, 2016 Describe any critical habitat, essential fish habitat or other ecologically sensitive areas within or near the project area.
Existing Conditions
The majority of the study area is impervious surface and vegetated right-of-way providing minimal wildlife habitat. The habitat is mostly limited to the identified forested wetlands and stream corridors in the project vicinity and to a lesser degree, the project impact area. No lakes or ponds occur within the project area. The urban forested portions of the study area likely provide refuge and foraging habitat for small mammals and birds.
Crystal Creek, North Creek, Penny Creek, Mill Creek, Tambark Creek, and five unnamed streams/rivers cross the project corridor. North Creek, Penny Creek, Silver Creek, and Tambark Creek are designated as Type F (fish bearing) streams. North Creek is a Type S stream (shoreline of the State) downstream of 208th Street SE, within the City of Bothell.
Properly functioning conditions (PFCs) are the sustained presence of natural habitat-forming processes necessary for the long-term survival of the species through the full range of environmental variation (NMFS, 1996a). NMFS (1996a) identifies that PFCs commonly include the following elements: water quality, habitat accessibility, the suitability of various habitat elements, channel condition and dynamics, and overall watershed conditions. The PFCs in the Action Area are currently either not properly functioning, or at risk.
Critical Habitat. NMFS published the final rule designating critical habitat for Puget Sound Chinook salmon in September 2005 (NMFS, 2005). The designation includes the lower portions of North Creek and Penny Creek, including portions of the Project Action Area (USFWS, 2015b).
NMFS has proposed designation of critical habitat for Puget Sound steelhead in 2013 (NMFS, 2013), although the entire Sammamish River watershed (including the Project Action Area) is excluded from the designation due to economic impacts. Therefore, there is no proposed steelhead critical habitat in the Project Action Area.
USFWS published the final rule designating critical habitat for Coastal-Puget Sound bull trout in September 2005 (USFWS, 2005) and re-designated it in September 2010 (USFWS, 2010). The final rule identifies Lake Washington as designated critical habitat for Coastal-Puget Sound bull trout. However, the rule excludes the entire Sammamish River watershed from the final critical habitat designations. Therefore, no designated bull trout critical habitat is present within the Action Area.
Project Effects
The Project includes construction activities occurring in the Action Area that could result in direct effects to listed species. The potential for direct effects to fish resulting from the proposed action are related to the proposed clearing and grading and general construction activities upstream from Action Area streams. Clearing and grading of stream buffers is limited to construction of the 164th NB Queue Bypass and the pedestrian improvements along 196th Street SE.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 32 March 31, 2016 Appropriate BMPs and TESC measures will be implemented to prevent erosion/sedimentation from entering these waterbodies. The Project does not involve any in-water work.
The Project development activities occur largely in previously disturbed or developed areas of roadway right-of-ways, although some vegetation removal will occur. While most of the vegetation is currently maintained, some riparian, wetland, or associated buffer vegetation may be disturbed, primarily during construction of the 164th NB Queue Bypass and the pedestrian improvements along 196th Street SE. Approximately 0.03 acre of wetland and 0.59 acre of stream and/or wetland buffer may be impacted. Areas of vegetation removal or disturbance will be stabilized as soon as practicable and replanted with native species, prior to completion of the Project. As a result, no measurable degradation in riparian functions (stream shading, temperature, LWD recruitment, litter fall production, or microclimate) is expected to occur, and some localized improvements in conditions are expected (Table 5). The temporary loss of vegetation functions in the Action Area is not expected to measurably affect any ESA-listed fish species.
Table 5 Unavoidable Impacts to the Baseline and Conservation and Minimization Impact/Habitat Degradation Offsetting Conservation/Minimization Measures
0.03 acre of wetland habitat and 0.59 Wetland and buffer mitigation will be conducted onsite acre of stream and/or wetland buffer and/or offsite. The mitigation plan will satisfy the most will be impacted. The majority of these stringent level of regulatory requirements and replace areas occurs away from streams in the affected functions and values within the project area at an Project Action Area and would most equal or greater rate than provided for by existing likely not measurably alter water quality conditions. and quantity within the Action Area. The implementation and maintenance of appropriate BMPs will prevent such occurrences from affecting areas occupied by ESA-listed species.
An increase of about 2.28 acres of The project will provide enhanced stormwater treatment for impervious surface, including 0.51 acre 0.91 acre of PGIS, or about 178% of the increase in PGIS of PGIS. area.
Based on output of the HI-RUN model, the pollutant loading estimates indicate only a slight potential for increased loading, compared to existing conditions. Although some stream reaches in the Project Action Area are not properly functioning for water quality, based on 303(d) listing for dissolved oxygen and bacteria concerns (Ecology, 2012b), the Project will not result in any degradation relative to these constituents. Based on the results of the HI-RUN dilution sub-routine, the potential for exposure of ESA-listed fish to increased dissolved zinc and copper concentrations is low. The results indicate that dilution rates will reduce concentrations to below the established concentrations associated with sub-lethal species impacts within 1-foot of the outfalls. In addition, this is a conservative estimate because the model was developed for regular highway projects, while the pollution generating impervious surface (PGIS) created by the Project will be short sections of BAT or
FINAL DCE Worksheet 33 March 31, 2016 turn lanes. The pollution generated by these surfaces is likely to be lower than general-purpose highway lanes. In addition, several of the outfalls occur in open-channel drainage features, which are not accessible to the ESA-listed species. As a result, the project is expected to have an insignificant or discountable effect on ESA-listed fish species. Findings and Conclusions
The project would avoid or minimize impacts to streams buffers by working within the existing hardscape and right-of-way to the extent practical. No in-water work will occur, and therefore no direct stream impacts are anticipated. The project team will follow all local jurisdictional requirements to avoid and minimize critical area impacts. Stream buffer impacts are regulated by the local jurisdictions within the study area. All permanent and temporary buffer impacts would be restored in accordance with Everett Municipal Code 37.110, Snohomish County Code 30.62A.320, Bothell Municipal Code 14.04.530, and Mill Creek Municipal Code 18.06.930. Community Transit would meet or exceed all stormwater and water quality requirements, as well as wetland and stream buffer mitigation requirements for the proposed Swift II BRT project. See also Section X for required avoidance and minimization measures.
