Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Dennis L. Derickson <br /> February 9, 1987 <br /> Page 2 <br /> :TA iE <br /> Joseph R. Blum <br /> XAMMAXXXAXAAAAX <br /> Director 4 <br /> // I OF WASH IINGT( N <br /> I PA• MENT OF FISHERIES <br /> 115 General Administration Buil )Ivmpia, Washington 9150.1 • (_Uh) '5!-oh(X) • (SC-iN) 23-1-oh(N) <br /> February 9, 1987 p <br /> 1g2111 r <br /> FEB <br /> Mr. Dennis L. Derickson, AICP EB 1 ^% 198✓ <br /> Planning Director <br /> City of Everett Y <br /> City Hall Panning �eNt. <br /> 3002 Wetmore <br /> Everett, Washington 90201 <br /> Dear Mr. Derickson: <br /> Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for <br /> Everett Development Company, 66 Acre Fill - <br /> Smith Island, File Number SMA #9-86, <br /> SEPA Number 118-86 <br /> The Washington Department of Fisheries (WDF) has reviewed the above-referenced <br /> DNS. We offer the following comments: <br /> 1. A Hydraulic Project Approval issued by WDF is required prior to <br /> any construction activity below the ordinary high water mark in <br /> surface waters of the state. (RCW 75.20. 100, WAC 220-110) . This <br /> would include, but not be limited to, any dredging, dock construction <br /> or outfall placement related to this project. <br /> 2. We suggest item B.5(c) (page 6) of the Checklist be expanded as <br /> follows to more accurately identify fish use near the site: <br /> "The Snohomish River produces significant runs of several <br /> salmon species. The lower river mainstem and sloughs serve <br /> as important rearing and migration areas for juvenile salmon <br /> during their seaward migration. " <br /> 3. Items A.7 and A.9 of the Checklist both solicit information regarding <br /> existing environmental data or pending applications for other projects <br /> concerning the proposed site. This parcel of property has been <br /> subject to a partial environmental evaluation due to its consideration <br /> as an alternative dredge spoils disposal area for the U.S. Navy <br /> Homeporting Project at Everett. We suggest both items A.7 and A.9 <br /> be modified to reflect this. <br /> 4. Is it appropriate to exclude the eventual industrial development <br /> of the site from the threshold determination and environmental review <br /> occurring at this time? If phased review is occurring, <br /> (WAC 197-11-060(5) ) it should be so stated (WAC 197-11-060(5.e) ) . <br />