The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2. Jefferson County Early Learning NEPA. SEPA OMB No. 2506-0177 (exp.2/28/2025) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT WASHINGTON, DC 20410-1000 This Worksheet was designed to be used by those “Partners” (including Public Housing Authorities, consultants, contractors, and nonprofits) who assist Responsible Entities and HUD in preparing environmental reviews, but legally cannot take full responsibilities for these reviews themselves. Responsible Entities and HUD should use the RE/HUD version of the Worksheet. Farmlands Protection (CEST and EA) - PARTNER https://www.hudexchange.info/environmental-review/farmlands-protection 1. Does your project include any activities, including new construction, acquisition of undeveloped land or conversion, that could convert agricultural land to a non-agricultural use? ☐ Yes  Continue to Question 2. ☒ No  If the RE/HUD agrees with this recommendation, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. 2. Does “important farmland,” including prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide or local importance regulated under the Farmland Protection Policy Act, occur on the project site? You may use the links below to determine important farmland occurs on the project site:  Utilize USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service’s (NRCS) Web Soil Survey http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm  Check with your city or county’s planning department and ask them to document if the project is on land regulated by the FPPA (zoning important farmland as non-agricultural does not exempt it from FPPA requirements)  Contact NRCS at the local USDA service center http://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs or your NRCS state soil scientist http://soils.usda.gov/contact/state_offices/ for assistance ☐ No  If the RE/HUD agrees with this recommendation, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. Provide any documents used to make your determination. ☐ Yes  Continue to Question 3. 3. Consider alternatives to completing the project on important farmland and means of avoiding impacts to important farmland.  Complete form AD-1006, “Farmland Conversion Impact Rating” and contact the state soil scientist before sending it to the local NRCS District Conservationist.  Work with NRCS to minimize the impact of the project on the protected farmland. When you have finished with your analysis, return a copy of form AD-1006 to the USDA-NRCS State Soil Scientist or his/her designee informing them of your determination. Work with the RE/HUD to determine how the project will proceed. Document the conclusion: ☐Project will proceed with mitigation. Explain in detail the proposed measures that must be implemented to mitigate for the impact or effect, including the timeline for implementation. Click here to enter text.  If the RE/HUD agrees with this recommendation, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. Provide form AD-1006 and all other documents used to make your determination. ☐Project will proceed without mitigation. Explain why mitigation will not be made here: Click here to enter text.  If the RE/HUD agrees with this recommendation, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. Provide form AD-1006 and all other documents used to make your determination. Worksheet Summary Provide a full description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers • Any additional requirements specific to your program or region Include all documentation supporting your findings in your submission to HUD. The project area is in the incorporated city of Port Townsend, a land lease from the Port Townsend School District of a space used continuously for school activities for over 50 years. Land lease attached. OMB No. 2506-0177 (exp.2/28/2025) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT WASHINGTON, DC 20410-1000 This Worksheet was designed to be used by those “Partners” (including Public Housing Authorities, consultants, contractors, and nonprofits) who assist Responsible Entities and HUD in preparing environmental reviews, but legally cannot take full responsibilities for these reviews themselves. Responsible Entities and HUD should use the RE/HUD version of the Worksheet. Floodplain Management (CEST and EA) – PARTNER https://www.hudexchange.info/environmental-review/floodplain-management 1. Does 24 CFR 55.12(c) exempt this project from compliance with HUD’s floodplain management regulations in Part 55? ☐ Yes Provide the applicable citation at 24 CFR 55.12(c) here. If project is exempt under 55.12(c)(6) or (8), provide supporting documentation. Click here to enter text.  If the RE/HUD agrees with this recommendation, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. Continue to the Worksheet Summary. ☒ No  Continue to Question 2. 2. Provide a FEMA/FIRM map showing the site. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) designates floodplains. The FEMA Map Service Center provides this information in the form of FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs). Does your project occur in a floodplain? ☒ No  Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. ☐ Yes Select the applicable floodplain using the FEMA map or the best available information: ☐ Floodway  Continue to Question 3, Floodways ☐ Coastal High Hazard Area (V Zone)  Continue to Question 4, Coastal High Hazard Areas ☐ 500-year floodplain (B Zone or shaded X Zone)  Continue to Question 5, 500-year Floodplains ☐ 100-year floodplain (A Zone)  The 8-Step Process is required. Continue to Question 6, 8-Step Process 3. Floodways Is this a functionally dependent use? ☐ Yes The 8-Step Process is required. Work with HUD or the RE to assist with the 8-Step Process.  Continue to Worksheet Summary. ☐ No  Federal assistance may not be used at this location unless an exception in 55.12(c) applies. You must either choose an alternate site or cancel the project. 4. Coastal High Hazard Area Is this a critical action such as a hospital, nursing home, fire station, or police station? ☐ Yes  Critical actions are prohibited in coastal high hazard areas unless an exception in 55.12(c) applies. You must either choose an alternate site or cancel the project. ☐ No Does this action include new construction that is not a functionally dependent use, existing construction (including improvements), or reconstruction following destruction caused by a disaster? ☐ Yes, there is new construction of something that is not a functionally dependent use. New construction must be designed to FEMA standards for V Zones at 44 CFR 60.3(e) (24 CFR 55.1(c)(3)(i)).  Continue to Question 6, 8-Step Process ☐ No, this action concerns only existing construction. Existing construction must have met FEMA elevation and construction standards for a coastal high hazard area or other standards applicable at the time of construction.  Continue to Question 6, 8-Step Process 5. 500-year Floodplain Is this a critical action? ☐ No  If the RE/HUD agrees with this recommendation, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. ☐Yes  Continue to Question 6, 8-Step Process 6. 8-Step Process. Is this 8-Step Process required? Select one of the following options: ☐ 8-Step Process applies. This project will require mitigation and may require elevating structure or structures. See the link to the HUD Exchange above for information on HUD’s elevation requirements.  Work with the RE/HUD to assist with the 8-Step Process. Continue to Worksheet Summary. ☐ 5-Step Process is applicable per 55.12(a)(1-4). Provide the applicable citation at 24 CFR 55.12(a) here. Click here to enter text.  Work with the RE/HUD to assist with the 5-Step Process. Continue to Worksheet Summary. ☐ 8-Step Process is inapplicable per 55.12(b)(1-5). Provide the applicable citation at 24 CFR 55.12(b) here. Click here to enter text.  If the RE/HUD agrees with this recommendation, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. Worksheet Summary Provide a full description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers • Any additional requirements specific to your program or region Include all documentation supporting your findings in your submission to HUD. FIRM Panel #53031C0132C reveals that the project area is not in a floodplain of any type. OMB No. 2506-0177 (exp.2/28/2025) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT WASHINGTON, DC 20410-1000 This Worksheet was designed to be used by those “Partners” (including Public Housing Authorities, consultants, contractors, and nonprofits) who assist Responsible Entities and HUD in preparing environmental reviews, but legally cannot take full responsibilities for these reviews themselves. Responsible Entities and HUD should use the RE/HUD version of the Worksheet. Noise (CEST Level Reviews) – PARTNER https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/environmental-review/noise-abatement-and-control 1. What activities does your project involve? Check all that apply: ☐ New construction for residential use NOTE: HUD assistance to new construction projects is generally prohibited if they are located in an Unacceptable zone, and HUD discourages assistance for new construction projects in Normally Unacceptable zones. See 24 CFR 51.101(a)(3) for further details.  Continue to Question 4. ☐ Rehabilitation of an existing residential property NOTE: For modernization projects in all noise zones, HUD encourages mitigation to reduce levels to acceptable compliance standards. See 24 CFR 51 Subpart B for further details.  Continue to Question 2. ☒ None of the above  If the RE/HUD agrees with this recommendation, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. 2. Do you have standardized noise attenuation measures that apply to all modernization and/or minor rehabilitation projects, such as the use of double glazed windows or extra insulation? ☐ Yes Indicate the type of measures that will apply (check all that apply): ☐ Improved building envelope components (better windows and doors, strengthened sheathing, insulation, sealed gaps, etc.) ☐ Redesigned building envelope (more durable or substantial materials, increased air gap, resilient channels, staggered wall studs, etc.) ☐ Other (explain below) Click here to enter text.  If the RE/HUD agrees with this recommendation, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below and provide any documentation. ☐ No  Continue to Question 3. 3. Complete the Preliminary Screening to identify potential noise generators in the vicinity (1000’ from a major road, 3000’ from a railroad, or 15 miles from an airport). Describe findings of the Preliminary Screening: Click here to enter text.  Continue to Question 6. 4. Complete the Preliminary Screening to identify potential noise generators in the vicinity (1000’ from a major road, 3000’ from a railroad, or 15 miles from an airport). Indicate the findings of the Preliminary Screening below: ☐ There are no noise generators found within the threshold distances above.  If the RE/HUD agrees with this recommendation, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. Provide a map showing the location of the project relative to any noise generators. ☐ Noise generators were found within the threshold distances.  Continue to Question 5. 