Following the above construction techniques, conservation measures, and regulations summarized herein and to be defined in the bid documents and construction drawings prepared for the project, this project is anticipated to have the following effects on ESA regulated species: • The proposed project “may affect, but not likely to adversely affect” Puget Sound Chinook salmon ESU. • The proposed project “may affect, but not likely to adversely affect” Puget Sound steelhead DPS. • The proposed project will have “no effect” on Coastal-Puget Sound DPS bull trout. • The proposed project “may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect” designated Puget Sound Chinook salmon ESU critical habitat. • The proposed Project is anticipated to have no effect on designated bull trout critical habitat because there is no critical habitat in the Action Area. • No proposed steelhead critical habitat occurs in the Action Area, so the Project “will not destroy or adversely modify” proposed steelhead critical habitat.
Additional information on biological resources can be found in Appendix C: Draft Critical Areas Report and Appendix D Biological Assessment, and Section X for minimization and avoidance measures.
O. Recreational Is the project located in or adjacent to a park or recreation area?
No
Yes, provide information on potential impacts to the park or recreation area. Please also indicate if the park involved Land and Water Conservation Act funds (Section 6(f))
FINAL DCE Worksheet 34 March 31, 2016 Existing Conditions
Five resources were found within one-eighth of a mile of the project corridor (Table 5). Beyond one-eighth of a mile, no construction-related use of recreation resources would likely occur due to limited footprint of the project and relatively short duration of construction at any one location. None of these resources were purchased or developed with grants from the Land and Water Conservation Fund (Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office, 2015); therefore a Section 6(f) analysis is not required for this project.
th Table 6 Section 4(f) Resources within 1/8 of a mile of a Bus Station Owner/ Distance from Bus Resource Location Operator Station Centennial Park City of Bothell 1130 208th St. SE, Bothell 625 Feet
North Creek Park and 1011 183rd St. SE, Mill Water Retention Snohomish County 630 Feet Creek Facility 15429 Bothell-Everett Library Park City of Mill Creek 215 Feet Highway, Mill Creek 13903 North Creek Drive, Mill Creek Sports Park City of Mill Creek 40 Feet Mill Creek 0 Feet (The proposed station abuts the park property but is across a McCollum Park Snohomish County 600 128th St. SE, Everett busy public street and over 350 feet from the nearest playfield or trail.)
There are two regional trails within the project boundaries, the Interurban Trail and the North Creek Trail. The primary purpose of regional trails is considered to be transportation and meet the criteria for a Section 4(f) exemption as defined in 23 CFR 774.13(f). They are listed here because these trails are also used for recreational purposes. Refer to the Draft Section 4(f) Technical Memorandum in Appendix I and Section C of this document for additional details.
Project Effects
The majority of construction activities would be located at the bus stations identified in Figures 1 and 2. The closest resources are the Mill Creek Sports Park and the Interurban Trail, which are 40 and 10 feet away from one of the project bus stations, respectively. While the southbound station at 132nd Street SE at Elgin Way/Dumas Road is technically “zero” feet away from the park property, the proposed station is located across a busy public street (Dumas Road), a transit center, and a commuter parking lot, and is more than 350 feet away from the nearest trail or playfield. It is not anticipated that the project would interfere with the enjoyment of the resources. Trail users would be mobile, not very close to the construction activity, and only be near construction activities for a short period of time. Although users of the Mill Creek Sports Park and McCollum Park would be relatively stationary, neither park requires serenity or quiet for enjoyment of the property, with the sports park hosting sporting events and McCollum Park maintaining a BMX track. The BMX track is over 450 feet away from the closest proposed
FINAL DCE Worksheet 35 March 31, 2016 Station. North Creek Park and Library Park would be more likely to host noise-sensitive occupants and activities; however, they are located 630 feet and 215 feet away, respectively, from any proposed bus station where construction would occur. It is not anticipated that the temporary increase in noise during construction would be audible at those distances.
The completed project would not create any negative effects to 4(f) resources in the project area. The addition of the Swift II BRT service is intended to create better access to businesses and services throughout the project corridor, including access to public parks and other public facilities.
As described in Section M, the project would not have an impact on any historic properties or archaeological sites that would be considered Section 4(f) resources.
Findings and conclusions
With the exception of McCollum Park and the Mill Creek Sports Park, all Section 4(f) resources are located too far away from the project site to experience any type of constructive use as a result of construction noise and vibration or temporary aesthetic impacts during construction. Although SR 527 is a major thoroughfare within the project area, access would be maintained to all of the Section 4(f) resources during construction via a Traffic Control Plan. Construction- related impacts near McCollum Park and the Mill Creek Sports Park are not likely to substantially impair their protected activities, features, or attributes; no constructive use is anticipated. For more information, please see Appendix I: Draft 4(f) Technical Memorandum.
The proposed Swift II BRT stations and operation of the service would not introduce any significant adverse impacts to Section 4(f) resources.
P. Seismic and Soils Are there any unusual seismic or soil conditions in the project vicinity? If so, indicate on project map and describe the seismic standards to which the project will be designed.
No
Yes, describe
The terrain changes quite a bit over the length of the 12-mile corridor, but soils in the APE are generally of the Everett gravelly sandy loam series, the Alderwood gravelly sandy loam series, or Urban Land (NRCS 2015). The Everett series soils are the result of glacial outwash, while the Alderwood soils are alluvium. Urban Land soil is that which has been heavily modified by human development. There are no unusual seismic or soil conditions in the project area.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 36 March 31, 2016 Q. Water Quality Does the project have the potential to impact water quality, including during construction.
No
Yes, describe potential impacts and best management practices which will be in place.
See description below.
Will there be an increase in new impervious surface or restored pervious surface?
No Yes, describe potential impacts and proposed treatment for stormwater runoff.
