Laserfiche WebLink
11 . Applicable agencies, adjacent property owners and interested parties were given the opportunity to review <br />the proposal. The following agencies and individuals provided comments: <br />11.1 WasJ1ington Department of Fi h and WildUfo {WD F W) <br />11.1.1 In a comment letter dated July 201 <br />\ 2017, WDFW makes reference to its comments on <br />Draft EIS related to the original proposal in a letter dated April 2nd , 2010, and provides <br />additional comment on the revised proposal. In the original comment letter, WDFW <br />identified several concerns. These included: <br />11.1.1.1 The number of lots was excessive considering the terrain. <br />11.1.1.2 Elimination of mountain goat habitat. <br />11.1.1.3 Habitat connectivity. <br />11.1.1.4 Impacts to Silver Creek, a fish bearing stream. <br />11.1.1.5 Habitat impacts on the steep slopes to the east of the development. <br />11.1.1.6 Alluvial fans and debris flow hazards. <br />11.1.1. 7 Firefighting issues. <br />The comment letter identified Alternative 5 of the DEIS as the least harmful alternative. <br />In its comment letter on the revised proposal, WDFW provides additional concerns. These include: <br />11.1.2 <br />11.1.1.8 Wildlife connectivity and use; <br />11.1.1.9 Alterations to streams; <br />11.1.1.10 Increased fire risk; <br />11.1.1.11 General habitat impacts related to development; <br />WDFW Recommendations <br />In the two comment letters, the following mitigation measures are recommended: <br />11.1.2.1 Adoption of the least harmful alternative, Alternative 5 in the DEIS. <br />11.1.2.2 Exclusion of proposed parcels on the steeper, eastern portion of the site. <br />11.1.2.3 Dedication of the entire area east of the transmission lines as open space <br />with an easement, and development of a management plan for the open <br />space easement. <br />4