5. Complete the Noise Assessment Guidelines to quantify the noise exposure. Indicate the findings of the Noise Assessment below: ☐ Acceptable: (65 decibels or less; the ceiling may be shifted to 70 decibels in circumstances described in §24 CFR 51.105(a)) Indicate noise level here: Click here to enter text.  If the RE/HUD agrees with this recommendation, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. Provide noise analysis, including noise level and data used to complete the analysis. ☐ Normally Unacceptable: (Above 65 decibels but not exceeding 75 decibels; the floor may be shifted to 70 decibels in circumstances described in 24 CFR 51.105(a)) Indicate noise level here: Click here to enter text. Is the project in a largely undeveloped area1? ☐ No  The project requires completion of an Environmental Assessment (EA) pursuant to 51.104(b)(1)(i). ☐ Yes The project requires completion of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) pursuant to 51.104(b)(1)(i).  Work with the RE/HUD to elevate the level of review. Provide noise analysis, including noise level and data used to complete the analysis. Continue to Question 6. ☐ Unacceptable: (Above 75 decibels) 1 A largely undeveloped area means the area within 2 miles of the project site is less than 50 percent developed with urban uses and does not have water and sewer capacity to serve the project. Indicate noise level here: Click here to enter text. The project requires completion of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) pursuant to 51.104(b)(1)(i). Work with HUD or the RE to either complete an EIS or obtain a waiver signed by the appropriate authority.  Continue to Question 6. 6. HUD strongly encourages mitigation be used to eliminate adverse noise impacts. Work with the RE/HUD on the development of the mitigation measures that must be implemented to mitigate for the impact or effect, including the timeline for implementation. ☐ Mitigation as follows will be implemented: Click here to enter text.  Provide drawings, specifications, and other materials as needed to describe the project’s noise mitigation measures. Continue to the Worksheet Summary. ☐ No mitigation is necessary. Explain why mitigation will not be made here: Click here to enter text.  Continue to the Worksheet Summary. Worksheet Summary Provide a full description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers • Any additional requirements specific to your program or region Include all documentation supporting your findings in your submission to HUD. This project does not involve residential housing and thus is in compliance with this section without mitigation. OMB No. 2506-0177 (exp.2/28/2025) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT WASHINGTON, DC 20410-1000 This Worksheet was designed to be used by those “Partners” (including Public Housing Authorities, consultants, contractors, and nonprofits) who assist Responsible Entities and HUD in preparing environmental reviews, but legally cannot take full responsibilities for these reviews themselves. Responsible Entities and HUD should use the RE/HUD version of the Worksheet. Sole Source Aquifers (CEST and EA) - PARTNER https://www.hudexchange.info/environmental-review/sole-source-aquifers 1. Is the project located on a sole source aquifer (SSA)1? ☒No  If the RE/HUD agrees with this recommendation, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. Provide documentation used to make your determination, such as a map of your project or jurisdiction in relation to the nearest SSA. ☐Yes  Continue to Question 2. 2. Does the project consist solely of acquisition, leasing, or rehabilitation of an existing building(s)? ☐Yes  The review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. ☐No  Continue to Question 3. 3. Does your region have a memorandum of understanding (MOU) or other working agreement with EPA for HUD projects impacting a sole source aquifer? Contact your Field or Regional Environmental Officer or visit the HUD webpage at the link above to determine if an MOU or agreement exists in your area. ☐Yes  Continue to Question 4. ☐No  Continue to Question 5. 4. Does your MOU or working agreement exclude your project from further review? ☐Yes  If the RE/HUD agrees with this recommendation, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. Provide documentation used to make your determination and document where your project fits within the MOU or agreement. ☐No  Continue to Question 5. 5. Will the proposed project contaminate the aquifer and create a significant hazard to public health? Consult with your Regional EPA Office. Your consultation request should include detailed information about your proposed project and its relationship to the aquifer and associated streamflow source area. 1 A sole source aquifer is defined as an aquifer that supplies at least 50 percent of the drinking water consumed in the area overlying the aquifer. This includes streamflow source areas, which are upstream areas of losing streams that flow into the recharge area. EPA will also want to know about water, storm water and waste water at the proposed project. Follow your MOU or working agreement or contact your Regional EPA office for specific information you may need to provide. EPA may request additional information if impacts to the aquifer are questionable after this information is submitted for review. ☐No  If the RE/HUD agrees with this recommendation, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. Provide your correspondence with the EPA and all documents used to make your determination. ☐Yes  The RE/HUD will work with EPA to develop mitigation measures. If mitigation measures are approved, attach correspondence with EPA and include the mitigation measures in your environmental review documents and project contracts. If EPA determines that the project continues to pose a significant risk to the aquifer, federal financial assistance must be denied. Continue to Question 6. Worksheet Summary Provide a full description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers • Any additional requirements specific to your program or region Include all documentation supporting your findings in your submission to HUD. In review of the Sole Source Aquifers Map found at https://epa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=9ebb047ba3ec41ada1877155fe31356b On 9.22.2023 it was found that the project location is not located in a sole source aquifer area. Map attached. 9/22/23, 12:30 PM Sole Source Aquifers https://epa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=9ebb047ba3ec41ada1877155fe31356b 1/1 County of Island, Bureau of Land Management, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P, Interma 600ft600ft600ft600ft600ft -122.750 48.125 Degrees + – Sole Source Aquifers 1100 Van Ness St., Port Tow Show search results for 1100 V… Search result 1100 Van Ness St, Port Townsend, WA, 98368,USA Zoom to OMB No. 2506-0177 (exp.2/28/2025) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT WASHINGTON, DC 20410-1000 This Worksheet was designed to be used by those “Partners” (including Public Housing Authorities, consultants, contractors, and nonprofits) who assist Responsible Entities and HUD in preparing environmental reviews, but legally cannot take full responsibilities for these reviews themselves. Responsible Entities and HUD should use the RE/HUD version of the Worksheet. Wetlands (CEST and EA) – Partner https://www.hudexchange.info/environmental-review/wetlands-protection 1. Does this project involve new construction as defined in Executive Order 11990, expansion of a building’s footprint, or ground disturbance? The term "new construction" includes draining, dredging, channelizing, filling, diking, impounding, and related activities and construction of any any structures or facilities. ☐ No  If the RE/HUD agrees with this recommendation, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. ☒ Yes  Continue to Question 2. 2. Will the new construction or other ground disturbance impact a wetland as defined in E.O. 11990? ☒ No  If the RE/HUD agrees with this recommendation, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to the Worksheet Summary below. Provide a map or any other relevant documentation to explain your determination. ☐ Yes  Work with HUD or the RE to assist with the 8-Step Process. Continue to Question 3. 3. Does Section 55.12 state that the 8-Step Process is not required? ☐ No, the 8-Step Process applies. This project will require mitigation and may require elevating structure or structures. See the link to the HUD Exchange above for information on HUD’s elevation requirements.  Work with the RE/HUD to assist with the 8-Step Process. Continue to Worksheet Summary. ☐ 5-Step Process is applicable per 55.12(a). Provide the applicable citation at 24 CFR 55.12(a) here. Click here to enter text.  Work with the RE/HUD to assist with the 5-Step Process. This project may require mitigation or alternations. Continue to Worksheet Summary. ☐ 8-Step Process is inapplicable per 55.12(b). Provide the applicable citation at 24 CFR 55.12(b) here. Click here to enter text.  If the RE/HUD agrees with this recommendation, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to Worksheet Summary. ☐ 8-Step Process is inapplicable per 55.12(c). Provide the applicable citation at 24 CFR 55.12(c) here. Click here to enter text.  If the RE/HUD agrees with this recommendation, the review is in compliance with this section. Continue to Worksheet Summary. Worksheet Summary Provide a full description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers • Any additional requirements specific to your program or region Include all documentation supporting your findings in your submission to HUD. Jefferson County Public Land Records mapping with the critical area of ‘Wetlands’ layer reveals no wetlands in the project area. OMB No. 2506-0177 (exp.2/28/2025) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT WASHINGTON, DC 20410-1000 This Worksheet was designed to be used by those “Partners” (including Public Housing Authorities, consultants, contractors, and nonprofits) who assist Responsible Entities and HUD in preparing environmental reviews, but legally cannot take full responsibilities for these reviews themselves. Responsible Entities and HUD should use the RE/HUD version of the Worksheet. Wild and Scenic Rivers (CEST and EA) – PARTNER https://www.hudexchange.info/environmental-review/wild-and-scenic-rivers 1. Is your project within proximity of a Wild and Scenic River, Study River, or Nationwide Rivers Inventory River? ☒ No  If the RE/HUD agrees with this recommendation, the review is in compliance with this section. Provide documentation used to make your determination. ☐ Yes  Continue to Question 2. 2. Could the project do any of the following?  Have a direct and adverse effect within Wild and Scenic River Boundaries,  Invade the area or unreasonably diminish the river outside Wild and Scenic River Boundaries, or  Have an adverse effect on the natural, cultural, and/or recreational values of a NRI segment. Consult with the appropriate federal/state/local/tribal Managing Agency(s), pursuant to Section 7 of the Act, to determine if the proposed project may have an adverse effect on a Wild & Scenic River or a Study River and, if so, to determine the appropriate avoidance or mitigation measures. Select one: ☐ The Managing Agency has concurred that the proposed project will not alter, directly, or indirectly, any of the characteristics that qualifies or potentially qualifies the river for inclusion in the NWSRS.  