Existing Conditions
The project is located within two highly developed watersheds, the Swamp Creek and North Creek basins within the Cedar/Sammamish, Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) #8. These basins are extensively developed with the majority of the development having occurred prior to 1990. The northern portion of the project (from the Boeing complex south, to approximately the planned station at Airport Road & 112th Street SW) lies within the Swamp Creek basin. Current land use in this basin consists of a mixture of highly urbanized commercial and industrial land uses (including the Boeing Everett Plant) and suburban residential areas. The remainder of the project (from the planned station at Airport Road & 112th Street south to the Canyon Park P&R) lies within the North Creek basin. This basin is also extensively developed with commercial properties, single-family and multifamily residential units. In addition, the basin contains several major roadways including Interstate 5 (I-5), I-405, and several state routes (SRs) (Snohomish County, 2002). These areas are primarily composed of PGIS. The project improvements primarily will be within existing road right-of-way, which consists of paved roadway with sidewalk and minor roadside planter strips.
Crystal Creek, North Creek, Penny Creek, Mill Creek, Tambark Creek and five unnamed streams/rivers cross the project corridor. Although these waterbodies could be impacted during construction, it is unlikely given that all, except for Penny Creek, are not located in close proximity to any of the bus stations, which is where the majority of construction would occur (Table 7). Penny Creek crosses through the area where the SR 527 Northbound Queue Bypass at 164th Street SE is proposed. Although the stream is located near the proposed improvements at this location, impacts are not expected.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 37 March 31, 2016 Table 7 Streams and water quality categories in the project vicinity (Ecology, 2012) Water Body 303(d) Water Quality Category Proximity to Construction Crystal Creek Category 5 for dissolved oxygen Crosses corridor 185 feet (Queensborough Creek) Category 4A for bacteria north of the Canyon Park Category 1 for pH P&R
North Creek Category 4A for dissolved oxygen* Crosses corridor north of Category 2 for pH* 217th Street SE and east of 4th Drive SE
Penny Creek Category 2 for dissolved oxygen and pH Crosses corridor south of 164th Street SE
Mill Creek Has not been assessed Crosses corridor north of (Smokehouse Creek) 153rd Street Southeast
Tambark Creek Has not been assessed Crosses 196th Street SE (sidewalk project) * North Creek is not listed where it crosses the southern portion of the project corridor, but is listed south of 128th Street SE.
The following streams are named by Snohomish County, but the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) considers them unnamed. None of the unnamed streams/rivers have been assessed by Ecology, and therefore, they are not assigned an assessment category (Ecology, 2012). Unnamed streams/rivers cut across the project corridor just south of 19th Drive Southeast (Sulfur Springs), south of 196th Street Southeast (Silver Creek), north of Seattle Hill Road (Nickle Creek), east of Dumas Road (Sitka Creek), and Northwest of Admiralty Way (Swamp Creek).
Project Effects
Station Improvements. The Ecology SMMWW requires the determination of Threshold Discharge Areas (TDA) for every Swift BRT station in order to determine existing hydrologic and hydraulic conditions. In general, each TDA along the corridor contains improvements for two stations only, and the new impervious area within the typical TDA is below the threshold for flow control requirements. The new impervious surface for the stations is outside of the roadway and is considered non-pollution generating, therefore, runoff treatment is not typically required. If flow control or runoff treatment is required by the local agencies as the design progresses, stormwater management facilities will be included with the proposed stations or mitigation fees will be paid in lieu of new on-site facilities.
Roadway Improvements. The improvements for the Southbound Station on SR 527 at SR 524/208th Street SE, the Northbound Station on SR 527 at 164th Street SE, and along 128th Street SW/SE between 3rd Street SE and 4th Avenue W will include roadway widening to improve safety and reliability to transit service within the congested travel corridor. The improvements at these locations will likely exceed the new impervious area thresholds, so runoff
FINAL DCE Worksheet 38 March 31, 2016 treatment facilities will be required. In that case, stormwater management facilities will be designed to meet or exceed the requirements of the Ecology SMMWW and the local agency.
Pedestrian Connectivity Improvements. To improve connectivity between the Swift II BRT stations and surrounding neighborhoods, new pedestrian facility connections and improvements to existing pedestrian facilities are proposed at five locations within the corridor: along 196th Street SE, along 10th Drive SE and 129th Street SE, along 134th Street SW and 4th Avenue W, along Marino Avenue and Center Road, and at Beverly Park Road and 112th Street SW. The stormwater requirements will also be assessed in more detail as the design progresses for these new pedestrian improvements. The new impervious surface for these sidewalk improvements will likely be outside of the roadway and be considered non-pollution generating, therefore, not requiring runoff treatment. If these improvements include enough new effective impervious surface that flow control is required, stormwater management facilities will be designed to meet requirements of the Ecology SMMWW and the local agency.
Findings and Conclusions
The proposed action would increase the amount of impervious area within the project limits by a total of approximately 2.28 acres, and the area of PGIS by about 0.51 acre. As part of the proposed action, about 1.99 acres of stormwater flow control (detention and/or low impact development (LID) facilities), is proposed. Furthermore, enhanced stormwater treatment would be provided for an area substantially larger (0.91 acre) than the area of new PGIS in the project area. Filterra biofiltration units, or similar biofiltration systems and/or additional LID facilities would be used to treat the runoff from new PGIS where no stormwater treatment currently occurs. The treated runoff would be infiltrated into trenches designed for flows as high as those associated with the 50-year storm. In project elements where infiltration is not possible, other flow control and treatment facilities could include underground storage and/or various LID facilities such as rain gardens, pervious pavement, and dispersion through amended soils. Alternately, mitigation fees could be paid to the appropriate jurisdiction in lieu of new on-site facilities.
Although the Community Transit Swift II BRT project has stations within four separate jurisdictions—City of Bothell, City of Mill Creek, City of Everett, and Snohomish County—all matters related to stormwater management for all four jurisdictions fall under the common jurisdiction, the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology). The 2012 Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (SMMWW) has the most stringent codes and will be applied to the entire project corridor for consistent stormwater regulatory requirements. See also Section X for additional minimization and avoidance measures.
To address potential cumulative stormwater impacts in the region from the multiple, individual Swift II BRT stations dispersed along the corridor, Community Transit will work with the local jurisdiction and provide additional on-site stormwater improvements in key areas or contribute toward a stormwater mitigation fund or project.
The proposed Swift II BRT project is not anticipated to introduce any likely significant adverse water quality impacts during construction or during operation.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 39 March 31, 2016 Is the project located in the vicinity of an EPA-designated sole source aquifer (SSA)?
No Yes, provide the name of the aquifer which the project is located in and describe any potential impacts to the aquifer. Also include the approximate amount of new impervious surface created by the project. (May require completion of SSA worksheet.)
The project is not located in the vicinity of an EPA-designated sole source aquifer.
R. Wetlands Does the proposal temporarily or permanently impact wetlands or require alterations to streams or waterways?
No
Yes, describe potential impacts
Existing Conditions
ESA identified five depressional wetlands along the proposed project alignment, designated as Wetlands A through C and E through F (Figures 3a through 3e in Appendix C Critical Areas Report). A potential wetland was noted at the intersection of 128th Street SE and 3rd Avenue SE, but this area was found to lack wetland parameters and does not meet the wetland criteria. A potential jurisdictional ditch (Jurisdictional Ditch G) was observed; however, the proposed station location has been removed from the project.
Existing wetland and stream buffer conditions are greatly degraded by the surrounding urban landscape. In all instances, the recommended standard buffer width is reduced by the presence of paved roads and sidewalks. Buffers that do exist are primarily vegetated with mowed grass, ornamental trees and shrubs, or invasive species such as Himalayan blackberry and reed canarygrass. Existing buffers in the study area provide little protection to associated wetland and stream functions.
Project Effects
According to Snohomish County, the area surveyed at the intersection of 128th Street SE and 3rd Avenue SE is a wetland mitigation site for permanent wetland impacts that resulted from the construction of a housing development in 2006 (The Jay Group, 2006). According to the mitigation provided, approximately 1,085 square feet of wetland area was created and approximately 2,095 square feet of wetland area was to be enhanced within this parcel. This area’s current site characteristics do not meet the wetland definition/criteria (i.e., presences of hydric soils, hydrology, and hydrophytic vegetation). Impacts to a mitigation area could trigger regulatory review, even if the mitigation area is not currently meeting the wetland criteria; therefore we recommend additional consultation with local, state and/or federal agencies with jurisdiction over regulated waters to discuss compliance issues if it appears the project will impact this site.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 40 March 31, 2016 Even with avoidance and minimization measures, some impacts to wetlands, wetland buffers, and/or stream buffers are expected. Anticipated project impacts are presented below (Table 8). The proposed Swift II BRT project may impact seven wetland or stream buffer areas. One of those sites (at 196th Street SE) could include impacts to a wetland mitigation site that is no longer functioning as a wetland. See Appendix C: Draft Critical Areas Report.
Where the project would impact wetland or stream buffers, the area impacted would be reduced to the maximum extent practical. All affected buffers, which are typically vegetated with mowed grass, ornamental trees and shrubs, or invasive species, would have the vegetation enhanced as required by each jurisdiction’s critical areas regulations. Buffer enhancement efforts would include removing non-native plants and replanting with native species. The buffer enhancement would be selected to support the specific site conditions and area being replanted.
Table 8 Potential Wetland Impacts Location Jurisdiction Associated Impact Wetland/Stream Station Construction Airport Road at Kasch Park Road Everett A Wetland Buffer (southbound) Impact Airport Road at 100th Street SW Snohomish B Wetland Buffer (southbound) County Impact Airport Road at 112th Street SW Everett C Wetland Buffer (northbound) Impact 128th Street SE at 3rd Avenue SE Snohomish Former mitigation Impact (northbound) County site; currently not a wetland
132nd Street SE at Dumas Road Mill E Wetland Buffer (southbound) Creek Impact
SR 527 at 196th Street SE (southbound) Bothell F/Silver Creek Wetland Buffer Impact/Stream Buffer Impact
17th Avenue SE at 220 Street SE Bothell G /Jurisdictional Impact Avoided (southbound) - Station Removed Ditch Pedestrian Improvements
196th Street SE Snohomish Tambark Wetland Buffer County Creek/NWI wetland Impact/Stream Buffer Impact/ Possible Wetland Impact Road Improvements SR 527 at 164th Street SE Mill Penny Creek Stream Buffer (northbound) Creek Impact
FINAL DCE Worksheet 41 March 31, 2016 Findings and Conclusions
Wetland and stream buffer impacts are regulated by the local jurisdictions within the study area. All permanent and temporary buffer impacts would be restored in accordance with Everett Municipal Code 37.110, Snohomish County Code 30.62A.320, Bothell Municipal Code 14.04.530, and Mill Creek Municipal Code 18.06.930. See also Section X for required mitigation ratios and other avoidance and minimization measures. Community Transit would meet or exceed all wetland, stream, and related buffer mitigation requirements.
The proposed Swift II BRT project minimizes impacts to wetlands, streams, and their buffers by avoiding the critical area when possible, or by reducing the extent of the disruption of the area and working within the existing hardscape and right-of-way to the extent practical. No in-water work is planned for the project; therefore, no direct stream impacts are anticipated. The project team will follow local jurisdictional requirements to avoid and minimize critical area impacts as per their requirements.
The proposed Swift II BRT project would not introduce likely significant adverse impacts, either temporarily or permanently, to any wetlands, streams, or their buffers.
S. Construction Impacts Describe the construction plan and identify impacts due to construction noise, utility disruption, debris and spoil disposal, and staging areas. Address air and water quality impacts, safety and security issues, and disruptions to traffic and access to property.
The construction period for the entire project would like last 15 to 18 months. However, construction at any one location would be phased, with construction occurring at each station for approximately 2 to 6 months depending on the amount of utility relocations and roadway improvements associated with that station.
Construction Noise. During construction there would be temporary increases in sound levels near active areas of construction and along roadways used for construction vehicles. The increase in noise levels would depend on the type of equipment used and the amount of time it is in use. Typical construction equipment could include bulldozers, graders, pavers, and concrete and haul trucks. Sounds originating from temporary construction sites as a result of construction activity are exempt from the requirements of City of Bothell, City of Mill Creek, City of Everett, and Snohomish County noise regulations, as well as WAC 173-60. According to the State and local noise standards, construction activities are exempt from regulation between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekends. In addition to work during these hours above, it is anticipated that portions of the construction will require night and/or weekend work in order to minimize impacts to traffic in this highly congested corridor. This work would be limited in duration and would occur in phases along the corridor. Based on the previously completed Swift BRT Project, jurisdictional permitting requirements are likely to require some roadway and utility work to occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. on weekdays, 8:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m. on Saturdays, and any time on Sundays. Several potential measures to control evening, weekend, and nighttime construction noise impacts are provided in the Draft Noise Technical Memorandum in Appendix H. If
FINAL DCE Worksheet 42 March 31, 2016 determined to be necessary, final construction noise abatement measures for any required nighttime construction would be determined through the noise ordinance variance processes with the respective jurisdictions. If noise construction abatement measures are required, they will be included in the construction bid documents and in the construction permits issued by the local jurisdiction.