If the RE/HUD agrees with this recommendation, the review is in compliance with this section. Provide documentation of the consultation (including the Managing Agency’s concurrence) and any other documentation used to make your determination. ☐ The Managing Agency was consulted and the proposed project may alter, directly, or indirectly, any of the characteristics that qualifies or potentially qualifies the river for inclusion in the NWSRS.  The RE/HUD must work with the Managing Agency to identify mitigation measures to mitigate the impact or effect of the project on the river. Worksheet Summary Provide a full description of your determination and a synopsis of the information that it was based on, such as: • Map panel numbers and dates • Names of all consulted parties and relevant consultation dates • Names of plans or reports and relevant page numbers • Any additional requirements specific to your program or region Include all documentation supporting your findings in your submission to HUD. There are no rivers with Wild and Scenic designation in Jefferson County. 9/22/23, 12:26 PM Washington | Rivers.gov https://www.rivers.gov/washington 1/7 Of course, Washington is known for water. On the west side, the rainforests of the Olympic Peninsula ll hundreds of wilderness streams, in turn supporting world-famous salmonid runs. Those same Olympic Mountains capture rain for the Elwha River, one of the greatest experiments in environmental restoration ever. At one time famous for the 100- pound-plus salmon found there, the river was dammed in the early 1900s by the Elwha and Glines Canyon dams. For more than a century, the eleven runs of salmon of the river were blocked from the headwaters. Finally, after two decades of planning, the largest dam removal in U.S. history began on September 17, 2011. Six months later the Elwha Dam was gone, followed by the Glines Canyon Dam in 2014. Today, the Elwha River once again ows freely from its headwaters in the Olympic Mountains to the Strait of Juan de Fuca. And the sh are returning—as is the river delta from the release of millions of cubic yards of sand and silt behind the dams. By the way, the river has been found eligible for designation as wild and scenic for its entire length and, if ever designated, would be the rst restored river added to the National System. On the east side of the state, the Columbia River dominates the landscape—and the lives of the people living there. The river transports the snowmelt of Canada, providing irrigation water for farms and drinking water for millions. It provided the power and cooling for the Manhattan Project, the infamous project to bring nuclear bombs into existence. The Columbia Basin Project, made famous by the folk songs of Woody Guthrie, serves about 671,000 acres in east-central Washington. So great is the ow of the Columbia River that the hundreds of thousands of acres irrigated is done with just 2% of the rivers ow—or less. Today, most of the river sits behind massive dams generating power for millions, but Washington Image Details  Javin Elli 9/22/23, 12:26 PM Washington | Rivers.gov https://www.rivers.gov/washington 2/7 a 51-mile stretch remains “free owing”—the Hanford Reach. This section of river has been found eligible and suitable for designation as wild and scenic and ows through the Hanford Reach National Monument, the rst national monument for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington has approximately 70,439 miles of river, of which 197 miles are designated as wild and scenic—less than 3/10ths of 1% of the state’s river miles. + − Leaflet (https://leafletjs.com) | Open Street Map 9/22/23, 12:26 PM Washington | Rivers.gov https://www.rivers.gov/washington 3/7 Rivers In Washington (/river/illabot) Illabot Creek (/river/illabot) Washington (/river/illabot) (/river/klickitat) Klickitat River (/river/klickitat) Washington (/river/klickitat) (/river/snoqualmie-middle-fork) Middle Fork Snoqualmie River (/river/snoqualmie- middle-fork) Washington (/river/snoqualmie- middle-fork) (/river/pratt)(/river/skagit)(/river/white-salmon) 9/22/23, 12:26 PM Washington | Rivers.gov https://www.rivers.gov/washington 4/7 Pratt River (/river/pratt) Washington (/river/pratt) Skagit River (/river/skagit) Washington (/river/skagit) White Salmon River (/river/white-salmon) Washington (/river/white- salmon) |Contact Us (/contact)|National Awards (/national-awards)|The Numbers (/numbers) |Nationwide Rivers Inventory (/nri)Documents (/documents) PARTNERS Bureau of Land Management (https://blm.gov/programs/national-conservation-lands/wild-and-scenic-rivers) National Park Service (https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1912/index.htm) NPS Partnership Rivers (https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1912/partnership-wild-and-scenic-rivers.htm) U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (https://fws.gov) U.S. Forest Service (https://www.fs.usda.gov/managing-land/wild-scenic-rivers) River Management Society (http://river-management.org/) REFERENCES Bibliography (/bibliography) Interagency Council (/council) Stewardship (/stewardship) News (/news) 9/22/23, 12:26 PM Washington | Rivers.gov https://www.rivers.gov/washington 5/7 Videos (/video) Vulnerability Disclosure Policy (/vulnerability-disclosure-policy) 9/22/23, 12:26 PM Washington | Rivers.gov https://www.rivers.gov/washington 6/7 9/22/23, 12:26 PM Washington | Rivers.gov https://www.rivers.gov/washington 7/7 SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 1 (WAC 197-11-960) SEPA 1 Environmental Checklist Purpose of checklist Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization, or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal. Instructions for applicants This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use “not applicable” or “does not apply” only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision-making process. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Instructions for lead agencies Please adjust the format of this template as needed. Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B, plus the Supplemental Sheet for Nonproject Actions (Part D). Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non- projects) questions in “Part B: Environmental Elements” that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal. 1 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/Checklist-guidance SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 2 (WAC 197-11-960) A. Background Find help answering background questions2 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Jefferson County Early Learning Facility and Family Support Center 2. Name of applicant: Jefferson County, YMCA of the Olympic Peninsula 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Amanda Christofferson Grants Administrator Jefferson County Auditor’s Office Jefferson County | 1820 Jefferson St. | Port Townsend, WA 98368 Phone: 360-385-9232 Email: amchristofferson@co.jefferson.wa.us 4. Date checklist prepared: 03-01-2024 5. Agency requesting checklist: Washington State Department of Commerce CDBG General Purpose Grant Program 6. Proposed timing of schedule (including phasing, if applicable): 06/2024 Construction Start. 06/2025 Construction Completed. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. ASTM Phase I JCELC Geotech Report 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No there are no other pending applications. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Building permit from City of Port Townsend 2 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist-guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-A-Background SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 3 (WAC 197-11-960) Permit for operation of a licensed childcare facility from Washington State Dept. of Children Youth and Family 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The project is to develop and construct a child care facility prepared for full licensing to accommodate 42 new child care slots including 8 infant spots. Additionally, the project will support meal preparation and delivery for more than 100 families, and facilitate family resource navigation for more than 250 families. The project will consist of five classrooms, a commercially-rated kitchen, office space, mother’s room, “flex” room, multi-purpose room, and an outdoor playground. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The project is located in Port Townsend, Washington. It includes a 1.16 acre area that is currently an athletic field on the high school campus of the Port Townsend School District Property identified by Jefferson County Parcel as # 001023006 within the 30N/1W/2. The area is bounded by Blaine and Harrison Streets. The land has been officially leased to the Olympic Peninsula YMCA in order to achieve the mutual goal of increasing opportunities for early learning in the community. Lease attached. B. Environmental Elements 1. Earth Find help answering earth questions3 a. General description of the site: Circle or highlight one: Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other: 3 https://ecology.wa.gov/regulations-permits/sepa/environmental-review/sepa-guidance/sepa-checklist-guidance/sepa-checklist-section-b-environmental-elements/environmental-elements-earth SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 4 (WAC 197-11-960) b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The general area of this site is flat with the exception of a minor zone to the East which contains a slope approximately 30 to 33 degrees at it’s steepest point. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them, and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. The site is underlain by continental glacial till (Qgt) deposits. The Hydrologic soil group is C. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Site area: 53,501 sf. Cut: 1,923 cy Fill: 402 cy Net: 1,521 cy of cut f. Could erosion occur because of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Erosion control measures shall be placed by the contractor prior to construction to reduce the potential for erosion. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 55% of our leased land area (leased land area is a portion of an existing parcel). h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any. Proposed measures include straw wattles, sediment storage tank/pond, construction entrance, silt fence, catch basin inserts, plastic covering, and hydroseeding. SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 5 (WAC 197-11-960) 2. Air Find help answering air questions4 a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. None. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. This is a residential zone with Historic Commercial Zone within 1500 ft. No Light Industrial/ Heavy Industrial or Manufacturing zoning in the vicinity. 4 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist-guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-Air SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 6 (WAC 197-11-960) SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 7 (WAC 197-11-960) c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: This is not an emission producing site. All energy used onsite is from electricity. 