Utility Disruption. There is a potential for existing utilities to be affected when constructing within the road right-of-way. Disruptions in utility service are most likely to occur where the exact location of utility lines is unclear, as is the case with some older systems. The design process will include utility field locating, utility potholing, and outreach to utility providers ahead of construction in order to minimize disruptions during construction. Some utility relocation will be required for construction of the stations and road widening projects. Construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be used to insure disruptions in service would be kept to a minimum.
Debris and spoil disposal, and staging areas. Filling, excavation, and grading would be required to extend the roadway.
Air Quality Impacts. Fugitive dust from construction operations and emissions from construction equipment and vehicles would temporarily impact air quality in the project area. Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be implemented during project construction to control dust levels and emissions. This would be achieved through use of measures such as well-maintained construction equipment, watering and stabilizing areas where earthwork is being conducted, and cleaning wheels and streets to reduce transportation of dirt off-site.
Water Quality Impacts. The proposed design is not expected to have any adverse effects to water resources. Avoidance and minimization measures incorporated into the design and construction process would reduce the potential for adverse effects to water resources. In addition, a temporary erosion sediment control (TESC) plan including sediment-control BMPs such as silt fences, check dams, sediment traps, sedimentation basins, and flocculation methods would be used. A Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) plan would also be implemented. As part of the construction bid documents, the selected contractor will be required to provide TESC and SPCC plans to Community Transit prior to starting on-site construction activities.
Safety and Security Issues. No environmental health hazards would result from this project. As with most construction projects, there would be some risk of equipment spilling or leaking hazardous waste. However, the degree of risk would not be any greater than under normal circumstances. In addition to implementing the Community Transit approved SPCC plan that will include precautions to safely store hazardous materials and construction equipment, Community Transit requires the contractor provide and implement a Site Specific Health and Safety (SSHS) Plan which identifies potential hazardous materials, provide MSDS information sheets for each material, defines storage for the material, and safe handling procedures.
Disruptions to Traffic and Access to Property. During construction it is anticipated that there would be temporary impacts/disruptions to traffic for in-lane work, including paving and utility installations. Work will be scheduled and/or phased to minimize disruptions and a Traffic Control Plan or Detour Plan will be implemented. If necessary, construction may be completed
FINAL DCE Worksheet 43 March 31, 2016 at night and on weekends to minimize the traffic impacts. Access would be maintained to abutting land uses and to land uses beyond the project limits during project construction. In addition, access to properties within the project limits would be maintained at all times, and the ability of owners to use their property for existing or planned uses would not be affected.
The proposed Swift II BRT project will not introduce any likely significant adverse impacts during construction, including impacts such as noise, utility disruption, debris and spoil disposal, staging areas impacts, air or water quality impacts, safety and security issues, disruptions to traffic, or property access.
T. Cumulative and Indirect Impacts Are cumulative and indirect impacts likely?
No
Yes, describe the reasonably foreseeable: a) Cumulative impacts, which result from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes them. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time.
b) Indirect impacts, which are caused by the action but are later in time or farther removed in distance, yet are still reasonably foreseeable. Indirect impacts may include growth-inducing effects and other effects related to induced changes in the pattern of land use, population density or growth rate, and related effects on air, water and other natural systems, including ecosystems.
Swift II Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) – Boeing to Canyon Park Project is included in the Puget Sound Regional Council’s Transportation 2040 plan and the Snohomish County Comprehensive Plan 2015 Update. The decision to include the project a part of the community’s long-range plan implies that no adverse cumulative or indirect impacts were identified that would have removed the project from consideration. In addition, the project was also examined in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for 2015 Comprehensive Plan Update, and no cumulative impacts to the social or natural environment were identified in relation to this project.
U. Property Acquisition If property is to be acquired for the project, indicate whether acquisition will result in relocation of businesses or individuals.
Note: For acquisitions over $500,000, FTA concurrence in the property’s valuation is also required.
Permanent property acquisition is generally limited to station easements in areas where additional space is required to locate the station and the associated improvements. The vast
FINAL DCE Worksheet 44 March 31, 2016 majority of property acquisitions for the project involve acquiring easements over strips of land along existing right of way. Throughout project planning and preliminary engineering, efforts were made to reduce significant impact on private property. As a result of those efforts, the project will result in no displacements of businesses, residences or tenants.
Property would need to be acquired for permanent right-of-way, permanent easements, and temporary construction easements. The property impacts would only require sliver takes, and therefore the project would not result in the relocation of businesses or individuals. It is anticipated that permanent right-of-way acquisition for road improvements will be required on eight (8) properties (totaling approximately 0.18 acres), permanent easements will be required on eighteen (18) properties (totaling approximately 0.19 acres), and temporary construction easements will be required on thirty-four (34) properties (totaling approximately1.42 acres).
Community Transit will administer the right of way acquisition process pursuant to applicable Federal, State of Washington, and local regulations, including:
1. 49 CFR Part 24 as amended January 4, 2005: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Regulations for Federal and Federally Assisted Programs: Final Rule and Notice (UNIFORM ACT) 2. FTA Circular C 5010.1D, Grant Management Requirements Chapter IV, pertaining to Real Estate Project Management 3. Washington Revised Statutes: 81.112 4. Applicable statutes regulating environmental aspects of acquisition, such as site inspection, survey of prior owners and uses, etc., include 42 USC Subsections 9601- 9675 and RCW Chapters 8.26
These references will guide Community Transit’s acquisition procedures. Washington state law and Federal regulations provide general guidance to the acquisition process and also govern property owner rights and the eminent domain process.
The proposed Swift II BRT project will not result in the relocation of businesses or individuals.
V. Energy If the project includes the construction or reconstruction of a building, identify potential opportunities to conserve energy which could be employed. This includes building materials and techniques used for construction; special innovative conservation features; fuel use for heating, cooling and operations; and alternative renewable energy sources.
The project is expected to reduce long-term energy use by encouraging public transit use rather than driving alone in private vehicles. The project does not include the construction of any actively heated or cooled buildings; only shelters that help protect waiting passengers from the inclement weather. Much of the lighting proposed for the project would use LED bulbs to conserve energy.
According to the Community Transit BRT Corridor Planning and Route Definition Study Final Report (Parsons Brinckerhoff, 2014), it is anticipated that 3,300 riders would utilize the new Swift II BRT each day if the line were to operate daily and by the year 2035 ridership could
FINAL DCE Worksheet 45 March 31, 2016 increase to nearly 4,000 daily riders. The Project would reduce future vehicle trips by providing public transportation to residents of Bothell, Mill Creek, and Everett. This would result in fewer vehicle miles traveled, which would reduce road congestion and thereby lower GHG emissions when compared to no build conditions.
W. Public Involvement Describe public outreach efforts undertaken on behalf of the project. Indicate opportunities for public meetings (e.g. board meetings, open houses, special hearings). Indicate any significant concerns expressed by agencies or the public regarding the project.
Public outreach efforts have included a series of meetings with project stakeholders, several of which were open to the public. Public presentations about the project by Community Transit staff have been given to:
• Community Transit Board of Directors (9/4/14 and 4/2/15) • Mill Creek City council (9/9/14) • Snohomish County Committee for Improved Transportation (9/23/14) • King County Seashore Transportation Forum (11/7/14) • Puget Sound Regional Council Regional Traffic Operations Committee(4/2/15) • Bothell City Council (4/21/15) • Mill Creek City Council (5/26/15) • Everett City Council (5/27/15)
In addition, three open houses were held specifically to present the project and answer questions from the public. These were located in the Cities of Bothell (6/22/15), Everett (6/23/15), and Mill Creek (6/24/15) at locations close to the proposed Swift II line. Flyers announcing the meetings dates and times were mailed out to all households and businesses (23,711 flyers total) within 0.25-mile of the project alignment, posted on existing Community Transit bus routes, and on the Community Transit website. A full summary of Community Transit’s public outreach efforts to date, along with the mailer sent out to the public, is shown in Appendix F: Draft Environmental Justice Technical Memorandum.
Public notice with project information was given through newspaper articles and announcements for more than seven public meetings, over 23,000 flyers mailed to addresses within one quarter mile of the transit corridor, Rider Alerts posted along the proposed transit corridor, and route and project information posted on the Community Transit web-site. No significant concerns have been raised by agencies or the public.
X. Mitigation Measures Describe all measures to be taken to mitigate project impacts.
Temporary Construction
The final design of the proposed project will take into consideration existing utility lines when determining the final location of new facilities so as to minimize conflicts with future
FINAL DCE Worksheet 46 March 31, 2016 maintenance work on those lines. Other construction impacts, such as noise, dust, access restrictions, and the use of potentially hazardous construction materials will be minimized through implementation of BMPs and other programs such as the TESC, SPCC, Traffic Control and SSHS Plans.
Transportation
Traffic disruptions caused by construction of the stations, and in particular the concrete pads within the roadway, would be mitigated by adjusting construction hours to fall outside of heavy traffic periods (e.g., commute times). Some night and weekend work may be required. The Contractor would be required to implement a Traffic Control Plan that identifies approved routes for all construction traffic in addition to the BMPs that would be implemented to manage traffic near the construction sites.
Community Transit is currently working with Snohomish County to execute an agreement outlining mitigation for impacts to the regional Interurban Trail. Two suitable options for rerouting the trail have been identified (one preferred and one alternate). Both options would provide a detour during construction that would be published in the Traffic Control Plan for the project and would include adequate signage to ensure the trail is easily accessible.
Snohomish County Parks has identified a preferred alignment for permanent relocation of the Interurban Trail that would diverge from the existing trail at the intersection of 128th Street SE and 3rd Ave SE. Rather than continuing on 128th St SE heading west, the trail would utilize 3rd Avenue SE and would head northwest to merge with the existing Interurban Trail before it crosses I-5.This re-route has been identified as the preferred route because it would result in an improved trail that would be moved off of the busy 128th St SE sidewalk and would go through a less trafficked residential neighborhood and then through a vacant greenbelt rather than along the I-5 northbound collector distributor road.
Approximately 9,800 square feet would need to be purchased in order for the preferred rerouted trail to be viable. Negotiations have not begun for this project. Should Community Transit be unsuccessful in negotiating the purchase of permanent trail easements for the preferred alignment, the project would be designed to accommodate the trail in its current location on the existing sidewalk along the north side of 128th Street SE from the Interstate 5 (I-5) northbound on-ramp to 3rd Street SE. If this alternative is constructed, the project would provide a wider (10 feet wide) sidewalk along 128th Street SE than currently exists, in order to comply with trail standards.
Air Quality
Due to the linear nature of road construction projects, emissions typically do not occur in the same location for extended periods. Consequently, air quality impacts from project construction would be temporary and would be minimized by best management practices.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 47 March 31, 2016 Construction BMPs to control dust and exhaust emissions include:
• Maintaining all equipment in good operating condition. • Watering dirt driveways and construction surfaces, installing temporary ground covers, sprinkling the project site with approved flocculating agents, and/or using temporary stabilization practices upon completion of grading to control dust. • Providing wheel-cleaning stations to ensure construction vehicle wheels and undercarriages do not carry excess dirt from the site onto adjacent roadways. • Cleaning streets on a regular basis to ensure excess dust and debris are not inadvertently transported from the construction site to adjacent roads. • Planning construction staging to minimize soil exposure for extended periods.
One of the proposed construction BMPs would minimize GHGs by maintaining all construction equipment in good operating condition. Proper maintenance reduces fuel consumption and GHG emissions. Project construction will include setting up active construction areas, staging areas, and material transfer sites to reduce equipment idling time. In addition, construction workers will be encouraged to use ridesharing to reduce temporary energy use and associated GHG emissions. These activities will minimize GHG emissions during construction.