3. Water Find help answering water questions5 a. Surface: Find help answering surface water questions6 1. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. There are no surface water bodies in the immediate vicinity or on the project site. Refer to Jefferson County Internal GIS mapping showing layers for FEMA Flood Zones, Wetland, and DNR Streams and Water Bodies Type 1-9 5 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist- guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-3-Water 6 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist-guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-3-Water/Environmental-elements-Surface-water SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 8 (WAC 197-11-960) 2. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. There are no surface water bodies in the immediate vicinity or on the project site. 3. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. There are no surface water bodies in the immediate vicinity or on the project site. 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give a general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No, this area is served by the City of Port Townsend for water and sewer service. 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. Refer to map above 6. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground: Find help answering ground water questions7 1. Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give a general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 2. Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals…; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. This property is served by the City of Port Townsend Waste Water treatment facility. c. Water Runoff (including stormwater): 1. Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. 7 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist-guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-3-Water/Environmental-elements-Groundwater SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 9 (WAC 197-11-960) Stormwater runoff is anticipated. Stormwater will be routed on site to a stormwater detention pond and then pumped to existing stormwater infrastructure onsite that ultimately discharges to city infrastructure to the southwest. 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. The contractor shall implement contamination protections to reduce the potential for waste materials to leave the site. 3. Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. The project proposes to mimic existing drainage patterns to the maximum extent feasible. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: Stormwater detention pond, stormwater catch basins and routing on-site, planted surfacing. 4. Plants Find help answering plants questions a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: ☐ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other ☐ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other ☐ shrubs ☒ grass ☐ pasture ☐ crop or grain ☐ orchards, vineyards, or other permanent crops. ☐ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other ☐ water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other ☐ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? The grass will be removed in the area of the building site. c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 10 (WAC 197-11-960) d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any. Native vegetation will be used around the perimeter of the stormwater features and surrounding landscape enhancements. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. Western hemlock is to the north of the site. 5. Animals Find help answering animal questions8 a. List any birds and other animals that have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. Examples include: • Birds: hawk • Mammals: deer b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. Utilizing the WDFW Priority Habitat and Species mapping tool no known data was provided. Report attached. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Not known. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any. Planting of native vegetation for berries and cover is meant to enhance bird and small animal habitat. Use of a raingarden will likewise enhance wildlife access to water. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. No known. 6. Energy and natural resources Find help answering energy and natural resource questions9 a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. All electric. 8 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist-guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-5-Animals 9 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist-guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-6-Energy-natural-resou SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 11 (WAC 197-11-960) b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any. 1. VRF and dedicated outside air heat pumps for heating and cooling which is more efficient than heating with electric heat 2. VRF heat recovery which transfers heating or cooling between spaces 3. Heat pump domestic hot water heating which is more efficient than electric heating 4. Dedicated outside air handler system (DOAS) with heat wheel which captures exhaust air energy and transfers to the outside air thereby reducing the energy used by the DOAS 5. DOAS are demand controlled which means they only bring in the amount of air required for vary ventilation 6. All equipment will operate on schedules which will reduce the energy used in unoccupied times 7. The roof shades windows during the summer to reduce cooling energy use but allows winter summer sun to reduce heating loads 8. Excellent R-values in the exterior wall and roof which reduce cooling and heating loads 7. Environmental health Health Find help with answering environmental health questions10 a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur because of this proposal? If so, describe. 1. Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. Based on Phase I ESA performed by certified engineers site visit, historical research and evaluation of potential off-site risks no contamination concerns were identified. 2. Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. None 10 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist-guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-7-Environmental-health SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 12 (WAC 197-11-960) 3. Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. None. 4. Describe special emergency services that might be required. None. 5. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any. None. b. Noise 1. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? The traffic speeds in the area are all 25pmh. Zoning map from questions 2. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site)? Short 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Retention of existing vegetation to the East to provide a natural noise disruptor to the adjacent residences. 8. Land and shoreline use Find help answering land and shoreline use questions11 a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. The current use is as a sports field for the Port Townsend School District (PTSD). Though it has been defunct for some time and used only intermittently for that purpose. It neighbors a residential neighborhood. b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses because of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use? No. 11 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist-guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-8-Land-shoreline-use SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 13 (WAC 197-11-960) 1. Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how? No. Refer to the map provided in 2.b.. This is a residential zone in the Urban Growth Area of Incorporated Port Townsend. c. Describe any structures on the site. One small shed exists currently and a baseball diamond backstop. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Both will be demolished. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The land is zoned for City Public Infrastructure. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Public Infrastructure. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? This is not a shoreline site. h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. No. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? 100 people approximately. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any. There is no removal of existing structures associated with this project. l. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any. The proposed project to build an Early Learning Facility is in keeping with the PTSD mission and land use. m. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts to agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: There are no agricultural or forest lands in the project area. SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 14 (WAC 197-11-960) 9. Housing Find help answering housing questions12 a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. This is not for the construction of housing. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. There is no demolition associated with this project. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: There are no associated housing supply impacts with this project. 10. Aesthetics Find help answering aesthetics questions13 a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? 22 feet. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. The proposed structure is only one-story and is distanced from other structures. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: By making the structure a modest one-story, it reduces the potential of visual impacts. There is also proposed landscaping surrounding the building to help it blend into its surroundings. 11. Light and glare Find help answering light and glare questions14 a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Indoor lighting would occur during daytime operations of the building. Exterior building and parking lot pole lights will be downward facing to reduce light pollution and remain on throughout the evening for security. The proposed light should not create glare or issues off-site. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? 12 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist-guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-9-Housing 13 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist-guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-10-Aesthetics 14 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist-guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-11-Light-glare SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 15 (WAC 197-11-960) No. The proposed lighting will increase safety and will not interfere with views. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Downward facing exterior lights and parking lot poles. 12. Recreation Find help answering recreation questions a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? The Port Townsend Highschool maintains sports fields on the property of all types; soccer, football, baseball, tennis, pickleball, and gymnasium for basketball and volleyball. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. The proposed project does occur in an area with a sports field. The school district has an improved and utilized baseball diamond within 500 feet of the site and an improved and maintained softball field within approximately one mile. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: The site will have an improved playground for use by the age of children that it will serve. 13. Historic and cultural preservation Find help answering historic and cultural preservation questions15 a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers? If so, specifically describe. No buildings or structures are over 45 years old on the leased project site. Immediately adjacent structures are older than 45 years old but are not listed on national registers. Also on this site is the Lincoln School Building which is older than 45 years old and is registered with the National Register for Historic Places. b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. 15 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist-guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-13-Historic-cultural-p SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 16 (WAC 197-11-960) No. c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. Conducted consultation with the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribal Historic Preservation Office (THPO) and the State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP). Both concluded a determination of no cultural resource impacts on the site with the stipulation of an Inadvertent Discovery Plan is following for all ground disturbing activities. d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. Follow the requirements of the Inadvertent Discovery Protocol. 14. Transportation Find help with answering transportation questions16 a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. This project is using an existing driveway entrance off of an existing improved road, Blaine Street. b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Site is served by Jefferson Transit within 889 ft. Refer to map below showing yellow flags at bus stop locations. 16 https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist-guidance/SEPA-Checklist-Section-B-Environmental-elements/Environmental-elements-14-Transportation SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 17 (WAC 197-11-960) c. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle, or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). There will be an improved public 6 foot wide gravel pathway along the Blaine St. frontage. d. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. This project is located over 4 miles distance from the county airport. No rail exists in Port Townsend. The project is half a mile from the Washington State Ferry terminal at Port Townsend. SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 18 (WAC 197-11-960) e. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and nonpassenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? Per the Traffic Impact Analysis provided by Transportation Solutions there are 214 weekday daily trips estimated with 107 in and 107 out. Peak volumes would be morning and late afternoon during drop-off and pick-up. Select trips from commercial trucks would occur for delivery of food/supplies to the commercial kitchen. f. Will the proposal interfere with, affect, or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. No. There are no forest or agricultural product uses at the site. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: 15. Public services Find help answering public service questions17 17 https://ecology.wa.gov/regulations-permits/sepa/environmental-review/sepa-guidance/sepa-checklist-guidance/sepa-checklist-section-b-environmental-elements/environmental-elements-15-public-services SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 20 (WAC 197-11-960) Position and agency/organization: Date submitted: D. Supplemental sheet for nonproject actions Find help for the nonproject actions worksheet20 Do not use this section for project actions. Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? • Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? • Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? • Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection, such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? • Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 20 https://ecology.wa.gov/regulations-permits/sepa/environmental-review/sepa-guidance/sepa-checklist-guidance/sepa-checklist-section-d-non-project-actions SEPA Environmental checklist September 2023 Page 21 (WAC 197-11-960) 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? • Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? • Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. PO Box 2546, Bellingham, WA 98227 Phone: (360) 714-9409 October 13, 2023 Simon Little simon@studio-stl.com Re: Report Environmental Site Assessment: Phase I Eastern Portion of Jefferson County Parcel 001023006 Stratum Group is pleased to present the results of our Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for the above referenced property in Port Townsend, Washington. This Phase I Assessment was conducted in conformance with the Federal Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312) and in general conformance with the methodology of ASTM Standard Practice E 1527-21. The subject property is consists of a grass covered ball field that is and has been part of the Port Townsend High School property. No contamination is suspected in connection with the current site uses. Based on our site visit, historical research and evaluation of potential off-site risks, it is reasonable and prudent to believe that the risk of contamination at the site is so minimal that no further investigation is warranted. Should you have any questions concerning this Environmental Site Assessment, please do not hesitate to contact us at (360) 714-9409. Sincerely, Stratum Group Dan McShane, M.Sc., L.E.G. Licensed Engineering Geologist Eastern Portion Jefferson County Parcel 001023006 Port Townsend, Washington ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT: PHASE I Prepared For: By: Studio STL PO Box 2546 Bellingham, WA 98227 (360) 714-9409 October 13, 2023 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................... 1 SECTION 2. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................. 1 2.1 Methodology & Purpose....................................................................................................... 1 2.2 Professional Statement.......................................................................................................... 3 2.3 Limitations............................................................................................................................ 3 2.4 Data Gaps.............................................................................................................................. 4 SECTION 3. SITE LOCATION & PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS................................ 4 3.1 Location................................................................................................................................ 4 3.2 Site Physical Setting ............................................................................................................. 4 3.3 Geologic Setting.................................................................................................................... 4 3.4 Hydrologic Setting................................................................................................................ 4 SECTION 4. SITE OBSERVATIONS........................................................................................ 5 4.1 Adjoining Properties............................................................................................................. 6 SECTION 5. HISTORICAL USE OF SITE & ADJOINING PROPERTIES........................ 6 5.1 Summary of Past Subject Property Use................................................................................ 6 5.2 Summary of Past Use of Adjoining Properties..................................................................... 6 SECTION 6. SUBJECT PROPERTY DOCUMENTATION................................................... 6 6.1 Health Department................................................................................................................ 6 6.2 Department of Ecology Records........................................................................................... 7 SECTION 7. ENVIRONMENTAL DATABASE REVIEW..................................................... 7 7.1 Standard ASTM Environmental Record Sources................................................................. 7 7.2 Evaluation of Potential Off-Site Contamination Records..................................................... 7 7.3 Evaluation of Potential On-Site Contamination ................................................................... 8 SECTION 8. FINDINGS.............................................................................................................. 8 SECTION 9. CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................................... 8 APPENDICES APPENDIX I Figure 1 – Site Vicinity Map Figure 2 – Aerial Photograph of Site and Vicinity Figures 3 through 7 – Site Photographs APPENDIX II Topographic Maps Aerial Photographs APPENDIX III Historical Use and Public Records Search References Stratum Group Indemnity APPENDIX IV Resumes APPENDIX V ERIS Database Report October 13, 2023 Eastern Portion of Jefferson County Parcel 001023006, Port Townsend, WA Environmental Site Assessment: Phase 1 1 Project: 9.29.23 SECTION 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Stratum Group conducted a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for the eastern portion of Jefferson County Parcel 001023006 in Port Townsend, Washington. The environmental assessment process included a site visit, a historical investigation, review of environmental databases, and interviews to determine the risk of contamination to the soil, groundwater and/or vapor intrusion at the site. The subject property consists of a grass covered ball field that is and has been part of the Port Townsend High School property. Our historical research indicates the site has been part of the school property since the high school was built in 1892 and has been used as a ball field since at least the early 1900s. No potential off-site contamination sources identified in our research poses a risk of contamination to the subject property. Based upon our site visit, historical review, and evaluation of potential off-site contamination sources, it is our opinion that it is reasonable and prudent to believe that the environmental risk at the site is minimal and therefore no further investigation is warranted. SECTION 2. INTRODUCTION 2.1 Methodology & Purpose This Phase I Environmental Site Assessment is being completed prior to a potential commercial loan or property transfer. The purpose of this assessment is to identify, to the extent feasible pursuant to the processes prescribed within the Federal Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312) and ASTM Standard Practice E1527-21, recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject property. A recognized environmental condition (REC) is defined as (1) the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property due to a release to the environment; (2) the likely presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property due to a release or likely release to the environment; or (3) the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment. De minimis conditions are not recognized environmental conditions. A de minimis condition is defined as a condition that generally does not pose a threat to human health or the environment and that generally would not be the subject of an enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate government agencies. This report will also address controlled recognized environmental conditions (CRECs) and historical recognized environmental conditions (HRECs), if identified in association with the site. A CREC is defined as a REC that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authorities with contamination allowed to remain in place subject to implementation of required controls. An HREC is defined as previous release of hazardous substances or October 13, 2023 Eastern Portion of Jefferson County Parcel 001023006, Port Townsend, WA Environmental Site Assessment: Phase 1 2 Project: 9.29.23 petroleum products affecting the subject property that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or authorities and meeting unrestricted use criteria established by the applicable regulatory authorities without subjecting the subject property to any controls. A phase I report that conducts all appropriate inquiries into the previous ownership and uses of the property consistent with good commercial and customary practices permits the user of the report to satisfy one of the requirements to quality for landowner liability protections including innocent landowner, contiguous property owner, or bona fide prospective purchaser limitations on liability within the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) laws. Environmental issues or conditions at a property may be present that are beyond the scope of a typical phase I environmental site assessment, but which could under some conditions lead to contamination or future financial burden and may warrant further research or investigation beyond the phase I report. An example of non-scope considerations include business related environmental risk, asbestos-containing building materials, biological agents, cultural and historical resources, ecological resources, endangered species, health and safety, indoor air quality unrelated to releases of hazardous substances or petroleum products into the environment, industrial hygiene, lead-based paint, lead in drinking water, mold, radon, regulatory compliance, and wetlands. Non-scope considerations are generally not addressed in this phase I report; however, our findings will be identified if significant conditions are discovered during the conduct of our evaluation. The scope of our services included:  Inspection of the property for indication of hazardous substances, petroleum products, stained soil, stressed vegetation, or careless manufacturing or industrial practices  Document the hazardous materials storage and waste management practices and the condition of materials  Review of Federal, State, and local records as to locations of nearby hazardous waste sites, leaking underground storage tanks (USTs), and landfills through an ERIS database report. Off-site sources were evaluated for their potential to pose a risk to the subject property  Review of aerial photographs, topographic maps, fire insurance maps, city directories, and other available public records to determine past usage of the property and surrounding areas  Interview(s) of current subject property owners, occupants, and/or managers  Completion of an environmental questionnaire by subject property owner  Review of the physical setting, geology, and hydrology of the site  Preparation of this report describing the conditions encountered and recommendations for further study, if necessary. October 13, 2023 Eastern Portion of Jefferson County Parcel 001023006, Port Townsend, WA Environmental Site Assessment: Phase 1 3 Project: 9.29.23 2.2 Professional Statement We declare that, to the best of our professional knowledge and belief, we meet the definition of Environmental Professional as defined in §312.10 of 40 C.F.R. §312.10 [Federal All Appropriate Inquiries]. We have the specific qualifications based on education, training and experience to assess a property of the nature, history and setting of the subject property. We have developed and performed the all-appropriate inquiries in conformance with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR Part 312. Resumes for key personnel that conducted this environmental due diligence report are provided in Appendix IV. 2.3 Limitations No environmental site assessment can wholly eliminate uncertainty regarding the potential for RECs in connection with a subject property. Performance of this practice is intended to reduce, but not eliminate, uncertainty regarding the potential for RECs in connection with a subject property, and this practice recognizes reasonable limits of time and cost. All appropriate inquiries does not mean an exhaustive assessment of a property. There is a point at which the cost of information obtained or the time required to gather it outweighs the usefulness of the information and, in fact, may be a material detriment to the orderly completion of transactions. One of the purposes of this practice is to identify a balance between the competing goals of limiting the costs and time demands inherent in performing an environmental site assessment and the reduction of uncertainty about unknown conditions resulting from additional information. Not every property will warrant the same level of assessment. Consistent with good commercial and customary standards and practices as defined at 42 U.S.C. § 9601(35)(B), the appropriate level of environmental site assessment will be guided by the type of property subject to assessment, the expertise and risk tolerance of the user, future intended uses of the subject property disclosed to the environmental professional, and the information developed in the course of the inquiry. It should not be concluded or assumed that an inquiry did not constitute All Appropriate Inquiries merely because the inquiry did not identify recognized environmental conditions in connection with a subject property. Environmental site assessments must be evaluated based on the reasonableness of judgments made at the time and under the circumstances in which they were made. Subsequent environmental site assessments should not be considered valid standards to judge the appropriateness of any prior assessment based on hindsight, new information, use of developing technology or analytical techniques, or other factors. The environmental site assessment is based upon conditions at the time of completion of the individual environmental site assessment elements. Traffic Impact Analysis 16932 Redmond Woodinville Road NE | Suite # A206 | Woodinville, WA 98072 | 425-375-2292 February 16, 2024 To: Jeff Kostechka, P.E., Assistant City Engineer City of Port Townsend From: Jeff Hee, Sr. Transportation Engineer Subject: Jefferson County Early Learning Center (JCELC) Olympic Peninsula YMCA, the Applicant, is proposing to develop and operate Jefferson County Early Learning Center (JCELC) at approximately 1500 Van Ness Street. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project site is proposed at the northwest corner of Blaine Street / Harrison Street on tax parcel no. 001023006. The property is zoned P-I, Public Infrastructure, and is on a vacant field at the southeast corner of the Port Townsend High School campus. The JCELC includes a 7,681-square foot building for daycare and family support programs. The daycare program is anticipated to serve up to 42 students and up to 8 full-time staff. Hours of operation are between 6:45 AM and 7:15 PM. The family support program, approximately 1,528 square feet of building area, will provide meals and support for families with children 5-12 years old. This family support program will operate outside of school hours. Both programs will share the proposed multipurpose space and counselling offices. The office capacity total is up to 5 people. There are 15 onsite vehicle parking spaces proposed along with a curbside student drop-off and pick-up north of Blaine Street. Primary access is via an existing driveway area aligned with Blaine Street / Van Buren Street. The existing driveway also serves as secondary access to the rear of the high school and will be improved for access to the JCELC site. Parking and student loading for JCELC will be separate from the high school. A vicinity map is attached as Figure 1. A site plan is attached as Figure 2. PROJECT IMPACTS Trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, were used to forecast trip generation for the proposed project. • The ITE land use 565, “Daycare Center,” was used to describe the proposed primary use of the project. The number of students variable was used to forecast trip generation. • The ITE land use 710, “General Office Building,” was used to describe the proposed family support program. The building area was used as to forecast trip generation. The project is forecast to generate: • 214 weekday daily trips during hours of operation, split 107 in and out. • 38 AM peak hour trips, split 21 in and 17 out. • 37 PM peak hour trips, split 16 in and 21 out. Detailed trip generation calculations are attached. Jeff Kostechka, P.E., City of Port Townsend Jefferson County Early Learning Center (JCELC) Traffic Impact Analysis February 16, 2024 Page 2 of 6 Figure 3 illustrates the trip project’s trip distribution and peak hour travel assignment. The trip distribution was based on review of the residential densities near the project site. The peak hour travel assignments were computed by multiplying the trip distribution percentages by the PM peak hour trip generation. Only the site access at Blaine Street / Van Buren Street is forecast to be impacted by 20 or more project trips. LOCAL AREA CONDITIONS Harrison Street is a two-lane road that is classified as a local access, in the WSDOT Function Classification Plan. The City of Port Townsend Engineering Design Standards, April 1997, and City of Port Townsend Transportation Functional Plan, April 2009, classify the road as a (Major) Collector Arterial. Fronting the site, the west side of the road has a paved shoulder, and the east side has landscaping. In 2018, the average daily volume on Harrison Street south of Blaine Street was 959 vehicles per day, the average speed was 20.7 mph, and the 85th-percentile speed was 24.7 mph1. The intersection of Harrison Street / Blaine Street is all-way stop-sign controlled. Blaine Street is a two-lane local road fronting the site. Perpendicular parking for an adjacent church is on the south side of the road. There is also a section of sidewalk on the south side of Blaine Street from Van Buren Street