Hazardous Materials
Prior to beginning construction, the contractor would be required to submit a Site Specific Health and Safety Plan for review and approval that includes a site specific hazard analysis and requirements for material handling, storage, use and disposal, and requirements if hazardous waste is encountered during construction. The agency would make their contractor aware of known hazardous material sites in the project vicinity, and the contractor would be required to have training in recognition of potential hazardous materials during project work. In the event that any hazardous materials, either in soils or groundwater, were encountered on the project site during construction, the contractor would be required to conduct appropriate characterization and prepare and implement excavation and treatment/disposal plans for those materials. Materials including contaminated soils would be disposed of only at approved landfills and only after any treatment required is conducted. Contaminated water would be treated and discharged or hauled away and disposed of as required by state and federal codes.
Noise
Limiting construction activities to these times to the greatest extent feasible will minimize impacts to nearby residential properties, which are most sensitive to environmental noise during nighttime hours. Additional measures to reduce construction noise impacts could include:
• Use of properly sized and maintained mufflers; • Use of engine silencers or enclosures; • Placement of stationary, background noise-generating equipment such as generators, pumps, and compressors, away from nearby sensitive receivers; and • Use of portable noise barriers to screen equipment from nearby sensitive receivers.
It is likely that project construction will require intermittent nighttime work due to the high traffic volumes that use the project corridor and the permitting/MOT requirements that will be
FINAL DCE Worksheet 48 March 31, 2016 necessary for the project. This work would be limited in duration and would occur in phases along the corridor. Noise variances will likely be necessary from the four jurisdictions along the project corridor. In Bothell, noise variance procedures detailed in BMC 8.26.090; requires community development director decision based on specific criteria. In Everett, variance procedures are detailed in EMC 20.08.180. In Mill Creek, MCMC Chapter 9.14 does not specify a process for securing a noise variance; procedures will need to be verified with the City. Snohomish County provides allowances for a “Modified Standards Permit” under SCC 10.01.060.
The temporary noise variance applications submitted to the cities, and the Modified Standards Permit application submitted to the County, will include discussion of existing ambient noise levels and analysis of anticipated noise levels during nighttime and/or non-exempt weekend construction activities. The applications will additionally detail the anticipated periods and durations of nighttime and non-exempt weekend construction activities at specific station and roadway improvement sites along the project corridor. Other information will include the existing and anticipated noise levels, and contact information for handling noise complaints. Hours of construction will be determined by the selected contractor and by any limitations imposed under the noise variances.
Before and during the entire construction period, project outreach staff will be able to assist citizens by providing up-to-date information on proposed construction activities and responding to and assisting in resolving any noise complaints that may be received.
Historic and Cultural Resources
While the potential for encountering archaeological resources is low throughout the APE, Community Transit will implement an Inadvertent Discovery Plan (IDP) that will outline protocols and procedures to be followed in the event of construction encountering cultural resources.
Biological and Water Quality
Although the project design is not yet complete and impacts have not yet been quantified, the project team will follow local jurisdictional requirements to avoid and minimize critical area impacts in accordance with the following preferred mitigation sequence:
a) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of actions; b) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action; c) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment; d) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action; or e) Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments.
Numerous best management practices (BMPs) described below, have been incorporated into the proposed project to avoid and minimize short-term and long-term impacts to species and habitats in the project vicinity.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 49 March 31, 2016 Wetlands/Streams
Exact wetland, stream, and buffer impacts produced by the project are not known at this stage of the project. However, if impacts cannot be fully avoided, several permits would be necessary and jurisdictions with authority over the wetlands within the study area would require compensatory mitigation. Mitigation ratios required by local jurisdictions are provided in Table 8.
Table 9 Mitigation Ratios Required by Local Jurisdictions
Wetland Jurisdiction Creation Enhancement Category 1 City of Everett Category II 4:1 (for forested wetlands) 16:1 Category III 2:1 8:1 2 Snohomish County Category II 3:1 6:1
Category III 2:1 4:13
4 City of Bothell Category III 2:1 4:15 6 City of Mill Creek Category III 2:1 12:1
1 Per EMC 37.12C.5 2 Per SCC 30.62A.340(4)(a) 3 Enhancement is allowed in lieu of creation for up to one acre of wetland fill (SCC 30.62.340(4)(a)) 4 Per BMC 14.04.540F.1 5 At a minimum, enhancement acreage shall double the acreage required for creation and be limited to Category III and Category IV wetlands (BMC 14.04.540G) 6 Per MCMC 18.06.980A
Stormwater
If flow control or runoff treatment is required by the local agencies as the design progresses, stormwater mitigation would also be required. Community Transit would either include stormwater management facilities with the proposed stations or would pay mitigation fees in lieu of new facilities.
Erosion and Sediment Control
• Implement construction phasing that minimizes the amount of earthwork that exposes the ground surface to erosion. • Implement a temporary erosion sediment control (TESC) plan including sediment-control BMPs such as silt fences, check dams, sediment traps, sedimentation basins, and flocculation methods. • Use erosion-control practices (seeding, mulching, soil conditioning with polymers, use of geo-synthetics, sod stabilization, erosion-control blankets, vegetative buffer strips, and preservation of trees with construction fences). • Use construction entrances, exits, parking areas, and wheel wash stations as appropriate to reduce tracking sediment onto public roads. • Perform routine inspections of erosion-control and sediment-control BMPs and subsequent BMP maintenance.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 50 March 31, 2016 • Implement construction BMPs to control dust and limit impacts to air quality.
Clearing/Vegetation Removal
• High-visibility construction fencing will be installed to define the perimeter of the work area and protect sensitive areas from construction related impacts. • Clearly mark the limits of construction and protect vegetation remaining outside of these limits. Protect street trees as required by City code.
Stormwater Pollution/Spill Prevention
• A Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) plan will be implemented. Elements of this plan will satisfy all pertinent requirements set forth by federal, state, and local laws and regulations. • All vehicles operated within the study area will be inspected daily for fluid leaks before leaving the vehicle staging area. Any leaks detected will be repaired before the vehicle resumes operation. When not in use, all vehicles will be stored in the staging areas or stored with spill containment pans or pads. • Spill response equipment will be on-site for potential fluid leakage. • All mechanical equipment will be fueled at least 50 feet from wetlands and watercourses.
Staging Areas
• All staging and stockpile areas will be limited to paved or gravel right-of-way whenever feasible. • Staging areas will be located in areas that will prevent the potential of contamination of wetlands. Servicing and refueling of vehicles will not occur in areas that reduce potential spills of petroleum and hydraulic fluids in sensitive areas. Additionally, drip pans will be fitted with absorbent pads and placed under all equipment being fueled.
Other Construction Activities
• Any use of wet concrete will include provisions for allowing adequate time and protection of material for curing before concrete comes into contact with water. No wet or curing concrete will be allowed to come in contact with the waters that flow to streams in the project vicinity. • Nighttime lighting will be directed toward active work areas only during construction to minimize disturbance of wildlife in the study area.
Coordination with Relevant Agencies
Project development for the Swift II BRT project has included early and on-going coordination with the five jurisdictions along the corridor; the cities of Everett, Mill Creek, and Bothell, Snohomish County, and WSDOT for work on state routes. Community Transit is currently working with each of these jurisdictions to define project partnerships and proactively outline permitting requirements.
In addition, Community Transit is partnering with local agencies to implement transit signal priority capability at each signal along the route. Snohomish County, the lead agency, is working
FINAL DCE Worksheet 51 March 31, 2016 with WSDOT, Everett, and Community Transit to implement an ASCT project for county, WSDOT, and city signals in the Swift II BRT corridor.
Y. Other Federal Actions Provide a list of other federal NEPA actions related to the proposed project or in the vicinity.
Not applicable.
Z. State and Local Policies and Ordinances Is the project in compliance with all applicable state and local policies and ordinances?
No, describe noncompliance:
Yes
AA. Related Federal and State/Local Actions Corps of Engineers Permit (Section 10, Section 404)
Coast Guard Permit
Coastal Zone Management Certification
Critical Area Ordinance Permit
ESA and EFH Consultation
Floodplain Development Permit
Forest Practice Act Permit
Hydraulic Project Approval
Local Building or Site Development Permits
Local Clearing and Grubbing Permit
National Historic Preservation Act-Section 106 consultation
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Construction Permit
Shoreline Permit
Solid Waste Discharge Permit
Sole Source Aquifer Consultation
Section 4(f) (Historic or Recreational Properties; Wildlife Refuges)
FINAL DCE Worksheet 52 March 31, 2016 Section 6(f) (Recreational Properties)
Section 106 (Historic Properties)
Stormwater Site Plan (SSP)
Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (TESC)
Water Rights Permit
Water Quality Certification—Section 401
Tribal Consultation or Permits (if any, describe below)
Other
Others (describe as applicable):
Submitted By (name, title): Date:
Please submit two paper copies of this form, attachments, and a transmittal letter recommending a NEPA finding to the address below, or submit an electronic version to [email protected]. Contact FTA at the number below if you are unsure of these procedures. Modifications are typically necessary.
Federal Transit Administration, Region 10 phone: (206) 220-7954
915 2nd Avenue, Suite 3142 fax: (206) 220-7959
Seattle, WA 98174-1002 [email protected]
For links to further topical guidance, please visit Region 10’s Grantee Resources: Environment webpage.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 53 March 31, 2016 References
Casseday Consulting. 2015. Swift II BRT Draft Traffic Discipline Report. Prepared for Community Transit. September 15, 2015.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2014. EJView accessible at: http://epamap14.epa.gov/ejmap/entry.html. Accessed on: May 23, 2014.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2015. Washington Nonattainment/Maintenance Status for Each County by Year for All Criteria Pollutants. Accessed June 2015 at http://www.epa.gov/airquality/greenbk/anayo_wa.html
Environmental Science Associates. 2015a. Swift II BRT Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation. Prepared for Community Transit. November 19, 2015.
Environmental Science Associates. 2015b. Swift II BRT Draft Air Quality Technical Memorandum. Prepared for Community Transit. November 16, 2015.
Environmental Science Associates. 2015c. Swift II BRT Draft Critical Areas Report. Prepared for Community Transit. November 2015.
Environmental Science Associates. 2015d. Swift II BRT Draft Biological Assessment. Prepared for Community Transit. December 2015.
Environmental Science Associates. 2015e. Swift II BRT Cultural Resources Assessment. Prepared for Community Transit. November 2015.
Environmental Science Associates. 2015f. Swift II BRT Draft Environmental Justice Technical Memorandum. Prepared for Community Transit. November 17, 2015.
Environmental Science Associates. 2015g. Swift II BRT Draft Hazardous Materials Technical Memorandum. Prepared for Community Transit. November 17, 2015.
Environmental Science Associates. 2015h. Swift II BRT Draft Noise Discipline Report. Prepared for Community Transit. November 19, 2015.
National Marine Fisheries Service, 2015. Endangered and Threatened Marine Species under NMFS' Jurisdiction. Accessed November 25, 2015. Available at: http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/pr/species/fish/steelhead-trout.html
Parsons Brinckerhoff. 2014. Community Transit BRT Corridor Planning and Route Definition Study Final Report.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS), 2015. Information for Planning and Conservation. My Project Snohomish County, Washington. Accessed June 2015 at http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/project/A4NUTHKJ5ZDJJPMCICVDFMKD7M/overview.
Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). 2012. Washington State Water Quality Assessment 303(d)/305(b) Integrated Report.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 54 March 31, 2016 Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). 2015. Washington Nonattainment/ Maintenance Status for Each County by Year for All Criteria Pollutants. Accessed June 2015 at http://www.epa.gov/airquality/greenbk/anayo_wa.html.
Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). 2015. Water Quality Assessment Categories. Accessed June 2015 at http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/303d/WQAssessmentCats.html.
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), 2015. Priority Habitat Species Report. Data: PHSPlusPublic. Report Date: 11/25/2015.
FINAL DCE Worksheet 55 March 31, 2016 www.otak.com
2731 wetmore avenue, suite 402 everett, wa 98201 11241 willows road ne, suite 200 redmond, wa 98052