fronting the west portion of the church property. Depressed landscaping suggests an unmarked pedestrian path on the north side of the road fronting the site. In 2006, the average daily volume on Blaine Street west of Van Buren Street was 488 vehicles per day, the average vehicle speed was 19.2 mph, and the 85th-percentile speed was 22.6 mph1. The speed limit through the surrounding residential area is 25 mph. Posted 20-mph school speed limit signs are also in the vicinity of the site. At the northeast corner of Blane Street / Van Buren Street there is a sign for Cicmehan Trail and an ADA parking sign and gravel area for (perpendicular) parking. Nearby transit stops are at Port Townsend Library, within a ¼-mile south of the site on Lawrence Street at Harrison Street, at Fir Street / F Street, just over a ¼-mile north of the site, and at Mt. View Commons, within a ½-mile west of the site on Blaine Street west of Walker Street. Jefferson Transit Routes serving these stops are: • #1 Brinnon / Quilcene / Tri Area Route. Weekday to Saturday service at Port Townsend Library stop. • #2 Fort Worden. Weekday to Saturday service at Fir Street / F Street stop • #6A Tria Area Loop. Weekday to Saturday service at Port Townsend Library stop. • #7 Poulsbo / Port Ludlow / Tri Area Route. Weekday to Saturday service at Port Townsend Library stop. • #8 Sequim. Weekday to Saturday service at Port Townsend Library stop. • #11A Shuttle. Weekday to Saturday service at Port Townsend Library and Mt. View Commons stops. • #11B Shuttle. Weekday to Saturday service at Port Townsend Library stop. A crash history between 2019 and 2023 was reviewed in the vicinity of the site2. Figure 4 illustrates the analysis area. There were no crashes reported in the past 5 years near the site. 1 City of Port Townsend Streets Data GIS map 2 WSDOT Crash Portal Jeff Kostechka, P.E., City of Port Townsend Jefferson County Early Learning Center (JCELC) Traffic Impact Analysis February 16, 2024 Page 3 of 6 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS On February 6, 2024, peak hour intersection volumes were collected at Blaine Street / Van Buren Street. The data showed that there were 41 vehicles through the intersection in the AM peak hour (7:30-8:30 AM) and 52 vehicles through the intersection in the PM peak hour (5:00-6:00 PM). Future volumes were forecast by applying a conservative 2% annual growth rate over six years and adding project trips to the study intersection. Tables 1 and 2 summarize the AM and PM peak hour volume forecasts. Table 1. AM Hour Volumes – Blaine Street / Van Buren Street / Dwy Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Total Mvmt. Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Vol. 2024 Existing 4 8 1 1 14 6 1 3 0 3 0 0 41 2030 Background 5 9 1 1 16 7 1 3 0 3 0 0 46 AM Trips (Fig. 3) 10 0 0 0 0 9 0 1 0 9 1 8 38 2030 with-Project 15 9 1 1 16 16 1 4 0 12 1 8 84 Table 2. PM Peak Hour Volumes – Blaine Street / Van Buren Street / Dwy Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Total Mvmt. Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Vol. 2024 Existing 10 10 1 0 3 5 0 6 1 3 4 9 52 2030 Background 11 11 1 0 3 6 0 7 1 3 5 10 59 PM Trips (Fig. 3) 9 0 0 0 0 6 0 1 0 10 1 10 37 2030 with-Project 20 11 1 0 3 12 0 8 1 13 6 20 96 Intersection level of service (LOS), vehicle delay, measured in seconds of vehicle delay, volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio, and 95th-percentile queues were evaluated at Blaine Street / Van Buren Street using the Synchro computer program and HCM analysis methodologies. Table 3 summarizes the intersection operations analysis. Table 3. Intersection Operations Period Control AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS Delay V/C Queue LOS Delay V/C Queue 2024 Existing NB Stop A 9.3 0.01 < 1 car A 9.3 0.01 < 1 car SB Stop A 8.9 0.01 < 1 car A 8.8 0.03 < 1 car 2030 Background NB Stop A 9.4 0.01 < 1 car A 9.4 0.02 < 1 car SB Stop A 9.0 0.01 < 1 car A 8.9 0.03 < 1 car 2030 with-Project NB Stop A 9.8 0.01 < 1 car A 9.6 0.02 < 1 car SB Stop A 9.2 0.04 < 1 car A 9.1 0.06 < 1 car The existing and forecasted intersection volumes operate well within the city’s LOS D standard. The project driveway at Blaine Street / Van Buren Street is forecast to operate acceptably. PARKING ANALYSIS The project proposes 15 onsite vehicle parking spaces. Port Townsend Municipal Code Table 17.72.080 outlines the parking requirements: Jeff Kostechka, P.E., City of Port Townsend Jefferson County Early Learning Center (JCELC) Traffic Impact Analysis February 16, 2024 Page 4 of 6 • A 42-student daycare is required to provide at least 1 parking space per staff member and 1 drop- off/pick-up space onsite, or 9 spaces. • A 1,528-square foot professional office is required to provide at least 1 space per 600 square feet of building area, or 2 spaces. The code requires at least 11 parking spaces. The proposed 15 onsite parking spaces satisfy the code. On-street parking is not proposed to be used to reduce the onsite parking. VEHICLE LOADING This analysis focuses on the daycare program only. The proposed curbside student drop-off and pick-up area is approximately 110 feet in length which equates to 4 to 5 vehicles to dropping-off and picking-up students. A queuing analysis was conducted to determine the probability of the number vehicles arriving exceeding the number of onsite parking spaces designated for loading. For this analysis queuing theory was used to forecast potential vehicle queues using multi-server waiting line model equations.3 During the AM peak hour there are 19 vehicles inbound to the daycare (16 inbound in the PM peak hour). An ‘arrival rate’ for 19 AM peak hour vehicles entering the site is 0.317 vehicles per minute. The ‘service rate’ is assumed at 3.5 minutes per vehicle or 0.286 vehicles per minute; this represents a vehicle parking, (un)loading, and leaving. The ‘number of servers’ represents the curbside area for dropping-off / picking up students 4 vehicles (or servers). The waiting line model equations show that there is a 32.9% ‘probability the system is empty.’ The ‘average number of vehicles in the system’ is just over 1 vehicle and the ‘average number of vehicles waiting in queue’ is less than 1 vehicles. The ‘average time a vehicle is in system’ is just over 3.5 minutes the ‘average time a vehicle spends in the queue’ is less than 30 seconds. The probability that all 4 curbside spaces are occupied is 2.1% and the probability that a fifth vehicle enters the fully occupied system is 0.6%. A copy of the analysis is attached. It is my opinion that there is a negligible risk for a significant impact if the probability of one more vehicle than the number of servers is around 1.0% or less (5 vehicles for 4 servers). The loading analysis shows that curbside parking is reasonable to accommodate the vehicle queues generated during student drop-off / pickup times. SIGHT DISTANCE Sight distance was evaluated at the project driveway on Blaine Street and at Blaine Street / Harrison Street. Consistent with the Engineering Design Standards, The WSDOT Design Manual (Chapters 1260 and 1310) was reviewed for intersection and stopping sight distance requirements. For a 25-mph speed, 155 feet of stopping sight distance and 280 feet of intersection sight distance is required per the design manual. 3 Supplement C (studylib.net) Jeff Kostechka, P.E., City of Port Townsend Jefferson County Early Learning Center (JCELC) Traffic Impact Analysis February 16, 2024 Page 5 of 6 Sight distance triangle exhibits in this report are superimposed onto an existing aerial. The JCELC building is setback outside of the respective sight triangles. • Figure 5 illustrates the stopping sight distance at the site driveway. • Figure 6 illustrates the intersection sight distance at the site. • Figure 7 illustrates the stopping sight distance at the all-way stop-sign controlled intersection at Blaine Street / Harrison Street, intersection sight distance is not required for an all-way stop-sign controlled intersection. NON-MOTORIZED ANALYSIS The existing school driveway will be widened to accommodate two-way traffic and a sidewalk is proposed to connect Blaine Street and the site, on the east side of the driveway. The vehicle speed data on Blaine Street is less than 20 mph, average speed, and less than 25 mph, 85th-percentile speed. The speeds on the school campus and driveway are not anticipated to exceed the measured vehicle speeds and the volume on the driveway is typical of a very low to low volume road4; and thus, marked bicycle lanes are not recommended along the driveway. On Blaine Street, as stated above the vehicle speeds are less than 25 mph. The intersection volumes at Blaine Street / Van Buren Street identified a total of 5 pedestrian crossing maneuvers and 1 bicycle between 7 and 9 AM and 11 pedestrian crossing maneuvers between 4 and 6 PM. The average daily traffic volume on Blaine Street is forecast to be less than 500 vehicles per day with the project. Conditions on Blaine Street do not suggest significant bicycle or pedestrian improvements. The vehicle speeds on Harrison Street are also less than 25 mph, with the average speed just over 20 mph and the 85th-percentile speed just over 22 mph. The daily traffic volume on Harrison Street is forecast to be less than 1,000 vehicles per day with the project, and likewise pedestrian and bicycle volumes are low. In many instances, the “low” vehicle speeds and volumes would not suggest a need for marked bicycle lanes. The Roadway Cross-Section Reallocation: A Guide (2023)5 states that on distributor streets; “With maximum operating speeds of 25 mph and fewer than 6,000 vehicles per day, painted markings or signs alone typically can provide sufficient separation and safe intersections.” There are existing nonmotorized paths through the school campus connecting Harrison Street and Blaine Street. The Applicant proposes to construct approximately 265 linear feet curb, gutter, sidewalk, and roadside landscaping along the north side of Blaine Street east of the of Van Buren Street. The sidewalk would then transition back to the grass-gravel section currently along the roadway and at Blaine Street / Harrison Street. No frontage improvement proposed on Harrison Street with JCELC. The site would require significant regarding more than the project value and are not feasible with the JCELC. 4 AASHTO Guidelines for Geometric Design of Low-Volume Roads, 2nd Edition, 2019. 5 NCHRP Research Report 1236 Jeff Kostechka, P.E., City of Port Townsend Jefferson County Early Learning Center (JCELC) Traffic Impact Analysis February 16, 2024 Page 6 of 6 Future investments in improvements on Blaine Street and Harrison Street, including traffic calming measures such as curb bulbs, are proposed to be reserved and deferred until the School District completes a future Safe Routes to School grant. Street parking is anticipated to be replaced on Blaine Street. Street parking can be effective in narrowing roadways and reducing speeds. CONCLUSIONS AND REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION The JCELC is forecast to generate 214 weekday daily trips, 38 AM peak hour trips, and 37 PM peak hour trips. Onsite parking (15 spaces) satisfies the city’s parking requirements for a daycare. The designated student drop-off / pickup lane, with space for 4 to 5 vehicles, is sufficient to serve the peak hour traffic generated to the site. The JCELC structure is setback from the travel-ways and does not impact sightlines at the site driveway and at Blaine Street / Harrison Street. A 5-year crash history was reviewed and showed no crashes in the local area between 2019 and 2023. Low speeds and volumes on local roadways do not suggest significant pedestrian or bicycle improvements. The Applicant will widen the existing driveway to support site access and provide a pedestrian connection from Blaine Street to the site on the east side of the driveway. Additionally, curb, gutter, sidewalk and landscaping are proposed along Blaine Street. Grades at Blaine Street / Harrison Street and along Harrison Street require a significant investment to add sidewalk and other non-motorized features; and thus, these are proposed to be reserved and deferred until the School District completes a future Safe Routes to School grant. Overall, project impacts are not forecast to impact the local area significantly or adversely. Should you have any questions, please contact me at your earliest convenience. N 100 0 100 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET 200 PORT TOWNSEND HIGH SCHOOL J C E L C H A R R I S O N S T B E N T O N S T V AN NE SS ST FIR S T V A N B U R E N S T P I E R C E S T BLAIN E S T P R O J E C T A C C E S S BLAIN E S T V AN NE SS ST F ST CH E STN U T S T GARF I E L D S T LINC OLN S T H A R R I S O N S T Figure 1: Vicinity Map JCELC Traffic Impact Analysis Scoping Port Townsend, WA N 0 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET 50 Figure 2: Conceptual Site Plan STUDENT DROP-OFF / PICKUPAPPROX. 90 FEET, OR 4 CARS 50 approx. 110’ loading area JCELC Traffic Impact Analysis Scoping Port Townsend, WA N 100 0 100 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET 200 PORT TOWNSEND HIGH SCHOOL J C E L C H A R R I S O N S T B E N T O N S T V AN NE SS ST FIR S T V A N B U R E N S T P I E R C E S T BLAIN E S T P R O J E C T A C C E S S BLAIN E S T V AN NE SS ST F ST CH E STN U T S T GARF I E L D S T LINC OLN S T H A R R I S O N S T 1 (2)2 2(2)4(3) 4(3) ( 4 ) 3 4 ( 4 ) 4 3 2 1 2 (10)9 10(8) 3 (10)9 ( 1 ) 1 1 ( 1 ) ( 9 ) 1 0 ( 8 ) 1 0 4 (3)3 2(3) (3)4 (3)3 ( 3 ) 2 2 ( 3 ) 6(9) (AM) PM Peak Hour Trips 15% 1 5 % 1 5 % 5 % 2 0 % 2 0 % 10% Figure 3: Distribuon and Assignment JCELC Traffic Impact Analysis Scoping Port Townsend, WA N 100 0 100 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET 200 PORT TOWNSEND HIGH SCHOOL J C E L C H A R R I S O N S T B E N T O N S T V AN NE SS ST FIR S T V A N B U R E N S T P I E R C E S T BLAIN E S T P R O J E C T A C C E S S BLAIN E S T V AN NE SS ST F ST CH E STN U T S T GARF I E L D S T LINC OLN S T H A R R I S O N S T Figure 4: Crash History Study Area Crash History (2019-2023) Study Area JCELC Traffic Impact Analysis Scoping Port Townsend, WA N 50 0 50 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET 100 Blaine S t V a n B u r e n S t H a r r i s o n S t P i e r c e S t Garfi e l d S t Blaine S t D r i v e w a y H a r r i s o n S t S I T E Figure 5: Stopping Sight Distance Driveway / Blaine St / Van Buren St 155’ 155 ’ A B B Point A B Distance Edge of roadway 155’ of sight distance (per WSDOT Design Manual) JCELC Traffic Impact Analysis Scoping Port Townsend, WA N 50 0 50 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET 100 Blaine S t V a n B u r e n S t H a r r i s o n S t P i e r c e S t Garfi e l d S t Blaine S t D r i v e w a y H a r r i s o n S t S I T E Figure 6: Intersecon Sight Distance Driveway / Blaine St / Van Buren St 280 ’ A B Point A B Distance 18’ offset from Edge of roadway (per WSDOT Design Manual) 280’ of sight distance (275.6’ per WSDOT Design Manual) 280’ B JCELC Traffic Impact Analysis Scoping Port Townsend, WA N 50 0 50 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET 100 Blaine S t V a n B u r e n S t H a r r i s o n S t P i e r c e S t Garfi e l d S t Blaine S t D r i v e w a y H a r r i s o n S t S I T E 155 ’ 1 5 5 ’ A B B Point A B Distance Edge of roadway 155’ of sight distance (per WSDOT Design Manual) 1 5 5 ’ 155’A B B Figure 7: Sight Distance Blaine St / Harrison St (All-Way Stop-Sign Controlled Intersecon) JCELC Traffic Impact Analysis Scoping Port Townsend, WA Page 7 of 6 Detailed Trip Generation Land Use (ITE LU) Students Trip Rate In Out Total Daycare Program (565) 42 students T = 3.56(X) + 47.23 * 99 98 197 Family Support Program (710) 1,528 sf gfa 0.01084 / 1,000 sf gfa 8 9 17 Weekday Daily Trips 107 107 214 Daycare Program (565) 42 students T = 0.66(X) + 8.42 * 19 17 36 Family Support Program (710) 1,528 sf gfa 0.00152 / 1,000 sf gfa 2 0 2 AM Peak Hour Trips 21 17 38 Daycare Program (565) 42 students Ln(T) = 0.87 Ln(X) + 0.29 * 16 19 35 Family Support Program (710) 1,528 sf gfa 0.00144 / 1,000 sf gfa 0 2 2 PM Peak Hour Trips 16 21 37 **** ITE fitted curve equation; where: T = trip ends and X = number of students www.idaxdata.com to to Two-Hour Count Summaries Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count. Total 0 0 1 0 1 3 0 0 5 53001020 0 3 Peak Hour 2 1 0 0 3 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 2Count Total 2 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 00000008:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 8:00 AM 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 7:30 AM 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EB WB NB SB Total East 7:45 AM 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 -0%0%HV%-0%25%0%- 0 0 7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 West North South 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 3 01011460 0 Interval Start Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total --0%--7%0%7%0% Peak Hour All 0 4 8 8 0 2 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0100000 0 41 0 HV 0 0 2 0 0 Count Total 0 7 12 1 1 1 20 3 0 1 62 0 7 38020000002101 0 0 0 3 39 8:45 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 41 8:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 1 0 0010200 0 0 0 18 36 8:15 AM 0 2 2 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 8 24 8:00 AM 0 1 4 1 0 0 9 0 0 0 1 0 0004201 1 0 0 5 0 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 7:30 AM 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1001000 0 0 0 6 0 7:15 AM 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 07:00 AM 0 1 2 0 1 0 1 UT LT TH RT UT LT Rolling One HourEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthbound UT LT TH RT Interval Start Blaine St Blaine St Van Buren St Driveway 15-min TotalUTLTTHRT Date: 02/06/2024 Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM SB 0.0%0.75 TOTAL 7.3%0.57 TH RT WB 4.8%0.48 NB 0.0%0.50 Peak Hour: 7:30 AM 8:30 AM HV %:PHF EB 15.4%0.54 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 1 0 0 3 2 0 N Van Buren St Blaine St Blaine St Va n B u r e n S t Blaine St Dr i v e w a y 41TEV: 0.57PHF: 0 0 3 3 13 0 6 14 1 21 110 031 42 0 1 8 4 13 15 0 project.manager.wa@idaxdata.com www.idaxdata.com Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 1 0 000 0 1 0 0000 0 0 0 00 0 THLT 00000000 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 THLT 1000000 1 00000 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour 0 0Count Total 0 100000000 0 1 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 1 8:30 AM 1000000 0 0 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 8:00 AM 0000 0 0 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 AM 00000007:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 07:00 AM RT 3 0 Interval Start Blaine St Blaine St Van Buren St Driveway 15-min Total Rolling One Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0001000 RTTHLT RTTHLTRT 0 0 0 3 0 Peak Hour 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Count Total 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 1000000000000 0 0 0 0 2 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000 0 0 0 1 3 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 8:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0001000 0 0 0 1 0 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TH RT 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 UT LT TH RT UT LT Northbound Southbound UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT Interval Start Blaine St Blaine St Van Buren St Driveway 15-min Total Rolling One HourEastboundWestbound SouthboundNorthboundWestboundEastbound project.manager.wa@idaxdata.com www.idaxdata.com to to Two-Hour Count Summaries Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count. Total 1 3 2 1 0 0 2 2 11 42000110 4 5 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 00000015:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 EB WB NB SB Total East 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 --0%HV%-0%0%0%- 1 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 West North South 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 0 3 4100350 0 Interval Start Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total 0%-0%0%0%0%-0%0% Peak Hour All 0 10 10 6 0 0 8 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000 9 52 0 HV 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 0 13 21 1 0 1 10 3 5 11 83 0 13 52300001000100 2 0 2 20 47 5:45 PM 0 5 2 1 3 0 0 2 0 0 8 31 5:30 PM 0 4 6 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 3 1001100 0 1 5 11 32 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 8 31 5:00 PM 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1002000 0 0 0 4 0 4:45 PM 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 4:30 PM 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0002000 0 0 1 10 0 4:15 PM 0 1 4 0 1 0 0 1 1 04:00 PM 0 0 3 0 0 1 2 UT LT TH RT UT LT Rolling One HourEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthbound UT LT TH RT Interval Start Blaine St Blaine St Van Buren St Driveway 15-min TotalUTLTTHRT Date: 02/06/2024 Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM SB 0.0%0.67 TOTAL 0.0%0.65 TH RT WB 0.0%0.50 NB 0.0%0.58 Peak Hour: 5:00 PM 6:00 PM HV %:PHF EB 0.0%0.53 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 N Van Buren St Blaine St Blaine St Va n B u r e n S t Blaine St Dr i v e w a y 52TEV: 0.65PHF: 9 4 3 16 21 0 5 3 0 8 140 160 75 0 1 10 10 21 12 0 project.manager.wa@idaxdata.com www.idaxdata.com Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 00 0 THLT 00000000 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 THLT 0000000 0 00000 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour 0 0Count Total 0 000000000 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0000000 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0000 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 00000004:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04:00 PM RT 0 0 Interval Start Blaine St Blaine St Van Buren St Driveway 15-min Total Rolling One Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0000000 RTTHLT RTTHLTRT 0 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TH RT 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 UT LT TH RT UT LT Northbound Southbound UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT Interval Start Blaine St Blaine St Van Buren St Driveway 15-min Total Rolling One HourEastboundWestbound SouthboundNorthboundWestboundEastbound project.manager.wa@idaxdata.com